FINAL REPORT Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, Ripley and Siatras Lands, Part Lots 7 and 8, Concession 3, Former Township of Osgoode, City of ,

Prepared for: Sunset Lakes Development Corporation 6598 Pebble Trail Way Greeley, Ontario K4P 0B6

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 2791 Lancaster Rd., Suite 200 Ottawa, ON K1B 1A7

February 4, 2010

CIF # P002-187-2009

Project No.: 122510329

STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment was completed for a proposed subdivision development in part Lots 7 and 8, Concession 3, in the former Township of Osgoode, City of Ottawa Ontario. Based on a review of aerial imagery, existing archaeological potential maps, information regarding registered archaeological sites in the vicinity, local physiography and topography, Census returns, historic maps of the project area and soil integrity within the project area it has been determined that there is elevated potential for previously undiscovered archaeological resources within the project area. Given the elevated archaeological potential for both prehistoric and historic period archaeological resources within that area it is recommended that parts of the project area undergo Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment prior to any project related activities that could cause ground disturbances and result in disturbance of any previously undiscovered archaeological resources.

Project No.: 122510329 i STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... I

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

2 STUDY AREA ...... 1

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 7

3.1 Archaeological Culture History Of ...... 7 3.2 Prehistoric Period Resources ...... 13 3.3 Historic Period Resources ...... 13

4 STUDY RESULTS ...... 17

5 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 17

6 CLOSURE ...... 21

7 REFERENCES ...... 22

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1 - Location of Project Area ...... 2 Figure 1-2 Proposed Plan of Subdivision ...... 3 Figure 2-1 Project Area Showing Ground Conditions in 2008 ...... 4 Figure 2-2 Soil Types Present in the Project Area ...... 5 Figure 2-3 Project Area Topography, Showing North End of Drumlin ...... 6 Figure 3-1 Areas of Archaeological Potential As Identified on City of Ottawa eMaps ...... 8 Figure 3-2 Project Area As Shown Over Detail of 1863 Walling Map ...... 15 Figure 3-3 Project Area Shown Over Detail of ...... 16 Figure 3-4 Detail of 1960 and 2002 Air Photos, ...... 18 Figure 3.5 Approximate Location of 19th Century House Shown on Walling Map ...... 19 Figure 4.1 Areas of Archeological Potential Requiring Stage 2 Assessment ...... 20

Project No.: 122510329 ii STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 Southern Ontario Prehistoric Cultural Chronology, Years Before Present (BP) ...... 6 Table 3-2 Land Occupancy as Indicated in Historic Records, ...... 14

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Land Registry Office Records Appendix B Archaeological Potential Determination Checklist

PROJECT PERSONNEL

Project Director Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A. Archival Research Christienne Uchiyama, B.A. (Hons), Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A. Report Christienne Uchiyama, B.A. (Hons), Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A.

Project No.: 122510329 iii STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

1 INTRODUCTION Sunset Lakes Development Corporation (Sunset Lakes) has proposed to create a subdivision development in the south part of the City of Ottawa, in the geographic Township of Osgoode, east of the Town of Manotick (Figure 1-1). The present plan of subdivision calls for the development of 61 residential house lots in the north part of the subdivision, three artificial lakes, a park and walking trails (Figure 1-2). Further residential lots are scheduled to be built in the south part of the development in the future. Portions of the project property were identified in the City of Ottawa’s archaeological potential modeling as having archaeological potential and thus a Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment (AA) of the project property was required as part of the conditions for development. Sunset Lakes contracted Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) to complete the Stage 1 AA for submission to the City of Ottawa Planning Department and to the Ontario Ministry of Culture. 2 STUDY AREA The Project area is an irregularly shaped plot of land of approximately 57 ha (140 acres). Fronting along Stagecoach Road in the geographic Township of Osgoode, being approximately the south-east ¼ of Lot 7 and all of the east ½ of Lot 8, Concession 3 (Figure 2-1). At present most of the project area is undeveloped and historically was used, where feasible, for agricultural purposes. The property lies within the North Gower Drumlin Field physiographic region, an area of approximately 150 square miles on either side of the Rideau River in Rideau and Osgoode Townships. (Chapman and Putnam, 1984). As its name implies the dominant characteristic of the physiographic region is a series of drumlins which are generally oriented north-south. Overall, the soil between the drumlins is composed of silt or clay deposited by the Champlain Sea and drainage is not well developed, particularly in the lowlands. The drumlin features, on the other hand, exhibit good drainage and exhibiting occasional stony qualities. The project property exhibits both of these overall soil types, with the north end of a drumlin identifiable in the south-west part of the property, where there are cleared fields, and low, poorly drained sections surrounding the drumlin ridge, and notable by their forest cover (Figure 2-1). Specific soil types within the project property include poorly to imperfectly drained Mille Isle, Uplands and Goulbourn series soils, and well-drained Kars Sandy Loam and Grenville Sandy Loam soils (Figure 2-2) (Hills et al. , 1944). The Grenville soils are associated (within the project area) exclusively with the drumlin ridge; the Kars soils are located along Stagecoach Road, where the ground is slightly elevated above the poorly drained soils below the drumlin (Figure 2-3). Although not directly associated with the project area, the Middle Castor River has its headwaters to the north-west of the project property (Figure 1-1). Although not navigable at this point, the Middle Castor River is a branch of the larger, and navigable Castor River, a tributary of the , approximately 38 km to the east. Much closer is the Rideau River, located 6 km to the west. There are, however, no watercourses within the limits of the project area, and the nearest that the Middle Castor River flows to the project property is 290 m south- west of the south-west corner of the property. At this point the stream is less than 1 m wide.

Project No.: 122510329 1 Project Area

1000 m

Figure 1-1 Location of ProjectArea (Source Map: National Topographic Series 30-G-04) LEGEND:

NOT TO SCALE Completed By: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION Figure 1-2 Proposed Plan of Subdivision Drawing No.: PART OF LOTS 7 & 8 - CONCESSION 3 (Original Courtesy of Sunset Lakes Development Corporation) Scale: Date: CITY OF OTTAWA - Formerly TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE SK-1 YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL DD TAA RR SSTTT DD KKS RR CCK LLLAA BBL RR 250 m DD IIILLL CCRR AAI S C RRA SSS VEE TTT PPP TTT VV T BBB SS OO MM AAA E S RRO OM LLL EE R OO RRR VV GG SS AAA OV D SSS TTT OO DD OS CCC T RR NN LOO AAA GG AA BLLL KKK N E LLL BB NNN REE TTT SSS IIRIR RR S GGG PPI UUR TTT G P OU T R MM OO AAA RRR EE CC A O LLL OOO L LLL VVV III E OIOO EEE N NNN SSS TTT WWW AAA YYY

YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL TAA SSTTT KKS CCK LLLAA BBL S Lot 8, Concession 3 SSS T TTT A AAA G GGG E EEE C CCC O OOO A AAA C CCC H HHH R RRR D DDD Lot 7, Concession 3

DRR D DD OODD OOO WW LLLKK EEL

D DDD E EEE E EEE R RRR M MMM E EEE A AAA D DDD O OOO W WWW D DDD R RRR Project Area

Figure 2-1 Project Area Showing Ground Conditions in 2008 (Source: City of Ottawa eMap, 2010) 1000 m

Kars Gravelly Sandy Loam

Mille Island Loamy Coarse Sand

Project Area

Goulbourn Organic

Grenville Sandy Loam

Uplands Sandy Loam

Figure 2-2 Soil Types Present in the Project Area (Base Map Source - Hills et al., 1944) OOO IIIO RRR AA O LLLI TA AAA LLLL TTT TTTT A AL A TTT C TTTAA AAA IIIOO CCC ST NNN CI H SS N CC HHH KK IININ CC GGG RI R AAC G PRR RRR LLLA RRR PP D BBL R DDD OOO VVV EEE E SS SSS EE T RR TTT CCR VEE T OOVV 250 m SSS STTT RRO P SS GR PPP EE GG AAA VV DD BBB A OV ND RRR OO ANN LLL R RR AA A T G LLL AAA TTT GG TTT C ASASAS EE RR CCC A IRR UUR NPNPNP IIIR OU KKK N PP OO AAA M CC S GGGR EMM C SSSBBB GRRR EE TL RRR TTTLLL RTTT AAAAA OOAOAA LC N LLLCCC VNVNVN LLLK E KIKK EEEGGG IOIOIO G OSSS SSSR NS SRRR NNNTTT TTT T TOOO WWAWAA WA VVV LLL E SS AAAL EEE EES ALLL RE YYYIIOI TTT SSS CRR YOIOO SSTTT S CC ESS TTT EE NNN VEE VVE OVV OOV WWW ROO RRO W GGRR GGR AAA EGG D A REE NDD YYY IIRIIR NN PPI LLLAA EMM TTTL EE URR OOUU CCO

SSS SSS TTT TTT A SSS AAAA SSSS A ST BBB TTTT BBB TTT L AAA LLLL AAAA L E AG EEEE GGGG E GGG VVV E VVV EEEE I EEE IIIIIEI YY CCC EIEEE AYY CCCC E AA CO WWW A OOOO WWW WW OOO WW A NN AAAA W NN AAA WWWW IOO CCC W LIIOIIO CCCC LLLLI C AAA LLL HHH AAA AAL HHHH Y TAA H YYYY TTT R Y SST RRRR SS RRR KK DDD CKK DDDD CC D LLLAA SSS BLLL SSS BB TTT TTT AAA AAA BBB BBB LLL LLL EEE EEE VVV VVV II IIIEIIEIE EIEE WWW WWW

WWW WWW AAA AAA YYY YYY

Drumlin

D DDD E EEE E EEE R RRR M MMM E EEE A AAA D DDD O OOO W WWW D DDD R RRR

Figure 2-3 Project Area Topography, Showing North End of Drumlin STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS The assessment of archaeological potential for the site considered both prehistoric and historic period resources. Archaeological potential modeling for prehistoric era sites is based largely on the identification of landscape features which are either known to have attracted past habitation or land use, or which appear to have potential for attracting human use. These features include: navigable rivers and lakes; confluences of watercourses; smaller sources of potable water; ridges or knolls that overlook areas of resource potential; outcrops of high-quality stone for tool making; and, most importantly, combinations of these features. In general it has been demonstrated that areas within 200-300 m of watercourses, or other significant bodies of water (ASI, 1990; Cox, 1989), and in particular those areas with multiple water sources (Young et al., 1995), are considered to be of elevated archaeological potential. Patterns of land use by historic Euro-Canadians to some extent mirror those of the prehistoric period. This is not surprising, since the same general needs must be met, i.e., proximity to potable water, access to natural resources, and a level, well drained habitation site. On the other hand, the Euro-Canadian conversion of both fertile and more marginal land for agricultural purposes, the development of non-water travel routes, the exploitation of different resources such as subsurface mineral deposits, and other differences in land use patterns make potential modeling of Euro-Canadian and other non-Aboriginal historic sites somewhat less reliable. Fortunately, these sites are more visible than their prehistoric counterparts, which helps offset this lower level of predictive reliability. Archaeological potential mapping of the project area indicates that there are two general areas of elevated archaeological potential within the project area (Figure 3-1) (ASI 1999; City of Ottawa, 2009). At the north-east part of the property archaeological potential is identified for the currently cleared ground along Stagecoach Road, and corresponds to the location of the Kars Sandy Loam soils described in Section 2.0. The other major area of potential identified incorporates the drumlin feature as well as some portions of the poorly drained soils to the north and west of the drumlin. In this instance, however, it is likely that the potential identified for the poorly drained areas is a residue of the creation of buffer zones around features of archaeological interest, such as the drumlin, and unintentionally captured areas of lower archaeological potential.

3.1 Archaeological Culture History Of Eastern Ontario Overall, archaeological research in many parts of Eastern Ontario has been fairly limited, at least compared to adjoining areas in Southern Ontario and northern New York State, resulting in only a limited understanding of the cultural processes that occurred in this part of the province. The following summary of the prehistoric occupation of Eastern Ontario (see Table 3.1 for chronological chart) is based on syntheses in Archaeologix (2008), Ellis and Ferris (1990), Jacques Whitford (2008), Pilon (1999) and Wright (1995). Identifiable human occupation of Ontario begins just after the end of the Wisconsin Glacial period. The first human settlement can be traced back 11,000 years, when this area was settled by Native groups that had been living to the south of the emerging Great Lakes. This initial occupation is referred to as the "Palaeo-Indian" archaeological culture.

Project No.: 122510329 7 O WW OOO NN DDD LIIOIO D LLLL SSS ALLL T TTTAA TTT SST CKK AACC RR LLLA SS DDR BB EE L D S RR IIILLL SSS CC AAI B PPP E RRA BBB P TTT VEE TTTR LLL AAA ST VV T L R SS OO MM 250 m AAA RRR EE RR OM C VV GG SOO CCC TTT OOV G SS AAA O DD SS KKK A RR ND OS N GG ANN LOO S NNN G AA LLL SSS EE TLLL BB T G R TTT TTT GGG IIRIR RR A R PP UUR AAA RRR M OU L EMM OO LLL OOO EE CC LLL I VVV IOIOIO O EEE NNN SSS T WWW TTT AAA YYY

AYY WAA N WW IOONN LLLIIIO ALLL TTTAA SST CKK CC S LAA SSS LLL T BB TTT A AAA G GGG E EEE C CCC O OOO A AAA C CCC H HHH R RRR D DDD

RR DDR OWW DDOO AAD

RR DDR ODD OOOO WWO KW SSS LLLKK S EL TTT EE DDD T D A AAA EEE E GGG E G Project Area EEE EEE RRR E R C M CCC MMM OOO E O EEE A A AAA AAA C D CCC DDD O HHH OOO H W R WWW RRR D DDD D DDD R RRR Archaeological Potential Zone

Figure 3-1 Areas of Archaeological Potential As Identified on City of Ottawa eMaps STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

Table 3.1 - Southern Ontario Prehistoric Cultural Chronology, Years Before Present (BP)

ARCHAEOLOGICAL PERIOD TIME CHARACTERISTICS Early Paleo-Indian 11,000–10,400 BP caribou and extinct Pleistocene mammal hunters, small camps

Late Paleo-Indian 10,400–10,000 BP smaller but more numerous sites slow population growth, emergence of woodworking industry, Early Archaic 10,000-8,000 BP development of specialised tools

environment similar to present, fishing becomes important Middle Archaic 8,000–4,500 BP component of subsistence, wide trade networks for exotic goods

increasing site size, large chipped lithic tools, introduction of bow Late Archaic 4,500-3,100 BP hunting

Terminal Archaic 3,100-2,950 BP emergence of true cemeteries with inclusion of exotic trade goods

introduction of pottery, continuation of Terminal Archaic settlement Early Woodland 2,950-2,400 BP and subsistence patterns

increased sedentism, larger settlements in spring and summer, Middle Woodland 2,400-1,400 BP dispersed smaller settlement in fall and winter, some elaborate mortuary ceremonialism

Transitional Woodland 1,400-1,100 BP incipient agriculture in some locations, seasonal hunting & gathering

Late Woodland limited agriculture, development of small village settlement, small 1,100-700 BP (Early Iroquoian) communal longhouses Late Woodland shift to agriculture as major component of subsistence, larger 700-600 BP (Middle Iroquoian) villages with large longhouses, increasing political complexity

Late Woodland very large villages with smaller houses, politically allied regional 600- 350 BP (Late Iroquoian) populations, increasing trading network

Early Palaeo-Indian (EPI) (11,000-10,400 before present BP) settlement patterns suggest that small groups, or “bands”, followed a pattern of seasonal mobility extending over large territories. Many (although by no means all) of the EPI sites were located on former beach ridges associated with Lake Algonquin, the post-glacial lake occupying the Lake Huron/Georgian Bay basin, and research/evidence indicates that the vegetative cover of these areas would have consisted of open spruce parkland, given the cool climatic conditions. Sites tend to be located on well-drained loamy soils, and on elevations in the landscape, such as knolls. The fact that assemblages of artifacts recovered from EPI sites are composed exclusively of stone skews our understanding of the general patterns of resource extraction and use. However, the taking of large game, such as caribou, mastodon and mammoth, appears to be of central importance to the sustenance of these early inhabitants. Moreover, EPI site location often appears to be located in areas which would have intersected with migratory caribou herds. In the Ottawa Valley it appears that the palaeo-environment had not recovered sufficiently from the former glaciations to have allowed an EPI occupation. There is, however, some evidence of EPI incursion to the Rideau Lakes area. The Late Palaeo-Indian (LPI) period (10,400-10,000 BP) is poorly understood compared to the EPI, the result of less research focus than the EPI. As the climate warmed the spruce parkland was gradually replaced and the vegetation of Southern Ontario began to be dominated by Project No.: 122510329 9 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT closed coniferous forests. As a result many of the large game species that had been hunted in the EPI period either moved north with the more open vegetation, or became locally extinct. Like the EPI, LPI peoples covered large territories as they moved around to exploit different resources. Environmental conditions in Eastern Ontario and the Ottawa Valley were sufficient to allow for a Late Palaeo-Indian occupation, although the evidence of such is still very limited. The transition from the Palaeo-Indian period to the Archaic archaeological culture of Ontario prehistory is evidenced in the archaeological record by the development of new tool technologies, the result of using an increasing number of resources as compared to peoples from earlier archaeological cultures, and developing a broader based series of tools to more intensively exploit those resources. During the Early Archaic period (10,000-8,000 BP), the jack and red pine forests that characterized the LPI environment were replaced by forests dominated by white pine with some associated deciduous elements. Early Archaic projectile points differ from Palaeo-Indian forms most notably by the presence of side and corner notching on their bases. A ground stone tool industry, including celts and axes, also emerges, indicating that woodworking was an important component of the technological development of Archaic peoples. Although there may have been some reduction in the degree of seasonal mobility, it is still likely that population density during the Early Archaic was low, and band territories large. The development of more diversified tool technology continued into the Middle Archaic period (8,000-4,500 BP). The presence of grooved stone net-sinkers suggests an increase in the importance of fishing in subsistence activities. Another new tool, the bannerstone, also made its first appearance during this period. Bannerstones are ground stone weights that served as counterbalance for "atlatls" or spear-throwers, again indicating the emergence of a new technology. The increased reliance on local, often poor quality chert resources for chipped stone tools suggests that in the Middle Archaic groups inhabited smaller territories lacking high quality raw materials. In these instances lower quality materials which had been glacially deposited in local tills and river gravels were used. This reduction in territory size appears to have been the result of gradual region-wide population growth, which forced a reorganization of subsistence patterns, as a larger population had to be supported from the resources of a smaller area. Stone tools designed specifically for the preparation of wild plant foods suggest that subsistence catchment was being widened and new resources being more intensively exploited. A major development of the later part of the Middle Archaic period was the initiation of long distance trade. In particular, native copper tools manufactured from sources near Lake Superior were being widely traded. During the later part of the Middle Archaic (5,500-4,500 BP) a distinctive occupation, or tradition, known as the Laurentian Archaic, appears in south-eastern Ontario, western Quebec, northern New York and Vermont. Laurentian Archaic sites are found only within the transitional zone between the deciduous forests to the south and coniferous forests to the north known as the Canadian Biotic Province and are identifiable through the association of certain diagnostic tool types, including ground slate semi-lunar knives (or “ulus”), plummets for use in fishing, ground slate points and knives, and ground stone gouges, adzes and grooved axes. It is thought that there was less reliance on plant foods and a greater reliance on hunting and fishing in this region than for Archaic peoples in southern and south-western Ontario. Laurentian Archaic sites have been found in the middle Ottawa River valley, along the Petawawa River and Trent River watersheds and at Brockville.

Project No.: 122510329 10 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

The trend towards decreased territory size and a broadening subsistence base continued during the Late Archaic (4,500-2,900 BP). Late Archaic sites are far more numerous than either Early or Middle Archaic sites. It appears that the increase in numbers of sites at least partly represents an increase in population. However, around 4,500 BP water levels in the Great Lakes began to rise, taking their modern form. It is likely that the relative paucity of earlier Archaic sites is due to their being inundated under the rising lake levels. The appearance of the first true cemeteries occurs during the Late Archaic. Prior to this period, individuals were interred close to the location where they died. However, with the advent of the Late Archaic and local cemeteries individuals who died at a distance from the cemetery would be returned for final burial at the group cemetery often resulting in disarticulated skeletons, occasionally missing minor bone elements (e.g. finger bones). The emergence of local group cemeteries has been interpreted as being a response to both increased population densities and competition between local groups for access to resources, in that cemeteries would have provided symbolic claims over a local territory and its resources. Increased territoriality and more limited movement are also consistent with the development of distinct local styles of projectile points. The trade networks which began in the Middle Archaic expand during this period, and begin to include marine shell artifacts (such as beads and gorgets) from as far away as the Mid-Atlantic coast. These marine shell artifacts and native copper implements show up as grave goods, indicating the value of the items. Other artifacts such as polished stone pipes and slate gorgets also appear on Late Archaic sites. One of the more unusual of the Late Archaic artifacts is the "birdstone”, small, bird-like effigies usually manufactured from green banded slate. The Early Woodland period (2,900-2,200 BP) is distinguished from the Late Archaic period primarily by the addition of ceramic technology. While the introduction of pottery provides a useful demarcation point for archaeologists, it may have made less difference in the lives of the Early Woodland peoples. The first pots were very crudely constructed, thick walled, and friable. It has been suggested that they were used in the processing of nut oils by boiling crushed nut fragments in water and skimming off the oil. These vessels were not easily portable, and individual pots must not have enjoyed a long use life. There have also been numerous Early Woodland sites located at which no pottery was found, suggesting that these poorly constructed, undecorated vessels had yet to assume a central position in the day-to-day lives of Early Woodland peoples. Other than the introduction of this rather limited ceramic technology, the life-ways of Early Woodland peoples show a great deal of continuity with the preceding Late Archaic period. For instance, birdstones continue to be manufactured, although the Early Woodland varieties have "pop-eyes" which protrude from the sides of their heads. Likewise, the thin, well-made projectile points which were produced during the terminal part of the Archaic period continue in use. However, the Early Woodland variants were side-notched rather than corner-notched, giving them a slightly altered and distinctive appearance. The trade networks which were established in the Middle and Late Archaic also continued to function, although there does not appear to have been as much traffic in marine shell during the Early Woodland period. These trade items were included in increasingly sophisticated burial ceremonies, some of which involved construction of burial mounds.

Project No.: 122510329 11 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

In terms of settlement and subsistence patterns, the Middle Woodland (2,200 B.C.-1,100 BP) provides a major point of departure from the Archaic and Early Woodland periods. While Middle Woodland peoples still relied on hunting and gathering to meet their subsistence requirements, fish were becoming an even more important part of the diet. Middle Woodland vessels are often heavily decorated with hastily impressed designs covering the entire exterior surface and upper portion of the vessel interior. Consequently, even very small fragments of Middle Woodland vessels are easily identifiable. It is also at the beginning of the Middle Woodland period that rich, densely occupied sites appear along the margins of major rivers and lakes. While these areas had been utilized by earlier peoples, Middle Woodland sites are significantly different in that the same location was occupied off and on for as long as several hundred years. Because this is the case, rich deposits of artifacts often accumulated. Unlike earlier seasonally utilized locations, these Middle Woodland sites appear to have functioned as base camps, occupied off and on throughout the course of the year. There are also numerous small upland Middle Woodland sites, many of which can be interpreted as special purpose camps from which localized resource patches were exploited. This shift towards a greater degree of sedentism continues the trend witnessed from the Middle Archaic, and provides a prelude to the developments that follow during the Late Woodland period. There are three complexes of Middle Woodland culture in Ontario. The complex specific to eastern Ontario is known as “Princess Point” most notably represented by ceramics decorated with a stamped zigzag pattern applied at various angles to the exterior of the vessel, known as “pseudo scallop shell”. Another common decorative style is the dentate stamp, a comb-like tool creating square impressions. The relatively brief period of the Transitional Woodland period is marked by the acquisition of cultivar plants species, such as maize and squash, from communities living south of the Great Lakes. The appearance of these plants began a transition to food production, which consequently led to a much reduced need to acquire naturally occurring food resources. Sites were thus occupied for longer periods and by larger populations. Transitional Woodland sites have not been undiscovered in eastern Ontario.

The Late Woodland period in southern Ontario is associated with societies referred to as the Ontario Iroquois Tradition. This period is often divided into three temporal components; Early, Middle and Late Iroquoian (see Table 3.1). In eastern Ontario, especially in the Ottawa River Valley, there is considerable overlap of people continuing to practice a hunting and gathering economy and those using limited horticulture as a supplement to gathered plants. For the most part, however, classic Late Woodland sites in eastern Ontario are limited to an area at the east end of Lake Ontario and along the St. Lawrence River valley. Early Iroquoian components have been identified near Pembroke on the Muskrat River; however, there is evidence for only limited use of cultivated plants. Middle Iroquoian sites have not been identified east of Kingston.

During the Late Iroquoian period a distinctive material culture emerges at the east end of Lake Ontario and along the St. Lawrence River up to Québec City, known as the St. Lawrence Iroquois (SLI). SLI sites are characterized by large semi-permanent villages and associated satellite settlements. The inhabitants of these villages and satellites practiced horticulture of staple crops which made up the bulk of their diet. Other food resources were hunted, fished and gathered. SLI village sites can be extensive, up to 10 acres or more in size and composed

Project No.: 122510329 12 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT of a number of longhouse structures. Special purpose satellite settlements, such as hunting and fishing camps, are smaller in area and in the number and size of structures within the settlement. While the early-contact period descendants of the Late Woodland SLI and Huron used the Ottawa River and its tributaries as transportation routes between the St. Lawrence River and the interior, Late Woodland village sites have not yet been identified in this area.

3.2 Prehistoric Period Resources There are at present no registered prehistoric period archaeological resources within a 2 km radius of the project property (MCL, 2010). The closest registered prehistoric archaeological site is the Victory Hill site (Borden number BhFw 13), a Middle Woodland Snyder’s Point complex (c.1900-1800 BP) site located approximately 5.5 km to the north-east, beside the Rideau River (JW, 2003). The next closest prehistoric site is located on the east side of the Rideau River, almost immediately across from the Victory Hill site, and is another Woodland period site (Mother Lode, BhFw 6). The Rideau River and Lakes system is known to have been an important transportation route and settlement area for prehistoric Aboriginal peoples. Examples of artifacts dating from circa 9,000 BP to 500 BP have been found along the Rideau system, indicating a long and persistent occupation (Jacques Whitford, 2003; Phillips and Nieuwhoff, 1995; Watson, 1990, 1991, 1992). Although there are no known prehistoric period sites in close proximity to the current project area the drumlin, as both an elevated piece of ground and a distinctive land form, and the relative proximity of the headwaters of the Middle Castor River and the Rideau River, may have been attractive features for prehistoric use and/or occupation. Similarly, the area of well drained soils along Stagecoach Road may have provided a location for temporary occupation for specialised resource extraction activities from the surrounding lower and wetter ground.

3.3 Historic Period Resources At present there are three registered historic period archaeological resources located near the project area (MCL, 2010; Stantec, 2009). These three sites are all 19 th century Euro-Canadian homestead sites and all are composed minimally of a stone foundation and scatter of cultural debris. One of the sites, the Kilfoyle site (Borden # BhFv-23) is located just over 2 km to the west of the project property. The other two, Mrs Jordan’s (BhFv-15) and Francis Evans (BhFv- 16) are located just under 2 km south of the project area. There are at present no registered heritage properties near the project area (OHF, 2010). Osgoode Township, in historical Carleton County and now part of the City of Ottawa, was established in the early 19th century. The township was surveyed in 1821 and named in honour of William Osgoode, Chief Justice of Upper and Lower Canada (Walker and Walker, 1968). One of Justice Osgoode’s major decisions led to the abolition of slavery in the Canadas. The earliest settler in the newly surveyed township arrived in the winter of 1826. Early settlement in Osgoode was centred around the Castor River in Concessions 8 and 9 and the number of inhabitants in the township was very low throughout the 1820s and 1830s (LAC, 1831-1840). The earliest record associated with the current project area dates to 1808 and the patenting of the entirety of Lot 7, Concession 3 from the Crown to Mary Dunn (Table 3.2 and see Appendix A, Land Registry Office Records). However, there is no record of anyone living within the project property until 1840, when Walter Rafe (also spelled Reafe, Raafe and Reaf in subsequent documents) , a labourer from Ireland, is listed as resident on the west ½ of Lot 8,

Project No.: 122510329 13 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

with 4 acres of land under cultivation (LAC, 1840). The identification of Lot 8 may be a mistake, however, as this is the only time that Rafe is identified with Lot 8. In all subsequent records Mr. Rafe is shown as being resident in Lot 7. The 1851 census lists Rafe as resident on the west ½ of Lot 7 and a Matthew Breem as resident on the west ½ of Lot 8 (LAC, 1851). No records indicate any occupation of the east ½ of either lot, which is the current project property.

Table 3-2 Land Occupancy as Indicated in Historic Records Lot 7 Lot 8 Record East ½ West ½ East ½ West ½ Patent Mary Dunn (08-04-1808) Mary Dunn (08-04-1808) n/a n/a 1830-39 Tax Rolls none listed none listed none listed none listed 1840 Tax Roll none listed none listed none listed Walter Rafe 1851 Census none listed Walter Rafe none listed Mathew Breem 1861 Census Walter Rafe Walter Rafe Michael Neilan none listed 1863 Walling Map Walter Rafe Walter Rafe M. Neilan M. Neilan Martin Neilan and Thomas Alice O'Toole (23- Brennan (21- Patent n/a n/a 07-1866) 07-1866) 1871 Census Walter Rafe Walter Rafe James Pyper indeterminate 1879 Belden Estate of W. Rafe (north ½) Thomas Rafe (north ½) Atlas Patrick Rafe (south ½) James Rafe (south ½) James Pyper Patrick McHale The 1861 census records show Walter Rafe as resident on the entire 200 acres of Lot 7. At that time he was 49 years old, married and with nine children aged 2 to 21. The records also indicate that the family lived in a 1½ storey log house. This is likely the same house indicated on Walling’s 1863 map of Carleton County (Figure 3-2). The Rafe house is shown on the north side of Lot 7, outside of the present project area. The 1861 census also lists a Michael Neilan as resident on 100 acres in Lot 8. Also an Irish labourer, Neilan was married and had one child. They also resided in a 1½ storey log house, which is also likely the one shown on the Walling map (Figure 3-2). This house is located in the east half of Lot 8, within the limits of the current project area. The Walling map suggests that Neilan occupied the whole of Lot 8, although this is the only record that suggests that he held all 200 acres (Table 3.2). The map also shows the location of the Middle Castor River to the south-west of the project area. Patents on the two halves of Lot 8 are recorded in July of 1866 (Table 3.2, Appendix A). The east ½ is patented to Martin Neilan (suggesting an incorrect recording of his name in the 1861 census) and Alice O’Toole. The west ½ of Lot 8 was patented to Thomas Brennan. The 1879 Belden atlas (Figure 3-3) shows a very different arrangement, largely due to the death of Walter Rafe in 1876 (Appendix A). The remaining 150 acres in Walter’s estate were divided between his widow, Bridget (Indicated on the map as Wm. Raafe Est. [sic]), and sons Thomas and James. Only two residences are shown, however; the original house shown on the Walling map and the house of James in the south-west ¼, west of the project area. The Belden atlas also shows the location of schoolhouse on the west side of Lot 7, on a half acre that Walter and Bridget had transferred in 1873 (Appendix A).

Project No.: 122510329 14 500 m

Project Area

Figure 3-2 Project Area As Shown Over Detail of 1863 Walling Map 500 m

Figure 3-3 Project Area Shown Over Detail of Osgoode Township in 1879 Belden Atlas STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

Although Lot 8 lists James Pyper and Patrick McHale as owners, there are no residences indicated on either property. It is possible that the land was owned but that the owners resided with family members nearby (Figure 3-3). There are no very early aerial photographs of the project area. However, a 1960 air photo shows a standing building, probably an old house in the centre of the drumlin, surrounded by cleared, fenced fields (NAPL, 1960) (Figure 3-4). More recent air photos clearly show the cellar of that building as well as surface features that may represent farm outbuildings (Figure 3-4). The location of the visible ground features is in reasonably close proximity to that of the Neilan house from the 1863 map, and the features may be related to that occupation (Figure 3-5). Overall the project area exhibits only moderate potential for the presence of significant historic period archaeological resources. With the possible exception of an (unlikely) occupation as early as 1840 by Walter Rafe, the project area is unlikely to contain evidence of early historic occupation. However, the presence of the surface features evident in recent air photos could allow for the identification of previously poorly known outbuilding types.

4 STUDY RESULTS Based on principles of archaeological potential modeling, existing archival records and characteristics identified on the Ministry of Culture’s Archaeological Potential Determination Checklist (see Appendix B), parts of the project area are considered to have elevated potential for the presence of significant archaeological resources of either the prehistoric or historic periods. These two areas include the north end of the drumlin located in the south-west corner of the project property, and the cleared part of the property that fronts along Stagecoach Road (Figure 4.1). The remaining areas of the property are composed of poorly drained soils and are considered to have low archaeological potential.

5 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment it is Stantec’s professional opinion that parts of the project area demonstrate potential for the presence of significant archaeological deposits of integrity and that Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment should occur in those locations. If at all feasible the ground within the areas of archaeological potential should be ploughed as if they were to be cultivated to allow for a pedestrian survey of the ground, the preferred methodology as per Ministry of Culture guidelines. If ploughing is not technically feasible due to the nature and extent existing ground cover or other conditions, Stage 2 assessment will need to be completed using a test pit excavation strategy. In either case the survey interval will be at no more than 5 m. A visual assessment of other parts of the property should also occur during Stage 2 assessment to confirm that these areas are of low archaeological potential or to identify other locations that should be surveyed. During the Stage 2 assessment all field activities will be recorded using a GPS. All diagnostic artifacts (prehistoric and historic period) or formal tools (prehistoric period) will be recorded and retained for further analysis and evaluation. In the event that significant archaeological resources are identified further archaeological assessment ( i.e. Stage 3 site specific assessment) may be required.

Project No.: 122510329 17 Surface Features

Building

100 m 50 m 1960 2002 Figure 3-4 Detail of 1960 and 2002 Air Photos, Showing Location of Building and Surface Features/Depressions

(Sources: NAPL, 1960 and City of Ottawa emap, 2010) YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL DD TAA RR SSTTT DD KKS RR CCK LLLAA BBL RR 250 m DD IIILLL CCRR AAI S C RRA SSS VEE TTT PPP TTT VV T BBB SS OO MM AAA E S RRO OM LLL EE R OO RRR VV GG SS AAA OV D SSS TTT OO DD OS CCC T RR NN LOO AAA GG AA BLLL KKK N E LLL BB NNN REE TTT SSS IIRIR RR S GGG PPI UUR TTT G P OU T R MM OO AAA RRR EE CC A O LLL OOO L LLL VVV III E OIOO EEE N NNN SSS TTT WWW AAA YYY

YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL TAA SSTTT KKS CCK LLLAA BBL S SSS T TTT A AAA G GGG E EEE C CCC O OOO A AAA C CCC H HHH R RRR D DDD

M. Nielon House

DRR D DD OODD OOO WW LLLKK EEL

D DDD E EEE E EEE R RRR M MMM E EEE A AAA D DDD O OOO W WWW D DDD R RRR Project Area

Figure 3.5 Approximate Location of 19th Century House Shown on Walling Map (Source: City of Ottawa eMap, 2010) YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL DD TAA RR SSTTT DD KKS RR CCK LLLAA BBL Disturbed - Former Quarry, RR 250 m DD IIILLL CCRR AAI S No Further Assessment RequiredC RRA SSS VEE TTT PPP TTT VV T BBB SS OO MM AAA E S RRO OM LLL EE R OO RRR VV GG SS AAA OV D SSS TTT OO DD OS CCC T RR NN LOO AAA GG AA BLLL KKK N E LLL BB NNN REE TTT SSS IIRIR RR S GGG PPI UUR TTT G P OU T R MM OO AAA RRR EE CC A O LLL OOO L LLL VVV III E OIOO EEE N NNN SSS TTT WWW AAA YYY

YY AAY WW NN LIIOIO LLLLLL TAA SSTTT KKS CCK LLLAA BBL S SSS Area of Low Ground and Poorly Drained Soil, T TTT A AAA G No Further Assessment Required GGG E EEE C CCC O OOO A AAA C CCC H HHH R RRR D DDD

Area of Elevated Archaeological Potential

DRR D DD OODD OOO WW LLLKK EEL

D DDD E EEE E EEE R RRR M MMM E EEE A AAA D DDD O OOO W WWW D DDD R RRR

Figure 4.1 Areas of Archeological Potential Requiring Stage 2 Assessment (Source: City of Ottawa eMap, 2010) STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

Stantec cautions, however, that it is possible that deeply buried archaeological resources, could still exist within the limits of the proposed project and that the following standard conditions will continue to apply: • Should human remains be identified during operations, all work in the vicinity of the discovery will be suspended immediately. Notification will be made to the Ontario Provincial Police, or local police, who will conduct a site investigation and contact the district coroner. Notification must also be made to the Ministry of Culture and the Registrar of Cemeteries, Cemeteries Regulation Unit, Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services.

• Should other cultural heritage values (archaeological or historical materials or features) be identified during operations, all work in the vicinity of the discovery will be suspended and the Ministry of Culture archaeologist contacted. This condition provides for the potential for deeply buried or enigmatic local site areas that are not typically identified in archaeological field assessments. Stantec archaeological staff will also be available to give advice and guidance should such discoveries occur.

6 CLOSURE This report has been prepared for the sole benefit of Sunset Lakes Development Corporation and may not be used by any third party without the express written consent of Stantec Consulting Ltd. and Sunset Lakes Development Corporation. Any use which a third party makes of this report is the responsibility of such third party. This report is filed with the Minister of Culture in compliance with sec. 65 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The ministry reviews reports to ensure that the licensee has met the terms and conditions of the licence and archaeological resources have been identified and documented according to the standards and guidelines set by the Ministry of Culture, ensuring the conservation, protection and preservation of the heritage of Ontario. It is recommended that development not proceed before receiving confirmation that the Ministry of Culture has entered the report into the provincial register of reports. We trust this report meets your current requirements. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require further information or have questions about any facet of this project. Yours truly, Stantec Consulting Ltd.

DRAFT DRAFT

Christienne Uchiyama, B.A. Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A. Assistant Archaeologist Senior Archaeologist and Heritage Planning Consultant [email protected] [email protected]

Project No.: 122510329 21 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

7 REFERENCES ASI (Archaeological Services Inc), 1990 . A Guide to Prehistoric Archaeological Resources: Approaches to Site Potential Modeling for Environmental Assessment. Report on file, Land Use ASI (Archaeological Services Inc), 1999 . The Archaeological Resource Potential Mapping Study of the Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton. Report on file with the City of Ottawa. Archaeologix, 2008. Archaeological Assessment (Stage 1) Shell Proposed Refinery Project, St. Clair Township, Lambton County, Ontario. Report prepared for Jacques Whitford Limited, Markham, Ontario Belden and Co., 1879 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Carleton, including Ottawa. Toronto: H. Belden & Co. (Reprinted 1997, Wilson’s Publishing Company). Cox, Steven L., 1989. Report on the Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of the Bangor Hydro- Electric Second 345 KV Tie Line Project Route. Report on file, Maine State Museum, Bangor, Maine. Chapman, L.J., and D.F. Putnam, 1984. The Physiography of Southern Ontario (3 rd Edition). Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 2. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. City of Ottawa, 2010. Ottawa Atlas. Electronic mapping site, http://apps104.ottawa.ca/emap/ Ellis, Chris J., and Neal Ferris (eds.), 1990. The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650. Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, Ontario Archaeological Society, Number 5. Hills, G.A., N.R. Richards and F.F. Morwick, 1944. Soil Survey of Carleton County, Province of Ontario. Report No. 7 of the Ontario Soil Survey. Guelph: Experimental Farms Service, Dominion Department of Agriculture And The Ontario Agricultural College. Jacques Whitford, 2003. Stages 2 and 3 Archaeological Assessment, Proposed Greenbelt Pathway Trailhead Phase 1, Victory Hill, Ottawa, Ontario. Report prepared for the National Capital Commission, Ottawa, Ontario. ---, 2008. Stage 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment - Interconnecting and Third Party Pipelines. Report prepared for Shell Canada Products, Sarnia, ON. LAC (Library and Archives Canada) 1831-40 Tax Assessment Rolls of Osgoode Township, Microfilm M-7736. 1851 Census of 1851 (Canada East, Canada West, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia), Microfilm C-11716. 1861 Census of Canada East, Canada West, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, 1861, Microfilm C-1013 and C-1014 1871 Federal Census of 1871 (Ontario Index). Microfilm C-10012 and C-10013.

Project No.: 122510329 22 STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, RIPLEY AND SIATRAS LANDS, PART LOTS 7 AND 8, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE, CITY OF OTTAWA, ONTARIO – DRAFT REPORT

MCL (Ministry of Culture), 2010. Archaeological Sites Database. Records on file at the Heritage Unit, Toronto, Ontario. NAPL (National Air Photo Library) 1960 Roll A17264, Photo 141 OHF (Ontario Heritage Foundation), 2010. Registered Heritage Properties Database. http://www.hpd.mcl.gov.on.ca/scripts/hpdsearch/english/default.asp . Phillips, Caroline J., and P. Nieuwhoff, 1995. Newboro Lock 110H, Rideau Canal. Annual Archaeological Report Ontario, Volume 6 (New Series). Toronto: Ontario Heritage Foundation, pp.112-113. Pilon, Jean-Luc (ed), 1999. La préhistoire de l'Outaouais = Ottawa Valley Prehistory. Institut d'histoire et de recherches sur l'Outaouais, Hull, Quebec.

Stantec (Jacques Whitford Stantec Limited), 2009. Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment, Rideau Forest Phase 8 Subdivision, Ottawa, Ontario. Report prepared for J.L. Richards & Associates, Ottawa, Ontario. Walling, H.F., 1862. Map of the Counties of Stormont, Dundas, Glengarry, Prescott & Russell, Canada West, from actual survey under the direction of H.F. Walling. National Map Collection H2/420/Stormont/1862. Wlaker, Harry and Olive Walker, 1968. Carleton Saga. Ottawa: Carleton County Council.

Watson, Gordon D., 1990. Palaeo-Indian and Archaic Occupations of the Rideau Lakes. Ontario Archaeology. No. 50: 5-26. ---, 1991. Dating the Woodland Occupations of Sand Island, Lower Rideau Lake, Leeds County, Ontario. Annual Archaeology Report Ontario, Volume 2 (New Series). Toronto: The Ontario Heritage Foundation, pp. 146-150. ---, 1992. Dating Eastern Ontario Woodland Ceramics. Annual Archaeological Report Ontario, Volume 3 (New Series). Toronto: The Ontario Heritage Foundation, pp. 113-117. Wright, J.V., 1995. A History of the Native People of Canada, Volume 1 (10,000-1,000 B.C.). Canadian Museum of Civilization, Mercury Series, Archaeology Paper 152. Gatineau, PQ: Canadian Museum of Civilization. Young, P.M., M.R. Horne, C.D. Varley, P.J. Racher, and A.J. Clish, 1995. A Biophysical Model for Prehistoric Archaeological Sites in Southern Ontario. Research and Development Branch, Ministry of Transportation, Toronto, Ontario.

P:\2010\Archaeology 2010\122510329 - Stage 1 AA Ripley & Siatras Lands, Part Lots 7 & 8, Concession 3, Osgoode Township, City of Ottawa, ON\DRAFT Stage 1 AA- Siatras and Ripley - 2010 01 19.doc

Project No.: 122510329 23

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, Ripley and Siatras Lands, Part Lots 7 and 8, Concession 3, Former Township of Osgoode, City of Ottawa, Ontario

APPENDIX A

Land Registry Office Records

Project No.: 122510329

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, Ripley and Siatras Lands, Part Lots 7 and 8, Concession 3, Former Township of Osgoode, City of Ottawa, Ontario

APPENDIX B

Archaeological Potential Determination Checklist

Project No.: 122510329

Archaeological Potential Determination Checklist Not Feature of Archaeological Potential Yes No Comment Available 1 Known archaeological sites within 250 m?  If Yes, potential determined PHYSICAL FEATURES 2 Is there water on or near the property?  2a Primary water source within 300m  If Yes, potential determined 2b Secondary water source within 200m If Yes, potential determined 2c Past water source within 300m  If Yes, potential determined

3 Elevated topography If yes, and Yes for any of 4-9,  potential determined 4 Pockets of sandy soil in a clay or rocky area If yes, and Yes for any of 3,  5-9, potential determined 5 Distinctive land formations If yes, and Yes for any of 3-4,  6-9, potential determined HISTORIC USE FEATURES 6 Associated with food or scarce resource harvest If yes, and Yes for any of 3-5, areas  7-9, potential determined 7 Indications of early historic settlement If yes, and Yes for any of 3-6,  8-9, potential determined

8 Associated with historic transportation route If yes, and Yes for any of 3-7  or 9, potential determined 9 Contains property designated under the Ontario If yes, and Yes for any of 3-8, Heritage Act  potential determined APPLICATION SPECIFIC INFORMATION 10 Local knowledge  If Yes, potential determined 11 Recent (post-1960) disturbance (confirmed If Yes, no potential extensive and intensive)  Summary: • If Yes to any of 1, 2a-c, or 10 Archaeological Potential is confirmed

• If Yes to two or more of 3-9 Archaeological Potential is confirmed

• If Yes to 11 or No to 1-10 Low Archaeological Potential is confirmed

Based on example in Ontario Ministry of Culture Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologi sts, final draft, August 2006, Unit 1C-Stage 1