Cultural Heritage Assessment Report Ashborough Village Peterborough, Ontario

Report PACAC17-028 Appendix E

YiZheng Ltd. Cultural Heritage Assessment Report Ashborough Village Peterborough, Ontario

Prepared by: AECOM 410 – 250 York Street, Citi Plaza 519 673 0510 tel London, ON, Canada N6A 6K2 519 673 5975 fax www.aecom.com

July, 2017 Project Number: 60522608 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Statement of Qualifications and Limitations

The attached Report (the “Report”) has been prepared by AECOM Canada Ltd. (“AECOM”) for the benefit of the Client (“Client”) in accordance with the agreement between AECOM and Client, including the scope of work detailed therein (the “Agreement”).

The information, data, recommendations and conclusions contained in the Report (collectively, the “Information”):

§ is subject to the scope, schedule, and other constraints and limitations in the Agreement and the qualifications contained in the Report (the “Limitations”); § represents AECOM’s professional judgement in light of the Limitations and industry standards for the preparation of similar reports; § may be based on information provided to AECOM which has not been independently verified; § has not been updated since the date of issuance of the Report and its accuracy is limited to the time period and circumstances in which it was collected, processed, made or issued; § must be read as a whole and sections thereof should not be read out of such context; § was prepared for the specific purposes described in the Report and the Agreement; and § in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, may be based on limited testing and on the assumption that such conditions are uniform and not variable either geographically or over time.

AECOM shall be entitled to rely upon the accuracy and completeness of information that was provided to it and has no obligation to update such information. AECOM accepts no responsibility for any events or circumstances that may have occurred since the date on which the Report was prepared and, in the case of subsurface, environmental or geotechnical conditions, is not responsible for any variability in such conditions, geographically or over time.

AECOM agrees that the Report represents its professional judgement as described above and that the Information has been prepared for the specific purpose and use described in the Report and the Agreement, but AECOM makes no other representations, or any guarantees or warranties whatsoever, whether express or implied, with respect to the Report, the Information or any part thereof.

Without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing, any estimates or opinions regarding probable construction costs or construction schedule provided by AECOM represent AECOM’s professional judgement in light of its experience and the knowledge and information available to it at the time of preparation. Since AECOM has no control over market or economic conditions, prices for construction labour, equipment or materials or bidding procedures, AECOM, its directors, officers and employees are not able to, nor do they, make any representations, warranties or guarantees whatsoever, whether express or implied, with respect to such estimates or opinions, or their variance from actual construction costs or schedules, and accept no responsibility for any loss or damage arising therefrom or in any way related thereto. Persons relying on such estimates or opinions do so at their own risk.

Except (1) as agreed to in writing by AECOM and Client; (2) as required by-law; or (3) to the extent used by governmental reviewing agencies for the purpose of obtaining permits or approvals, the Report and the Information may be used and relied upon only by Client.

AECOM accepts no responsibility, and denies any liability whatsoever, to parties other than Client who may obtain access to the Report or the Information for any injury, loss or damage suffered by such parties arising from their use of, reliance upon, or decisions or actions based on the Report or any of the Information (“improper use of the Report”), except to the extent those parties have obtained the prior written consent of AECOM to use and rely upon the Report and the Information. Any injury, loss or damages arising from improper use of the Report shall be borne by the party making such use.

This Statement of Qualifications and Limitations is attached to and forms part of the Report and any use of the Report is subject to the terms hereof.

Signatures

Report Prepared By: Michael Greguol, MA Cultural Heritage Specialist

Report Reviewed By: Christopher Andreae, Ph.D, CAHP Senior Architectural Historian YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Distribution List

# Hard Copies PDF Required Association / Company Name

0 Yes The Biglieri Group Ltd. on behalf of YiZheng Ltd. 0 Yes AECOM Canada Ltd.

Revision History

Revision # Date Revised By: Revision Description

June 2, M. Greguol 0 Draft Report 2017 July 18, M. Greguol 1 Final Report 2017 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Executive Summary

AECOM Canada Ltd. (AECOM) was retained by The Biglieri Group Ltd. on behalf of YiZheng Ltd. to conduct a Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (CHAR) for an approximately 71.5 hectare (ha) study area located on the properties at 2219 and 2159 Old Norwood Road, 500, 510, and 516 Maniece Avenue, and 2320 Ashburnham Drive in the City of Peterborough, Ontario. All or portions of the properties are being considered for the proposed Ashborough Village development. The proposed development is for a low density residential neighbourhood with approximately 1200 units which will include a mixed-use neighbourhood of residential and commercial uses to complement the Peterborough Lift Lock travel node in close proximity to the proposed development site.

The CHAR was undertaken to identify municipally, provincially, and federally recognized heritage properties as well as to identify potential heritage properties within the study area, in order to evaluate the potential impacts that the proposed development may have on built heritage resources and/or cultural heritage landscapes. The study was completed according to the guidelines set out in the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport’s (MTCS) Ontario Heritage Toolkit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process 2005).

For the purposes of this CHAR, the study area consists of 2219 and 2159 Old Norwood Road, 500, 510, and 516 Maniece Avenue, and 2320 Ashburnham Drive as well as properties immediately adjacent to the subject properties in order to evaluate potential impacts to the recognized or potential heritage value of the adjacent properties. Generally, the study area is bound by Old Norwood Road, Television Road, Maniece Avenue, and Ahsburnham Drive, east of the Trent-Severn Canal in Peterborough, Ontario.

The following six properties were identified as potential heritage properties within the study area for this CHAR: § 2159 Old Norwood Road; § 2450 Ashburnham Drive; § 506 Maniece Avenue; § 524 Maniece Avenue; § 542 Maniece Avenue; and § 550 Maniece Avenue.

In order to mitigate the adverse visual impacts of the proposed new subdivision on the east side of the Trent- Peterborough Lift Lock, a landscaping strategy or use of a green space buffer between the east side of Ashburnham Drive and the proposed subdivision may create a visually sensitive transition between the National Historic Site and the proposed new development. Landscaping in particular should be carefully considered within the vicinity of the intersection of Ashburnham Drive and Hunter Street where the Peterborough Lift Lock is located.

Transition between the National Historic Site and the proposed new development should be planned accordingly with the City of Peterborough and Parks Canada as recommended in the Liftlock Functional Planning Study.

At a minimum, photographic documentation of the structure and the surrounding landscape at 2159 Old Norwood Road should be undertaken prior to development to form an archival record of the property prior to development. The documentation should be deposited with a municipal archive in order to preserve the historic record of the property. Any documentation record prepared for the property should be deposited with:

Peterborough Museum and Archives 300 Hunter Street East Peterborough, Ontario YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Table of Contents

Page

1. Study Purpose...... 1

2. Methodology...... 4 2.1 Study Method...... 4 2.2 Regulatory Framework...... 4 2.2.1 Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement...... 4 2.2.2 Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport and Ontario Heritage Act ...... 5 2.2.3 City of Peterborough and the Municipal Cultural Plan...... 6 2.2.4 Liftlock Secondary Plan...... 7

3. Historical Overview...... 9 3.1 Physical Setting ...... 9 3.2 Regional History ...... 9 3.2.1 Context...... 9 3.2.2 Otonabee Township, Peterborough County and the City of Peterborough...... 9 3.2.3 Trent Severn Waterway...... 11 3.2.4 Study Area History ...... 12

4. Site Description...... 19 4.1 Context ...... 19 4.2 Recognized Heritage Properties ...... 23 4.3 Potential Heritage Properties ...... 24

5. Proposed Undertaking and Impacts...... 27 5.1 Proposed Undertaking ...... 27 5.2 Potential Impacts ...... 27 5.3 Potential Mitigation ...... 28 5.3.1 Trent-Severn Waterway and Peterborough Lift Lock ...... 28 5.3.2 Barn – 2159 Old Norwood Road...... 29

6. Recommendations...... 30 6.1 Trent-Severn Waterway and Peterborough Lift Lock...... 30 6.2 Barn – 2159 Old Norwood Road ...... 30

7. Bibliography...... 31

Appendices

Appendix A. Cultural Heritage Inventory Appendix B. Ashborough Village Development Plan YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

1. Study Purpose

1 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

2 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

3 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

2. Methodology

2.1 Study Method

The CHAR was undertaken according to the guidelines identified in the MTCS Ontario Heritage Toolkit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process and the City of Peterborough’s Cultural Heritage Impact Statements Draft Terms of Reference. While completing the CHAR, AECOM undertook the following tasks: § A review of municipal, provincial, and federal heritage registers and inventories including the City of Peterborough Cultural Mapping, the Ontario Heritage Trust’s online inventory of buildings, museums, and easement properties, the Canadian Register of Historic Places, and the Directory of Federal Heritage Designations; § Preparation of a land use history of the study area based on a review of primary and secondary sources; § Consultation with Erik Hanson, Heritage Resources Coordinator for the City of Peterborough to confirm the presence of recognized heritage properties; § A field investigation undertaken on May 19, 2017 to document recognized heritage properties and identify potential heritage properties containing building or structures more than 40 years of age; § Analysis of the cultural heritage value or interest of identified potential heritage properties, according to the criteria outlined in Ontario Regulation 9/06 (O.Reg. 9/06); § Analysis of potential adverse impacts, according to the guidelines including the MTCS Ontario Heritage Toolkit; and § Preparation of recommendations to identify potential mitigation strategies in order to avoid or minimize impacts to identified or potential heritage properties.

2.2 Regulatory Framework

2.2.1 Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement

The Planning Act (1990) and the associated Provincial Policy Statement (2014) provide a legislative framework for land use planning in Ontario. Both documents identify matters of provincial interest, which include the conservation of significant features of architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological, or scientific interest. The Planning Act requires that all decisions affecting land use planning matters “shall be consistent with” the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). In general, the PPS recognizes that Ontario’s long-term prosperity, environmental health, and social well-being depend on protecting natural heritage, water, agricultural, mineral, cultural heritage and archaeological resources for their economic, environmental, and social benefits. More specifically, PPS Section 2.6.1 states “Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved.” In reference to development on adjacent properties, the PPS Section 2.6.3. states “Planning authorities shall not permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage property except where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved.”

The following definitions are outlined within the PPS to aid in the interpretation of the policies:

Adjacent lands: means for the purposes of policy 2.6.3, those lands contiguous to a protected heritage property or as otherwise defined in the municipal official plan.

4 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Built heritage resource: means a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community, including an Aboriginal community. Built heritage resources are generally located on property that has been designated under Parts IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or included on local, provincial and/or federal registers.

Conserved: means the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained under the Ontario Heritage Act. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment, and/or heritage impact assessment. Mitigation measures and/or alternative development approaches can be included in these plans and assessments.

Cultural heritage landscape: means a defined geographical area that may have been modified by human activity and is identified as having cultural heritage value or interest by a community, including an Aboriginal community. The area may involve features such as structures, spaces, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association. Examples may include, but are not limited to, heritage conservation districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; villages, parks, gardens, battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trailways, viewsheds, natural areas and industrial complexes of heritage significance; and areas recognized by federal or international designation authorities (e.g. a National Historic Site or District designation, or a UNESCO World Heritage Site).

Development: means the creation of a new lot, a change in land use, or the construction of buildings or structures requiring approval under the Planning Act, but does not include: a) activities that create or maintain infrastructure authorized under an environmental assessment process; b) works subject to the Drainage Act; or c) for the purposes of policy 2.1.4(a), underground or surface mining of minerals or advanced exploration on mining lands in significant areas of mineral potential in Ecoregion 5E, where advanced exploration has the same meaning as under the Mining Act. Instead, those matters shall be subject to policy 2.1.5(a).

Heritage attributes: means the principal features or elements that contribute to a protected heritage property’s cultural heritage value or interest, and may include the property’s built or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting (including significant views or vistas to or from a protected heritage property).

Protected heritage property: means property designated under Parts IV, V or VI of the Ontario Heritage Act; property subject to a heritage conservation easement under Parts II of IV of the Ontario Heritage Act; property identified by the Province and prescribed public bodies as provincial heritage property under the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties; property protected under federal legislation; and UNESCO World Heritage Sites.

Significant: means in regard to cultural heritage and archaeology, resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest for the important contribution they make to our understanding of the history of a place, an event, or a people.

Site alteration: means activities, such as grading, excavation and the placement of fill that would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of a site.

2.2.2 Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport and Ontario Heritage Act

The MTCS is responsible for the administration of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) and is responsible for determining the policies, priorities and programs for the conservation, protection and preservation of Ontario’s

5 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

heritage, which includes both built heritage and cultural heritage landscapes. Section B.1.1 (4) also states that significant cultural heritage features should be avoided, where possible. In the event that they cannot be avoided, effects should be minimized where possible and every effort should be made to mitigate adverse impacts, in accordance with provincial and municipal policies and procedures. Cultural heritage features should be identified early in the assessment process in order to determine significant cultural features and potential impacts.

Ontario Regulation 9/06, Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (O. Reg. 9/06) under the Ontario Heritage Act provides criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest. If a property meets one or more of the following criteria it may be designated under Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act:

1) The property has design value or physical value because it:

§ Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method;

§ Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit; or

§ Demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement.

2) The property has historic value or associative value because it:

§ Has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization, or institution that is significant to a community;

§ Yields, or has the potential to yield information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture; or

§ Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer, or theorist who is significant to a community.

3) The property has contextual value because it:

§ Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area;

§ Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings; or

§ Is a landmark.

Should the potential heritage resource meet one or more of the above-mentioned criteria, and when there is no longer provincial ownership, the heritage property may be considered for designation under Section 34.5 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

2.2.3 City of Peterborough and the Municipal Cultural Plan

The City of Peterborough’s Municipal Cultural Plan (2012) provides a vision for Peterborough, highlighting the economic prosperity, social progress, and quality of life. It focusses on culture’s role in creating a liveable, sustainable community with a vibrant downtown and healthy neighbourhoods. Based upon extensive community engagement, the Plan provides a shared cultural vision in Peterborough and a set of guiding principles and actions that ensures Peterborough reaches its greatest potential as a culturally vibrant, creative city.1

1 City of Peterborough, Municipal Cultural Plan, www.peterborough.ca (accessed May 2017).

6 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

The final outcome of the planning process for the Cultural Plan is the development of a series of “Strategic Directions” that seek to promote culture both within the municipality and the community/ Specifically related to cultural heritage, Strategic Direction 3 is to “Strengthen Heritage” within the City of Peterborough. Specifically, the direction is to “build on the City’s past heritage work through continued development of policy and regulatory frameworks and tools such as heritage conservation districts to protect Peterborough’s historic buildings and landscapes.”

One of the components of the Municipal Cultural Plan are the Cultural Maps tools which map cultural assets included within the City of Peterborough, including identified and protected heritage properties. For mapping purposes, the municipality has included three classes of heritage resources:

§ Fixed heritage: These are fixed land or land-based resources such as heritage buildings or natural areas; § Movable heritage: These are heritage resources that can be detached and moved from one location to another such as artworks or documents; and § Intangible heritage: These are the non-physical forms of cultural heritage such as stories, traditions, songs, and beliefs. They are products of our history that reflect a particular way of life tied to a place and the people who live there.

No cultural assets were identified on the cultural mapping within the study area for this CHAR.

2.2.4 Liftlock Secondary Plan

The City of Peterborough is currently preparing a Secondary Land Use Plan to guide the future development of the Liftlock Planning Area. The Liftlock Planning Area was annexed in 1998 and 2008 from the Township of Otonabee- South Monaghan and the former Township of Otonabee for the purpose of accommodating long-term residential growth. The area is approximately 180 hectares (445 acres) and is bound by Parkhill Road to the north, Television Road to the east, the Canadian Pacific Railway track to the south, and the Trent Canal to the west.

A Secondary Land Use Plan contains policies and mapping for specific areas identified within an Official Plan as requiring more detailed direction on certain issues (e.g. land use, community design, natural heritage, servicing, transportation) that are either inadequately addressed in the Official Plan or are at variance with the Official Plan.

Secondary Plans provide a framework for guiding development in a specific area. They typically include a land use plan and policy statements that are adopted by Official Plan Amendment into the Official Plan. Once a Secondary Land Use Plan is adopted, any new development within the area covered by the Plan must conform to the policies and principles established in the Plan.

As a part of the planning process for the Secondary Plan, a Functional Planning Study was completed in 2006 which identified the character of the area and its connection to the Peterborough Lift Lock and the Trent-Severn Waterway National Historic Site. Two of the conclusions of the study stressed the importance of the historic connection to the area when considering future development:

New Lift Lock Observation Location – A new viewing location for the Peterborough Lift Lock should be established along the east side of the Trent Canal to enable a proper and safe observation area from Ashburnham Drive. This new viewing location will also enhance the prominence of the Peterborough Lift Lock within the community and for the motoring public. This initiative can be accomplished in conjunction with the recommended shifting of the Hunter Street- Ashburnham Drive intersection and the associated realignment of Ashburnham Drive to the east.

7 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Trent Severn Waterway Management Plan – The “Trent-Severn Waterway National Historic Site of Canada Management Plan” dated October 2000 introduces a management plan to safeguard the entire Trent-Severn Waterway inclusive of the Peterborough Lift Lock as a national asset and a national historic site. Any development in close proximity to this feature needs to be sensitive to the historic value and prominence of the Waterway and Lift Lock, and the objectives of this Plan as published by Parks Canada on behalf of the Government of Canada2.

2 T.M. Robinson, Liftlock Functional Planning Study, 2005 www.peterborough.ca (accessed May 2017).

8 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

3. Historical Overview

3.1 Physical Setting

The study area is located within the Peterborough Drumlin Field physiographic region of Ontario. The region was described as “a rolling till plain with an area of about 1750 square miles (4530 square kilometres)”.3 The region extends from Hastings County in the east to Simcoe County in the west and contains approximately 3,000 drumlins. The expansive extent of the drumlins is evident on historic topographic mapping, indicating the various changes in topography. This is particularly evident just east of the study area.

Historically, the drumlin fields resulted in increased challenges for farming the land within Peterborough County. Aside from the increased slopes, farmers were challenged by stoniness and wet swampy hollows. In addition, the Crown survey that was imposed on the landscape (See Section 3.2.2) created townships, concessions and lots with baselines parallels to the shores of the Great Lakes. In Peterborough, this resulted in drumlin fields in the middle of surveyed lots and roads, creating awkward fields for agricultural purposes.4

3.2 Regional History

3.2.1 Context

The study area is located east of the Trent Severn Waterway and includes 2219 and 2159 Old Norwood Road, 500, 510, and 516 Maniece Avenue, and 2320 Ashburnham Drive as well as properties immediately adjacent to the subject properties. Historically, the study area was located on Lots 29 and 30, Concession 12, in the Township of Otonabee, Peterborough County. More recently, the study area has been amalgamated into the boundaries of the City of Peterborough. The study area forms part of the eastern boundary of the city limits. The existing City of Peterborough developed on the edges of both Otonabee Township and Monaghan Township.

3.2.2 Otonabee Township, Peterborough County and the City of Peterborough

The Crown Surveys for the Townships of North Monaghan and Otonabee began in 1818 and 1819, respectively, with the township line marked by the course of the Otonabee River. During these original surveys, Samuel Wilmot, Deputy Surveyor for Upper Canada recommended a townsite on what would become Peterborough. The site was desired to be a junction for Smith, Douro, North Monaghan and Otonabee Townships. A tract of land intended for the town site was set aside in North Monaghan along the west side of the Otonabee River at the north edge of the township.5

Adam Scott, a millwright and the first settler in Peterborough County, arrived in 1819. In 1821, Scott completed construction of a small wood frame mill along the banks of the Otonabee River near the corner of present-day King and Water Streets. This mill site was intended to be the impetus for the establishment of a small community and was set up to service the few early settlers who had already penetrated the backwoods of the surrounding

3 L.J. Chapman and D. F. Putnam, The Physiography of Southern Ontario. 3rd Edition (Toronto: Ontario Geological Survey, 1984), p. 169. 4 Ibid., p. 171. 5 Elwood Jones and Bruce Dyer, Peterborough: The Electric City (Burlington: Windsor Publications Ltd)., 1987.

9 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

townships.6 For a number of years, Scott and several mill workers remained the only residents in the area. Scott’s house, mill, and a small distillery were the only buildings on the town site at this time, which was then called “Scott’s Plains”.

Settlement was relatively scarce following the Crown Surveys until 1825 when Peter Robinson, Superintendent of Immigration and Commissioner of Crown Lands in Upper Canada organized a large immigration scheme. The government-sponsored scheme was designed to solve overpopulation in Ireland and achieve British colonial settlement goals. As a result, Robinson and the government organized for the immigration of approximately 2,000 Irish settlers to the area. Most arrived in groups of 20 or 30 and were settled into various surrounding townships.

During the same year, the town plot, then known as Scott’s Plains, was surveyed by Richard Birdsall and lots were severed into small village parcels. Over time and with increasing settlement, the area grew and a series of annexations absorbed surrounding communities around the developing town. In 1827, the name “Scott’s Plains” was changed to Peterborough in honour of Peter Robinson. At this time, the town of Peterborough was located in Geographic Township of North Monaghan and settlement on east side of the Otonabee River, in the Geographic Township of Otonabee, was minimal. At the end of the 1827 the townsite had approximately 20 buildings, and another 20 houses were built by the next year.7

In 1826-1827, the government aided in the construction of a dam and several saw and grist mills as well as the construction of the first school house and a bridge across the Otonabee River at the end of present-day Hunter Street. By 1838, the town had two grist mills, two sawmills, two distilleries, a brewery, a tannery, four churches, one school, and its first stone house. The first steam boats arrived in Rice Lake in 1832, which made regular trips between Rice Lake and Peterborough, opening up other lands for settlement. The population of the settlement grew steadily throughout the 1830s from 500 in 1832 to close to 800 by 1838. Continual growth throughout the 1840s and 1850s was also spurred on the growing timber and lumber industries in Peterborough County.

As a result of the construction of the Hunter Street Bridge over the Otonabee River, access to land on the east side of the river was greatly improved resulting in increased settlement in the Geographic Township of Otonabee. By 1854, the Peterborough and Coburg Railway had reached Peterborough with a rail stop on the east side of the river at the small growing community known as “Scotch Village”. Over the next 15 years, lots in Concession 13 were severed into small village parcels, industry developed, and “Scotch Village” became the larger community of the Village of Ashburnham. As the Town of Peterborough to the west in North Monaghan Township continued to grow, the Village of Ashburnham and surrounding lands were annexed and became part of the Town of Peterborough.

Through the 19th century a thriving economy grew based on milling of flour, oats, and woolens, manufacture of sash and doors, carpets, agricultural implements, mining equipment and bridge-building. In 1884, Peterborough was the first community in Canada to power its streetlights with electricity. The Edison Electric Company (later acquired by Canadian General Electric) opened a plant in Peterborough in 1891. In 1899 CGE Peterborough produced an electric car. In 1902, Hydro-Electric power became generally available from the Peterborough Utilities Commission.

By 1904, Peterborough was officially incorporated as a city. The City’s population continued to grow throughout the 20th century and by 1921, had grown to 21,000.8 Like most towns and cities in Ontario, the steady decline of the railways during the 20th century and the emergence of the private motor vehicle or automobile have resulted in the growth of the municipality centered on the construction and maintenance of municipal and provincial road network to and within Peterborough. As a result, Peterborough, much like many municipalities in Ontario has seen continual

6 Martha Ann Kidd, Historical Sketches of Peterborough (Peterborough: Broadview Press), 1988. 7 Jones. 8 Ibid.

10 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

growth in its urban and suburban footprint into formerly agricultural areas throughout the 20th and 21st centuries. Most recently, the population of Peterborough in 2006 was 75,406 and has since grown to 78,698 in 2011.9

3.2.3 Trent Severn Waterway

The same route used by Samuel De Champlain in 1615 to travel from Georgian Bay to the Bay of Quinte would later be canalized to become the present-day Trent-Severn Waterway, a designated National Historic Site of Canada. The Trent-Severn Waterway is a 386 km long canal route which connects Lake Ontario at Trenton to Lake Huron at Port Severn and into Georgian Bay. It is comprised of roughly 32 km of man-made channels, and portions of natural waterways including Trent River, Otonabee River, the Kawartha Lakes, Lake Simcoe, Lake Couchiching, and the Severn River, a series of locks, a marine railway, and two lift locks.

Although initially surveyed as a military route in the early 19th century, pressure from early settlers in Upper Canada for the construction of an inland navigation route from Lake Ontario to Georgian Bay resulted in the building of a small wooden lock north of Peterborough in present-day Bobcaygeon in 1833. This was intended to be a part of a larger system of waterway connections in order to open up the interior of the province and to promote agriculture, lumber industry, and commerce. Three years later, the first funds were appropriated for the opening of a waterway via the Trent River and the Kawartha Lakes to link Lake Ontario with Lake Simcoe (and later to Georgian Bay). Construction of this waterway would continue slowly and sporadically over a period of 87 years from the construction of the first lock in 1833 until the completion of the waterway for navigation in 1920.10

In 1890, after the construction of a number of locks and canals to the north of Peterborough, bids were taken from contractors to construct three additional canal sections and locks. These canal sections included Trenton to Rice Lake, Peterborough to Lakefield, and from Balsam Lake to Lake Simcoe. Work on these sections of the waterway was completed between 1904 and 1918. The section of the canal between Peterborough and Lakefield was constructed to navigate around the portion of the Otonabee River known as “Nine Mile Rapids”, a dangerous and swift moving section of the river that drops significantly in elevation at the City of Peterborough.11 Throughout the 19th century, navigating this section of the Otonabee River necessitated many overland portages. Dredging for the portion of the Trent Canal around Nine Mile Rapids began in 1890-1891 and started at Nassau Mills in the Geographic Township of Douro and was extended to Little Lake in the Geographic Township of Otonabee. The significant drop in elevation at Peterborough, however, presented a particular challenge that could not be solved.

In 1896, Richard Birdsall Rogers, a superintendent of the Trent Canal, designed a large hydraulic lift lock based on examples of existing locks in France, Belgium, and England in order to facilitate the completion of the canal in Peterborough. The construction of Lock 21, also known as the Peterborough Lift Lock, began in 1896 and was completed in 1904. At the time of completion, it was the highest hydraulic lift lock ever constructed with a vertical lift of 20 m and was reputed to be the largest unreinforced concrete structure in the world.12 Today, Lock 21 is still the highest hydraulic lift lock in the world and has been designated as a National Historic Site of Canada (Photo 1).13

9 Statistics Canada, “Census Profile: Peterborough” www.statscan.gc.ca (accessed May 2017). 10 Parks Canada, The History of the Trent-Severn Waterway. The Panel on the Future of the Trent-Severn Watwerway, http://www.tswpanel.ca/en/rep-reg/place-lieu.aspx?id=11449 (accessed May 2017). 11 J. Angus, A Work Unfinished: The Making of the Trent-Severn Waterway (Orillia: Severn Publications), 2000. 12 Ibid. 13 Parks Canada, “Peterborough Lift Lock National Historic Site of Canada”. Canadian Register of Historic Places http://www.historicplaces.ca (accessed May 2017).

11 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Photo Courtesy of Musée McCord, Stanley Triggs, 1900 Photo 1: Construction of the Peterborough Lift Locks in 1900 (Left) and the Lift Locks today (Right)

3.2.4 Study Area History

Historically, the study area falls on Lots 29 and 30, Concession XII, Geographic Township of Otonabee, Peterborough County, Ontario. Today, the lots have been extensively subdivided and the study area consists of mostly residential and agricultural properties, as well as a golf course.

By 1875, the City of Peterborough and Ashburnham Village were developed with Ashburnham Village settlement located exclusively within Concession XIII adjacent to the study area in the Township of Otonabee (Figure 3). Concession Road (present-day Armour Road) marks the boundary between Ashburnham Village and undeveloped rural land to the east. Lots 29 and 30, Concession XII appear to have been undeveloped rural land in Otonabee Township to the east of present-day Armour Road. J.D. Armour is listed as the landowner of Lot 30; however, no landowner is listed for Lot 29 and no structures are illustrated on either of the lots. Historic transportation routes present by 1875 in proximity to the study area include present-day Armour Road, McFarlane Street, and Hunter Street East (formerly Elizabeth Street), as well as the former Coburg and Peterborough Railway to the west of the study area.

The 1879 Illustrated Atlas of the County of Peterborough for the Township of Otonabee does not list any landowner names and illustrates the location of major structures only, such as schoolhouses and churches (Figure 4). The City of Peterborough is illustrated to the west of the study area in North Monaghan Township and what appears to be Ashburnham Village is noted along the western portions of Lots 29-31, Concession XII adjacent to the western study area limits. Historic transportation routes in place around the study area at this time include present-day Armour Road to the west, Television Road to the east, and Old Norwood Road to the north.

The Trent Canal (part of the Trent Severn Waterway) and Peterborough Lift Lock were constructed across the western half of Lots 29 and 30, Concession XII between 1890 and 1904, splitting the lots to create the landscape as it stands today and forming the current shape of the study area. To the south of the study area, the canal bisects present-day Armour Road (previously Concession Road) to reconnect to the Otonabee River at Little Lake. The portion of Armour Road to the south of the canal is now known as Ashburnham Drive, which was extended north to Old Norwood Road and runs adjacent to the east side of the canal. This portion of Ashburnham Drive now forms the western limits of the current study area.

12 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

In 1933 historical topographic mapping depicts the study area as still very rural and undeveloped (Figure 5). By then, all four roads that form the boundaries of the study area had been opened and a few residences and farm buildings are shown maintaining frontage along what is now Ashburnham Drive and Maniece Avenue. Properties fronting onto Old Norwood Road and Television Road are located on the north and east sides of the roads and are outside of the study area. In addition, access roads to the agricultural property at what is now 2159 Old Norwood Road are shown accessing the property from both Old Norwood Road and Ashburnham Drive. The Ashburnham Drive access road has since been closed.

Historical topographic mapping in the mid- and late-20th century show gradual but minimal change over time in the study area (Figure 6). By 1956, the City of Peterborough and Ashburnham had grown considerably to the west, however, the Trent Severn Waterway appears to form an informal city boundary as the study area, just east of the waterway still remains rural with no major alterations. The biggest change in the landscape of the study area took place with the establishment of the Lift Lock Golf Course that was opened in the 1960s, and forms the majority of the western portion of the study area. By 1971, the golf courses as well as a number of additional residential properties on the north side of Maniece Avenue are depicted on the topographic mapping (Figure 7).

Today, the landscape has still remained relatively rural and appears to be one of the few remaining areas of undeveloped land along the eastern boundary of the City of Peterborough. Suburban developments have been constructed on the land immediately north and south of the study area. Several newer residential properties have been constructed on the north side of Maniece Avenue as well as a pair of new residences on the south side of Old Norwood Drive. However, a small number of historic dwellings are still interspersed on Maniece Avenue, and the barn structure located on 2159 Old Norwood Road is one of the few remnants structures connecting the landscape of the study area to its agricultural history.

13 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

14 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

15 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

16 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

17 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

18 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

4. Site Description

4.1 Context

Contextually, the study area consists of a mix of residential, agricultural, and recreational properties. The vast majority of the study area consists of undeveloped agricultural fields in the centre of the study area. A few modern residential buildings are located on the south side of Old Norwood Drive, and a mix of historic and modern dwellings are located on the north side of Maniece Avenue. To the west, the study area is dominated primarily by the existing Lift Lock Golf Club and a few existing residential properties.

Photo 2: View looking south from Old Norwood Road showing agricultural land

19 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Photo 3: View looking south from Old Norwood Road showing agricultural land

Photo 4: View showing modern residential dwelling at 2327 Old Norwood Road

20 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Photo 5: View showing modern residential dwelling at 2135 Old Norwood Road

Photo 6: View looking east showing Liftlock Golf Course

21 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Photo 7: View looking east along Old Norwood Road

Photo 8: View looking north along Ashburnham Drive (Liftlock Golf Course is at right)

22 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

Photo 9: View looking west along Maniece Avenue

4.2 Recognized Heritage Properties

As part of this CHAR, AECOM reviewed municipal, provincial, and federal heritage registers to identify properties within the study area that have been recognized for their cultural heritage value. No recognized heritage properties are located within the study area, however, properties adjacent to the study area include a National Historic Site.

As part of this review, the City of Peterborough’s Municipal Cultural Plan and digitized Municipal Cultural Mapping was reviewed to identify the presence of municipally recognized heritage properties. Upon review of the mapping and following consultation with Erik Hanson, Heritage Resources Coordinator for the City of Peterborough, it was determined that no municipally recognized heritage properties were located within the study area. In addition, the Ontario Heritage Trust’s online inventory of buildings, museums, and easement properties were reviewed which determined that no provincially recognized heritage properties were located within the study area.

At the federal level, the Canadian Register of Historic Places and the Parks Canada Federal Directory of Heritage Designations indicated that no federally recognized heritage properties were located within the study area. However, the Trent Severn Waterway and the Peterborough Lift Lock, a National Historic Site14 is located within close proximity to the study area. Located on the west side of Ashburnham Drive, the most notable built structure in close proximity to the study area is the lift lock structure which carries Hunter Street west of its intersection with Ashburnham Drive. The structure is located approximately 40 metres from the edge of the Lift Lock Golf Course property. Three commemorative plaques are located within the vicinity of the Peterborough Lift Lock associated with the history of the structure and the waterway.

14 Historic Sites and Monuments Board Agenda Paper 1979-028, Recognition Statute Historic Sites and Monuments Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. H-4)

23 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

The first plaque, erected by the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada in 1985 is located on the west side of the waterway at the Peterborough Lift Lock Museum and reads:

The Peterborough Lift Lock Opened in 1904, with a lift of 19.8 meters, this is the highest hydraulic lift lock in the world and the first of two built in North America, both on the Trent-Severn Waterway. It operates on a balance principle. A constant water pressure supports each ram through connecting pipes below ground. When extra water is let into the upper chamber, a connecting valve is opened and the heavier chamber automatically descends forcing up the lower chamber to start a new cycle. Among innovations on this lift were the use of concrete, air-filled seals, drop gates, and cast-steel presses for the rams.

The second plaque was installed in 1987 by the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering and commemorates Nicol Baird, a British-born engineer, for his part in the surveying, supervision, and construction of the Trent Severn Waterway. The Trent Severn Waterway has been recognized by the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering as a significant historical engineering site. The plaque is located on the west side of the waterway.

The third plaque in proximity to the study area is located on the Lift Lock structure adjacent to the road underpass and was installed in 1928 by the Peterborough Branch of the Engineering Institute of Canada. This plaque commemorates Richard Birdsall Rogers, a Canadian civil and mechanical engineer whose most significant achievement was his contribution to the design of the Peterborough Lift Lock. The plaque, installed on the west side of the Lift Lock structure reads:

In Memory of Richard Birdsall Rogers, CE, MEIC, OLS, who was Superintending Engineer of the Trent Canal during the construction of this Lift Lock. Born in Peterborough, Jan-16-1857, Died October-2-1927.

4.3 Potential Heritage Properties

In addition to recognized heritage properties, AECOM undertook a site investigation of the study area to identify properties that had potential be of cultural heritage value or interest. As a matter of best practice, AECOM used the MTCS rolling-40 year rule to screen the potential of a site to be of cultural heritage value or interest. The approximate age of buildings and/or structures may be estimated on the history of the development of an area, fire insurance maps, architectural styles, or building methods. Properties with 40+ year old building or structures do not necessarily hold cultural heritage value or interest; their age simply indicates a higher potential. As such, properties within the study area that contained buildings or structures that appeared to be of 40 years or older were identified for their potential heritage value.

The field investigation undertaken for this CHAR identified six properties within the study area that contained buildings or structures that were greater than 40 years of age that had the potential to have cultural heritage value or interest. Five of the six properties contained historic dwellings that appear to have been built between the late- 19th to mid-20th century. All five of the dwellings were included within the study area, however, they are adjacent to the proposed development properties. One of the six properties (2159 Old Norwood Road) contained a barn structure that has been a part of the property since the late-19th/early-20th century. Details related to the six potential properties are included below in Appendix A. The residential properties on the south side of Maniece Avenue were not included as part of the report, as they were determined to not be adjacent to the development property and thus not within the study area for this CHAR. All properties were reviewed and documented from public road allowances.

The following six properties were identified as potential heritage properties within the study area for this CHAR:

24 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

§ 2159 Old Norwood Road; § 2450 Ashburnham Drive; § 506 Maniece Avenue; § 524 Maniece Avenue; § 542 Maniece Avenue; and § 550 Maniece Avenue.

25 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

26 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

5. Proposed Undertaking and Impacts

5.1 Proposed Undertaking

As a part of the proposed site plan, YiZheng Ltd. is proposing to develop the subject properties for a low density residential neighbourhood with approximately 1200 units which will include a mixed-use neighbourhood of residential and commercial uses. The subdivision is currently proposed to be built predominantly on the undeveloped agricultural property with proposed access roads from Ashburnham Drive, Old Norwood Road, and Television Road. A smaller golf course is proposed to be retained in the southwest corner of the property.

5.2 Potential Impacts

Where recognized and potential heritage properties were identified, anticipated potential direct and indirect impacts to cultural heritage must be evaluated based on the current understandings of the project boundaries and scope. For the purposes of this CHAR, the potential impacts of the proposed site development have been assessed according to the City of Peterborough’s Draft Terms of Reference for Completing Cultural Heritage Impact Statements and as well as the MTCS Ontario Heritage Toolkit: Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process document. In accordance with these documents, a proposed undertaking has a potential to result in positive or adverse impacts.

Positive impacts of a development on cultural heritage resources or districts include, but are not limited to: § restoration of a building, including replacement of missing attributes; § restoration of an historic streetscape or enhancement of the quality of the place; § adaptive re-use of a cultural heritage resource to ensure its ongoing viability; and/or § access to new sources of funds to allow for the ongoing protection and restoration of the cultural heritage resource.

Adverse impacts include, but are not limited to: § demolition of any, or part of any, heritage attributes or features; § alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance of a building; § shadows created that obscure heritage attributes or change the viability of the associated cultural heritage landscape; § isolation of a heritage resource or part thereof from its surrounding environment, context or a significant relationship; § obstruction of significant identified views or vistas of, within, or from heritage conservation districts or identified cultural landscapes; § a change in land use where the change affects the property’s cultural heritage value; and/or § land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect a cultural heritage resource.

The proposed site development is not anticipated to result in direct adverse impacts to recognized heritage resources located within the study area. However, the demolition of the barn structure located at 2159 Old Norwood Drive can be considered an adverse impact to a potential heritage property. Although not formally recognized for its

27 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

heritage value, the barn has been a part of the agricultural landscape of the study area since the early/mid-20th century.

Construction of approximately 1200 unit subdivision will result in a change in land use from the existing predominantly agricultural landscape of the study area. In addition, the close proximity of the proposed subdivision to the canal, Peterborough Lift Lock and associated Parks Canada lands on the west side of Ashburnham Drive, will visually impact the views from the lift-lock landscape of the Waterway. The critical viewing areas are located between Hunter Street and the south end of the visitor centre parking lot.

5.3 Potential Mitigation

An appropriate mitigation strategy attempts to minimize the negative impacts of an undertaking on a cultural heritage resource. There is no, one, correct way to mitigate the adverse impacts of new construction on or adjacent to heritage properties or resources. Strictly from the perspective of best practice for heritage conservation, the preferred option is one that conserves a property’s cultural heritage value. The Provincial Policy Statement, 2014, identifies the requirement to conserve cultural heritage, specifically in Section 2.6.1 stating “Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved.” Typically this involves maintaining a heritage resource in situ. In reality, economic, technical, and/or environmental site considerations may require some form of compromise and/or alternate means of heritage conservation.

5.3.1 Trent-Severn Waterway and Peterborough Lift Lock

In accordance with the Liftlock Functional Planning Study (2006), Parks Canada should play a role in confirming a mitigation and/or design strategy that will visually screen the National Historic Site from the new development. In addition, consideration could be given to a new viewing location for the Peterborough Lift Lock as a part of the development, as recommended in the Liftlock Functional Planning Study.

A landscaping strategy for the proposed green corridor along Ashburnham Drive should be reviewed through consultation with Parks Canada. The floodplain limits and natural heritage corridor along Ashburnham Drive will contribute to this landscaped buffer and green corridor. Ideally, the proposed buffer will include pedestrian amenity space allowing for a more prominent pedestrian pathway along Ashburnham Drive, creating a safe space for pedestrians to travel to and from and view the historic Peterborough Lift Lock.

The City of Peterborough's Liftlock Secondary Plan process considers the existing and future land uses for the corridor along Ashburnham Drive adjacent to the Lift Lock lands. There should be ongoing consultation between the City of Peterborough, the owner of the subject lands and Parks Canada to further discuss the implementation strategy for the proposed green corridor and landscaped buffer in order to mitigate the visual impact of the view from the lift lock

28 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

5.3.2 Barn – 2159 Old Norwood Road

The barn associated with 2159 Old Norwood Road appears to have been constructed prior to 1930, and is one of the few remaining agricultural structures associated with the properties within the study area. Although connected to the surrounding agricultural field, the property has undergone recent alterations including the construction of a much more modern residential dwelling which has altered the historic farmscape. In addition, the property, including the barn structure is not recognized at the municipal, provincial, or federal levels. Consequently, mitigation related to the loss of the barn should be planned accordingly. At a minimum, photographic documentation of the structure and the surrounding landscape should be undertaken prior to development to form an archival record of the property. The documentation could be deposited with municipal archives in order to preserve the historic record of the property.

29 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

6. Recommendations

6.1 Trent-Severn Waterway and Peterborough Lift Lock

In order to mitigate the impacts of the change in land use and visual impacts of a new subdivision adjacent to the Peterborough Lift Lock, consideration should be given to the visual transition from the canal and lift lock property to the proposed subdivision. A landscaping strategy or use of a green space buffer between the east side of Ashburnham Drive and the new development may be an appropriate strategy to form a visual transition or sensitive barrier between the National Historic Site and the new development. Landscaping in particular should be most carefully considered within the vicinity of the intersection of Ashburnham Drive and Hunter Street where the Peterborough Lift Lock is located.

Transition between the National Historic Site and the new development should be planned accordingly with the City of Peterborough and Parks Canada as recommended in the Liftlock Functional Planning Study.

6.2 Barn – 2159 Old Norwood Road

Peterborough Museum and Archives 300 Hunter Street East Peterborough, Ontario

30 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

7. Bibliography

Angus, J. A Work Unfinished: The Making of the Trent Severn Waterway. Orillia: Severn Publications. 2000.

Chapman, L.J. and D. F. Putnam. The Physiography of Southern Ontario. 3rd Edition. Toronto: Ontario Geological Survey. 1984.

City of Peterborough. Draft Terms of Reference for Completing Heritage Impact Statements.

City of Peterborough, Municipal Cultural Plan, www.peterborough.ca (accessed May 2017).

Kidd, Martha Ann. Historical Sketches of Peterborough. Peterborough: Broadview Press. 1988.

Illustrated Atlas of the County of Peterborough. Toronto: Miles & Co. 1879.

Jones, Elwood and Bruce Dyer. Peterborough: The Electric City. Burlington: Windsor Publications Ltd. 1987.

LaBranche, Bill. Peterborough Scrapbook: A Pictorial History of the City of Peterborough, 1825-1975. Peterborough: Maxwell Review. 1975.

Ministry of Culture. Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process. 2006.

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Provincial Policy Statement. 2014.

National Topographic Series. Peterborough. 31 D/08. 1933.

National Topographic Series. Peterborough. 31 D/08. 1956.

National Topographic Series. Peterborough. 31 D/08. 1971.

Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. 018.

Parks Canada. Canadian Register of Historic Places. www.historicplaces.ca (accessed May 2017).

Parks Canada. The History of the Trent-Severn Waterway. The Panel on the Future of the Trent-Severn Waterway. http://www.tswpanel.ca/english/historytsw.asp (accessed May 2017).

Ramoine, Robert. Peterborough Town and Ashburnham Village. 1875.

Statistics Canada. Census Profile “Peterborough”. www.statscan.gc.ca (accessed May 2017).

T.M. Robinson Associates. Liftlock Functional Planning Study. 2005. www.peterborough.ca (accessed May 2017).

31 Contact Michael Greguol, M.A. Cultural Heritage Specialist T +1 519-963-5866 E [email protected]

Adria Grant, M.A., CAHP Manager, Cultural Resources T +1 519-963-5861 E [email protected]

aecom.com Appendix A

Cultural Heritage Inventory Ashborough Village, Peterborough, Ontario YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

2159 Old Norwood Road, Peterborough

Description: Early 20th century timber frame barn on raised concrete block foundation. The CHVI or Potential CHVI: structure includes a gambrel roof, currently clad with metal roofing materials. Exterior siding Design/Physical – Representative example on the barn appears to be vertical wood barn board siding. The fenestration is mostly of early-20th century timber frame barn present in the window and door openings built into the block foundation, with the exception construction of two small windows located in the gambrel roof peak. The barn and the surrounding Historical/Associative – None landscape are the only visual remnants of the farmscape property. Contextual – Contextually linked to the agricultural fields surrounding the property The barn is located at the end of a long narrow driveway that is accessed from the south and other landscape features including the side of Old Norwood Drive. The residential dwelling on the property is a late-20th/early-21st long driveway accessed from Old Norwood century house. Road

Heritage Attributes: · None

Potential Direct or Indirect Impacts to Cultural Heritage Value: Demolition of the barn and the suburban development of the landscape will result in the removal/loss of the remaining agricultural structures and landscape associated with the existing property.

2450 Ashburnham Drive, Peterborough

Description: Mid-20th century 1½ storey vernacular residential dwelling built with Victory CHVI or Potential CHVI: Home style details. The steep-pitched roof and north and south gable ends contribute to its Design/Physical – Representative example Victory Home style along with its overall mass, scale, and form. Additional design details of Victory Style housing commonly built found on the dwelling include a centre peak gable over the front entrance and the following World War II in Canada symmetrical three-bay arrangement of the front façade of the house. The front door is Historical/Associative – None flanked by two sets of three windows and a covered front porch is supported by decorative Contextual – None concrete posts. Exterior cladding consists of aluminum siding. Heritage Attributes: · None

Potential Direct or Indirect Impacts to Cultural Heritage Value: None anticipated. Impacts at this location will take place on the adjacent property and will not result in any direct impacts to 2450 Ashburnham Drive.

506 Maniece Avenue, Peterborough

Description: Mid-20th century 1 storey vernacular dwelling with low-pitched CHVI or Potential CHVI: gable roof. The exterior of the dwelling is clad with a stone, however, it is Design/Physical – None unconfirmed whether the stone is a structural component of the house or an Historical/Associative – None exterior veneer. A shed style extension of the roof extends over the front Contextual – None porch of the house to form a covered verandah across the façade. Heritage Attributes: • None

A-1 YiZheng Ltd. CHAR – Ashborough Village

524 Maniece Avenue, Peterborough

Description: Late-19th/early-20th century 2-storey vernacular residential CHVI or Potential CHVI: dwelling. The 3-bay dwelling includes a medium-pitched side-gable roof with Design/Physical – Representative of some Gothic Revival a central gable peak over an arched gable window. Although not a true cottage details example, the brick house represents some details typically found on Gothic Historical/Associative – None Revival cottages found in Ontario. The moderate scale, and symmetrical Contextual – None arrangement of the front façade is typical of the style, however the house is devoid of the ornate Gothic woodwork often found on these dwellings. Heritage Attributes: Additional design details include symmetrical window and door arrangements · None on the ground floor, a shallow hipped roof over the front door, and brick flat arch lintels over the front façade windows. The wood window shutters are more modern components and are not designed in a manner typically found on Gothic Revival cottages.

The house is one of three brick dwellings built on the north side of Maniece Avenue in the same form.

542 Maniece Avenue, Peterborough

Description: Late-19th/early-20th century 2-storey vernacular residential CHVI or Potential CHVI: dwelling. The 3-bay brick dwelling includes a medium-pitched side-gable roof Design/Physical – None with a shed dormer. The house is similar in scale, mass, and form to other Historical/Associative – None cottages found on Maniece Avenue, however it differs in design details Contextual – None including its hipped verandah on the front façade. The front door is flanked by symmetrical windows. Recent additions and design details include a brick Heritage Attributes: chimney on east side of the dwelling. · None

The house is one of three brick dwellings built on the north side of Maniece Avenue in the same form.

550 Maniece Avenue, Peterborough

Description: Late-19th/early-20th century 2 storey vernacular residential dwelling. The three CHVI or Potential CHVI: bay brick dwelling includes a gable-pitched roof. The house is similar in scale, mass, and Design/Physical – None form to other cottages found on Maniece Avenue, however differs in design details including Historical/Associative – None its hipped verandah on the front façade. The front door is flanked by symmetrical windows. Contextual – None Recent additions and design details include a brick chimney on east side of the dwelling. Heritage Attributes: The house is one of three brick dwellings built on the north side of Maniece Avenue in the · None same form. In comparison to the other two similar dwellings, this structure is the most reserved in terms of its design characteristics.

A-2 Appendix B

Development Plan – Ashborough Village PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION

PART OF BLOCKS V AND W, EXISTING RESIDENTIAL EXISTING RESIDENTIAL REGISTERED PLAN No. 1A AND

PART OF 29 AND 30, CONCESSION 12 THORNBURY DRIVE THORNBURY

NAISH DRIVE NAISH GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF OTONABEE, NOW IN OLD NORWOOD RD. OLD NORWOOD RD. CITY OF PETERBOROUGH 215.5 220.76 17.21 15.24 15.24 7.62 15.69 7.14 28.50 15.25 206 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 7.01 15.25 15.25 27.44 20.95 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 22.51 15.25 14.97 COUNTY OF PETERBOROUGH 21.38

38.70

249 519 520 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 33.17 32.88 22.04

31.76 669 31.48

31.20 30.92 30.41 30.31 30.64 30.47 30.36 30.25 30.20 30.14 30.08

3.69

27.47 35.82 15.25 15.25 4.49 18.50 670 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 7.07 15.24 22.51 15.25 70.92

70.94 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 15.25 213 10.35 37.75 39.96 KEY MAP

78.55 518

516 517 65.82 205.5 65.86 65.87 28.79 38.61 18.31 32.70 215 521 10.35 15.25 671 TELEVISION ROAD 18.50 18.50 18.50 STREET "Q" 16.49 69.48 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL

41.13 522 PARKHILL ROAD E 9.14 LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT AS 9.14 7.07 7.07 30.32 PER REPORTS BY BEACON 25.00 25.00 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14

8.47 7.07 7.07 ENVIRONMENTAL NOVEMBER 18.50 18.50 2016 & VALDOR ENGINEERING 523 560 561 11.87 12.39 OLD NORWOOD RD 9.14

4.53 12.14 12.14 12.14 12.14 672

FEBRUARY 2017 30.00 30.00 19.12 50.84 15.24 15.24 248 32.30 17.21 15.25 13.72 13.72 13.72 9.88 524 30.01 N.T.S.

12.65 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 74.63 9.14 37.25 9.14 30.00 30.00 83.78 559 562

9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 PARKHILL ROAD W

74.51 30.00 25.00 25.02 SUBJECT 10.93 18.34 21.68 31.27 AMOUR ROAD 23.17 60.86 BLOCK '716'

1 81.59 7.62 525

9.14 9.14 673

558 563 15.25 9.14 9.14 13.72 13.72 12.69 12.20 12.20 13.46 15.96 PROPERTY 28.63 3.80 11.87 9.14 11.87 30.50 45.95 526 25.85 45.59 9.14 557 564 9.14 9.14 2 30.34 42.65 42.65 HUNTER ST 9.14 13.27 37.90 38.98 674 41.86 425

46.54 15.25 527 TELEVISION ROAD

16.01 9.14 422 423 419 420 421 413 414 415 416 417 418 424 30.23 30.28 30.32 412 30.02 30.07 30.13 30.18 66.22 36.54 411 556 565 25.00 31.50 426 9.14 9.14 642 641 640 639 638 637 636 635 634 633 632 631 630 30.00 30.00

9.14 30.93

13.72 12.20 32.33 33.73 9.14 34.36 35.12

33.66 36.52 23.60 12.20 11.87 37.91 42.21 BLOCK '717' 410 528 3 205 9.14 9.14 555 566 18.50 16.01 13.72 13.72 13.72 13.72 13.72 13.72 12.49 12.20 12.20 12.20 12.20 427 9.14 9.14 245 63.73 7.07 675 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.19 15.25 10.70 NAC (3.70ha) 12.20 9.25 9.18 9.38 32.59 16.05 EX. TRENT CANAL 409 49.46 529 9.25 ASHBURNHAM DR 18.50 9.25 9.14 29.97 9.14 9.14 554 567 9.25 9.14 9.14 18.50 7.09 9.25 25.77 30.00 LITTLE LAKE 4 9.14 428 STREET "B" 18.50 18.50 18.50 STREET "U" 6.98 5.26 9.15 408 18.50 18.50 676 15.25 11.76 43.64 6.2610.41 530 553 568 STREET "P" 29.42 4.67 9.14 9.14 7.07 32.84 9.64 61.82 8.84 31.31 24.96 41.56 31.31 25.35 16.03 12.26 7.07 19.29 41.44 BLOCK '715' 25.00 10.10 12.20 6.08 9.16 3.73 18.50 470 4.55 6.22 18.50 502 6.00 7.07 12.34 5 407 503 34.54471 18.50 10.06 552 569 12.34 29.77 12.20 11.78 30.00 38.82 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 18.50 LANSDOWNE ST

3.46 12.34 9.14 61.41 28.18 22.01 9.14 9.14 30.00 24.65 622 6.98

30.00 30.00 10.31 10.31 12.26 211 9.14 24.509.14 30.00 677 9.14 15.25 30.00504 429 5.94 531 6.00 6 501 21.68 33.42472 13.25 32.59 9.14 7.65 551 570 406 32.25 15.90 12.08 469 9.14 30.25 1.43 9.14 70.61 31.77 12.20 9.14 9.14 9.14 7.74 30.58 15.71 18.50 9.14 30.00 505 30.44 621 LANSDOWNE ST

9.14 30.00 30.00 26.90 25.00 6.00 12.24 10.70 10.70 7 500 473 623 624 625 30.35

9.14 626 9.14 9.14 30.00 532 17.48 BLOCK '714' TRANS-CANADA HWY 9.14 468 30.35 STREET30.00 "E" 78.30 9.14 9.14 6.36 627 405 430 30.01 30.35 9.14 571 628

9 12.20 30.35 15.25 9.14 31.48 506 499 9.14 34.09 678 8 474 629 9.14 9.14 533 13.03 620 10.10 12.20 12.25 550 18.16 32.34 12.28 467 25.04 9.14 12.34 16.03 9.14 10.70 10.70 7.07 10 9.14 431 9.14 9.14 30.00 26.92 12.34 10.31 507 404 9.14 9.14 9.14 34.33 30.00 12.34 12.20 498 475 10.57 9.21 10.92 11 9.14 32.85 9.14 534 6.41 55.61

466 4.69 9.14 12.28 9.14 9.14 432 549 572 6.00 49.12 9.14 9.14 508 619 15.25 679 12 9.14 9.14 7.78 10.92 9.14 9.91 497 476 32.27 30.25 19.86 403 9.14 535 9.14 32.09 SCHEDULE OF LAND USE 9.14 465 28.35 34.23 12.20 9.14 16.02 240 13 433 9.14 548 6.00 9.82 9.14 14.10 23.00 9.14 12.30 509 14.10 9.14 9.14 573 17.32 138.08 496 477 32.25 14 9.14 464 536 30.04 9.14 17.98 402 9.14 9.14 434 7.07 210 9.14 9.14 547 205 35.79 12.20 510 15.25 680 15 12.27 495 478 9.14 9.14 574 10.80 BLOCK '713' 9.14 9.14 537 618 30.15 9.14 463 9.14 30.00 9.14 9.14 9.14 9.14 16.10 435 18.50 10.70 9.14 9.14 546 6.00BLOCK '718'401 511 7.06 PARKLAND (0.43ha) RESIDENTIAL 9.95 37.35 9.14 9.14 575 9.14 14.64 12.20 494 479 AREA (ha) 9.14 538 12.93 DESCRIPTION LOT / BLOCK NO. 462 32.25 9.14 9.07 29.78 21 38.58 9.14 9.14 436 545 617 UNITS 9.14 7.07 9.14 9.14 30.00 15.25 681 512 TELEVISION ROAD (30m R.O.W. WIDTH) 30.00 38.58 493 9.14 15.36 9.14 576 10.70 480 539 66.19 28.93 20 9.14 12.23 25.00 9.14 9.14 461 9.14 15.98 ASHBURNHAM DRIVE (30m9.14 R.O.W. WIDTH) 9.14 12.20 437 21.54 544 10.70 9.14 9.14 616 33.04 513 9.14 9.14 577 25.00 9.70 19 492 481 19.48 32.00 12.23 9.14 9.14 6.00 460 18.50 9.14 9.14 9.14 438 615 10.70 9.14 18 15.94 543 18.50 15.25 9.14 18.50 682 SINGLE DETACHED RESIDENTIAL 71.08 514 9.14 540 9.14 578 12.23 9.14 STREET "A" 491 482 48.78 28.80 9.14 10.70 12.07 17 459 9.14 7.07 12.81 614 15.91 9.14 9.14 439 26.54 54.54 9.14 7.07 542 515 9.14 10.70 STREET "L" 22 30.00 30.00 9.14 579 STREET "D" 16 6.00 490 483 30.00 9.59 9.14 613 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 53.14 23.87 17.23 10.70 9.14 30.19 9.14 9.14 458 9.16 9.14 13.16 440 541 12.94 13.96 15.25 BLOCK '719' 9.14 9.14 612 683 8.84 13.74 STREET "V" STREET "T" 9.14 25.00 580 46.4223 62.87 30.00 489 484 STREET "O" 32.87 119, 125, 210, 221, 314, 315, 334, 335, 373, 9.14 9.14 457 35.30 9.14 9.14 611 24.79 9.52 17.90 BLOCK '708' 441 27.00

53.60 9.14 4.63 608 16.48 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 15.24m 51 32.00 10.70 9.14 581 268.43 BLOCK '709' 488 485 9.14 610 374,470,471,502,503,516-520,539,540,657-686 38.18 9.25 30.00 23.00 23.00 24 18.50 456 32.25 9.14 607 23.55 9.14 53.60 9.14 9.14 442 10.70 32.00 15.25 9.14 684 9.14 609 33.25 9.14 27.25582 9.59 27.05 9.41 486 7.07 606 37.51 9.14 9.14 30.00 10.70 15.48 9.14 53.60 9.14 7.07 455 9.14 9.14 37.90 30.00 443 30.00 BLOCK '701'32.24 9.14 25 7.76 9.14 605 10.04 16.76 9.14 25.00 9.16 203 7.07 11.14 29 71.20 6.00 487 9.22 388, 412-418, 429, 26 454 604 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 13.72m 8 EX. INSTITUTIONAL 444 7.07 18.50 STREET27.00 "K" 18.50 9.14 9.22 6.98 28 27 9.14 25.25 685 23.01 33.83 47.56 603 17.59 583 18.50 453 32.00 9.22 26.04 BLOCK '706' 18.50 9.59 32.00 235 18.50 11.14 445 41.40 STREET "S" 30.00 9.14 25.00 7.07 602 9.22 20.76 33.08 6.57 40.16 9.14 9.59 23.00 584 7.07 25.00 7.07 32.19 18.50 9.22 6.00 30, 31, 82, 83, 112, 120-124, 126-145, 157, 158, 211-220, 222-265, 292, 11.21 30.00 452 446 48.60 372 585 601 10.31 9.14 30.00 33.40 9.14 6.98 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 12.19m 113 25.00 9.14 9.14 7.07 600 401-408, 410,411,419-424, 615,624-628,689-692 586 34.62 24.75 11.14 9.59 9.14 (PETERBOROUGH MUSEUM & ARCHIVES) 7.07 18.50 53.60 447 41.40 371 7.95 LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT 25.00 BLOCK '705' STREET "R" BLOCK '700' 587 599 73.16 13.11 50.00 9.14 35.83 60.00 18.50 15.24 AS PER REPORTS BY 25.00 7.07 18.50 53.60 18.50 23.00 9.14 686 18.27 61.47 598 BEACON ENVIRONMENTAL BLOCK '710' BLOCK '707' 448 BLOCK '693' 370 588 37.04 29.95 7.07 30.00 7.07 9.14 NOVEMBER 2016 & 27.42 23.00 25.00 9.14 9.14 597 38.25 18.50 30.00 9.81 589 VALDOR ENGINEERING 35.27 48.60 9.14 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 10.67m 349, 357, 409, 609-614, 616-623, 629, 656, 19 449 369 9.14 12.20 FEBRUARY 2017 59634.30 7.07 9.14 9.14 590 7.07 33.35687 24.67BLOCK '732' 30.00 9.14 13.64 9.14 STREET "C" 9.14 37.72 BLOCK '733' PARKLAND (0.12ha) 450 368 591 12.61 60.00 53.60 230 82 50.00 9.14 9.14 9.14 23.00 25.00 278 9.14 9.85 12.20 BLOCK '712' 18.50 BLOCK '704' 18.50 30.00 592 13.24 NAC (2.10ha) 27.9130 9.14 9.14 688 53.60 30.00451 367 199 9.14 37.12 6.00 277 NAC (0.94ha) 1-29, 32-81, 84-111, 113-118, 146-156, 159-209, 266-291, 293-313, 81 7.07 25.00 9.14 12.30 11.72 53.60 593 30.00 30.00 9.14 9.14 25.00 276 9.14 12.20 316-333, 336-348, 350-356, 358-372, 375-387, 389-400, 425-428, 12.19 BLOCK '720' 366 594 MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 9.14m 501 15.78 29.9031 30.00 53.60 13.91 9.14 13.43 4.85 80 9.14 BLOCK '699' 9.14 9.14 32.00 689 9.14 83 275 9.14 41.28 27.00 430-469, 472-501, 504-515, 521-538, 541-608, 630-655, EX. RESIDENTIAL 9.14 18.50 595 7.07 25.00 BLOCK '703' 365 18.50 9.14 29.49 50.00 48.60 25.00 274 9.14 12.20 32 12.19 30.00 27.06 9.14 79 25.00 53.60 9.14 9.81 LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT AS 84 400 BLOCK '694' 11.72 279 9.14 9.14 13.64 BLOCK '711' 30.00 30.00 30.00 273 690 PER REPORTS BY BEACON 7.07 364 45.73 13.63 29.41 23.00 7.07 9.81 33 78 9.14 9.14 7.20 18.50 ENVIRONMENTAL NOVEMBER 9.14 9.14 399 30.00 280 199 225 85 53.60 272 9.14 12.20 2016 & VALDOR ENGINEERING 9.14 TOWNHOUSE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH 6.1m 693-711 137 2.95 9.14 398 11.72 363 281 FEBRUARY 2017 29.41 7.07 9.14 9.14 34 STREET "F"77 9.14 9.14 271 9.14 9.14 30.00 6.00 6.95 13.64 47.05691 86 23.00 9.14 9.14 397 282 9.14 13.83 362 9.14 270 4.81 14.20 29.56 9.14 157 60.00 30.80 18.50 MIXED USE (RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL) 725 115 1.46 35 76 STREET "B" 9.14 18.50 220 9.23 9.14 87 18.50 23.00 9.14 396 283 20.64 STREET "A" BLOCK '702' 9.14 269 7.07 9.14 9.14 30.00 53.60 7.07 9.14 361 9.81 692 9.49 30.82 7.07 9.14 395 25.00 284 36 9.14 75 156 11.72 11.72 9.14 9.14 268 13.23 88 25.00 30.00 10.44 9.14 30.00 9.14 6.18BLOCK '731' 9.14 30.00 285 18.50 23.00 33.39 9.14 25.00 9.14 6.00 BLOCK '695'30.80 360 9.14 267 23.05 NET DEVELOPABLE TOTAL 944 29.16 37 9.14 74 155 158 10.36 9.14 9.14 9.14 30.00 7.10 81.61 9.36 89 185 286 9.14 30.00 7.07 18.50 53.60 BLOCK '721' STREET9.14 "N" 266 7.07 9.14 9.14 25.00 BLOCK '698' 34.88 30.00 359 25.00 9.14 303 9.14 25.00 30.00 287 200.5 10.14 9.14 73 154 9.59 9.14 9.14 20.26 215 25.48 36.8838 90 159 184 11.72 394 9.14 13.64 30.00 10.44 9.14 18.50 9.14 9.14 7.07 30.00 302 288 GOLF COURSE 726 - 14.10 10.36 12.02 10.49 9.14 23.00 358 9.14 6.00 9.14 30.00 72 393 9.14 41.27 153 35.30 301 9.14 11.38 39 91 160 183 289 23.00 9.14 9.14 18.11 30.00 9.14 9.14 9.14 392 11.72 43.11265 9.14 7.07 9.14 9.14 9.14 10.26 46.41 STREET "H" 30.00 300 290 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND 728 - 3.14 152 11.80 9.59 9.14 12.19 40 13.64 92 161 182 391 9.14 9.14 18.50 25.00 9.14 30.00 18.71 9.68 71 9.14 9.14 357 299 25.00 81.55 53.19 9.14 9.14 291 80.75 23.00 6.00 9.14 43.09264 25.00 151 9.14 390 35.30 9.14 304 14.77 10.44 30.00 9.14 9.81 NATURAL AREAS & CORRIDORS (NAC) 712, 717, 724, 733 - 10.45 200 41 93 162 181 298 12.19 9.14 9.14 30.00 57.86 30.00 BLOCK '696' 7.07 9.14 9.14 9.14 18.50 9.14 9.14 389 25.00 356 18.50 13.64 30.00 11.72 305 297 9.14 150 11.80 7.07 18.50 38.82 26.96 61.05 42 163 180 263 7.07 9.14 306 198.5 12.19 9.14 9.14 PARKLAND 713, 723, 729, 730, 732 - 1.97

9.14 9.14 296 11.61 12.19 9.14 94 9.14 355 25.00 23.00 32.98 78.68 149 9.14 43 164 179 7.07 9.14 307 295 18.50 34.50 61.32 25.00 9.14 18.50 262 12.92 9.14 13.64 9.14 18.50 42.90 9.14 13.15 354 16.51 308 6.30 4.20 9.14 294 12.19 TRAIL 714, 715, 718, 719, 720, 721, 722, 727, 731 - 0.28 210 70 148 9.14 7.07 7.98 11.20 44 30.00 165 178 9.14 9.14 18.50 200 309 35.72 54.16 7.07 9.14 9.14 23.00 9.14 293 261 9.14 25.00 353 10.18 5.05 10.36 35.30 9.14 147 118.69 BLOCK '697' 9.14 30.00 69 25.00 177 26.51 STREET "M" 310 18.50 45 13.15 166 9.14 9.14 12.19 9.14 30.00 9.14 186 292

18.50 7.07 9.14 STREET "J" 30.00 352 9.14 OTHER LANDS OWNED BY APPLICANT 716 - 0.11 12.72 9.14 47.68 7.07 32.41 9.14 311 25.83 12.25 23.95 9.14 9.14 10.44 68 95 13.64 19.58 260 46 7.07 146 167 176 25.00 323 9.14 9.14 30.00 187 10.36 16.99 30.00 12.19 9.14 9.14 373 9.14 312 9.14 25.00 351 9.14 9.14 29.67 12.63 9.14 38.84 13.15 9.14 10.18 322 47 67 168 175 17.56 9.14 313 RIGHT OF WAY STREETS A-V - 11.89 9.14 96 18.50 9.14 9.14 BLOCK '729' 188 30.00 259 9.14 18.50 13.64 30.00 18.50 16.99 350 321 9.14 12.19 10.56 9.14 9.14 6.00 9.14 9.14 13.00 38.84 STREET "I" 9.14 30.00 314 26.33 29.81 17.29 48 66 7.07 174 17.88 BLOCK11.80 '722' 9.14 9.14 97 PARKLAND (0.98ha) 23.93 320 169 9.14 9.14 189 9.14 9.14 25.00 324 12.19 196.5 9.36 9.14 349 258 44.13 17.90 9.14 9.14 9.14 374 319 29.67 65 42.17 49 30.12 173 32.25 8.10 9.14 98 13.64 9.14 190 9.14 30.45 12.69 TOTAL SITE AREA 944 71.10 9.14 9.14 15.26 325 18.50 9.14 318 12.19 257 205 9.80 9.14 42.09 145 30.00 9.14 9.14 18.50 50 64 7.07 18.50 172 375 17.90 11.80 99 35.16 317 20.76 32.89 9.14 9.14 118.69 191 9.14 348

9.14 9.14 326 5.67 12.70 12.19 9.14 12.19 256 HUNTER STREET 17.10 9.96 9.14 9.91 6.00 316 38.5751 63 171 376 54.33 100 7.07 9.14 18.50 192 9.14 30.00 144 15.25 30.00 37.38 9.14 347 35.63 9.14 9.14 9.14 327 12.19 9.14 9.14 EX. TRENT CANAL 9.14 315 18.50 255 12.86 52 62 12.19 12.19 10.36 377 34.75 101 170 45.70 9.83 9.14 27.45 9.14 9.14 193 346 10.18 9.14 9.14 30.00210 25.00 328 12.19 35.81 143 30.00 9.14 9.14 6.00 REQUIRED INFORMATION 210.5 254 53 61 12.19 12.19 209 9.14 378 BLOCK '723' 26.03 164.81 31.14 102 12.19 13.15 9.14 18.50 194 9.14 345 33.56 9.14 9.14 10.36 9.14 12.19 9.14 PARKLAND (0.29ha) 211 208 9.14 9.14 17.10 12.19 9.96 253 30.62 60 103 142 9.14 379 329 28.80 12.78 191 9.14 195 9.14 9.14 9.14 207 344 9.14 12.19198 12.19 212 9.14 9.14 12.19 37.38 9.14 252 6.79 AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 51(17) OF THE PLANNING ACT R.S.O. 1990. 12.19 28.80 59 104 206 380 330 9.14 141 9.14 196 9.14 343 12.19 6.39 9.14 6.00 213 9.14 9.14 9.14 13.58 12.19 9.14 9.14 251 58 9.14 30.85 (g) SEE PLAN 105 9.96 381 331 12.19 9.14 205 197 9.14 342 LIMIT OF DEVELOPMENT 9.14 214 12.19 6.00 STREET9.14 "K" 108.43 12.66 (a) SEE PLAN 29.91 12.19 9.14 250 AS PER REPORTS BY (h) MUNICIPAL WATER AND SEWAGE AVAILABLE 9.14 31.85 188 204 BLOCK '730' 57 106 12.19 9.14 382 332 STREET12.19 "L" BEACON ENVIRONMENTAL 9.14 140 215 198 9.14 (b) SEE PLAN 9.14 12.19 STREET "B" 341 9.14 249 NOVEMBER 2016 & 203 41.91 12.85 (i) SILTY / SANDY SOIL 9.14 9.14 9.14 12.19 31.85 56 12.19 383 333 VALDOR ENGINEERING (c) SEE KEY MAP 79.37 107 27.21 18.50 9.14 216 9.14 12.19 9.14 202 199 340 248 FEBRUARY 2017 (j) SEE PLAN 9.14 195 30.00 9.14 12.19 31.85 12.76 139 9.14 9.14 9.14 55 12.19 18.50 (d) SEE SCHEDULE OF LAND USE 9.96 384 5.35 247 (k) MUNICIPAL WATER AND SEWAGE AVAILABLE 108 217 21.71 197 31.85 25.93 30.00 12.19 12.19 200 9.14 334 4.71 12.19 PARKLAND (0.15ha) 7.07 9.14 339 12.73 BLOCK '724' 30.00 9.14 (e) SEE PLAN 164.14 10.36 9.14 246 13.15 138 385 12.19 31.85 (l) SEE PLAN 54 109 218 12.19 6.12 26.68 NAC (3.71ha) 190.5 25.00201 9.14 338 (f) SEE PLAN 25.00 9.14 12.19 245 NOTE: CONTOURS RELATE TO CANADIAN GEODETIC DATUM 9.14 9.14 12.19 31.85 198.13 219 386 7.47 110 15.24 9.14 137 10.36 337 12.19 31.85 244 STREET18.50 "G"13.15 30.00 9.14 9.14 30.00 9.14 BLOCK '725' 30.46 12.49 12.19 220 7.07 12.19 31.85 18.50 387 18.50 243 9.14 8.00 111 18.50 195 32.25 336 12.19 25.00 9.14 197 31.85

14.22 242 MIXED USE (1.46ha) 100.92 EX. INSTITUTIONAL 136 28.17 9.14 7.46 9.14 221 12.20 12.19 112 7.07 12.19 18.50 11.36 31.85 13.15 12.19 388 335 9.14 241 9.14 22.00 7.13 9.63 12.19 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE 9.14 31.85

30.00113 195 30.00 12.19 240 22.91 135 21.84 31.31 9.47 12.19 7.07 18.50 12.19 30.85 9.14 17.14 8.84 239 12.19 114 188.82 31.07 12.19 15.63235 66.01 4.10 238 9.14 222 206 9.14 115 18.50 18.50 236 37.93 237 207 (PETERBOROUGH LIFT LOCK VISITOR CENTRE) 134 30.27 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LANDS TO BE SUBDIVIDED AS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE

29.60 25.83 12.73 12.19 223 116 7.07 12.76 11.14 12.93 12.19 ADJACENT LANDS ARE ACCURATE AND CORRECTLY SHOWN IN ACCORDANCE WITH A PLAN OF SURVEY PREPARED BY ELLIOTT AND PARR 117 51.96 66.50 133 224 12.19 12.19 12.19 15.15 71.33 52.82 12.19 [PETERBOROUGH] LTD. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS. 18.50 12.19 12.19 234 118 21.69 30.00 63.40 225 12.19 12.19 12.19 47.37

9.71 55.43 34.59 207 9.14 18.70 132 30.11 233 226 12.18 135.82 136.02 11.45 4.96 23.54 81.91 119 12.19 7.03 227 228 229 230 231 232

BLOCK '728' 29.41 29.52 29.62

29.93 29.72 62.58 37.31 120 1.80 131 26.91 18.50 12.19 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT POND (3.14ha) 40.44 56.42 25.68 14.49 14.56 14.73 16.31 12.19 12.19 12.19 14.79 19.03 25.34 19.65 30.41 130 29.06 5.02 35.16 14.14 131.69 121 SHAWN M. O'CONNOR, O.L.S. DATE: 30.52 12.19 ELLIOTT & PARR SURVEYORS LTD. 12.19 R5.00 22.39 12.19 194 12.19 12.07 35.24129 6.84 22.40 18.87 8.95 162.31

0.00 12.19 4.72 122 R18.00 12.19 12.19 40.97 128 29.60 35.45 14.66 11.95 12.19 6.00 32.19 127 8.15 OWNER'S CERTIFICATE 126 218.62

123 12.19 22.23 21.73 28.88 200 13.38 12.19 205 52.57 6.00 I HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE BIGLIERI GROUP LTD. TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT THIS DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION TO 35.99 124 125 7.36 THE CITY OF PETERBOROUGH. BLOCK '727'

53.00 147.30

195 33.84 54.34 164.27

23.24 EX. COMMERCIAL ZHOU QING DATE: 193.5 YIZHENG LTD.

41.59

88.67 19.38 ASHBOROUGH 193.5 110.14 VILLAGE

264.34 203 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL

EX. TRENT CANAL

BLOCK '726' 200 BUILDING YOUR IDEAS - INTO BIG PLANS GOLF COURSE (14.10ha) THE BIGLIERI GROUP LTD.

197 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT & PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Telephone: (416) 693-9155 Facsimile: (416) 693-9133 20 Leslie Street, Suite 121, Toronto, Ontario M4M 3L4 [email protected]

TELEVISION ROAD (30m R.O.W. WIDTH)

196

198.10 195 196 17.50

194

2.55

ASHBURNHAM DRIVE (30m R.O.W. WIDTH) 7.36 30.48

197

17.43

53.75 42.08 MANIECE AVENUE (26m R.O.W. WIDTH)

35.65

140.06 165.92 150.59 113.36

MANIECE AVENUE (26m R.O.W. WIDTH) No Description Date Int.

PROJECT NUMBER: 16383

193 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DRAWN BY CHECKED BY DATE: March 10, 2017 DRAWING No.: 200 DP-1 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL SCALE: 1:2000 JS AB

202