PLANNING REPORT. Part of Lot 227, Concession 2, SWTSR Geographic Township of Proton Township of Southgate County of Grey

Transcription

1 PLANNING REPORT Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Part of Lot 227, Concession 2, SWTSR Geographic Township of Proton Township of Southgate County of Grey Prepared for: Stan Gilas 327 Sykes Street North Meaford, ON N4L 1J1 Prepared by: Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. 978 First Avenue West Owen Sound, ON N4K 4K5 Tel: Fax: File No. 2618

2 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF REPORT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT LANDS (FIGURE 1) SURROUNDING LAND USE (FIGURE 2) DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL (FIGURE 3) CONSULTATION TECHNICAL REPORTS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED APPROVALS POLICY FRAMEWORK REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT, 2014 (PPS) EVALUATION OF THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT GREY COUNTY OFFICIAL PLAN (GCOP)(FIGURE 4) TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHGATE OFFICIAL PLAN (TSOP) (FIGURE 5) TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHGATE ZONING BY-LAW NO (FIGURE 6) SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 REQUIRED APPROVALS... 7 TABLE 2 PLANNING ACT SECTION 2 MATTERS OF PROVINCIAL INTEREST... 8 TABLE 3 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT APPENDIX 1: APPENDIX 2: APPENDIX 3: APPENDIX 4: APPENDIX 5: APPENDIX 6: APPENDIX 7: Draft Plan of Subdivision Environmental Impact Study Archaeological Assessment MTCS Letter Servicing Report Grey County Official Plan Excerpts Southgate Official Plan Excerpts 2

3 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas PLANNING JUSTIFICATION REPORT Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision Part of Lot 227, Concession 2, SWTSR Geographic Township of Proton Township of Southgate County of Grey 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of Report Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. (CPC) has been retained by Mr. Stan Gilas of Dundalk, to prepare an application to permit a residential subdivision on the above noted lands. This planning justification report, a draft plan of subdivision and supporting technical studies have been prepared in the support of this application. The following planning justification report provides a description of the property and surrounding land uses, as well as an evaluation of the proposal with regard to the relevant land use policy. In determining the appropriateness of the proposed plan of subdivision, the following analysis will consider the compatibility of the proposed plan with the surrounding lands and review the various technical studies that have been prepared in support of the proposal. 1.2 Location & Description of Subject Lands Figure 1 The lands subject to this application are located at the northern edge of the Dundalk settlement area in the Township of Southgate. The property is legally described as Part of Lot 227, Concession 2, SWTSR, in the geographic Township of Proton. The subject property is approximately 8.5 hectares (±21 ac.) in area. The southwestern half of the property was previously used for agriculture. The northeastern portion of the property contains wet areas with a poorly defined drainage system. The topography of the property includes a gentle slope to the south, directing local surface water flows to the southwest and the southeast. Two tree lines are located on the southwestern and northwestern property boundaries. As noted previously, the lot is located at the northern periphery of the Dundalk Primary Settlement Area. The property is accessed by a field entrance onto the adjacent Bradley Street. 3

4 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas Figure 1 Aerial of Subject Property 1.3 Surrounding Land Use Figure 2 The lands to the southeast of the Gilas property contain an existing residential subdivision. The street pattern in this area includes crescents and a cul-de-sac. The parcel to the southwest is currently vacant, although a subdivision has been approved and some early construction activities have occurred. This subdivision is separated from the Gilas proposal by a narrow strip of land extending for the full depth of the Gilas lands on the western boundary. The lands northwest and north of the subject property contain primarily agricultural cropland. The wooded area and marsh northeast of the property extends off the site to the northwest. Figure 2 - Surrounding Land Use 4

5 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas 1.4 Description of Proposal Figure 3 The draft plan of subdivision (Appendix 1) proposes a mix of housing types on the southwestern portion of the land, which is approximately 4.8 hectares (12ac) in area. The eastern portion, containing 3.7 hectares (9ac), is not proposed for any form of urban development at this time. It is shown as additional lands owned by Mr. Gilas on the attached plan of subdivision. The subdivision will feature singledetached lots (16), along the boundary with the adjacent existing residence houses along Bradley Street and semi-detached (10), fourplex (32), and townhouse (33) dwelling units. In total, 89 dwelling units are being proposed. Access to the development will be provided by an extension of Bradley Street, which presently provides access to the residential subdivision to the south. Darryl M. Robins Consulting (DMR) has prepared a servicing report for the subdivision, which proposes to extend gas, water and sewer lines currently existing at the end of Bradley Street to service the subdivision. A proposed stormwater retention facility in the central section of the property near the southern lot line will serve the subdivision. Block 35 has been retained as open space to permit a future street connection to the subdivision to the southwest. The extension of Bradley Street offers the potential for future street extension to the east and northeast. It is noted that the Township Consulting Engineers, Triton Engineering, has stated that the proposed subdivision will require more water services than is presently available in reserve capacity. Triton Engineering has stated that reserve capacity will expand once a new municipal well is operational in 2018 or The design and character of the planned subdivision is consistent with development in the immediate area, and conforms to the intent of the Provincial Policy Statement, the Grey County Official Plan and the Township of Southgate Official Plan. 1.5 Consultation CPC met with County and Township staff in August During discussions, a minor alteration to the street layout was suggested in order to provide a future connection with the registered plan to the southwest. During this meeting, no significant concerns were raised with regard to the subdivision layout, lot structure, or municipal servicing. The future road extension has been included in the attached plan of subdivision as Block 35. DMR Consulting contacted the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) in February 2014 to obtain an opinion of the on-site environmental features. The GRCA indicated that an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) would be required to 5

6 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas confirm the boundaries of wetland areas in the east portion of the property, and that a GRCA permit would be required for site alterations and grading in regulated areas. The EIS was completed and updated in January 2016, and it is attached in this application as Appendix 2. DMR Consulting contacted the consulting engineers for the Township of Southgate in the Summer of 2016 in order to obtain information on water servicing and sanitary servicing. Triton Engineering indicated that the water servicing requirements of the subdivision will exceed the servicing capacity of the Settlement Area of Dundalk. Triton Engineering further indicated that there is limited reserve capacity for sanitary services. Further details on servicing may be found in Section 1.6 of this report. 1.6 Technical Reports & Supporting Documentation In order to provide a complete application, a number of technical studies were commissioned. SAAR Environmental, now WSP, prepared an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) to determine the impact of subdividing the western portion of the site on the on-site and surrounding environment (Appendix 2). The EIS found that the proposed detention pond will not impact on nearby wetlands, which occur over 50 m from the proposed storm water pond boundaries. Additional mitigation measures have been proposed to reduce the impacts of construction activities on these nearby wetlands, and are described in the attached report. A Stage 1 & 2 Archaeological Assessment (Appendix 3) was conducted by Fisher Archaeological Consulting. The study found that there were no items of heritage value or interest and that no further archaeological work was required. The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport entered the report into the Ontario Public Register of Archeological Reports without a request for further technical review (Appendix 3). A Servicing Report was prepared by Darryl M. Robins Consulting Engineers in order to assess the Gilas Subdivision with regard to township road capacity, storm water drainage capacity, township water service capacity, and waste water capacity (Appendix 4). The report found that a traffic study would not be necessary due to the relatively low density nature of the proposal. The principal entrance to the development would be from Bradley Street. The roads in the subdivision, when constructed, would be maintained year-round by the Township. The servicing report found that surface water flows on the site tend to flow to the southeast and the northeast. There is no suitable storm water outlet in the southwest of the site, due to the condition of the Bradley Street Storm Sewer. As such, the site and the streets will be graded to direct storm water flows to the east of the site to a proposed storm water management pond as illustrated in the draft plan of subdivision. 6

7 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas The analysis of municipal water service capacity and sanitary sewer capacity was conducted by Darryl M. Robins Consulting Engineers, with input from Triton Engineering. With regard to water services, it was found that the reserve capacity of Dundalk Waterworks is 2,819 m 3 /day. The current maximum day demand is 1,695 m 3 /day, and would increase by m 3 /day with the proposed Gilas Subdivision, to a total maximum day demand of 1,959.4 m 3 /day.. Triton Engineering noted in their correspondence that they calculate reserve capacity according to firm capacity, as opposed to design capacity. Triton Engineering further advised that the Servicing Report does not consider reserve capacity that has been committed to other developments. Based on their calculations, Triton Engineering stated that the Gilas Subdivision will exceed the reserve capacity of the Dundalk Waterworks until upgrading occurs. With regard to sanitary services, it was found that the average daily influent flow of the Dundalk Wastewater Treatment Plant would increase 94 m 3 /day with the proposed Gilas Subdivision, from the current average daily flow of 728 m 3 /day to a total average daily flow of 822 m 3 /day. The Dundalk Wastewater Treatment Plant was found to have a design capacity of 1,832 m 3 /day. Triton Engineering has cautioned that there is limited uncommitted sanitary servicing capacity available. 1.7 Required Approvals The Gilas lands, in their entirety, are designated as a Neighborhood Area in the Township of Southgate Official Plan, Map 1 to Schedule A; Dundalk. The lands are shown as a Primary Settlement Area in the Grey County Official Plan. The property has a split zoning, with Restricted Agriculture (AR) on the western portion and Environmental Protection (EP) on the eastern portion. Based on the present land use policy, the following approvals are required in order to attain draft plan approval. Application Table 1 Required Approvals Approval Authority Approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision Application County of Grey Township of Southgate Zoning By-law No The purpose of the amendment is to rezone the Restricted Agricultural Zone (A2) and Environmental Protection Zone (EP) Township of Southgate to residential zones that will permit the proposed Detached units, Semi-detached units, Triplexes, Fourplexes, and Townhouse Units. The EP designated area will be changed to more accurately reflect wetland boundaries as confirmed by the attached Environmental Impact Study (EIS) (Appendix 2). 7

8 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas 2.0 POLICY FRAMEWORK This section of the report will review Provincial, County and Local land use policy and assess it against the proposed subdivision. This assessment will demonstrate this proposal s conformity to the relevant policies in Provincial, County and Local land use planning documents. 2.1 Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O 1990 The Planning Act establishes a set of criteria that must be considered by any Approval Authority when contemplating the approval of a draft plan of subdivision. Section 51(24) contains the aforementioned criteria. These criteria are addressed as part of this section of the Planning Report. In considering a draft plan of subdivision, regard shall be had, among other matters, to the health, safety, convenience, accessibility for persons with disabilities and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the municipality and to, (a) the effect of development of the proposed subdivision on matters of provincial interest as referred to in section 2; In consideration of the above noted section of the Planning Act, a municipality or any other approval authority, when carrying out its responsibilities under the Planning Act, shall have regard to provincial interests as outlined in Section 2 of the Act. The provincial interests described in Section 2 of the Planning Act are evaluated against the proposed subdivision in Table 2. Table 2 Planning Act Section 2 Matters of Provincial Interest The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, (a) the protection of ecological systems, including natural areas, features and functions; The subject property is composed of two distinct geographic features, an idle farm field and a wooded area that contains some wet depressions. The lands have been assessed through an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) and the EIS concluded that the proposed development and stormwater detention area could proceed without negatively impacting the natural features on the eastern portion of the subject property. (b) the protection of the agricultural The land to be developed is adjacent to the resources of the Province; northern boundary of the settlement area Cash crop lands are located immediately north of the subject lands. This proposal will not negatively impact agricultural resources on the adjacent properties. (c) the conservation and management Schedule B of the Grey County Official Plan 8

9 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas of natural resources and the mineral resource base; (d) the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological or scientific interest; (e) the supply, efficient use and conservation of energy and water; (f) the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems; (g) the minimization of waste; (h) the orderly development of safe and healthy communities; (h.1) the accessibility for persons with disabilities to all facilities, services and matters to which this Act applies; (i) the adequate provision and distribution of educational, health, social, cultural and recreational facilities; (j) the adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing; (k) the adequate provision of employment opportunities; identifies a tertiary gravel deposit occurring in the northeast portion of the property. This portion of the deposit could not support an extraction operation, as a number of Dundalk neighbourhoods are located on it. The mineral resource base will therefore not be negatively affected by this proposal. In order to provide a complete application, an archaeological assessment was conducted. The assessment found nothing of heritage value or interest and determined that no further archaeological work is required. The efficient use and conservation of energy and water are determined primarily by energy efficient construction and the instating of low flow fixtures. The proposed development will use an extension of Bradley Street, which creates a logical extension of the services currently available on this street. The development is within a full servicing municipality and all standard services including gas will be installed in the subdivision. Not applicable. The proposal is a natural extension of urban residential development to the southeast and southwest. Sidewalks will be installed to encourage safe movement of the residents of the subdivision. The mix of dwelling types encourages a range of income earners that could be attracted to this area. This provision is not applicable for this stage of the process, and would be more appropriately considered as a building code issue. This provision is not applicable to this proposal, as the provision of these services is a township responsibility that should be reflected in their land use policies. The draft plan of subdivision indicates a residential mix from single family dwellings to fourplexes. The proposed development of the subdivision will generate opportunities in the construction trade. There is also potential that the increased residential development will support commercial operations in Dundalk, leading to the 9

10 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas (l) the protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and its municipalities; (m) the co-ordination of planning activities of public bodies; (n) the resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests; (o) the protection of public health and safety; (p) the appropriate location of growth and development; (q) the promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians. 1994, c. 23, s. 5; 1996, c. 4, s. 2; 2001, c. 32, s. 31 (1); 2006, c. 23, s. 3; 2011, c. 6, Sched. 2, s. 1. expansion of employment opportunities. The increased residential development will expand the municipality s assessment base, with minimal impact on services. The interests of various public bodies have been considered as part of this development. Pre-submission consultation was conducted with upper and lower tier staff. The GRCA was asked to comment on the stormwater detention pond by the engineering consultants. The pre-submission consultation process provides the remedy for many concerns prior to an application s formal submission. Once submitted, the planning process allows for municipalities, agencies and the public to participate in the evaluation of the proposal. In the event there are conflicts, various methods are employed to resolve issues that may be identified. If no resolution can be achieved, the matter can be adjudicated by the Ontario Municipal Board. Given the density, street pattern and provision of sidewalks in the proposed development, no negative impact on public health or safety is anticipated. The proposed development is to occur within a Primary Settlement Area, which is encouraged in the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement, the County Official Plan, and the Official Plan for the Township of Southgate. This provision is not applicable to this proposal. Section 51(24) (b) whether the proposed subdivision is premature or in the public interest; According to the PPS, residential development is to be directed to settlement areas. As a primary settlement area, on full municipal services, Dundalk is well suited to accommodate the proposed expansion to its residential area. The PPS and the Grey County Official Plan encourage a full range of residential accommodation. The 89 dwelling units proposed include single detached, semi 10

11 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas detached, triplex, fourplex and townhouse units. The range of housing units should address the density and related policies of the PPS. Section 51(24) (c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any; The proposed development conforms to the policies of the County of Grey Official Plan and Township of Southgate Official Plan. The development is compatible with and connects to the adjacent subdivisions, located to the west and south. Section 51(24) (d) the suitability of the land for the purposes for which it is to be subdivided; The land to be developed is in a former agricultural field that has been inactive for decades and is within the boundaries of a primary settlement area. Lands within primary settlement areas have been identified for their potential to support growth in rural communities, such as Southgate. As such, the subject property is suitably located along the edge of the existing urban boundary and would act as a natural extension of the built environment. Section 51(24) (e) the number, width, location and proposed grades and elevations of highways, and the adequacy of them, and the highways linking the highways in the proposed subdivision with the established highway system in the vicinity and the adequacy of them; The draft plan of subdivision indicates the above noted details. As previously noted, the principal access to the subdivision will be Bradley Street, located adjacent to the southeast corner of the subdivision. Section 51(24) (f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots; The draft plan of subdivision indicates the dimensions of all proposed lots. The lots encourage a slightly higher density standard than the density included in the municipal zoning by-law, however the lot sizes conform to the policies as set out in the County and local Official Plan. The zoning by-law proposed for the subdivision should be flexible enough to respond to changes in the housing market. Section 51(24) (g) the restrictions or proposed restrictions, if any, on the land proposed to be subdivided or the buildings and structures proposed to be erected on it and the restrictions, if any, on adjoining land; At present, the eastern portion of the subject property will retain its Environmental Protection zone, but altered to more accurately reflect the nature and extent of this area. No development in this area is anticipated. The EIS 11

12 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas submitted along with this report and accompanying application at this time supports the location of the proposed lots and stormwater detention pond. Section 51(24) (h) conservation of natural resources and flood control; The servicing report has shown a stormwater detention pond located in the central portion of the subject property, which is designed to meet the stormwater management needs of the proposed development. The site will be graded and the streets will be designed to direct all stormwater runoff from the subdivision area into this detention pond. Section 51(24) (i) the adequacy of utilities and municipal services; Sanitary: It is proposed to extend the existing 200mm diameter sanitary sewer on Bradley Street to service the Gilas subdivision. The Average Sewage Flow for Gilas Subdivision was calculated to be 94m 3 /day. When the development proceeds, it is expected that the average day flow at the Dundalk s wastewater treatment plant would be increased to 822m 3 /day. Based on these calculations, there appears to be sufficient design capacity at the Dundalk Wastewater Treatment plant to accommodate the proposed development. However, Triton Engineering has stated that there is limited available reserve capacity for sanitary services. Water: An extension is proposed to extend the 150mm diameter watermain on Bradley Street to service the Gilas subdivision. The Water Demand for Gilas Subdivision was calculated to be m 3 /day. When the development proceeds, it is expected that the maximum day demand at the Dundalk waterworks would be 1,959.4m 3 /day. There appears to be a sufficient design capacity at the existing water works facility to accommodate the proposed development. Triton Engineering calculates the design capacity of the Dundalk Waterworks according to Firm Capacity, which differs from Design Capacity. Firm Capacity is defined as the capacity of the system without the largest source of water in service. Based on its analysis of committed water reserves for other developments in the area, Triton Engineering concluded that there is not enough water servicing available for the proposed development. Triton Engineering noted that a Municipal Class Environmental Assessment is being conducted to increase Dundalk s reserve capacity, and that a new municipal well may be online by 2018 or Water servicing requirements will be addressed as a part of the planning process, after the application is filed. 12

13 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas Section 51(24) (j) the adequacy of school sites; The public and separate school administrations were contacted with regard to school capacity. Both Boards indicated that there is adequate capacity in both primary and secondary facilities to easily accommodate students generated by this subdivision. Section 51(24) (k) the area of land, if any, within the proposed subdivision that, exclusive of highways, is to be conveyed or dedicated for public purposes; No active public open space is allocated at this time and no request has been put forward by the municipality. The additional lands owned by the applicant may, in whole or in part, provide a natural passive park area. Section 51(24) (l) the extent to which the plan s design optimizes the available supply, means of supplying, efficient use and conservation of energy; and The conservation of energy is generally optimized by the method of construction and insulation of the housing units and the type of electrical and plumbing fixtures installed. Section 51(24) (m) the interrelationship between the design of the proposed plan of subdivision and site plan control matters relating to any development on the land, if the land is also located within a site plan control area designated under subsection 41 (2) of this Act or subsection 114 (2) of the City of Toronto Act, , c. 23, s. 30; 2001, c. 32, s. 31 (2); 2006, c. 23, s. 22 (3, 4). Section 51(24) may be considered when specific proposals for the multiple family area are put forward. These units will be encouraged to place parking behind the buildings and to encourage attractive design. 2.2 Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 (PPS) Section 3 of the Planning Act permits the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to issue policy statements that reflect provincial interests in municipal land use planning. Section 3 also requires all decision-makers in municipal land use planning matters, to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). The latest PPS came into effect on April 30th, Section 2 of the Planning Act, reviewed Table 2 of this report, reflects many of the policies found in the PPS. When such overlap occurs, a reference to Section 2 will be noted. 13

14 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas Evaluation of Provincial Policy Statement It is appreciated that the PPS is to be read in its entirety and as such, any land use planning decision must be tested against the applicable provisions of the PPS. The PPS contains several major policy areas; however, the following provisions are considered the most applicable with respect to the proposed plan of subdivision: 1.0 Building Strong Healthy Communities 1.1 Managing and Directing Land Use to Achieve Efficient and Resilient Development and Land Use Patterns 1.4 Housing 1.6 Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities 2.0 Wise Use and Management of Resources 2.1 Natural Heritage 2.2 Water 2.6 Cultural Heritage and Archaeology 3.0 Protecting Public Health and Safety 3.1 Natural Hazards Table 3 Provincial Policy Statement Section Policy Evaluation 1.0 Building Strong Healthy Communities Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by: a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term; b) accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential (including second units, affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes), recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs; The design of the proposed subdivision is compact and efficiently uses land. This parcel is appropriately located within the Dundalk Primary Settlement Area. A wide range of dwelling types are included in this proposal. Much of the proposed dwellings are contained in multiunit structures. The proposal offers a variety of housing options including single detached, semi detached, triplex, fourplex and townhouse dwelling units. This combination of residential dwelling units creates housing opportunities for individuals and families of varying income levels. c) avoiding development and land use The proposed application will retain 14

15 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns; d) avoiding development and land use patterns that would prevent the efficient expansion of settlement areas in those areas which are adjacent or close to settlement areas; e) promoting cost-effective development patterns and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs; f) improving accessibility for persons with disabilities and older persons by identifying, preventing and removing land use barriers which restrict their full participation in society; h) promoting development and land use patterns that conserve biodiversity and consider the impacts of a changing climate Settlement Areas.1 Settlement areas shall be the focus of growth and development, and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted..2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on: a) densities and a mix of land uses the easterly portion of the site in its natural condition, to avoid any negative impacts on the environment. The physical designs of the services will be designed to municipal standards. The proposed development is on the periphery of the Dundalk urban area. It is also within the boundary of the primary settlement area. Therefore, the proposal should not offend this policy. It is not anticipated that the municipal boundaries will expand north in the near future. If expansion north does occur, an extension of the east end of the proposed Bradley Street terminus could be considered. As noted above, the proposed development offers an array of housing types from single detached to fourplexes. The development will present a compact development alternative to the typical single detached residential development found in the Dundalk settlement area. The proposed lot configuration on a 4.8ha parcel generates a density of approximately 18.6 units/ha. This provision is not applicable for this stage of the process, and would be more appropriately considered as a building code issue. The Environmental Impact Study submitted in conjunction with this application (Appendix 2) supports the development as proposed and the location of stormwater detention facility. A tree planting requirement will assist in promoting biodiversity. This application will result in various types of dwelling units, contributing to a balanced growth in Dundalk. 1. The parcel as a whole is approximately 8.5 hectares (±21 ac). Of these 8.5 hectares,

16 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas which: 1. efficiently use land and resources; 2. are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service facilities which are planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified and/or uneconomical expansion; 3. minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change, and promote energy efficiency; 4. support active transportation; 5. are transit-supportive, where transit is planned, exists or may be developed; and 6. are freight-supportive; and b) a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment in accordance with the criteria in policy , where this can be accommodated..3 Planning authorities shall identify appropriate locations and promote opportunities for intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs..4 Appropriate development standards should be promoted which facilitate intensification, redevelopment and compact form, while avoiding or mitigating risks to public health and safety..5 Planning authorities shall establish and implement minimum targets for intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas, based on local conditions. However, where provincial targets are established through provincial plans, the provincial target shall represent the minimum target for affected areas..6 New development taking place in designated growth areas should occur adjacent to the existing built-up area hectares (12 acres) will be developed to accommodate the 89 dwelling units, for a density of approximately 18.6 dwelling units per hectare. The unit types vary from single detached to apartment dwelling units. 2. The increased density will provide for more efficient use of services. Items 3 to 6 are not applicable to small urban centres such as Dundalk. As stated above, the development is compact, proposes several middensity housing options and provides for attractive urban streetscapes and a natural gradation from single detached dwellings to higher density development. The Southgate Official Plan shows the entire Gilas holding as neighborhood community, which anticipates the extension of the existing community to the south east and the rounding out of the Dundalk Primary Settlement area. The proposed development supports the compact form objectives of this policy. The County of Grey projects 1600 additional dwelling units to be added to the Township of Southgate. Of those units, 60% (960) are targeted for settlement areas. The proposed subdivision compliments this objective. At stated above, this development is a natural extension of existing residential development. 16

17 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas and shall have a compact form, mix of uses and densities that allow for the efficient use of land, infrastructure and public service facilities..7 Planning authorities shall establish and implement phasing policies to ensure: (a) that specified targets for intensification and redevelopment are achieved prior to, or concurrent with, new development within designated growth areas; and (b) the orderly progression of development within designated growth areas and the timely provision of the infrastructure and public service facilities required to meet current and projected needs. 1.3 Housing.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by: b) permitting and facilitating: 1. all forms of housing required to meet the social, health and wellbeing requirements of current and future residents, including special needs requirements; and 2. all forms of residential intensification, including second units, and redevelopment in accordance with policy ; c) directing the development of new housing towards locations where appropriate levels of infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to support current and projected needs; d) promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the use of active transportation and transit in areas This proposal will contribute to the County and Township s ability to meet the projected housing targets. The subject is designed to move from single detached holdings to higher density at the edge of the subdivision. b) The proposed development offers more than the standard single detached residential lot. The development proposes townhouse and semi detached multifamily residential structures such as fourplexes and triplexes to address various housing needs. This form of development is both appropriate and desirable in a community such as Dundalk. It will create less stress on municipal services and consume less land than a single detached subdivision with the same number of units. Because of the assortment of dwelling units, a wider spectrum of family incomes can be accommodated. c) Dundalk is a designated Primary Settlement Area by the County of Grey Official Plan and as such, should be the target of residential growth. Dundalk provides the necessary infrastructure and public service facilities to support development of this nature. d) As stated above, the proposed development is comprised of multifamily residential structures 17

18 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas where it exists or is to be developed; and which will efficiently use the land and available infrastructure Sewage, Water and Stormwater.1 Planning for sewage and water services shall: (a) direct and accommodate expected growth or development in a manner that promotes the efficient use and optimization of existing: 1. municipal sewage services and municipal water services; and 2. private communal sewage services and private communal water services, where municipal sewage services and municipal water services are not available; (b) ensure that these systems are provided in a manner that: 1. can be sustained by the water resources upon which such services rely; 2. is feasible, financially viable and complies with all regulatory requirements; and 3. protects human health and the natural environment; (c) promote water conservation and water use efficiency; The proposal will extend existing municipal servicing on Bradley Street. Stormwater management will be accommodated on site, except for a small area in the southwest corner of the proposal, which may be required to use the stormwater facilities on Bradley Street. Most of the provisions of this Section of the PPS apply to municipalities, when developing official plan and servicing policies. The promotion of water conservation and efficiency is achieved by installation of water efficient fixtures and encouraging conservation in water use. The proposal reflects a natural extension of municipal services and controls downstream impacts by proposing a stormwater detention pond as described in greater detail in the attached Servicing Report (Appendix 4). (d) integrate servicing and land use considerations at all stages of the planning process; and (e) be in accordance with the servicing hierarchy outlined through policies , , and Municipal sewage services and municipal water services are the preferred form of servicing for settlement areas. Intensification and redevelopment within settlement areas on existing municipal sewage services and municipal water services should The proposal includes municipal sewage services and municipal water services for a subdivision in a Settlement Area and is therefore consistent with this policy. 18

19 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas be promoted, wherever feasible..7 Planning for stormwater management shall: (a) minimize, or, where possible, prevent increases in contaminant loads; The project proposes a storm water detention pond to provide for the reduction in contaminant loads and to prevent flooding and erosion on downstream properties. (b) minimize changes in water balance and erosion; (c) not increase risks to human health and safety and property damage; (d) maximize the extent and function of vegetative and pervious surfaces; and (e) promote stormwater management best practices, including stormwater attenuation and re-use, and low impact development Transportation Systems.1 Transportation systems should be provided which are safe, energy efficient, facilitate the movement of people and goods, and are appropriate to address projected needs. The proposal will meet the standard for small urban centres that do not have public transit. 2.0 Wise Use and Management of Resources 2.1 Natural Heritage.1 Natural features and areas shall be The eastern portion of the property protected for the long term. has been assessed by a qualified biologist, in order to determine the occurrence and characteristics of natural heritage features on the site. The eastern area is not shown as a development area at this time, notwithstanding the official plan designation. The area will be left in its natural condition, which will maintain the surface and ground water features and maintain the linkage with the lands to the north, beyond the boundaries of the.2 The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area, and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible, improved, settlement area. The EIS (Appendix 2) prepared for the project by WSP, addressed the natural heritage policy in the PPS and determined that the proposed development would not impact any natural heritage features on the 19

20 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage features and areas, surface water features and ground water features..5 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: d) significant wildlife habitat; e) significant areas of natural and scientific interest; and.7 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in habitat of endangered species and threatened species, except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements..8 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions. 2.2 Water.1 Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality and quantity of water by: a) using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for integrated and long-term planning, which can be a foundation for considering cumulative impacts of development; b) minimizing potential negative impacts, including cross-jurisdictional and cross-watershed impacts; eastern section of the property. (See item.2.1.2) No endangered or threatened species were identified on the adjacent wetlands according to the EIS (Appendix 2). The attached EIS provides for mitigation strategies in order to ensure that there is no negative impact from the subdivision on the nearby wetlands. Construction activities will be permitted on site between the hours of 7 am to 7 pm within 120 m of the adjusted wetland boundary. Spruce trees adjacent to houses on Pine Court will also be retained where possible. Lastly, native ground cover, shrub, and tree species shall be planted in order to control outflows of the stormwater management pond. The proposal will efficiently manage stormwater on site. The subdivision is designed to avoid any impact on the water features on the eastern 3 ha of the site. The applicable provisions of section 2.1 are satisfied by the maintenance of the Environmental Protection area and the provision for a storm water facility on site with the mitigation measures included in the attached EIS (Appendix 2). c) identifying water resource systems consisting of ground water features, 20

21 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas, which are necessary for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed; d) maintaining linkages and related functions among ground water features, hydrologic functions, natural heritage features and areas, and surface water features including shoreline areas; e) implementing necessary restrictions on development and site alteration to: 1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable areas; and 2. protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and ground water, sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic functions; f) planning for efficient and sustainable use of water resources, through practices for water conservation and sustaining water quality; g) ensuring consideration of environmental lake capacity, where applicable; and h) ensuring stormwater management practices minimize stormwater volumes and contaminant loads, and maintain or increase the extent of vegetative and pervious surfaces..2 Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored. By retaining the eastern portion of the property in its natural state, the design of the subdivision meets this objective. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be 21

22 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas required in order to protect, improve or restore sensitive surface water features, sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic functions. 2.6 Cultural Heritage & Archaeology.1 Significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. 3.0 Protecting Public Health and Safety 3.1 Natural Hazards.1 Development shall generally be directed to areas outside of: (c) hazardous sites. The archaeological assessment conducted by Fisher Archaeological Consulting found nothing of heritage value or interest within the study area. The Ministry of Tourism and Culture accepted the archaeological assessment and submitted it to the public registry. Therefore, no further archaeological work is required. The subdivision will not encroach on any natural hazard area. 2.3 Grey County Official Plan (GCOP) Figure 4 The County of Grey Official Plan is designed to guide development in the County of Grey up to the year 2026, by providing a policy framework that encourages growth and prosperity, guides future economic and social change, and supports integrated communities that are sustainable, healthy and strong. The GCOP designates this parcel entirely Primary Settlement Area, according to Schedule A Land Use Designations. The only constraint identified on this property by the GCOP is a Wellhead Protection Area, Zone B, which will not be impacted by the plan of subdivision. The Primary Settlement Area policies are found in Section 6.2 of the GCOP and are intended to direct growth of varying types, in a manner that is efficient and appropriate. The official plan defines Primary Settlement Areas as larger settlements with full municipal servicing, and a wide range of uses, services and amenities, which are intended to be the primary target for residential and nonresidential growth. 22

23 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas Figure 4 - Grey County Official Plan - Schedule A There are several policy areas that apply to the subject application. Schedule A (Figure 4) of the County Official Plan indicates that the subject lands are included within the Primary Settlement Area. Certain GCOP policies will apply, although a County Official Plan Amendment is not required. Section of the GCOP outlines the requirements for a plan of subdivision In any new applications for plan of subdivision or plan of condominium submitted to the County for approval, the proponent shall consider and be prepared to justify the following: a) The layout of the proposed plan with regard to matters of: i. Access to public transportation (where applicable) and access to existing trails, ii. Connections to existing trails, iii. Improving and promoting the walkability / cyclability within the proposed plan and with consideration for existing walking and / cycling conditions, iv. Accessibility for persons with disabilities, v. The provision of sidewalks, vi. The street pattern of the proposed plan and how it fits with the surrounding neighbourhood. Plans which utilize a grid pattern or a modified grid pattern shall be considered more favourably than those with a curvy street patterns or cul-de-sacs, vii. Energy conservation and efficiency design measures such as LEED (Neighbourhood) and Low Impact Development, viii. Impact on the natural environment, as defined in Section 2.8 of this Plan. ix. Consideration of the design of street lighting to minimize impact on dark skies, x. The provision of usable parkland and green space, xi. Public access to water front or beach (where applicable), 23

24 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas xii. Snow removal and emergency vehicle access. b) A range of housing and employment densities. c) A mix of housing types including homes for the aged and assisted living facilities. d) The provision of affordable housing e) Consistency with Provincial Policy and Local Official Plan provisions f) The information requirements listed under Section 6.18 The proposed subdivision, as noted earlier, will adhere to the above policies where applicable. The street pattern reflects the existing modified grid pattern in Dundalk. The servicing turn around at the terminus of the Bradley Street Extension is temporary, as the municipality may want to extend the road at some future date. The normal cul-de-sac has been modified to reflect a hammer head design, which is not to be paved so it will not affect surface and ground water flow in the area designated EP. Section of the Plan contains policies that guide and direct growth to settlement areas, as part of the County growth management strategy Primary Settlement Areas: large settlements with full municipal servicing, and a wide range of uses, services, and amenities are intended to be the primary target for residential and non-residential growth. Dundalk is identified as a Primary Settlement Area which includes full municipal servicing. Residential growth is to be directed towards Primary Settlement Areas. GCOP growth projections include a population of 10,200 in the Township of Southgate by ,500 residents live in the Township as of 2006, and the Township is predicted to grow by 900 residents between 2016 and 2026 according to Table 1 of the GCOP. Some of the additional residents can be accommodated by the proposed subdivision. Housing policy contained in Section 1.8 specify the following provisions. 1.8 a) intensification and redevelopment, primarily within Settlement Areas, and within other areas where an appropriate level of physical and social services are available subject to the policies of Section 5.3. In this regard the County will require that the intensification targets as set out in Table 7 be met; b) the provision of alternative forms of housing for special needs groups, where possible. Special needs groups may include, but are not limited to, seniors, physically or mentally challenged and low income earners; c) the maintenance and improvement of the existing housing stock. This will be encouraged through local maintenance and occupancy standards by-laws; d) the utilization of available programs and/or funding, if any, from applicable levels of government for assisted housing for households, including those with special needs, as well as programs to rehabilitate older residential areas; and 24

25 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas e) housing accessible to lower and moderate income households. In this regard, accessory apartments, semi-detached, duplex, townhouse and low rise apartment units will provide the bulk of affordable housing opportunities and will likely be provided within settlement areas with appropriate levels of servicing being available. Outside of the settlement areas accessory apartments will be the most likely means of increasing housing affordability. County housing policy is intended, in part, to encourage a wide variety of housing by type, size and tenure, to meet projected demographic and market requirements of current and future residents of the County. This subdivision supports this policy, as over 75% of the proposed structures will include multiple units. This variety will help address housing needs for the current and future residents of this section of the County. Subsection a) of Section 1.8, encourages development within Settlement Areas, where such areas contain the appropriate level of physical and social services to support growth. Section 5.3, referenced above in 1.8 (a), relates to servicing. The servicing report for the subdivision is summarized in section 1.4 of this report and the full text is found in Appendix 4. With respect to Subsection e), the development contains several housing options, which this subsection defines as affordable housing. Policy establishes and outlines general policies for settlement areas. This proposal will develop vacant land located within an identified settlement area without extending the existing urban boundary, meeting the intent of the plan to focus growth in Primary Settlement Areas. The relevant policies of section are assessed as follows (2) Local Official Plans, Secondary Plans, Plans of Subdivision and Condominium Plans shall ensure a proper and orderly street pattern facilitating safe motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian travel, efficient use of services, and a variety of housing and development opportunities within designated Settlement Area designations. The street pattern of the proposed development is a partial grid with the longest straight-line street being approximately 180 metres in length. The layout of the streets contains several stop points and turns while maintaining good sight lines, which encourages slower driving speeds and allows motorists to better react to any immediate situations. The street pattern will also allow for pedestrians and cyclists to move through the subdivision area safely. This subdivision will also provide a variety of housing options to homeowners that are not commonly available in the area of Dundalk. 25

26 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas 2.6.2(3) Local Official Plans, Secondary Plans, Plans of Subdivision and Condominium Plans should give consideration to the orientation of the streets and dwelling units in order to ensure energy efficiency, convenient access to retail facilities, schools, recreational facilities, and services via motor vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian travel. The proposed dwelling units will front onto roadways that have direct access to the various services offered in Dundalk. Access is maintained on these roads yearround by the Township of Southgate (4) Local Official Plans and/or Secondary Plans should allocate land use designations or sufficient land area to accommodate development potential for a minimum of ten years to a maximum of 20 years. The Township of Southgate Official Plan designates the area to be developed as Neighbourhood Area. The purpose of the Neighbourhood Area designation is to identify areas of existing and planned residential development. The proposal supports this policy (8) Development within designated growth areas should progress in an orderly manner with mixed land uses in keeping with the timely expansion of municipal services and the provision of public service facilities. Local Official Plans shall define phasing policies to guide orderly development. Although the proposed development contains only residential uses, the mixture of dwelling types will present a wider variety of housing opportunities than those that generally occur in small urban centres. A wet area is located in the northeastern portion of the subject property, which has been mapped by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and the Grand River Conservation Authority. Neither the County nor Township official plan mapping recognizes this area as a significant wetland or hazardous area. However, the Township of Southgate does zone this area as Environmental Protection. An EIS has been conducted in order to further assess this area. Section 2.8 of the GCOP requires that consideration must be given to the natural environment. The adjacent hazard area does not contain a feature that would require a setback under the Grey County Official Plan. The proposed subdivision design will not negatively impact the adjacent hazard lands. 26

27 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas 2.4 Township of Southgate Official Plan (TSOP) Figure 5 In a similar manner to the Grey County Official Plan, the Township of Southgate Official Plan (TSOP) has established growth goals and objectives (Appendix 6). Sections 2.2 and 2.3 of the TSOP speak to growth principles and future settlement patterns, respectively. In Subsection it is stated that the policies of the plan are to provide for the promotion of efficient and cost-effective development strategies. This manifests into strategies that direct growth to existing settlement areas, ensuring a safe and healthy, living and working environment, and to provide for limited residential growth and commercial and industrial opportunities that meet defined criteria ensuring rural vitality and viability continue. The proposed plan of subdivision is consistent with the intent and purpose of this mandate. Section further encourages development in this settlement area by stating that, the greater majority of growth in the Township of Southgate is to be directed toward the urban community of Dundalk. Again, this proposal compliments the intent of the local Official Plan. Under the Township of Southgate Official Plan, the subject land is designated Neighbourhood Area in its entirety. Lands with this designation are primarily residential in nature, but do permit other uses compatible with residential development such as commercial, institutional and open space. Figure 5 - Township of Southgate Official Plan - Land Use 27

28 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas The permitted uses for a Neighbourhood Area designation include: Low and medium density residential dwellings, including single family, semi detached and multiple unit dwellings, townhouses, private nursing homes, funeral homes, senior citizen/retirement homes and group homes. The dwelling types in the proposal reflect the permitted uses. The development polices (4.1.2) for the Neighbourhood Area does not provide direction for single-detached dwelling units, but does contain policies regarding townhouses and multiple unit dwellings In considering a zoning by-law amendment and site plan to permit a townhouse and multiple unit dwelling, Council shall be satisfied of the following: i. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding lands, with regard to scale and visual impact. ii. The use will not cause or create traffic hazards or an unacceptable level of congestion on surrounding streets. iii. The use is located on a site that has adequate land area to incorporate required parking, open space, landscaping and buffering. iv. The use can be serviced by municipal water and sewer services. v. The proposed lots can be adequately serviced by adequate community facilities, including schools and parks. vi. Townhouse and Multiple Dwelling development shall require stormwater management for both quantity and quality control, as approved by the Municipality and other approval authorities. The character of the development will blend well with the Dundalk Settlement Area. The single detached dwellings will back onto lots that also contain single detached dwellings to the southeast. The dwellings on the west side of Bradley Street will transition from single-detached dwellings into semi-detached and then into fourplexes. The dwelling units at the centre of the proposed subdivision are townhouses that front onto the local streets with parking provided through a laneway at the rear, labelled as Street C. It is not anticipated that the traffic generated from the 89 dwelling units will be of an unacceptable level. The lots are designed to reflect existing zoning requirements and one assumes that landscaping buffering and parking were considered when the standards were established. As noted previously, the subdivision is adjacent to the existing urban area in Dundalk and a minimal service expansion will be required. Dundalk has community facilities, schools and parks to support a development of this scale. In regard to stormwater, the stormwater management facility near the centre of the proposed development will control water flow from the subdivision in order to prevent the spread of contaminants and to prevent flooding downstream. This stormwater facility will account for most of the stormwater generated by the development, although a lower area near Bradley Street may need to use the stormwater system on Bradley Street. 28

29 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas 2.5 Township of Southgate Zoning By-law No Figure 6 The lot fabric for the proposed subdivision is designed to generally reflect the requirements of Residential Type 1 and 3 zones. The implementation of these zones will vary, but will generally be consistent with the existing requirements of the Township s zoning by-law for these two residential zones. In order to accommodate changes in market demand, the type 3 zone should provide for detached dwellings. The attached zoning schedule (Figure 6) also refines the limits of the EP and permits a stormwater facility within the EP boundary. Figure 6 - Township of Southgate Zoning Proposed Designations 3.0 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS The proposed Gilas subdivision has been designed to be consistent with provincial, County, and Township policy pertaining to locating urban development, providing for housing market needs and respecting the environmental limits of the site. Based on the foregoing report and policy analysis, the following can be concluded: 1) The proposed draft plan has regard for Section 2 as well as the subdivision requirements of Section 51 of the Planning Act. 2) The proposal is consistent with the PPS and the policy of the Grey County and Southgate Official Plans. 3) The servicing provisions of the proposal will provide an interesting design by means of encouraging streetscapes, and emphasizing architecture. 29

30 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas Effort will be made on multiple family blocks to place the parking behind the building and screen parking in order to encourage interesting and quality design. Considering its location in a full service municipality, its variety of housing types and its respect for the environmental benefits of the site, the approval of the attached draft plan should be granted. Respectfully Submitted, Nikolas Kohek Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Approved By Don Scott Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. 30

31 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas APPENDIX 1: DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION

32 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas APPENDIX 2: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

33 Mr. N. Moss, Planner Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. 978 First Avenue West Owen Sound, ON N4K 4K Re: Site Inspection Environmental Reconnaissance Part Lot 227, Concession III, SWTSR Township of Southgate (Proton) County of Grey, Dundalk Settlement Area January 22, 2016 Dear Nolan SAAR Environmental Limited attended the above noted subject property on April 9 th and 10 th, 2014 to conduct spring avifauna migration surveys assessing the suitability of a proposed storm pond and rear lots for natural heritage implications. Senior ecologist L. Sober is now with WSP Canada Inc. (WSP) who are updating this file as requested by Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. WSP reviewed the archive file and attended the site to confirm if the initial observations remain accurate, given potential for habitat to change over time. 1. The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) wetland limits are broad brush, when compared to the more accurate MNRF wetland mapping (Figure 1). Therefore staking the limits of the wetland on the ground to refine these limits is appropriate. 2. The stormwater management report identifies the location for the stormwater management pond (SWMP). The pond has been engineered and takes into consideration our ecology concerns of safeguarding any shallow groundwater flow that may move toward the wetland and the creek. 1

34 Figure 1: Illustrates the location of wetland according to the Province and Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) SAAR concluded with adherence to mitigation, recommended herein, that the location for the SWMP and the Street B easterly lots, can be sustained without significant negative impact to ecological features and functions. This conclusion is largely based on the fact that the stormwater management pond (SWMP) is to be sited in an open fallow field adjacent to an existing subdivision development. The wildlife at this human edge of the subdivision and fallow field reflect this environment and are edge tolerant species. Birds are habituated to bird feeders and terrestrial animals include woodchuck and Eastern Cottontail rabbit. Wildlife are detailed in the following section for a fuller appreciation of the site character. 2

35 Site Character Opposite-leaved Dogwood (Cornus), Red-ozier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) Sensitive fern clusters (Onoclea sensibilis), White Birch (Betula papyrifera), Trembling Aspen (Populus tremuloides), Apple trees, specimen Elm, and White Spruce, comprise the vegetation amidst a dominant open field condition of Reed Canary and Orchard Grasses. Travelling east past the drainage junction point, the Elm continue but as the land grades lower in elevation, it supports greater quantities of White Birch, Red-osier Dogwood, Willow, Green Ash, High-bush Cranberry specimen, White Cedar, dead standing Elm, Grape Vine on Black Ash, which delineate the true limit of wetland boundary requiring setback from development. Wetland Small ponded areas exist within the MNRF unevaluated wetland during spring melt. The wetland function for herpetofauna in these wet and moist wetland zones is setback from the proposed development envelope as illustrated below in Map 2. Development Setbacks The proposed stormwater management pond has been provided with a 50m setback from the wetland feature. Street B rear lot fabric, the easterly limits of the proposed subdivision, has been provided with a minimum 50 metre setback which meanders with the wetland limit and extends to greater than 100 metres. Setback distance is measured at 50 metres from the MNRF wetland. Constriction One pinch point occurs at the area of proposed cul de sac and this will benefit from the wetland staking exercise to ground truth the physical limit of the wetland in this section of the property. 3

36 Color Plate 1: Wetland herptile use in vernal pools The amphibian function above has been setback from the proposed stormwater pond by 50 metres. Drainage SAAR inspected the existing municipal drains at peak flow conditions to gain an appreciation of any spillover areas and ponding. Color plates illustrate the character of the drain that falls between Wilson Crescent and Pine Court. 4

37 Color Plate 2: Spruce bordering the existing subdivision The existing subdivision to the south is flanked by tall tree screens. These should be retained wherever possible for privacy screening and local stopover function for migrant birds. 5

38 Color Plate 3: Spring freshet carried in the municipal drain 6

39 Map 2: GRCA Wetland and Adjacent Regulation Limit The above map from the GRCA offers an overview of the wetland and adjacent regulated lands. As noted previously, this generalized wetland area varies significantly from the Ontario Wetland Data of MNRF. Ground truthing is required on the site to stake the actual limits of the wetland feature. This will help determine the limits of development and the appropriate setbacks from the natural features. SAAR conducted field reconnaissance in the area of the proposed SWMP and Street B rear lots which confirmed that a portion of the southwesterly wetland as drawn above in Map 2 supported both upland (e.g. Hawthorn) and lowland plants and soils. We concluded that the margins could support the proposed SWMP without significant negative impact to the wetland feature. Pond creation would also provide an opportunity to enhance the native vegetation for future increased wildlife support. 7

40 Color Plate 4: Illustrates uplands 50m east of the proposed SWMP The above color plate was taken fifty metres east of the proposed SWMP to illustrate the upland vegetation which is not considered wetland. This included American Elm, Apple, Hawthorn and Trembling Aspen. 8

41 Color Plate 5: Topography dips at the proposed SWMP and provides a suitable catchment for the proposed collection of stormwater Field Approach SAAR walked the subject lands and beyond to a distance of 120 metres, to gain an appreciation of the site. SAAR also conducted reconnaissance at a landscape level for features extending to 500 metres from the site by roving survey in a vehicle. Spring migration events for birds were conducted on an evening for night flying migrant birds, as well as an early morning for daytime migrants (11 p.m.- 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. 9 a.m. respectively April 9, 10, 2014). Early morning bird songs were recorded at transect locations. Bird song locations were selected using an accepted random unbiased quadrat system across the parcel in question (4 locations), not limited to, but including, the SWMP location. Bird tapes using a hand held tape recorder were played, in particular within the forested wetland to elicit any early returning raptors and owls. 9

42 Findings No significant waterfowl stopped over during the spring reconnaissance. Late snow cover precluded potential night time stopover of Greater or Lesser Yellowlegs in any fallow field that might have held storm and snowmelt for a few evenings. One Pileated Woodpecker returned calls and was flushed, with no other large bodied birds and an absence also of Ruffed Grouse. The snowmobile trail around and through this wetland may act as a deterrent for resident larger birds such as the Grouse. Early morning bird songs were limited to local and migrant Canada Geese, and local resident birds in and on adjacent lands to the wetland which included: Two Tree Swallows, 6 Canada Geese, Black-capped Chickadees (11), 2 Mourning Dove pairs, 4 Red-winged Blackbirds, American Crow, American Blue Jay, American Cardinal and an Early Phoebe flying amidst 20+ Grackles. Grackles made use of the southerly Norway Spruce bordering the rear lot limits off of Pine Court. Mitigation The spruce noted above should be retained where possible. They offer a privacy screen as well for residents that would avoid additional future planting at that edge after construction of the SWMP. Limit machinery to avoid more sensitive dawn and dusk for wildlife within the wetland habitat and the 120 metre wide adjacent lands. This timing fluctuates with the season and sunrise and sunset timing. SAAR finds it appropriate to avoid noise before 7 a.m. and after 7 p.m. The regional breeding birds that occupy the forested wetland and the surrounding open fallow fields will continue to court, breed, nest and stopover after construction. Butterflies using the wetland edges will continue to be supported and can be enhanced with native plantings. The site can be enhanced, guided by an Ecological Planting Plan (EPP) that selects local plants suited to the soil, aspect, topography and wildlife requirements. The EPP layers of ground cover, shrub and tree species also 10

43 provide a dual water quality function by scouring sediment and nutrient through a planted linear wetland swale. Conclusions The current draft plan of subdivision reviewed by SAAR, is consistent with environmental policy and statutes. Both the stormwater management pond feature and Street B rear lot fabric achieve healthy setback from the observed wetland functions. If adhering to the SAAR mitigation, which includes an Ecological Planting Plan, we find the subdivision can be viewed as sustainable on this landscape. Further, it provides an opportunity to increase the biological diversity of wildlife at the wetland edges and provide viewing opportunities for the future residents and trail users. Specific limits of the wetland require a growing season inspection after snowmelt, so plant growth beyond woody stems can augment staking of the SWMP and cul de sac limits, as well as directing the specific areas required for native plantings. Please direct any questions or comments to the undersigned. Note this SAAR update has been provided by WSP Canada Inc. Best regards, L.L. Sõber, H.B.Sc. Senior Ecologist (formerly SAAR) WSP Canada Inc. update Mobile:

44 Planning Justification Report November, 2016 Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Plan of Subdivision - Gilas APPENDIX 3: ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

45 FISHER ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTING STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL STAGE 1: BACKGROUND STUDY & STAGE 2: ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT Original P (Stage 1) & P (Stage 2) 8 February, 2016

46 STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL STAGE 1: BACKGROUND STUDY & STAGE 2: ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT Original Property Location: Part of Lot 227, Range 2 West, geographic Township of Proton, Municipality of Southgate, Grey County Submitted to: Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport & Stan Gilas C/O Don Scott & Nolan Moss Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. 978 First Avenue West Owen Sound, Ontario, N4K 4K5 Telephone: (519) Fax (519) cuesta@cuestaplanning.com Project No.: 2618 Prepared by: Jacqueline Fisher Fisher Archaeological Consulting 452 Jackson Street West Hamilton, Ontario L8P 1N4 Telephone: (905) Fax: (905) jacquie.fisher@sympatico.ca Archaeological Licence Number: P042, Jacqueline Fisher PIF No.: P (Stage 1) & P (Stage 2) (PIF is valid) 8 th February, 2016

47 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i 1.0 INTRODUCTION Development Context Archaeological Context Physiographic Features Bedrock Geology and Soils Water Sources and Vegetation Lithic Sources Archaeological Sites Previous Archaeological Work in the Vicinity of the Study Area Historical Context Aboriginal History Dundalk, Proton Township, Grey County Land Use of the Study Area Historic Plaques STAGE 1 METHODOLOGY ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION REFERENCES PROJECT PERSONNEL NPD Table for the Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision, Stage APPENDIX A: Photograph Catalogue - Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision, Stage 1 TABLES Table 1 Summary of Maps & Aerial Images Relevant to the Study Area FIGURES Figure 1: Study Area Location and Topography Figure 2: Study Area Boundary Figure 3: Development Plan Figure 4: Soils and Geology of the Study Area Vicinity Figure 5: Portion of Proton Township, Illustrated Historical Atlas of Grey and Bruce Counties, Ontario, 1880 Figure 6: 1954/1955 Aerial Photograph of the Study Area Figure 7a-c: Superceded Topographic Maps Showing Study Area from 1950, 1978 and 2011 Figure 8: Archaeological Stage 1 Results

48 PLATES Plate 1: From northeast corner looking southwest across slightly undulating field, with trees and housing in background (photo 0202). Plate 2: From northeast corner looking west-southwest across grassy field, showing land gently sloping south (photo 0203). Plate 3: Low-lying area and artificial pond, looking northeast (photo 0205). Plate 4: Looking southeast across field sloping slightly to south and east towards low-lying area, with overgrown vehicle path running towards housing (photo 0207). Plate 5: Looking northeast across undulating field toward tree cluster and line in background (photo 0209). Plate 6: Along south edge of Study Area, showing a manicured lawn with minor lawn accessories and a grassy vehicle path; looking northeast (photo 0210).

49 STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL STAGE 1: BACKGROUND STUDY & STAGE 2: ASSESSMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fisher Archaeological Consulting conducted the Stage 1 Background Study for the proposed Gilas Subdivision in Dundalk, Ontario. The legal description of the Study Area is Part of Lot 227, Range 2 West, geographic Township of Proton, Municipality of Southgate, Grey County. The Study Area consists of 4.0 hectares of agricultural fields, a wooded section, and wetland, and is along the northern end of the community of Dundalk. The topography of the Study Area is undulating, rising gently to the north, with low spots in the southwest and eastern corners. A cedar wood and artificial pond are present in the eastern end of the Study Area, bordering marshy land, while the remainder was meadow with field grasses and some scrub brush prior to being ploughed in Geographically, Dundalk is situated at the highest point in southern Ontario. The headwaters of both the South Saugeen River and the Grand River are in the vicinity of Dundalk, and the Niagara Escarpment is located less than 20 kilometres to the east and north. Primary chert sources for both Fossil Hill and Manitoulin can also be found within 20 kilometres of the Study Area. Historically, Dundalk was moved to its current location ca 1873 to be adjacent to, and have a station on the Toronto, Grey and Bruce Railway. The village had originally been settled on the Toronto and Sydenham Road, 1.2 kilometres northeast of the Study Area, on the eastern edge of the Range 1 West lots in the 1860s. By the 1880s, Dundalk was a thriving community, however as many of Ontario s rural communities did, it suffered a decline in the early 20 th century. The reduction in size and subsequent growth of the community can be traced on the historic maps and images. The background research indicates that there is high potential for the discovery of both Aboriginal and historic Euro-Canadian material within the Study Area, with the exception of permanently wet or extensively disturbed areas (ie the artificial pond). The high potential for Aboriginal material is based primarily on distance to water and the general locality of the Study Area. Potential for Euro-Canadian material is high based on distance to water, and on the proximity of the Study Area to the 19 th century town. The Stage 2: Assessment was conducted over two days in the fall of 2015 and that nothing having Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI) was found during the Assessment. Therefore, based on this information FAC recommends the following: 1) that the Study Area has been adequately assessed, and since nothing having heritage value or interest was found, no further archaeological work is required. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page i

50 STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ONTARIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL STAGE 1: BACKGROUND STUDY & STAGE 2: ASSESSMENT FINAL REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION The following is a Stage 1 report, prepared for review by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS). Archaeological consultants, licensed by MTCS, are required to follow the Standards and Guidelines for Consulting Archaeologists (MTCS 2011) during land use planning as part of the evaluation of cultural heritage resources. This includes reporting all work to MTCS. There are four stages for archaeological work Stages 1 to 4. Stage 1 Background Study and Property Inspection. The purpose of the Stage 1 archaeological assessment is two-fold. Firstly, it is to determine the potential for the presence of as yet undocumented cultural heritage resources, and secondly, to determine whether known cultural heritage resources are extant on the subject land(s). Stage 2 Field work. Stage 2 is the actual field examination of high potential areas, and involves either surface survey of ploughed fields or shovel testing in areas that are undisturbed or cannot be cultivated. Stage 3 Testing. The purpose of the Stage 3 is to ascertain the dimensions of the site, its cultural affiliation (if possible), and to evaluate its significance. If the site in question is determined to be archaeologically significant, then appropriate mitigation measures will be decided upon. Stage 4 Mitigation. Stage 4 involves the mitigation of the development impacts to the archaeological site through either site excavation or avoidance (preservation). Stage 1 determines the amount of Stage 2 work required. Stage 2 determines if Stage 3 is warranted, and Stage 3, in turn, determines if the archaeological resources are significant and warrant a full excavation (Stage 4) or if the site may be preserved. All work was conducted under archaeological licence P042. The Stage 1: Background Study pertains to project information number P , and the Stage 2: Assessment pertains to the number P Development Context Fisher Archaeological Consulting (FAC) was contracted by Cuesta Planning on behalf of the landowner (Mr. Stan Gilas) to conduct the Stage 1 Background Research and Stage 2 Assessment for the proposed Gilas Subdivision in the community of Dundalk, Ontario. The Study Area s legal description is Part of Lot 227, Range 2 West, geographic Township of Proton, Municipality of Southgate (Dundalk), Grey County, Ontario. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 1

51 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario The proposed subdivision, approximately four hectares in size, is situated on the western edge of the community of Dundalk. It is bounded on the south by an existing subdivision, by agricultural lands to the north and west, and by a wood lot and scrubby ground to the east. The archaeological condition was assigned during the Planning Act Application. FAC had permission from the proponent to enter the property to complete the archaeological field work. 1.2 Archaeological Context The Study Area in 2014 was land comprised of an undulating, grassy meadow with a few areas of small trees and shrubs, and the edge of the eastern wood lot. The trees and shrubs are both scattered and in clusters, while the wood lot edge, along the Study Area s eastern boundary, consists primarily of cedars. A former artificial pond to the east has been infilled, yet that end remains a wetland with standing water, reeds and dogwoods surrounded by the cedar woods. The main section of the Study Area was ploughed specifically for the archaeological study. It was ploughed in the spring of 2015, but sections were left unploughed. The field was re-ploughed, but the visibility was not adequate to conduct the archaeological survey. The whole of the field was re-ploughed in the fall of 2015 to standards for an archaeological assessment, and the work was finalized then. The following discussion details the environmental and cultural setting of the research area. This provides a framework for conducting the archaeological potential survey Physiographic Features The Study Area is located near the northern edge of the physiographic region known as the Dundalk Till Plain (Chapman & Putnam 1984: ). This area forms the roof of Ontario, that being the highlands of the Province (Chapman & Putnam 1984:130). Dundalk itself has an elevation of 526 metres (1,735') above sea level, the highest point in southern Ontario (Grey County 2015). The Dundalk plain is gently undulating, while low drumlins to the north and west of the community of Dundalk provide additional surface relief in this vicinity (Chapman & Putnam 1984: 130). Proton Township as a whole is relatively level with a ridge crossing irregularly from north to south (Marsh 1931:146). Many of the original farmsteads in this region were abandoned due to poor tillage and a cool, short growing season, while others have expanded in acreage to provide pasture for cattle (Chapman & Putnam 1984: 132). Today, windmills pepper the landscape south of Dundalk, taking advantage of the highlands. While the Study Area is on the Dundalk plain, less than 20 kilometres to the east, northeast and northwest of Dundalk is the Niagara Escarpment. The escarpment extends from the Niagara River to Manitoulin Island, skirting the eastern end of Lake Ontario and following the southern shore or Georgian Bay from Thornbury to Tobermory on the Bruce Peninsula. The escarpment contains a wide variety of ecosystems providing a wealth of natural resources including flora, fauna, mineral and water sources, that will have been utilized from the first peoples to the present. In addition, the heights of land offered look-outs and dry ground for trails, and potentially sacred locations. The importance of the Niagara Escarpment, both environmentally and culturally, has been recognized through a UNESCO World Biosphere designation (Ontario s Niagara Escarpment 2015). Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 2

52 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario Bedrock Geology and Soils Dundalk is situated on the Middle and Lower Silurian Guelph Formation bedrock, which is comprised of sandstone, shale, dolostone and siltstone (Chapman & Putnam 1984: 2 and Ontario Geological Survey 1991: Map 2544). Amabel Formation, also Silurian, is located to the northeast of Dundalk on the Niagara Escarpment (ibid). The Study Area s soil type is classified as Listowel silt loam of the Grey Brown Podzolic Great Group (Gillespie and Richards 1954: Soil Map). This soil is characterized by imperfect drainage on smooth to gently sloping topography, and is slightly stony (ibid). Listowel is the primary soil type in this vicinity (see Figure 4), with pockets of Parkhill and Harriston loams, and Muck (ibid). Generally, a preference for settlement sites would be on well-drained soils, rather than poor ones such as clay or muck soils. However, the soil type cannot be used as a sole criterion for predictive modelling of site locations, as has been observed through archaeological survey and excavation Water Sources and Vegetation The distance to a water source is a major factor in determining an area's archaeological potential. Other factors include soil, vegetation and landscape features. Generally, areas within 300 metres to a seasonal or year round source of running water are considered to be of high archaeological potential. Headwaters of a number of different river systems arise in this area of Ontario. The rivers include the Grand, the Maitland, and the Saugeen. The Saugeen River is the primary watershed within Proton Township, and a branch of the South Saugeen rises just west of Dundalk (Chapman and Putnam 1984: Map P.2715). The Grand River rises northeast of Dundalk and one of its main branches passes through the eastern part of the village (ibid), approximately 400 metres southeast of the Study Area. The Grand River has the largest catchment basin in southwestern Ontario and is the primary watershed from the Dundalk plain southwards to its mouth at Lake Erie (ibid : 95). The Dundalk plain is also characterized by swamps or bogs, and poorly drained depressions (Chapman & Putnam 1984:130). There are a number of marshy pockets on the outskirts of Dundalk, one immediately east of the Study Area and another to the northwest. These wet areas are part of the headwater systems, the marsh to the east feeding a tributary of the Grand River that has been channelized as it passes through Dundalk. This tributary is depicted in the 1880 Historical Atlas of Grey and Bruce Counties (Belden 1880: 27). This marsh and tributary are less than 300 metres from the western Study Area boundary and 30 to 60 metres from the eastern boundary. In addition to the natural water bodies, artificial ponds dot the landscape taking advantage of, and improving on, the natural drainage systems. An artificial pond was present within the Study Area, on the eastern end near the marsh edge, as of the 1994 National Topographic Series (NTS) map. Currently the pond is a low, wet area infilled with silt and overgrown with reeds, but still containing standing water, as observed during the property inspection in the fall of Standing water extended beyond the pond footprint to the east, northeast, possibly marking the edge of the marsh. Another low, wet area was identified in the southwest corner of the Study Area during the property inspection. The aerial imagery (Figure 2) suggests a seasonal watercourse crossing the Study Area from its north edge to this corner. The land owner indicated that the natural drainage in the vicinity of the Study Area had been Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 3

53 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario changed by the construction of the subdivision immediately south of the Study Area, and that the drain situated to the southeast had been excavated in aid of prevention of basement flooding in the adjacent homes. Another artificial pond and channelized watercourse is present approximately 175 metres northwest of the Study Area, this watercourse draining north to another branch of the Saugeen. This drainage system possibly follows a seasonal watercourse. The water sources near the Study Area are within low points on the gently undulating landscape. Prior to deforestation by Euro-Canadian settlers, there would have been a variety of tree types present. A hardwood forest of maples, beech and some birch would have been present on the better drained areas, while the poorer drained areas and swamps would have contained elm, ash, cedar and tamarack (Chapman & Putnam 1984:131). The altitude of this area would have seen the land occupied by both upland and lower land species and white and black spruce, white pine, tamarack, balsam fir, alder, white birch, aspen and willows would have been common (Chapman & Putnam 1984:131). Current vegetation on the Study Area itself include field grasses, dogwood, cedar, pine and a few deciduous trees and shrubs including the tree lined northern field boundary, and reeds and rushes by the former pond Lithic Sources Sources of siliceous stone, specifically chert, for making tools were often focal areas for pre-contact Aboriginal people. There are a number of primary sources in this region of Grey and Simcoe Counties for both Fossil Hill and Manitoulin Formation cherts (Eley and von Bitter 1989:4). There are nine known sources between approximately 20 and 40 kilometres to the north, northeast, northwest and southeast of Dundalk (ibid) Archaeological Sites FAC submitted a request to MTCS for a search of the Ontario Archaeological Sites Database (OASD) for registered site data within a distance of one kilometre radius around the Study Area. There are no registered sites within these parameters. However, this is possibly more a reflection of a lack of formal surveys rather than a lack of sites Previous Archaeological Work in the Vicinity of the Study Area The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport has not indicated that there has been any previous archaeological work within 50 metres of the Study Area. 1.3 Historical Context Aboriginal populations entered southern Ontario ca 11,000 years before present following the retreating glaciers, and have maintained a continuous presence since that time. Settlement of this region of Ontario by Euro-Canadian pioneers began in the mid 19th century Aboriginal History After the final retreat of the glaciers and the opening up of the Great Lakes basin, people moved into the area. We know that what is now called Ontario has been inhabited by Aboriginal peoples for at least the last 11,000 years. What follows is a brief synopsis of the peoples who came before the European settlers from Paleo-Indians to Late Woodlands people when first contact was made. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 4

54 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario During the geological time frame of Lake Algonquin there is direct evidence that people were inhabiting southern Ontario (Ellis & Deller 1990:39). These people are known to researchers as Paleo-Indians who were non-agriculturalists and depended upon hunting and foraging of wild foods to survive. They would have moved their camps on a regular basis to the areas that would have provided resources as they became available. The size of the groups of people would in part depend upon the size and nature of those resources available at a particular location (Ellis & Deller 1990:52). People would have gathered or dispersed through the year depending on the availability of resources and social constraints. The environmental conditions of spruce parkland/woodland to pine forests would have necessitated frequent moves and a large range of territory in order acquire adequate resources. While the Paleo-Indian period lasted for a millennium, the Archaic horizon lasted for approximately seven times that length spanning from 8,000 B.C. to 850 B.C. It would appear that the Archaic peoples in Southern Ontario were subsisting in smaller territories than the former Paleo-Indians, thereby becoming more regionalized. Their population was increasing, probably due to the more reliable food resources as well as greater biodiversity in these resources. The broad divisions in the Archaic may be broken down into the Early, Middle and Late Archaic. The Early Archaic peoples continued with some characteristics from the Paleo-Indians, but developed some of their own, as any culture is never static. One of the major differences between the Late Archaic and Early Woodland (800 B.C. to ca. 0 B.C.) in the archaeological record of southern Ontario was the appearance of pottery. By the time of the Middle Woodland, there was a major shift in the way people settled the landscape and procured foods. It is at this time (500 B.C. to A.D. 700) that people were making fish a more important aspect of their diet, although hunting and foraging were done as well. As a consequence, rich and large sites began to appear on river valley floors. The sites were inhabited periodically for sometimes hundreds of years, and represented a warm season macroband base camp, to take advantage of spawning fish. People kept returning to particular fish spawning grounds, and became more reliant on this resource. People were becoming more sedentary and had a restricted band territory, compared to the people of the Archaic. When exactly the Late Woodland began and the Middle Woodland ended has been debated by archaeologists, but the designation has been based on a number of material distinct differences from the Middle Woodland. Differences include things such as new settlement and subsistence strategies, a new type of pottery construction, different pottery decorating techniques, and a variety of projectile point forms. Based on these characteristics, it is generally felt that the Late Woodland period began at around 800 A.D. and continued until A.D. 1650, after which the time frame is designated as post-contact period. The Study Area is within the early 17 th century territory verge between the Petun peoples of the Simcoe region and the Odawa (Fox 1991: 458). In the middle of that century, the Petun were dispersed by the Five Nation Iroquois (Trigger 1994: 46, and Trigger & Day 1994: 74). In 1818, William Claus negiotiated with the Ojibwa for over half a million hectares to the west and south of Lake Simcoe, the land cession that included the Study Area (Surtees 1994: 115). The Study Area is within the traditional territory of the Saugeen Ojibway Nation (SON 2015: SON Territory Map) Dundalk, Proton Township, Grey County Grey County itself was established in 1852 and by 1865, boasted 16 townships, four towns, and 44 villages or post offices (Grey County 2015). Proton Township is in the southeast corner of Grey Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 5

55 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario County. It is bounded on the west and north by the former Townships of Egremont and Artemesia in Grey County, on the south by Wellington County, and on the east by the Township of Melancthon. Melancthon was originally in Grey County, and was managed by the same municipal government as Proton until 1858 (Belden 1880: 12); Melancthon was transferred to the newly formed Dufferin County in1874 (DCMA 2013). In 2001, Proton and Egremont Townships and the community of Dundalk, amalgamated to form the Municipality of Southgate (Grey County 2015). The first survey through Proton Township was for the Toronto and Sydenham [Owen Sound] Road (or T&S Road, now Highway 10), ca 1848; this is sometimes referred to as the Old Survey (Smith 1865: 18). Lots were aligned perpendicular to the road in three or four ranges either side, the Study Area being in Range 2 West 1 (see Figure 5). The T&S Road formed the northeast boundary between Proton and Melancthon Townships. Marsh (1931:146) noted that these lots were numbered in 50 acre parcels distributed as free grants, with an adjoining 50 acre parcel kept available for 10 years in case the settler was desirous and able to expand their holding. The Range 1 West lots appear to be 50+ acre parcels, however the Range 2 West lots, including Lot 227, are approximately 65 acres. It is probable that the first lots taken up would have been those fronting the T&S Road. The remaining majority of Proton Township, beyond the T&S Road lots, was surveyed in 1850 by David Gibson (Smith 1865: 272). The first settlers located north of Dundalk along the T&S Road at Inistioge in the 1840s (Marsh 1931:147). The growth of Euro-Canadian settlement in Proton Township was slow in the mid-1800s. The 1851 census for Proton and Melancthon lists only 89 farms. By 1861, the census indicated that Proton had 252 landowners and a total population of 1,440 (Davidson 1972:237). The township was particularly inhospitable in the mid 19 th century due to the dense forests and swamps, however a few good farms were noted and its future as profitable pastureland was foretold (Smith 1865: 272). By 1866, a post office had been established for Dundalk on the Melancthon side of the T&S Road (Smith 1865: 165) and the original village established on that road (Marsh 1931: 152). The post office and village centre were both moved after the Toronto, Grey and Bruce Railway (TGBR) was constructed and the community became centred on the railway (Marsh 1931:147, 152). The TGBR was constructed between 1870 and 1873, and became part of the Canadian Pacific Railway system in 1884 (Ontario Plaques 2015). The TGBR crosses the western half of the lot, approximately 280 metres west of the Study Area. The post office and subsequent village were named after Dundalk, Ireland by the first Irish settlers (Marsh 1931:147). By 1880, Dundalk was a thriving community of 600 people with 8 stores, 3 steam saw mills, 2 steam grist mills, woollen and furniture factories,...three churches, one school...and a station on the T.G. and B. Railroad (Belden 1880: 12). In 1880, Dundalk was considered the only village of any considerable importance in the township (ibid). The community was officially incorporated as a village in 1887 (Grey County 2015). 1 The llustrated Historic Atlas of Grey & Bruce Counties (Belden 1880) refers to the Ranges as North & South, not East and West. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 6

56 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario The Gazeteer and Directory of the County of Grey, , listed the names of all male residents in the township, both Free Holders and Householders 21 years old and older, by lot and concession. There was no one fitting that description on Lot 227 R2W at that time (Smith 1865: ). While it is probable that the lot had been sold and was no longer Crown land, it is quite possible that it was purely agricultural in function Land Use of the Study Area A series of historic maps including superceded topographic maps, and aerial imagery were examined to provide information regarding the land use of the Study Area over the past 150 years, and this is presented in Table 1. Table 1: Summary of Maps & Aerial Images Relevant to the Study Area Image Year Comments Illustrated Historical Atlas of Grey & Bruce Counties, Proton Township Figure 5 National Topographic Series (NTS) Sheet 41 A/1 Scale 1:50, 000 Figure 7a Aerial Image, 1954/55 Shot : 63,360 (Llyod Reeds Map Collection, McMaster University) Figure 6 NTS Sheet 41 A/1 Scale 1: 50,000 Figure 7b only 5 individuals named in entire township, none on Lot 227 R2W; nothing depicted on Lot 227 R2W; - map labels the concessions South not West (ie R2S = R2W); - village of Dundalk on Lot 228 R2W, south of the Study Area; - Toronto, Grey & Bruce Railway present, crossing Lot 227 R2W west of the Study Area; - tributary of the Grand River illustrated within Dundalk the Study Area is depicted as open agricultural land with a treed hedgerow on the north; a farmstead (house & barn) are located just south of the Study Area, and probably match the farmstead visible in the 1955 aerial the Study Area is agricultural land, possibly in scrub or pasture, with woods at its eastern end; there appears to be a seasonal watercourse in an east/west access across the Study Area. There is no sign of a artificial pond on the Study Area; - a tree-lined rectangle on Lot 228 at the southern border of the Study Area, is indicative of Euro-Canadian activities set back from the road, however this is both beyond the Study Area boundary and within a current subdivision. (It appears that this mature evergreen boundary was maintained when the modern subdivision was constructed, cf. Figure 2) the community has expanded since the 1950s, but the Study Area is still surrounded by agricultural land; - the artificial pond on the Study Area is not indicated; the Study Area is agricultural land. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 7

57 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario Image Year Comments NTS Sheet 41 A/1 Scale 1:50,000 Figure 1 NTS Sheet 41 A/1 Scale 1:50,000 Figure 7c Ontario Base Map (OBM), Scale 1:10,000 MNR Figure 1 Satellite Image MNR Figure Dundalk village limits are established at the southern edge of the Study Area, and subdivisions now border the Study Area on that edge; - a wood lot and artificial pond are present in the eastern end of the Study Area, the remainder is still agricultural land similar to the 1994 edition the wood lot is indicated in the eastern end of the Study Area; the artificial pond is also still indicated within the Study Area the Study Area is primarily pasture with some scrub brush noted in the south corner; a footpath crosses the Study Area on a north/south axis; a seasonal watercourse and low area are visible on the western half of the Study Area; the cedar wood and scrub are also visible within the eastern end, as is the footprint of the artificial pond. The above table and accompanying figures highlight the continuing rural nature of the Study Area into the 21 st century. The Illustrated Historic Atlas, 1880, depicts the village edge as the boundary between Lots 227 and 228 R2W, south or southeast of the Study Area. A comparison between the 1880 Atlas and the 1950s NTS map and aerial photograph (Figures 5, 6 and 7a), indicates that the village reduced in size during that period, with some of the former streets in the Atlas just a shadow on the landscape in the 1955 aerial. There is no evidence of historic structures within the Study Area boundaries, the closest being a farmstead on Lot 228 R2W, immediately adjacent to the Study Area, visible on both the 1950s documents. The farmstead lane at that time appears to have been on the boundary between Lots 227 and 228 (Figure 6), however it is probable that it had a previous access lane off Grey Street in an earlier iteration of that road. The house and barn are recorded on the 1950 NTS map (Figure 7a) but are derelict or demolished as of 1978 (Figure 7b), and their property incorporated into the existing modern subdivision. While there is no indication of historic or modern activity other than agriculturally related within the Study Area, it has not remained completely unchanged since initial clearance of the forest. The wood lot east of the Study Area has expanded into the Study Area since the mid-20th century, as confirmed in the aerial images (compare Figures 6 and 1). In addition, an artificial pond was excavated in the late 20 th century, first recorded on the 1994 NTS map (compare Figures 7b and 1). The pond was also in the eastern end of the Study Area, presumably utilizing the high water table of the nearby marsh. Therefore, the only known development within the Study Area is the construction of the artificial pond. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 8

58 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario Historic Plaques There are no known plaques associated with the Study Area or its immediate environs. 2.0 METHODOLOGY 2.1 Stage 1 Methodology Information about the archaeological potential of the Study Area was gathered from various sources. The archaeological potential for pre-contact/historic Aboriginal settlement has been assessed using the data collected from the Ontario Sites Database (OSD) and environmental data collected from geological, soils, NTS topographic and Ontario maps. Historic Euro-Canadian site potential has been assessed using data from the OSD system, from primary sources such as 19 th century directories, historic maps, 20 th century mapping and aerial photography, and from secondary historic sources. A property inspection was conducted on the 4 th of November, 2014, under overcast skies with some drizzle. 2.2 Stage 2 Methodology The Stage 2 assessment was conducted in 2015 over two days, 23 rd September, 10 th November, 2015, according to the standards as regulated in the MTCS 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. The Study Area is approximately 4.0 hectares located in a rural setting abutting a small suburban area on its eastern boundary. Ploughing was feasible for majority of the Study Area and therefore allowed for visual assessment. The main field had to be ploughed three times due to incomplete ploughing, and then need for re-ploughing due to over-grown sections. Proper ploughing conditions (coverage and visibility) were attained in the late fall of 2015, and the field was assessed at that time. On the first visit in September, some shovel testing was conducted, and part of the field was assessed, but conditions were deemed to be inadequate. The remainder of the shovel testing, and assessment of the whole field was conducted on November 10 th, The visual assessment was conducted at a five-metre interval for the whole of the field. Shovel testing was conducted for those areas that could not be ploughed the southwest corner, the edge of the wood lot, and the southeast corner to confirm conditions. The shovel testing was conducted at five metre intervals and judgementally when determined to be the appropriate methodology. Each shovel test was a minimum diameter of 30cm, and extended five centimetres into subsoil. All shovel tests were backfilled, and the sod tamped down to the level of the surrounding area. All shovel tests were excavated stratigraphically. Soils were screened through six-millimetre mesh. 3.0 RECORD OF FINDS - STAGE 2 Documentary Record for Stage 2 Field notes - in FAC field notebook, Book 2 & Book 3 Field photography (digital) - see Appendix A, Photograph Catalogue Artifacts - none recovered Maps based on field work - within this report Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 9

59 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario 4.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Archaeological Potential Archaeological potential for Aboriginal sites and material is based on environmental factors, such as distance to water and soil type, and proximity to known sites and features (such as trails or specific resources). The potential for historic Euro-Canadian material is based on similar factors, with the addition of historic roads and railways and homes, industries or institutions identified in the documentary record. The earliest settlers would also have required potable water, a form of transportation (water ways prior to the roads and railways), and arable land. Dense marshes were eventually cleared and settled, but not as readily as the drier wood lots. The Study Area is within 300 metres of historic and current water sources, including both marsh and stream. The topography is undulating with the higher ground on the north and west portions, gently sloping down to the wet area on the eastern edge. The artificial pond appears to have silted in, however its location contains standing water and the surrounding land is clearly waterlogged most of the year, based on the vegetation (rushes, cedars, dogwood) as well as the conditions observed during the property inspection. The Study Area is also within 20 kilometres of known primary chert sources, and of the Niagara Escarpment, both of which would have drawn Aboriginal people to and through this region. While the soil of the Study Area is loam with imperfect drainage, and there are no registered sites in close proximity, the presence of water and higher ground overlooking that water source indicate a high potential for the discovery of Aboriginal archaeological material on the drier and undisturbed portions of the Study Area. The background research did not indicate any specific 19 th century homesteading or other activities associated with the Study Area. The Study Area was among the first lots surveyed in the township, although the Old Survey lots that were initially sold were probably those with frontage on the actual road, ie Range 1 lots. The village of Dundalk, located on the next lot south of the Study Area, was a thriving community in the late 19 th century after having been moved ca 1873 from its original location on the T&S Road to its current placement (adjacent to the railroad). The southern edge of the Study Area may be within 100 metres of the late 19 th century iteration of Grey Street, Dundalk. Therefore, the potential for historic Euro-Canadian material is high based primarily on the presence of water but also on its proximity to the earlier extent of Dundalk. Known development within the Study Area consists of the construction of an artificial pond in the late 20 th century. The pond construction will have removed any archaeological potential in its footprint and possibly reduced the potential in its immediate vicinity. Permanently wet locations within the Study Area will also be reduced in potential, their boundaries to be confirmed during the Stage 2 Assessment. 4.2 Archaeological Assessment The archaeological assessment was conducted over two days in the fall of 2015 (see Figure 8 for results). The original ploughing had been rough due to the amount of time that had elapsed since it had been an active agricultural field, and the presence of various wet patches. Once the ploughing was acceptable and visibility good (80% visibility), the field was visually assessed at a five metre interval. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 10

60 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario The visually assessed area of the field was slightly irregular as there were a number of wet patches that could not be ploughed. The southwestern corner was shovel tested judgementally in order to verify the wetness of this section, and it was confirmed to consist of wet soils. The general slope of the main field was gently rising from southeast to northwest, with a couple of low spots running in those directions. There was one slightly higher, flat piece of ground along the eastern boundary in the centre. Nothing having Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI) was noted during the visual assessment of the main field. The north and south eastern edges of the Study Area were shovel tested. The wooded section in the northeast corner consisted of a small section of flat ground before gently sloping down to the east to the area of the excavated pond. The soils were dry on the flat top, but gradually became more saturated further east and down slope. This wooded section was shovel tested at a five metre interval. The small triangular section in the southeast corner of the Study Area was also shovel tested to determine if there was any dry ground within this section. This section started out being conducted at a five metre interval, but was switched to judgemental (retained a distance of five metres between shovel testing lines, but extended the interval to 10 metres, or wherever dry ground might be encountered). No dry ground was encountered and a number of areas contained standing water. Nothing having CHVI was noted during the shovel testing component of this assessment. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Fisher Archaeological Consulting conducted the Stage 1 Background Study for the proposed Gilas Subdivision in Dundalk, Ontario. The legal description of the Study Area is Part of Lot 227, Range 2 West, geographic Township of Proton, Municipality of Southgate, Grey County. The Study Area consists of 4.0 hectares of agricultural fields, a wooded section, and wetland, and is along the northwestern edge of the community of Dundalk. The background research indicates that there is high potential for the discovery of both Aboriginal and historic Euro-Canadian material within the Study Area, with the exception of permanently wet or extensively disturbed areas (ie the artificial pond). The high potential for Aboriginal material is based primarily on distance to water and the general locality of the Study Area. Potential for Euro-Canadian material is high based on distance to water, and on the proximity of the Study Area to the 19 th century town. The Stage 2: Assessment was conducted over two days in the fall of 2015 and that nothing having Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI) was found during the Assessment. Therefore, based on this information FAC recommends the following: 1) that the Study Area has been adequately assessed, and since nothing having heritage value or interest was found, no further archaeological work is required. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 11

61 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario 6.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION A) This report is submitted to the Minister of Culture as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c0.18. The report is reviewed to ensure that it complies with the standards and guidelines that are issued by the Minister, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations ensure the conservation, protection and preservation of the cultural heritage of Ontario. When all matters relating to archaeological sites within the project area of a development proposal have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture, a letter will be issued by the minister stating that there are no further concerns with regard to alterations to archaeological sites by the proposed development. B) It is an offence under Sections 48 and 69 of the Ontario Heritage Act for any party other than a licensed archaeologist to make any alteration to a known archaeoloigcal site or to remove any artifact or other physical evidence of past human use or activity from the site, until such time as a licensed archaeologist has complete archaeological fieldwork on the site, submitted a report to the Minister stating that the site has no further cultural heritage value or interest, and the report has been filed in the Ontario Public Register of Archaeology Reports referred to in Section 65.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act. C) Should previously undocumented archaeological resources be discovered, they may be a new archaeological site and therefore subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proponent or person discovering the archaeological resources must cease alteration of the site immediately and engage a licensed consultant archaeologist to carry out archaeological fieldwork, in compliance with sec. 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. D) The Cemeteries Act, R.S.O c. C.4 and the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, c.33 (when proclaimed in force) requires that any person discovering human remains must notify the police or coroner and the Registrar of cemeteries, Ministry of Consumer Services ( ). Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 12

62 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario REFERENCES Belden, H. & Co Illustrated Historical Atlas of Grey and Bruce Counties. Stratford: Cumming Publishers, 2 nd reprint edition Chapman, L.J. and D.F. Putnam 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario. Third Edition. Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 2. Davidson, T. Arthur 1972 A New History of the County of Grey. Grey County Historical Society. Dufferin County Museum & Archives (DCMA) 2013 About Dufferin County. (accessed 12 January 2015). Eley, B. and P. von Bitter 1989 Cherts of Southern Ontario. Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum. Fox, William 1991 The Odawa. IN The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D Edited by Chris J. Ellis and Neal Ferris. Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, Ontario Archaeolgoical Society, Publication No. 5. Pages Gillespie, J.E. & N.R. Richards 1954 Soil Survey of Grey County. Canadian Department of Agriculture and Ontario Agricultural College, Report No. 17 of the Ontario Soil Survey Grey County 2015 Grey County, Colour it Your Way. (accessed 15 January 2015). Lloyd Reeds Map Collection /55 Shot Aerial Image. Lloyd Reeds Map Collection, McMaster University. (accessed 8 January 2015). Marsh, E.L A History of the County of Grey. Owen Sound: Fleming Publishing Company Ltd. Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry of Ontario (MNR) 2014 M a k e a T o p o g r a p h i c M a p. (accessed 8 January 2015). Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 13

63 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario Ontario Geological Survey 1991 Bedrock Geology of Ontario, Southern Sheet; Ontario Geological Survey Map 2544, Scale 1:1,000,000. Online at Brock University James A. Gibson Map Library: (accessed 9 January 2015). Ontario s Niagara Escarpment 2015 Canadian Biosphere Reserves. (accessed 9 January 2015). Ontario Plaques 2015 Toronto, Grey & Bruce Railway, OHT Plaque Text. IN Ontario Plaques website, Managed by A, Brown. (accessed 12 January 2015). Saugeen Ojibway Nations (SON) 2015 Saugeen Ojibway Nation Environment Office: Traditional Territory Map. (accessed 9 Jan 2015). Smith, W.W Gazeteer and Directory for the County of Grey, Toronto: Globe Steam Press. A v a i l a b l e o n l i n e a t (accessed 9 January 2015). Surtees, Robert J Land Cessions, IN Aboriginal Ontario. Historical Perspectives on the First Nations. Edited by Edward S. Rogers & Donald B. Smith. Pages Toronto: Dundurn Press. Ontario Historical Studies Series for the Government of Ontario. Trigger, Bruce 1994 The Original Iroquoians: Huron, Petun, and Neutral. IN Aboriginal Ontario. Historical Perspectives on the First Nations. Edited by Edward S. Rogers & Donald B. Smith. Pages Toronto: Dundurn Press. Ontario Historical Studies Series for the Government of Ontario. Trigger, B. and G. Day 1994 Southern Algonquian Middlemen: Algonquin, Nipissing, and Ottawa, IN Aboriginal Ontario. Historical Perspectives on the First Nations. Edited by Edward S. Rogers & Donald B. Smith. Pages Toronto: Dundurn Press. Ontario Historical Studies Series for the Government of Ontario. Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 14

64 Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision Cuesta Planning Stage 1: Background Study & Stage 2: Assessment Final Report Owen Sound, Ontario PROJECT PERSONNEL Project Manager: Stage 1 Property Inspection: Stage 2 Field Director: Stage 2 Field Archaeologists: Background Research: Report Authors: Report Editor: Graphics: Jacqueline Fisher (P042) Jacqueline Fisher Ruth Macdougall (P359) Jacqueline Fisher Aaron Clemens Jesse Gallant Stewart Macdougall Paul Neuman Drew Smith Julia Wither Ruth Macdougall Stewart Macdougall Ruth Macdougall Jon Cousins Jacqueline Fisher Jacqueline Fisher Emma Gordon NPD Table for the Stan Gilas - Dundalk Subdivision, Stage 1 & Stage 2 Permission was obtained to enter the property described in the above report The licensee had permission to remove any archaeological objects recovered during the scope of the above named project Yes na The archaeological record will be curated at FAC s facilities Stage 1 Property Inspection Weather Ground Conditions 4 th November 2014 overcast, cool, drizzle no snow Stage 2 Assessment Weather Ground Conditions 23 rd September 2015 Sunny, cool in morning with high of 17 C 10 th November 2015 Overcast, high of 9 C 80% visibility Fisher Archaeological Consulting Page 15

65 Ontario Road 10 Bradley St Pine Crt Highpoint St Scale 0 100m Grey St E Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Queen s Printer for Ontario, Dundalk Regional Road 9 KEY Study Area NTS 41 A/01, FAC Date: 18/12/15 Designer: EG Scale 0 1Km STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 1: Study Area Location and Topography

66 Pine Crt Bradley St Grey St E Google Earth Imagery, 22 October, FAC Date: 21/12/15 Designer: EG KEY Study Area Boundary Scale 0 100m STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 2: Aerial View of the Study Area

67 Pine Crt Grey St N Bradley St FAC Date: 18/12/15 Designer: EG KEY Study Area Boundary Scale 0 100m STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 3: Development Plan

68 KEY Study Area Vicinity Ls M Pal HI Listowel Silt Loam Muck Parkhill Loam Harriston Loam Soils of Grey County, Ontario, South Sheet. Soil Survey Report No. 17. Agriculture Canada, FAC Date: 10/10/14 Designer: EG Scale 0 1Km STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 4: Soils and Geology of the Study Area Vicinity

69 Lot 227, Range 2 West I W II W FAC Date: 10/10/14 Designer: EG Approximate Scale 0 2Km STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 5: Portion of Proton Township, Illustrated Historical Atlas of Grey and Bruce Counties, Ontario, 1880

70 Grey St Shot , Ontario Department of Lands and Forests: 1954/1955. Provided by Lloyd Reeds Map Colection - Air Photos. McMaster University: Hamilton, Ontario. KEY Study Area (approximate) FAC Date: 18/12/15 Designer: EG 0 Scale 200m STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 6: 1954/1955 Aerial Photograph of the Study Area

71 Ontario Road 10 Ontario Road 10 Regional Road 9 Regional Road 9 Figure 7a: NTS 41 A/01, Figure 7b: NTS 41 A/01, Ontario Road 10 KEY Study Area Location (approximate) Regional Road 9 Figure 7c: NTS 41 A/01, FAC Date: 18/12/15 Designer: EG Scale 0 1Km STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 7a-c: Superceded Topographic Maps Showing Study Area from 1950, 1978 and 2011

72 Pine Crt 5 Wet 6 Pond Bradley St Scale 0 100m Grey St E Google Earth Imagery, 22 October, FAC Date: 21/12/15 Designer: EG KEY Study Area Boundary Wet Ploughed Wooded & Gently Sloped 1 Plate Number & Direction Field Walked Shovel Tested at 5m Interval Judgementally Shovel Tested STAN GILAS - DUNDALK SUBDIVISION MUNICIPALITY OF SOUTHGATE, GREY COUNTY, ON. Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc. Figure 8: Archaeological Stage 2 Results

73 Plate 1: Visual assessment of the main field, looking north (November 2015).. Plate 2: Field conditions, November Plate 3: Drain for subdivision to east of the Study Area, looking northeast (November 2015). Plate 4: Shovel testing in the southeast corner of Study Area, looking northwest (November 2015). Plate 5: Shovel testing in woods in northwest corner, along edge of main field, looking NNW (September 2015). Plate 6: Shovel testing in edge of wooded section, looking NNW (November 2015). Fisher Archaeological Consulting Stan Gilas Sudvision, Dundalk Plates pg 1