All properties with identified BH resources within the addendum study area were then evaluated for potential project impacts.

Transcription

1

2 Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Culture Services Unit Programs and Services Branch 401 Bay Street, Suite 1700 Toronto ON M7A 0A7 Tel: Fax: Ministère du Tourisme, de la Culture et du Sport Unité des services culturels Direction des programmes et des services 401, rue Bay, Bureau 1700 Toronto ON M7A 0A7 Tél: Téléc: November 6, 2014 ( ONLY) Paul J. Racher 154 Otonabee Drive Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 E: MTCS file #: 32EA007 Proponent: Prowind Canada Inc. Subject: Heritage Assessment Report Addendum Prowind Canada Gunn s Hill Wind Farm November 5, 2014 Location: Township of Norwich, Oxford County Dear Paul J. Racher: This office has reviewed the above-mentioned addendum (the Addendum ), which has been submitted to this ministry as required under O. Reg. 359/09, as amended (Renewable Energy Approvals under the Environmental Protection Act) (the REA regulation ). This letter constitutes the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (the Ministry ) comments for the purposes of section 23(3)(a) of the REA regulation regarding the heritage assessment undertaken for the above project. The Addendum recommends the following: 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This addendum to the heritage assessment for the Gunn s Hill Wind Farm encompassed a study area consisting of previously un-assessed portions of the participating properties and all abutting properties. The addendum study area contained 21 properties not previously assessed. All of the properties were examined for built heritage resources and tested against the criteria of Ontario Regulation 9/06. The results of the evaluation indicated that 10 of the 21 properties had BH resources with CHVI (Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). The majority of these identified heritage resources met several of the criteria established in Ontario Regulation 9/06. All properties with identified BH resources within the addendum study area were then evaluated for potential project impacts. The results of these evaluations can be summarized as follows: One participating property was found to be designated under the Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The Township of Norwich designation By-law focuses solely on the David Start House located on the property. The heritage attributes identified in the Township of Norwich s designation By-law are: one arched chimney; original four-paned windows; wooden shutters; gable and gingerbread; central entrance door with transom and sidelights. The By-law also lists interior features such as: the pine floors and trim; wide pine window frames panelled to the floor; and plaster ceiling medallion in the iron hall. In addition, given that the house is an early farmhouse of the area it has associative

3 value as a concrete reminder of the agricultural past of the area, its physical location is also important. This building is located 816 m away from the closest turbine blade sweep (Turbine 3 located on the north side of the same property). In addition, this house is isolated from the agricultural portion of the property by mature trees. After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the identified heritage attributes of this resource. The remaining 9 properties with identified BH resources are located on abutting properties (Property Nos. 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). None of these properties were identified as Protected Properties. These heritage resources are located at least 772 m away from the proposed turbines (the closest heritage resource is on Property No. 17). After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the heritage attributes of these resources. Given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area; 2) documented the property s heritage attributes; 3) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resource; and 4) found that the project will not negatively impact any of heritage attributes of this designated heritage property, ARA recommends that the Township of Norwich be approached to provide consent to alter the property or written confirmation that authorization is not required in accordance with Ontario Regulation 350/09. Further, given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area; 2) documented all potential BH resources within the revised addendum study area on all abutting properties; 3) identified multiple heritage resources with CHVI based on the criteria in Ontario Regulation 9/06; 4) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resources; and 5) found that the project will not negatively impact any of these designated or identified resources, ARA maintains its original recommendation that the proposed Gunn s Hill Wind Farm be released from further heritage concerns. Based on the information contained in the Addendum, the Ministry is satisfied that the heritage assessment process and reporting are consistent with the applicable heritage assessment requirements established in s. 23 of O. Reg. 359/09. Please note that the Ministry makes no representation or warranty as to the completeness, accuracy or quality of the heritage assessment report addendum (please see Note 1). This letter does not waive any requirements under the Ontario Heritage Act. This letter does not constitute approval of the renewable energy project. Approvals or licences for the project may be required under other statutes and regulations. Please ensure that you obtain all required approvals and/or licences. Please ensure that the proponent is aware that, if new information or substantive project changes arise after issuance of this letter, the applicant should discuss them with you to determine if any additional assessment or reporting is required. If additional reporting or revisions are required, they should be submitted to the Ministry for review. Upon completion of that review, the Ministry will determine if any revisions to the content of this letter are required. Should you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Chris Mahood, MCIP, RPP Heritage Planner chris.mahood@ontario.ca cc. Kayla Jonas Galvin

4 Rochelle Rumney Prowind Canada Inc. Juan Anderson Prowind Canada Inc. Sarah Paul, Director Environmental Approvals Access & Service Integration Branch, MOECC Agatha Garcia-Wright, Director Environmental Approvals Branch, MOECC Paula Kulpa, Manager Culture Services Unit, MTCS Note 1: In no way will the Ministry be liable for any harm, damages, costs, expenses, losses, claims or actions that may result: (a) if the Addendum or its recommendations are discovered to be inaccurate, incomplete, misleading or fraudulent; or (b) from the issuance of this letter. Further measures may need to be taken in the event that additional heritage resources are identified or the Addendum is otherwise found to be inaccurate, incomplete, misleading or fraudulent.

5 Heritage Assessment Report Addendum Prowind Canada Gunn s Hill Wind Farm Geographic Township of Norwich Oxford County, Ontario Prepared for Prowind Canada Inc. 19 Bold Street, Unit 2B Hamilton, ON L8P 1T3 Tel: (905) Fax: (866) & The Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport By 154 Otonabee Drive Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) Heritage Assessment by P.J. Racher, M.A., CAHP Kayla Jonas Galvin, B.E.S 05/11/2014 Addendum to Original Report (#BH )

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under a contract awarded by Prowind Inc. in June 2010, ARA conducted a Heritage Assessment of lands with the potential to be impacted by the proposed Gunn s Hill Wind Farm project in the Township of Norwich (formerly East Oxford), Oxford County, Ontario. The proponent proposes to build a Class 4 wind energy generation facility with a total installed nameplate capacity of up to 18 MW (FIT contract number F WIN ). In June 2010, ARA submitted the original Heritage Assessment for the purpose of compliance with Section 23 of Ontario Regulation 359/09. The regulation establishes the requirements for obtaining a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) under the Environmental Protection Act. The MTCS was asked to review the conclusions and recommendations presented in the report and provide written comments to the proponent as required by of Ontario Regulation 359/09. This letter was provided on July 28, 2010 and indicated MTCS was satisfied with the report recommendations. In a recent review of the 2010 report, additional mapping was provided. The original mapping showed only the portion of land being leased for the proposed construction of Turbines 1, 2 and 3. An examination of formal mapping of the legal property boundaries identified additional resources for evaluation. In addition, a portion of another property situated between the two previously-identified participating properties was recently leased to accommodate additional cabling infrastructure (which will cross the northwestern corner of the property). Therefore, this report examines the participating properties containing Turbines 1, 2 and 3 and the newly added cabling. Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHLs) are not addressed in this addendum as they were previously examined in the 2010 report. For Protected Properties, Sections 19 and 20 of Ontario Regulation 359/09 require that a study area comprising the project location and all abutting properties be considered. For heritage resources located on non-protected Properties, however, a literal reading of these sections would limit the scope of such an assessment to only the participating properties. In the case of this amended report, the strictest requirements would only look at the two previously-identified participating properties and the newly added property (three parcels). Since no Protected Properties were identified on any abutting properties, the remaining parcels examined in this report form an addendum study area based on ARA s best practices. Accordingly, the study area for this addendum consists of the previously un-assessed portions of the participating properties and all abutting properties, totally 21 properties, thereby exceeding the heritage assessment requirements set out in Ontario Regulation 359/09. Several resources on properties abutting the previously-studied property portions for Turbines 1, 2 and 3 were likely not included in the 2010 study because they were not Protected Properties. All of the 21 properties were examined for built heritage resources and tested against the criteria of Ontario Regulation 9/06. The results of the evaluation indicated that 10 of the 21 properties have BH resources with Cultural Heritage or Interest (Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, i

7 and 20 21). The majority of these identified heritage resources met several of the criteria established in Ontario Regulation 9/06. All properties with identified Built Heritage resources within the study area were then evaluated for potential project impacts. The results of these evaluations can be summarized as follows: ii One participating property was found to be designated under the Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The Township of Norwich designation By-law focuses solely on the David Start House located on the property. The heritage attributes identified in the Township of Norwich s designation By-law are: one arched chimney; original four-paned windows; wooden shutters; gable and gingerbread; central entrance door with transom and sidelights. The By-law also lists interior features such as: the pine floors and trim; wide pine window frames panelled to the floor; and plaster ceiling medallion in the iron hall. In addition, given that the house is an early farmhouse of the area it has associative value as a concrete reminder of the agricultural past of the area, its physical location is also important. This building is located 816 m away from the closest turbine blade sweep (Turbine 3 located on the north side of the same property). In addition, this house is isolated from the agricultural portion of the property by mature trees. After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the identified heritage attributes of this resource. The remaining 9 properties with identified Built Heritage resources are located on abutting properties (Property Nos. 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). None of these properties were identified as Protected Properties. These heritage resources are located at least 772 m away from the proposed turbines (the closest heritage resource is on Property No. 17). After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the heritage attributes of these resources. Given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area; 2) documented the property s heritage attributes; 3) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resource; and 4) found that the project will not negatively impact any of heritage attributes of this designated heritage property, ARA recommends that the Township of Norwich be approached to provide consent to alter the property or written confirmation that authorization is not required in accordance with Ontario Regulation 353/09. Further, given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area; 2) documented all potential BH resources within the revised addendum study area on all abutting properties; 3) identified multiple heritage resources with CHVI based on the criteria in Ontario Regulation 9/06; 4) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resources; and 5) found that the project will not negatively impact any of these designated or identified resources, ARA maintains its original recommendation that the proposed Gunn s Hill Wind Farm be released from further heritage concerns.

8 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I TABLE OF CONTENTS III LIST OF TABLES III LIST OF APPENDICES III GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS IV PERSONNEL IV 1.0 SUMMARY OF ADDENDUM HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Identification of Built Heritage Resources Evaluation of Built Heritage Resources EVALUATION OF IMPACTS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES 19 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Properties with Potential BH Resources and CHVI Evaluation Results 7 Table 2: Properties with Identified BH Resources and Statements 8 Table 3: Summary of the Heritage Attributes of Identified BH Resources 9 Table 4: Minimum Distances between the Turbines and Identified BH Resources 11 Table 5: Impact Evaluation of Identified BH Resources 16 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Summary of Qualifications 20 Appendix B: Inventory of Properties with Potential BH Resources and CHVI Evaluation Results 30 Appendix C: Township of Norwich Designation By-law

9 GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS ARA BH Built Heritage CHL Cultural Heritage Landscape CHVI Cultural Heritage or Interest FIT Feed-in Tariff MTCS Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport REA Renewable Energy Approval PERSONNEL Project Director: P.J. Racher, M.A., CAHP Project Manager: K. Jonas Galvin, B.E.S. Heritage Assessment: P.J. Racher, K. Jonas Galvin Photography: K. Jonas Galvin Cartography: K. Brightwell, P.G. (GIS) Deliverables Manager: C.J. Gohm, M.A. Curriculum Vitae of the Personnel can be found in Appendix A. iv

10 1.0 SUMMARY OF ADDENDUM Under a contract awarded by Prowind Inc. in June 2010, ARA conducted a Heritage Assessment of lands with the potential to be impacted by the proposed Gunn s Hill Wind Farm project in the Township of Norwich (formerly East Oxford), Oxford County, Ontario. The proponent proposes to build a Class 4 wind energy generation facility with a total installed nameplate capacity of up to 18 MW (FIT contract number F WIN ). In June 2010, ARA submitted the original Heritage Assessment for the purpose of compliance with the Ontario Regulation 359/09. The regulation establishes the requirements for obtaining a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) under the Environmental Protection Act. The MTCS was asked to review the conclusions and recommendations presented in the report and provide written comments to the proponent as required by Ontario Regulation 359/09. This letter was provided on July 28, 2010 and indicated MTCS was satisfied with the report recommendations. In June 2012, ARA submitted an additional Heritage Assessment for the project concerned with the Overhead Cable Route. The study area consisted of existing electrical corridors extending for 5.56 km from the participating properties along Firehall Road through parts of the Township of Norwich and City of Woodstock. This report encompassed the proposed Overhead Cable Route and all abutting/adjacent properties. The MTCS was asked to review the conclusions and recommendations presented in the report and provide written comments to the proponent as required by Ontario Regulation 359/09. This letter was provided on December 11, 2012 and indicated MTCS was satisfied with the report recommendations. Although this portion of the project is no longer part of the Gunn s Hill Wind Farm project scope, the results of the study form part of the background information for this addendum. In a recent review of the 2010 report, additional mapping was provided. The original mapping showed only the portion of land being leased for the proposed construction of Turbines 1, 2 and 3. An examination of formal mapping of the legal property boundaries identified additional resources for evaluation. In addition, a portion of another property situated between the two previously-identified participating properties was recently leased to accommodate additional cabling infrastructure (which will cross the northwestern corner of the property). Therefore, this report examines the participating properties containing Turbines 1, 2 and 3 and the newly added cabling. Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHLs) are not addressed in this addendum as they were previously examined in the 2010 report. For Protected Properties, Sections 19 and 20 of Ontario Regulation 359/09 require that a study area comprising the project location and all abutting properties be considered. For heritage resources located on non-protected Properties, however, a literal reading of these sections would limit the scope of such an assessment to only the participating properties. In the case of this amended report, the strictest requirements would only look at the two previously-identified participating properties and the newly added property (three parcels). Since no Protected 1

11 Properties were identified on any abutting properties, the remaining parcels examined in this report form an addendum study area based on ARA s best practices. Accordingly, the study area for this addendum consists of the previously un-assessed portions of the participating properties and all abutting properties, totally 21 properties, thereby exceeding the heritage assessment requirements set out in Ontario Regulation 359/09. Several resources on properties abutting the previously-studied property portions for Turbines 1, 2 and 3 were likely not included in the 2010 study because they were not Protected Properties. The addendum study area can be seen on Map 1. The project was overseen by P.J. Racher, M.A., CAHP, Project Director. The heritage assessment was undertaken by P.J. Racher and K. Jonas Galvin, Heritage Operations Manager. The site visit was completed by K. Jonas Galvin. Cartography was completed by K. Brightwell, P.G. (GIS) and the Deliverables Manager was C.J. Gohm, M.A. Curriculum Vitae of these key personnel can be found in Appendix A. 2

12 3 Map 1: Map of Gunn s Hill Wind Project with Addendum Study Area Shown (Produced by ARA under licence from Ontario MNRF, Queens Printer 2014)

13 2.0 HERITAGE ASSESSMENT 2.1 Identification of Built Heritage Resources ARA referred to Oxford County s Heritage Resources Inventory for information concerning potential built heritage (BH) resources in the addendum study area as well as the Township of Norwich s website, specifically the Heritage section which lists Designated Properties and Historically Significant Properties. Field surveys were conducted on September 16, 2014, September 17, 2014 and September 30, 2014 in order to photograph and document properties with potential BH resources as well any additional candidate properties that were previously not identified. Background research undertaken as part of the in the 2010 Heritage Assessment and 2012 Overhead Cable Route Heritage Assessment was considered as part of the identification of BH resources. In addition, as part of these studies several properties were previously assessed. Turbine 1 is located at Firehall Road. The property was examined in the 2010 report (Property No. 18) Firehall Road, an abutting property, was also examined in the 2010 report (Property No. 19). No project impacts were identified. Several properties were assessed in the 2012 report: Highway 59, Highway 59 and Highway 59 (Properties 4, 1 and 2 respectively). However, the report only examined the impacts from the Overhead Cable, and not the turbines. Therefore, this report will examine these three properties in the context of the potential impacts from turbines. As a result, a total of 21 additional properties were identified, comprising primarily of agricultural properties. These properties were each assigned a unique identification number (Property Nos. 1 21). No Protected Properties were identified on the abutting properties. The participating property of / Curries Road was identified as a designated property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. A copy of the designation By-law can be found in Appendix C. 2.2 Evaluation of Built Heritage Resources All of the 21 properties within the study were examined for potential BH resources during the field survey and were evaluated against the criteria set out in Ontario Regulation 9/06 for determining cultural heritage value or interest (CHVI). A standardized checklist based on the criteria in Ontario Regulation 9/06 was created to aid in the evaluation process and was used to judge whether a given resource possessed Design or Physical, Historical or Associative, or Contextual. These pivotal terms can be summarized as follows: 4 Design or Physical manifests when a feature is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method; when it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value; or when it displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement;

14 5 Historical or Associative appears when a resource has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to the community; yields or has the potential to yield information that contributes to the understanding of a community or culture; or demonstrates or reflects work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to the community; Contextual is implied when a feature 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. The results of the evaluation of Property Nos against the standardized checklist are presented in Appendix B. The individual forms comprising Appendix B also include the location, description and photographic documentation of each property. The locations of all of the properties within the addendum study area appear in Map 2. The evaluation determined that 10 of the 21 properties met one or more of the established criteria. Accordingly, these can now be classified as properties with identified BH resources (Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). A synthesis of the results of the cultural heritage evaluation of the properties that are considered identified BH resources appears in Table 1-Table 2.

15 6 Map 2: Properties within the Addendum Study Area (ESRI 2014)

16 Table 1: Properties with Potential BH Resources and CHVI Evaluation Results Type of CHVI Property No. Address Criteria Met Property (Y/N) / Curries Road Participating Protected Property Yes Design or Physical, Historical or Associative Firehall Road Participating No None Curries Road Abutting No None Curries Road Abutting Yes Design or Physical Curries Road Abutting No None Curries Road Abutting Yes Design or Physical Curries Road Abutting Yes Design or Physical, Historical or Associative, and Contextual Curries Road Abutting Yes Design or Physical 9 No Address Curries Road (Land Locked) Gunn s Hill Road Abutting Yes Abutting No None Design or Physical, Historical or Associative Firehall Road Abutting No None No Address 1 Firehall Road No Address 2 Firehall Road No Address 3 Firehall Road No Address Firehall Road (Corner) Highway 59 Abutting Yes Abutting No None Abutting No None Abutting No None Abutting No None Design or Physical, Historical or Associative, and Contextual Highway 59 Abutting No None Highway 59 Abutting No None Highway 59 Abutting No None Highway 59 Abutting Yes Highway 59 Abutting Yes Design or Physical Design or Physical, Historical or Associative, and Contextual 7

17 Property No. 1 Table 2: Properties with Identified BH Resources and Statements Type of Address Statement(s) Property / Curries Road Participating Protected Property Curries Road Abutting Curries Road Abutting Curries Road Abutting Curries Road Abutting Gunn s Hill Road Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Highway 59 Abutting This house is a good example of a Gothic Revival farmhouse with central gable. The house was constructed by George Start and was lived in by seven generations of the family. As an early farmhouse of the area it serves as a touchstone to the agricultural past of the area. A good example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features a central gable and entrance. A latter addition porch with bargeboard is also found on the façade. A brick chimney on a side elevation reveals that the exterior was likely brick at one time. The house is a one storey vernacular building with front gable roof. The barn is clearly early for the area as it features a fieldstone foundation, however the cladding and roof appear to be modern. The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade, and 2 over 2 sash windows. Queen Anne elements include the varied roofline, stained glass window and projecting bay windows on the eastern portion of the building. The barn is an example of a Gambrel-roofed Central Ontario ( bank ) barn with early fieldstone foundation and modern metal walls and roof. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. These structures are physically, visually, and functionally linked to the farm of which they form a part. This property contains a shingled shed with a potential historic house. This house fair local example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features a brick facade, pitched gable and centered entrance. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. This property contains a neat vernacular cottage, modest and well-constructed with 2 over 2 sash windows. It may have functioned as a Worker s Cottage for the attached farm. The structure serves as a touchstone to the early settlement of the area. Contextually linked to the attached farmland. The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade and hipped roof. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. A good local example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features an L-shaped plan, a steeply pitched roofline, and a centre gable featuring an arched window. 8

18 9 Property No. Address Type of Property Highway 59 Abutting Statement(s) The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade, hipped roof, and 2 over 2 sash windows. The barn is a representative example of a Gambrelroofed Central Ontario ( bank ) barn. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. These structures are physically, visually, and functionally linked to the farm of which they form a part. According to the results of the CHVI evaluation, Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, and each possess one or more heritage attributes. In general, heritage attributes can be understood as the the principal features or elements that contribute to a protected heritage property s cultural heritage value or interest (MMAH 2014:43). These heritage attributes are the essential elements of each heritage resource, and accordingly must be articulated prior to the evaluation of potential project impacts. A summary of the heritage attributes of the properties with identified BH resources appears in Table 3. Property No. 1 Table 3: Summary of the Heritage Attributes of Identified BH Resources Type of Address Heritage Attribute(s) Property / Curries Road Participating Protected Property Curries Road Abutting Curries Road Abutting The heritage attributes identified in the Township of Norwich s designation By-law are: one arched chimney; original and four-paned windows; wooden shutters; gable and gingerbread; central entrance door with transom and sidelights. The By-law also lists interior features such as: the pine floors and trim; wide pine window frames panelled to the floor; and plaster ceiling medallion in the iron hall. In addition, given that the house is an early farmhouse of the area it has associative value as a concrete reminder of the agricultural past of the area, its physical location is also important. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its central gable and entrance, porch with decorative bargeboard and brick chimney. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its front gable roof, large front windows and massing. The heritage attribute of the barn is its fieldstone foundation.

19 10 Property No. Address Type of Property Curries Road Abutting Curries Road Abutting Gunn s Hill Road Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Highway 59 Abutting Heritage Attribute(s) Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its red brick façade, 2 over 2 sash windows, varied roofline, stained glass window and projecting bay window. The key attribute of the barn is its fieldstone foundation. Given that all of the structures have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, and they are contextually linked to the attached farmland, their physical location is also important. The visual links between the house, the barn and the farm are noteworthy. It is anticipated the heritage attributes of this property might include the shed and the massing of the potentially historic building. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its brick facade, front gable and centred entrance. Given that the house and agricultural outbuildings have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, their physical location is also important. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its simplicity, its modest massing and its 2 over 2 sash windows. Given that the structure has associative value as a concrete reminder of the early settlement of the area, and that it is contextually linked to the attached farmland, its physical location is also important. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its red brick facade and hipped roof. Given that the house and agricultural outbuildings have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area their physical location is also important. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its L-shaped plan, steep roofline, and centre gable with rounded-arch window. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its red brick facade and hipped roof, and 2 over 2 sash windows. The key attribute of the barn is its Gambrel roof. Given that all of the structures have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, and they are contextually linked to the attached farmland, their physical location is also important. The visual links between the house, the barn and the farm are noteworthy.

20 3.0 EVALUATION OF IMPACTS The examination of all 21 properties in the addendum study area determined that 10 of the properties comprised at least one identified BH resource (Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). The approximate proximity of the closest turbine blade sweep to each of these identified heritage resources appears in Table 4. No Standards and Guidelines have yet been provided by the MTCS to aid in the determination of minimal separation distances between design elements and heritage resources. Accordingly, all methodological attempts to make use of this quantitative data must rely primarily on subjective criteria and the opinion of qualified heritage professionals. Table 4: Minimum Distances between the Turbines and Identified BH Resources Type of Property No. Address Minimum Distance to Turbine Blade Sweep Property / Curries Road Participating Protected Property 816 m north Curries Road Abutting 992 m north Curries Road Abutting 924 m north Curries Road Abutting 813 m north Curries Road Abutting 814 m north Gunn s Hill Road Abutting 1,310 m northeast Highway 59 Abutting 854 m east Highway 59 Abutting 772 m northeast Highway 59 Abutting 930 m southeast Highway 59 Abutting 962 m southeast 11 As Table 4 demonstrates, these heritage resources are located at least 772 m away from the proposed turbine blade sweeps (the closest heritage resource is on Property No. 17). The most distant identified heritage resource is located 1,310 m away from the proposed turbines (Property No. 10). These data are essential for the accurate identification of direct and indirect impacts. For instance, the distance from the turbine location on / Curries Road to the house on the property that has been identified as having CHVI (David Start House) is 816 m. The distance ensures that the turbine will not result in any direct impacts on the property and will not create shadows or isolate the identified heritage attributes. In addition, though views are not among the identified heritage attributes, the turbine will not have any impact on the views to/from the house as it is isolated from the rest of their property and the surrounding landscape by mature trees (see Image 1 - Image 5 and Map 3).

21 12 Image 1: View of / Curries Road, Building Known as the David Start House Note: The Gothic Revival architecture and mature trees (Photo: September 16, 2014; Facing Northeast) Image 2: Context View of / Curries Road (Photo: September 16, 2014; Facing Northeast)

22 13 Image 3: View of Façade of / Curries Road (Photo: September 16, 2014; Facing North) Image 4: Context View of / Curries Road (Photo: September 16, 2014; Facing Northwest)

23 14 Image 5: View of / Curries Road from Firehall Road Note: Building known as the David Start House is not visible through the vegetation (Photo: September 16, 2014; Facing South)

24 15 Map 3: Context View of / Curries Road (ESRI 2014)

25 The definitions of negative impacts presented in InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (MCL 2006:3) can be effectively adapted into criterion for identifying both types of impacts. The results of this evaluation of impacts to the 10 properties with identified BH resources are summarized in Table Type of Negative Impact Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and appearance Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or significant relationship Direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and natural features A change in land use such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly open spaces Table 5: Impact Evaluation of Identified BH Resources (Adapted from MCL 2006:3) Applicable to Properties with Comments Identified BH Resources? No No No No No No There will be no destructive impacts whatsoever to any of the heritage attributes of these resources, as the proposed turbines are at least 772 m away (see Table 4). The proposed infrastructure involves alterations that are compatible with the historic fabric and appearance of the subject resources. Although the addition of turbine towers, blades, nacelles and other infrastructure will modify the appearance of the landscape in vicinity of the project location, these project elements will by no means negatively impact the heritage attributes of the identified BH resources. As Table 3 demonstrates, these attributes are largely defined by intrinsic values (i.e. those rooted in their design, age, integrity, etc.). These values will continue to exist with or without the addition of the proposed infrastructure. No shadows will be cast near any of the identified heritage resources. The turbines will be at least 772 m away (see Table 4). The heritage attributes of the resources will therefore be unaffected by the project. None of the heritage attributes outlined in Table 3 will be isolated from its surrounding environment, context or significant relationship. The proposed project infrastructure will not result in the direct or indirect obstruction of any significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and natural features associated with the BH resources. As Table 3 demonstrates, significant views and vistas are not heritage attributes of any of the properties with identified heritage resources. In addition, several of the properties (i.e / Curries Road and Gunn s Hill Road) are isolated from the rest of their property and the surrounding landscape by mature trees and/or other vegetation. No rezoning will occur; open space/agricultural lands remain.

26 17 Type of Negative Impact Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. Applicable to Properties with Identified BH Resources? No Comments These potential impacts have been addressed in separate environmental and archaeological reports. As Table 5 summarizes, the heritage attributes of the identified BH resources within the addendum study area will not be negatively impacted by the Gunn s Hill Wind Farm. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This addendum to the heritage assessment for the Gunn s Hill Wind Farm encompassed a study area consisting of previously un-assessed portions of the participating properties and all abutting properties. The addendum study area contained 21 properties not previously assessed. All of the properties were examined for built heritage resources and tested against the criteria of Ontario Regulation 9/06. The results of the evaluation indicated that 10 of the 21 properties had BH resources with CHVI (Property Nos. 1, 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). The majority of these identified heritage resources met several of the criteria established in Ontario Regulation 9/06. All properties with identified BH resources within the addendum study area were then evaluated for potential project impacts. The results of these evaluations can be summarized as follows: One participating property was found to be designated under the Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The Township of Norwich designation By-law focuses solely on the David Start House located on the property. The heritage attributes identified in the Township of Norwich s designation By-law are: one arched chimney; original four-paned windows; wooden shutters; gable and gingerbread; central entrance door with transom and sidelights. The By-law also lists interior features such as: the pine floors and trim; wide pine window frames panelled to the floor; and plaster ceiling medallion in the iron hall. In addition, given that the house is an early farmhouse of the area it has associative value as a concrete reminder of the agricultural past of the area, its physical location is also important. This building is located 816 m away from the closest turbine blade sweep (Turbine 3 located on the north side of the same property). In addition, this house is isolated from the agricultural portion of the property by mature trees. After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the identified heritage attributes of this resource. The remaining 9 properties with identified BH resources are located on abutting properties (Property Nos. 4, 6 8, 10, and 20 21). None of these properties were

27 identified as Protected Properties. These heritage resources are located at least 772 m away from the proposed turbines (the closest heritage resource is on Property No. 17). After the project impact analysis, no direct or indirect impacts were identified that would negatively affect any of the heritage attributes of these resources. Given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area ; 2) documented the property s heritage attributes; 3) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resource; and 4) found that the project will not negatively impact any of heritage attributes of this designated heritage property, ARA recommends that the Township of Norwich be approached to provide consent to alter the property or written confirmation that authorization is not required in accordance with Ontario Regulation 353/09. Further, given that this study has 1) identified one Protected Property within the addendum study area; 2) documented all potential BH resources within the revised addendum study area on all abutting properties; 3) identified multiple heritage resources with CHVI based on the criteria in Ontario Regulation 9/06; 4) evaluated all potential direct and indirect impacts to the identified heritage resources; and 5) found that the project will not negatively impact any of these designated or identified resources, ARA maintains its original recommendation that the proposed Gunn s Hill Wind Farm be released from further heritage concerns. 18

28 5.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES (ARA) and Heritage Resources Centre (HRC) 2010 Heritage Assessment Report, Prowind Canada Gunn s Hill Wind Farm. and Heritage Resources Centre. (ARA) 2012 Heritage Assessment Report, Gunn s Hill Wind Farm Overhead Cable Route. Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, Toronto: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Ministry of Culture (MCL) 2006 InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Series. Toronto: Ministry of Culture. Ministry of Tourism and Culture (MTC) 2011 Protected Properties, Archaeological and Heritage Resources: An Information Bulletin for Applicants Addressing the Cultural Heritage Component of Projects Subject to Ontario Regulation 359/09 Renewable Energy Approvals. Toronto: Ministry of Tourism and Culture. Oxford County 2006 Heritage Resources Inventory (Last Updated: August 14, 2006). Accessed online at: Appx/appendix4.pdf. Township of Norwich 2014 Heritage. Accessed online at: 19

29 Appendix A: Summary of Qualifications Paul J. Racher, M.A., CAHP Vice-President, Operations ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD. 154 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Phone: (519) x100 Mobile: (519) Fax: (519) Web: Biography Paul Racher is Vice-President, Operations of ARA. He has a BA in Prehistoric Archaeology from WLU and an MA in anthropology from McMaster University. He began his career as a heritage professional in Over the two and a half decades since, he has overseen the completion of several hundred archaeological and cultural heritage contracts. He holds professional license #P007 with the MTCS. Paul is former lecturer in Cultural Resource Management at WLU and a current Associate at the Heritage Resources Centre, a heritage think tank at the University of Waterloo. He is a professional member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). He also holds a membership the Ontario Archaeological Association (OAS). Education PhD Programme, Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto. Supervisors: E.B. Banning and B. Schroeder. Withdrawn M.A., Department of Anthropology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. Thesis titled: The Archaeologist's 'Indian': Narrativity and Representation in Archaeological Discourse Honours B.A., Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario. Major: Prehistoric Archaeology. Professional Memberships and Accreditations Current Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport Professional Licence (#P007) Professional Member of the Canadian Association of Professional Heritage Consultants Volunteer on the ethics committee Member of the Ontario Archaeological Society Volunteer on the Professional Committee Associate of the Heritage Resources Centre, University of Waterloo RAQS registered with MTO Work Experience Current Vice-President, Operations,, Kitchener, Ontario. Responsible for winning contracts, client liaison, project excellence, and setting the policies and priorities for a multi-million dollar heritage consulting firm Project Manager / Principal Investigator,, Waterloo, Ontario. Managed projects for a heritage consulting firm. In 10 field seasons, managed hundreds of projects of varying size Part-Time Faculty, Wilfrid Laurier University. Lecturer for Cultural Resource Management course (AR 336). In charge of all teaching, coursework, and student evaluations. 20

30 Work Experience (Continued) 1995 Field Archaeologist, University of Toronto. Served as a supervisor on a multinational archaeological project in northern Jordan Teaching Assistant, University of Toronto. Responsible for teaching and organizing weekly tutorials for a number of courses Part-Time Faculty, Wilfrid Laurier University. Lectured for several courses in anthropology. Held complete responsibility for all teaching, coursework, and student evaluations Partner in Consulting Company, Cultural Management Associates Incorporated. Supervised several archaeological contracts in Southern Ontario. Participated in a major (now published) archaeological potential modeling project for MTO Partner in Consulting Company, Cultural Resource Consultants. Managed the financial affairs of a consulting firm whilst supervising the completion of Several contracts performed for heritage parks in central Ontario Principal Investigator/Project Director,, Waterloo, Ontario. Oversaw the completion of large contracts, wrote reports, and was responsible for ensuring that contracts were completed within budget Assistant Director of Excavations, St. Marie among the Hurons, Midland, Ontario. Duties included crew supervision, mapping, report writing and photography Archaeological Crew Person,, Waterloo, Ontario. Participated in background research, survey, and excavation on a number of Archaeological sites across Ontario. Publications 2011 A Distinctive, Probably Early Palaeoindian, Stone Artifact from the Credit River Drainage. KEWA, Up from the Muck: Towards a Truly Professional Archaeology in Ontario. Arch Notes. July/August Issue A Biophysical Model for Prehistoric Archaeological Sites in Southern Ontario. Co-authored with Penny M. Young, Malcolm R. Horne, Colin D. Varley, and Andrew J. Clish. The Research and Development Branch, MTO The Tales We Tell The Iroquois as Savage in Ontario Archaeology. Vis a Vis: Explorations in Anthropology. University of Toronto, Toronto Scary Tales Narrativity and Representation in Archaeological Discourse. Nexus: The Canadian Student Journal of Anthropology. McMaster University, Hamilton Conference Papers 2013 Why Archaeology Matters. A lecture presented to the Hamilton Chapter of the Ontario Archaeological Society, Hamilton, Ontario Finding Archaeology. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the Ontario Archaeological Society in Niagara Falls, Ontario Up from the Muck: Towards a Truly Professional Archaeology in Ontario. Presented at the 2006 meetings of the Canadian Archaeological Association, Toronto, Ontario (With E.B. Banning) Sampling theory and microrefuse analysis: Neolithic house floors in Wadi Ziqlab, Jordan. Presented at the 1997 SAA meetings, Nashville, TN The Iroquois of Archaeology Narrativity and Representation in Ontario Archaeology. Presented at the 1991 conference of the Northeastern Anthropological Association, Waterloo, ON. 21

31 Scholarly Talks 2013 Why Archaeology Matters. A lecture presented to the 3rd Aboriginal Monitor Training Workshop, Ohsweken, Six Nations Territory, Ontario The Village Near the Stream. A lecture presented as part of the TALKS series at the Waterloo Regional Museum The Archaeology of Anishnawbek Peoples. A lecture presented at the Second Annual Symposium on Mississauga History and Culture, New Credit, Ontario Ganödagwёhda: dosgёh gёhö:de The Village Near the Stream. A lecture presented to select Grade 5, 6, and Aboriginal Studies teachers in the Region of Waterloo The Archaeology of Anishnawbek Peoples. A lecture presented at the First Annual Symposium on Mississauga History and Culture, New Credit, Ontario Why Archaeology Matters. A lecture presented to the 2nd Aboriginal Monitor Training Workshop, Ohsweken, Six Nations Territory, Ontario Archaeology and Burials. A lecture presented to the Cemeterian Operations Level II course at the 56th Annual Professional Development Program of the Ontario Recreational Facilities Association (ORFA), Guelph, Ontario The Strasburg Creek Site. A lecture presented to the Education committee of the City of Kitchener Council, Kitchener, Ontario Ethics in Cultural Resource Management. A lecture presented to the 2nd Aboriginal Monitor Training Workshop, Ohsweken, Six Nations Territory, Ontario The Archaeology of the Grand River Watershed. A lecture presented to the Ministry of the Environment at the request of the Six Nations Eco Centre, Ohsweken, Ontario. 22

32 Kayla Jonas Galvin, B.E.S. Heritage Operations Manager ARCHAEOGICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD. 154 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Phone: (519) x120 Fax: (519) Web: Biography Kayla Jonas Galvin, ARA's Heritage Operations Manager, has recently come to ARA and brings with her a wealth of knowledge gained from working for six and a half years at the Heritage Resources Centre at the University of Waterloo. She has served as Team Lead on the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport's (MTCS) Historic Places Initiative. She was Project Coordinator for Heritage Districts Work!, a study of 64 heritage districts in Ontario carried out by the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario. She is a coauthor of Arch, Truss and Beam: The Grand River Watershed Heritage Bridge Inventory in the Grand River Watershed and has worked on three phases of a Municipal Heritage Inventory in the Town of Halton Hills. Kayla has extensive experience with Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL), including a study of the Goderich Harbour and an examination of the Black Bridge area of Cambridge. At this writing, Kayla has almost completed her MA in Planning from the University of Waterloo. Kayla is an intern member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). Education Current Candidate for MA in Planning, University of Waterloo Honours BES University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario Joint Major: Environment and Resource Studies and Anthropology Distinction: Dean s Honour Roll Professional Memberships and Accreditations Current Intern Member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP) Work Experience Current Heritage Manager, Archaeological Research Associates Coordinated the completion of various heritage inventories, Heritage Impact Assessments and Cultural Heritage Resource Evaluations Heritage Planner, Heritage Resources Centre, University of Waterloo Coordinated the completion of various contracts associated with built heritage including responding to grants, RFPs and initiating service proposals Project Coordinator, - Heritage Conservation District Study, Architectural Conservancy of Ontario Coordinated the field research and wrote reports for the study of 32 Heritage Conservation Districts in Ontario. Managed the efforts of over 84 volunteers, four staff and municipal planners from 23 communities Team Lead, Historic Place Initiative, Ministry of Culture Liaised with Ministry of Culture Staff, Centre s Director and municipal heritage staff to draft over 850 Statements of Significance for properties to be nominated to the Canadian Register of Historic Places. Managed a team of four people. 23

33 Professional Development 2012 Region of Waterloo Workshop on Heritage Impact Assessments, Half-Day 2012 Conducting Historic Building Assessments Workshop, One-Day 2012 Window Restoration Workshop, One-Day 2011 Lime Mortars for Traditionally Constructed Brickwork, Two Day Workshop, ERA Architects and Historic Restoration Inc., Toronto 2011 Energy and Heritage Buildings Workshop Two-Day Workshop, Heritage Resources Centre 2010 Grant Writing Three-Day Workshop, Grant Training Centre, Toronto 2010 Architectural Photography, Mohawk College 2010 Project Management Fundamentals, University of Waterloo Continuing Education 2009 Cultural Heritage Landscapes Two-Day Workshop, Heritage Resources Centre 2009 Urban Landscape and Documentary Photography, Mohawk College 2008 Introduction to Digital Photography, Mohawk College 2008 Heritage Planning Four-Day Workshop, Heritage Resources Centre Awards 2009 A. K. (Alice King) Sculthorpe Award for Advocacy - Architectural Conservancy of Ontario Publications 2013 Ontario Planning Journal, November/December 2013, Grand River Watershed Heritage Bridge Conservation Book Committee Chair, 80 for 80: Celebrating 80 Years of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario Ontario Planning Journal, January/February 2013, Building stories about heritage assets: Community voices Acorn, Fall 2012, The Case of Northern New Towns, pages Acorn, Spring Creating the Heritage Heroes of the Future, page Alternatives, March/April 2012, In With the Old: The debate on wood vs. vinyl windows, page Heritage Districts Work: Evidence from the Province of Ontario, with R. Shipley and J. Kovacs, Urban Affairs Review, In Print Municipal World, February 2011, Moving Forward While Looking Back, pages Municipal World, September 2010, Heritage Conservation Districts Work!, pages

34 Curriculum Vitae Christopher J. Gohm, PhD Candidate Deliverables Manager ARCHAEOGICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD. 154 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Phone: (519) x130 Fax: (519) Web: Biography Christopher began working with ARA in Initially he served as a technical writer, responsible for the production of archaeological and heritage assessment reports in accordance with established provincial guidelines. In 2012, he became Deliverables Manager (an ARA-specific title, equivalent to Project Manager), and assumed responsibility for the establishment and maintenance of project timelines, delegation of laboratory responsibilities, quality control of deliverables, correspondence with clients and the MTCS, and overall project management. In addition to his duties at ARA, Christopher has taught sessional courses in Near Eastern archaeology and history at WLU, is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Toronto, and supervised excavations at Khirbat al-mudayna ath-thamad in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Education PhD Candidate, Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, Present University of Toronto. Supervisor: T. P. Harrison. Major: Syro-Palestinian Archaeology; Minors: Egyptology and Northwest Semitic. Dissertation: The Floruit of Iron Technology in the Lands of Ammon and Moab: A Typological and Archaeometallurgical Investigation of Early Iron Artifacts from Central Jordan M.A., Department of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations, University of Toronto. Supervisor: T. P. Harrison Supplemental Course Work, Woodsworth College, University of Toronto Honours B.A., Wilfrid Laurier University. 25 Professional Memberships and Accreditations Current Member of the American Schools of Oriental Research Work Experience Deliverables Manager, Archaeological Research Associates Present Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario. Responsible for client correspondence, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport correspondence, establishment and maintenance of timelines, delegation of laboratory responsibilities, technical writing, quality control of deliverables, and comprehensive project management.

35 Work Experience (Continued) Technical Writer and Researcher,, Kitchener, Ontario. Responsible for the production of Stage 1 4 archaeological reports, cultural heritage evaluation reports (CHERs), and heritage assessment reports in accordance with established provincial guidelines. Specific tasks included writing executive summaries, synthesizing the results of archaeological fieldwork, conducting historical background research (Pre-Contact, Early Contact and Euro-Canadian eras), processing land registry data, and summarizing relevant geographical and environmental information. 2009/2010 Volunteer Coordinator, Wadi ath-thamad Project, Wilfrid Laurier University. Responsible for processing volunteer application forms, organizing excavation teams, arranging payments, booking group flights, and responding to student queries. 2006/2007 Volunteer Coordinator, Wadi ath-thamad Project, Wilfrid Laurier University. Responsible for processing volunteer application forms, organizing excavation teams, arranging payments, booking group flights, and responding to student queries. 1999/2000 Ceramic Illustrator and Registrar, Work-Study Program, Wilfrid Laurier University. Responsible for the registration and illustration of a collection of ceramics from the Iron Age site of Tall Jawa. 1998/1999 Archaeological Database Builder, Work-Study Program, Wilfrid Laurier University. Participated in the creation of a comprehensive database of archaeological materials from Wilfrid Laurier University s collections. Archaeological Field Experience Khirbat al-mudayna ath-thamad (Wadi ath-thamad Project). Director: P. M. M. Daviau, Wilfrid Laurier University. Chronological breakdown: 2011 Field School Instructor; Field Supervisor in Field D (3 squares) 2010 Assistant Field School Instructor; Field Supervisor in Field D (7 squares) 2007 Field Supervisor in Fields C and D (3 squares) 2006 Field Supervisor in Fields A-South, C and D (5 squares) 2004 Field Supervisor in Field A-South (7 squares) 2001 Square Supervisor in Field A (square A7) 1999 Square Supervisor in Field A (squares A7 and A27) 1998 Volunteer Excavator in Field A (square A6) Academic Experience Sessional Lecturer (Contract Academic Staff), Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Wilfrid Laurier University. Course breakdown: NE101 First Civilizations: Mesopotamia and Egypt NE202 History of Ancient Egypt AR/RE205 Egyptian Art and Architecture AR219 JO Introduction to Field Archaeology AR/NE225 The Hellenistic and Roman Near East AR305 Archaeology of Egypt AR326 Byzantine and Early Islamic Archaeology AR347 Archaeology of Syria and Jordan 26

36 Academic Experience (Continued) 2006/2007 Teaching Assistantship, NMC 101Y Mesopotamia and the Ancient Near East. University of Toronto. Course Instructor: P.-A. Beaulieu. 2005/2006 Teaching Assistantship, NMC 260Y The Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. University of Toronto. Course Instructor: J. Ferguson Research Assistantship, A Study of Ancient Chalcolithic Copper Metallurgy. University of Toronto. Project Director: A. N. Shugar. Funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Publications 2011 Shugar, A. N. and Gohm, C. J. Developmental Trends in Chalcolithic Copper Metallurgy: A Radiometric Perspective. Pp in Culture, Chronology and the Chalcolithic: Theory and Transition, eds. J. L. Lovell and Y. M. Rowan. Levant Supplementary Series 9. Oxford: Council for British Research in the Levant and Oxbow Books Daviau, P. M. M.; Dolan, A.; Ferguson, J.; Foley, C. M.; Foley, L.; Gohm, C. J.; Judd, M. A.; and Weigl, M Preliminary Report of Excavations and Survey at Khirbat al- Mudayna ath-thamad and in its Surroundings (2004, 2006 and 2007). Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan 52: Shugar, A. N. and Gohm, C. J Tracking Chronological Developments in Chalcolithic Metallurgy: An Assessment of Possible Correlations between Radiocarbon Data and Compositional Analyses. Pp in Proceedings of the 34th International Symposium on Archaeometry, Zaragoza, 3-7 May 2004, ed. J. Pérez- Arantegui. Zaragoza: Institución Fernando el Católico. Articles Submitted for Publication 2012 Excavation at Khirbat al-mudayna and Survey in the Wādī ath-thamad: Preliminary Report of the 2008, 2010 and 2011 seasons. Co-authors: Daviau, P. M. M.; Chadwick, R.; Edwards, S.; Weigl, M.; Dolan, A.; Mulder-Hymans, N.; Ladurner, M.; and Ferguson, J. In prep for the Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan Wadi ath-thamad Project in Archaeology in Jordan, Seasons. Co-author: Ferguson, J. Submitted to: American Journal of Archaeology Metal Working and Casting. Co-author: Daviau, P. M. M. Submitted to: Encyclopedia of the Material Culture of the Biblical World (EBW). Eds: Berlejung, A.; Daviau, P. M. M., Kamlah, J.; and Lehmann, G. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck Tools, Metal. Submitted to: Encyclopedia of the Material Culture of the Biblical World (EBW). Eds: Berlejung, A.; Daviau, P. M. M., Kamlah, J.; and Lehmann, G. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. 27

37 Curriculum Vitae Katie Brightwell, BA, PG (GIS) Heritage Cartographer ARCHAEOGICAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATES LTD. 154 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener, ON N2C 1L7 Phone: (519) ext. 131 Fax: (519) Web: Biography Kathryn (Katie) Brightwell has an Honours Bachelor of Arts in Prehistoric Archaeology from WLU and a Post Graduate Diploma in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Geospatial Management from Niagara College. Katie began her career in cultural resource management in 2005 as a Field Technician and has served as a Teaching Assistant at the Baumann Site Field School and as a Field Director for ARA in the past. Her current responsibilities include managing and maintaining excavation and in-house cartographic data, performing spatial analysis and imagery interpretation, generating map layouts to the specifications set by the MTCS as well as advising staff on spatial data collection procedures. Katie holds an R-level archaeological license with the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (#R-341) and is a member of the OAS. Summary of Qualifications Applied Archaeological Research License (R341), Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport Nine years of experience in Ontario archaeology Working knowledge of the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (2011), Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Education Ontario College Graduate Certificate, Niagara College, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario Geographic Information Systems- Geospatial Management: President's Honour Roll Honours BA Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario Major: Archaeology, Minor: Physical Geography Professional Memberships and Accreditations Current Applied Archaeological Research License (R341), Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Current Ontario Archaeological Society (OAS) Current Urban and Regional Information Systems Association - Ontario Chapter (URISA-OC) Work Experience Current Heritage Cartographer, Archaeological Research Associates Manage and maintain excavation and in-house data as well as performing spatial analysis and imagery interpretation. Liaise with proponent to achieve project goals, generate mapping as required for Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport report submission. When necessary, provide education and advice to staff on mapping procedures both in-house and in the field. 28

38 Work Experience (Continued) Field Director, Archaeological Research Associates Performed all tasks required of field or laboratory technicians, maintained precise and accurate daily observations of excavation site activities. Managed up to 11 crew members as well as liaising with First Nations Aboriginal Monitors. Created artifact catalogues, generated site reports and produced mapping as required Field Technician, Archaeological Research Associates Performed physically demanding field excavations, identified artifacts and ensured correct use of equipment. Participated in unit photography and documentation. Utilized strong interpersonal skills through extensive teamwork and communication. Geographic Information System Projects Managed Ontario Heritage Tourism iphone Application (Student Intern) Ensured project is on time, within project scope and on budget while demonstrating professional and courteous communication with client. Maintained open communication with Software Development partners and evaluated provided Heritage Data to develop database schema. Participated in Application Testing and Documentation. Client: Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport Professional Development 2014 Applied Research License Workshop, MTCS (One day) 2012 Engineering Technology CADMCAD15 AutoCAD - Advanced, Mohawk College 2012 Engineering Technology CADMCAD06 AutoCAD - Introduction, Mohawk College Awards 2013 Citizenship Award - Archaeological Research Associates Awarded to the employee who is most socially and environmentally active on behalf of the company. Volunteer Experience Current Steering Committee Member, Ernie and Jean Crossland Environmental Scholarship Understanding the goals, objective and desired outcomes of the scholarship as represented by the interests of stakeholders. Ensure that the scholarship is making sensible financial decisions and is in line with the mandate and organizational strategy. Acting on opportunities to communicate positively about the scholarship President, Wilfrid Laurier University Archaeology Society Co-ordinate, Call and Chair meetings of the Executive and General Members. Held signing responsibilities of Archaeology Society contracts and bank accounts. Acted as an interface between Faculty, Administration, Students Union and Campus Clubs Special Events Co-ordinator, Wilfrid Laurier University Archaeology Society Organized and co-ordinated events for the academic year. Directed Events Sub-committees to facilitate timely conduct of events. Organized Annual Formal Dinner and Dance Fundraiser for 100+ attendees. 29

39 Appendix B: Inventory of Properties with Potential BH Resources and CHVI Evaluation Results PROPERTY NO. 1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address /46143 Curries Road (David Start House) Recognition Township of Norwich By-law 41-86, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with one Built Heritage resource. Also on the property are an Type of Property additional residential dwelling and several agricultural outbuildings and silos. All of these appear to be modern and are not recognized by the Township of Norwich s designation By-law Architectural Style(s) Gothic Revival Farmhouse Date(s) Circa Photo(s) Design or Physical (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method Historical or Associative Contextual Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark This residence is a good example of a Gothic Revival farmhouse with central gable. The house was constructed by George Start and was lived in by seven generations of the family. As an early farmhouse of the area it serves as a touchstone to the agricultural past of the area.

40 31 CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. The heritage attributes identified in the Township of Norwich s designation By-law are: one arched chimney; original four-paned windows; wooden shutters; gable and gingerbread; central entrance door with transom and sidelights. The By-law also lists interior features such as: the pine floors and trim; wide pine window frames panelled to the floor; and plaster ceiling medallion in the iron hall. In addition, given that the house is an early farmhouse of the area it has associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, its physical location is also important. No project impacts.

41 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date(s) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Firehall Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with no buildings. Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property does not possesses CHVI.

42 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date(s) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Curries Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with no buildings. Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property does not possesses CHVI.

43 PROPERTY NO. 4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Curries Road Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with one Built Heritage resource. Architectural Style(s) Gothic Revival Date(s) ca Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 30, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark A good example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features a central gable and entrance. A latter addition porch with bargeboard is also found on the façade. A brick chimney on a side elevation reveals that the exterior was likely brick at one time. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its central gable and entrance, porch with decorative bargeboard and brick chimney. No project impacts.

44 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date(s) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Curries Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Residential property. Modern Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 30, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

45 PROPERTY NO. 6 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Curries Road Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with two Built Heritage resources (residence and barn). Architectural Style(s) Vernacular house and barn with fieldstone foundation Date(s) Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark The house is a one storey vernacular building with front gable roof. The barn is clearly early for the area as it features a fieldstone foundation, however the cladding and roof appear to be modern. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its front gable roof, large front windows and massing. The heritage attribute of the barn is its fieldstone foundation. No project impacts.

46 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date(s) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Curries Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with two Built Heritage resources (residence and barn). Edwardian Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade, and 2 over 2 sash windows. Queen Anne elements include the varied roofline, stained glass window and projecting bay windows on the eastern portion of the building. The barn is an example of a Gambrel-roofed Central Ontario ( bank ) barn with early fieldstone foundation and modern metal walls and roof. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. These structures are physically, visually, and functionally linked to the farm of which they form a part.

47 38 CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its red brick façade, 2 over 2 sash windows, varied roofline, stained glass window and projecting bay window. The key attribute of the barn is its fieldstone foundation. Given that all of the structures have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, and they are contextually linked to the attached farmland, their physical location is also important. The visual links between the house, the barn and the farm are noteworthy. No project impacts.

48 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Curries Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with one Built Heritage resource (shed). Possible historic house (visible on aerial imagery but not visible from the road). Unknown Unknown Photo(s) Design or Physical (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method Historical or Associative Contextual Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark This property contains a shingled shed with a potential historic house. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. It is anticipated the heritage attributes of this property include the shed and the massing of the building. No project impacts.

49 PROPERTY NO. 9 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address No Address on Curries Road (PIN Number ) Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with no buildings (property is land locked). Architectural Style(s) Date(s) Photo(s) No photo available as the property is land locked. EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark 40 CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

50 PROPERTY NO. 10 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Gunn s Hill Road Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with one Built Heritage resource. Property has additional agricultural outbuildings not visible from the road. Architectural Style(s) Gothic Revival Date(s) ca Photo(s) Design or Physical (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method Historical or Associative Contextual Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark A fair local example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features a brick facade, pitched gable and centred entrance. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its brick facade, front gable and centred entrance. Given that the house and agricultural outbuildings have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area, their physical location is also important. No project impacts.

51 PROPERTY NO Street Address Recognition Location Type of Property Architectural Style(s) Date(s) DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Firehall Road None Township of Norwich, Oxford County Agricultural property with no buildings, portion of the property is wooded. Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 16, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

52 PROPERTY NO. 12 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address No Address on Firehall Road 1 (PIN Number ) Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with no buildings Architectural Style(s) Date(s) 43 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

53 PROPERTY NO. 13 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address No Address on Firehall Road 2 (PIN Number ) Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with no buildings, a portion of the property is forested. Architectural Style(s) Date(s) 44 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

54 PROPERTY NO. 14 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address No Address on Firehall Road 3 (PIN Number ) Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with no buildings, a portion of the property is forested. Architectural Style(s) Date(s) 45 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

55 PROPERTY NO. 15 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address No Address on Firehall Road 4 (Corner PIN Number ) Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with no buildings. Architectural Style(s) Date(s) 46 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

56 PROPERTY NO. 16 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 59 Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with one potential Built Heritage resource. Architectural Style(s) Vernacular Cottage Date(s) ca Photo(s) (Photo taken on May 17, 2012) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark A neat vernacular cottage, modest and wellconstructed with 2 over 2 sash windows. It may have functioned as a Worker s Cottage for the attached farm. Structure serves as a touchstone to the early settlement of the area. Contextually linked to the attached farmland. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its simplicity, its modest massing and its 2 over 2 sash windows. Given that the structure has associative value as a concrete reminder of the early settlement of the area, and that it is contextually linked to the attached farmland, its physical location is also important. No project impacts.

57 PROPERTY NO. 17 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 59 Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with one Built Heritage resource. There are additional agricultural outbuildings on the property not visible from the road. Architectural Style(s) Edwardian Date(s) ca Photo(s) Design or Physical (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method Historical or Associative Contextual Displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade and hipped roof. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of the residence include its red brick facade and hipped roof. Given that the house and agricultural outbuildings have associative value as concrete reminders of the agricultural past of the area their physical location is also important. No project impacts.

58 PROPERTY NO. 18 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 59 Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Residential property. Architectural Style(s) Modern Date(s) 49 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

59 PROPERTY NO. 19 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 59 Recognition None Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Residential property. Architectural Style(s) Single storey house clad with insul-brick Date(s) 50 Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement Historical or Associative Contextual 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses no CHVI.

60 PROPERTY NO. 20 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 59 Recognition Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with one potential Built Heritage resource Architectural Style(s) Gothic Revival Date(s) ca Photo(s) (Photo taken on May 17, 2012) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark A good local example of a Gothic Revival house. Typical of this style, it features an L- shaped plan, a steeply pitched roofline, and a centre gable featuring an arched window. CHVI Evaluation Heritage Attributes Impact Evaluation RESULTS OF HERITAGE ASSESSMENT Property possesses CHVI. Key attributes that embody the heritage value of this residence include its L-shaped plan, steep roofline, and centre gable with rounded-arch window. No project impacts.

61 PROPERTY NO. 21 DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Highway 19 Recognition Location Township of Norwich, Oxford County Type of Property Agricultural property with two potential Built Heritage resources Architectural Style(s) Edwardian and Central Ontario Barn (Gambrel-Roof Type) Date(s) ca ca Photo(s) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) (Photo taken on September 17, 2014) EVALUATION OF PROPERTY Criteria Description Statement(s) Design or Physical Historical or Associative Contextual 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 value Displays a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 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 the understanding of a community or culture Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, builder, artist, designer or theorist who is significant to a community Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings Is a landmark The house is a representative example of an Edwardian farmhouse with a red brick façade, hipped roof, and 2 over 2 sash windows. The barn is a representative example of a Gambrelroofed Central Ontario ( bank ) barn. These structures serve as touchstones to the agricultural past of the area. These structures are physically, visually, and functionally linked to the farm of which they form a part.