A Technical Guideline for Cultural Heritage Resources. for Projects Planned Under the

Transcription

1 A Technical Guideline for Cultural Heritage Resources for Projects Planned Under the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects and the Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Approved June 28, 2006

2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements Introduction Importance of Cultural Heritage Resources Defining Cultural Heritage Resource Types Determining Heritage Value Purpose of the Guideline Application of the Guideline Identifying and Assessing Cultural Heritage Resources and Managing Impacts Identifying Known Cultural Heritage Resources and/or Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources Identifying Known Cultural Heritage Resources Assessing Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources Conditions for Proceeding With Projects in High Potential Areas Considering Project Redesign Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment and Evaluation of the Heritage Value of Identified Resources Preparing a Cultural Heritage Assessment Report Determining Negative Impacts to Cultural Heritage Resources Determining an Appropriate Mitigation Strategy The Importance of Documenting Known and Potential Cultural Heritage Resources Documenting MNR Class EA Decisions on Cultural Heritage Resources Project Implementation Proceeding With Projects Within Five Years of Approval Proceeding With Projects After Five Years of Approval Future Activities Contingency Planning Project Monitoring Guideline Review and Amendment

3 List of Figures Figure 1: Process for Identification, Assessment of Significance, and Mitigation Techniques for Cultural Heritage Resources pg 7 Figure 2: Draft Checklist for Determining High/Low Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources pg 11 Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms Appendix 2 - Determining Heritage Value List of Appendices Appendix 3 Steps to Determine the Existence of Known Cultural Heritage Resources Appendix 4 - Clarification of Draft Checklist for Determining Cultural Heritage Potential Appendix 5 - Conditions for Proceeding with Projects in Areas Having High Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources Appendix 6 - Cultural Heritage Consultants Appendix 7 - Contingency Planning if Cultural Heritage Resources or Human Remains are Discovered During Project Implementation Appendix 8 - Stages of an Archaeological Assessment (Source: A Comprehensive Guide to Conserving Ontario s Archaeological Heritage) Appendix 9 - Parks Policy PM11.05, Treatment of Human Burial Sites in Provincial Parks and Procedure PM 11.05, The Discovery of a Burial Site Appendix 10 References and Links Acknowledgements Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Land Use & Environmental Planning Section (LUEPS) and the Planning & Research Section of Ontario Parks wish to acknowledge the contributions of the following towards the development of this Guideline: Ministry of Culture (MCL), the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), MNR District/Regional staff, MNR Legal Services, MNR Lands and Waters Branch, MNR Forest Management Planning Section, Forest Policy Section, Native Affairs Unit (NAU), Ontario Parks Operations and Development Section, and Ontario Parks Zone staff. 3

4 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Importance of Cultural Heritage Resources Simply defined, our heritage is everything that we value that we want to preserve and pass on to future generations. Cultural heritage is the portion of our heritage that retains the evidence of human activity. One uses the term cultural heritage resources (CHR) to describe elements of cultural heritage because they are a source of information or a tangible means to understand and appreciate what people value. Cultural heritage resources in the form of buildings or structures, landscapes, and archaeological sites are non-renewable and irreplaceable once they are lost, they are lost forever. The provincial interest in cultural heritage and its conservation is expressed in the Ontario Heritage Act, which provides the legislative framework for heritage conservation in Ontario. The conservation of heritage resources is also clearly identified as a matter of provincial interest under the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement. The Environmental Assessment Act, which binds the Crown in right of Ontario, provides for the protection, conservation and wise management of the environment. This Act includes cultural heritage resources in its definition of environment. The provincial interest in cultural heritage is further expressed through its participation in the Historic Places Initiative, a federal-provincial-territorial partnership with the objective of encouraging heritage conservation across Canada. 1.2 Defining Cultural Heritage Resource Types Both the Class Environmental Assessment for MNR Resource Stewardship and Facility Development Projects (Class EA-RSFD) and Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves (Class EA-PPCR) address the following types of cultural heritage resources: archaeological resources (including terrestrial and marine archaeological resources); built heritage resources; and cultural heritage landscapes. Cultural Heritage Resource Types: Archaeological resources (incl. terrestrial and marine) Built Heritage Resources Cultural Heritage Landscapes Traditional Use Sites are not specifically mentioned in this Guideline although defined in the Class EA-RSFD/PPCR glossaries (pg. 46 and pg. 50 respectively). Consideration of term Traditional Use Sites have been included in the three cultural heritage resource types listed above. Refer to Glossary of Terms (Appendix 1) for definitions, and examples of CHR types used in this Guideline. 4

5 1.3 Determining Heritage Value As defined in the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, a document developed cooperatively between federal, provincial and territorial governments across Canada, heritage value identifies a resource s aesthetic, historic, scientific, cultural, social or spiritual importance or significance for past, present or future generations. Criteria for determining cultural heritage value are established under the Ontario Heritage Act. Criteria for determining cultural heritage value of built heritage resources and cultural landscapes are established under O.Reg. 11/06, and include design of physical value, historical or associative value, and contextual value. Heritage value criteria for terrestrial and marine archaeological resources are currently available in draft form, and include information value, value as a public resource, and value to a community. Refer to Appendix 2 for an outline of heritage value criteria. This criteria is to be used in the preparation of a Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (CHAR) by a qualified expert when determining significance. 1.4 Purpose of the Guideline This Guideline has been developed to satisfy conditions of approval for two MNR class environmental assessments: Class Environmental Assessment for Resource Stewardship & Facility Development (Class EA-RSFD), and Class Environmental Assessment for Provincial Parks & Conservation Reserves (Class EA-PPCR). Each of the screening tables in the Class EAs requires that projects be assessed for their potential net effects, i.e. after also considering the application of proposed mitigation techniques, on CHRs (archaeological resources, built heritage resources, and cultural heritage landscapes). The Class EAs do not provide detailed guidance on the identification, assessment of significance and mitigation techniques for these resources. Therefore, the purpose of the Cultural Heritage Technical Guideline is to address: a) how cultural heritage resources should be identified; b) how to assess the significance of identified cultural heritage resources; and c) how to develop mitigation techniques regarding identified cultural heritage resources, when proposals for projects are being considered under MNR s Class EA-RSFD or Class EA-PPCR. Under both Class EAs, MNR is required to develop, in consultation with the Ministry of Culture, the Guideline described above. 5

6 1.5 Application of the Guideline The process outlined in this Guideline applies to: (a) all projects that require screening under the Class EA-RSFD/PPCR; (b) Those pre-screened Category A projects (refer to Section of Class EA- RSFD and Tables 1 through 3 in Appendix 2 of the Class EA-PPCR) that MNR considers will involve significant ground disturbances (including disturbances to Crown owned beds of waterbodies), or impacts to existing buildings/structures that may have cultural heritage significance (e.g. 40 years or more old). Pre-screened Category A projects which do not involve either significant ground disturbances or alterations to existing buildings and structures are unlikely to impact CHR. In addition, for all projects, the contingency planning provisions in Section 4.4 of the Guideline should be applied when previously unidentified CHR are discovered during project implementation. Consultation provisions of this Guideline may fulfill some or all Aboriginal consultation requirements with regard to fulfillment of the Crown s constitutional obligations. For further guidance on the Crown s obligation to consult with Aboriginal communities, MNR staff may wish to contact their assigned District Resource or Policy/Liaison Officers. This Guideline does not supersede any legislation, regulation or order in council developed by the MCL (e.g. MCL Provincial Standards and Guidelines, Part III.1). 2.0 Identifying and Assessing Cultural Heritage Resources and Managing Impacts One important point to note is that MNR staff are not expected to undertake the evaluation of the significance of a cultural heritage resource. This would be the role of a qualified expert. The general process of identifying and assessing cultural heritage resources and managing impacts includes the following: Project screening (Section 2.1); Identifying known cultural heritage resources and/or potential for cultural heritage resources (Section 2.2); Cultural heritage resource assessment and evaluation of the heritage value of identified resources (Section 2.5); Preparing a cultural heritage assessment report (Section 2.6) Determining potential impacts to CHR (Section 2.6.1); Determining an appropriate mitigation strategy (Section 2.6.2) Figure 1 outlines this process in more detail. 6

7 Figure 1: Process for Identification, Assessment of Significance, and Mitigation Techniques for Cultural Heritage Resources for Projects Planned under Class EAs Determine if Class EA screening required (s. 2.1) Class EA screening required (includes assessment of potential net effects on CHR) Class EA pre-screened Category A project with no significant ground disturbances, or impacts to significant buildings/structures (Appendix 1) Determine presence of known CHR (include areas within a minimum of 250m of known CHRs) (s. 2.2, 2.2.1) Unknown Assess potential for presence of CHR (s ) Yes No (previous study completed) High Low Project redesign (s. 2.4) Cultural Heritage Assessment Report (by qualified expert) Assesses the sensitivity and significance of CHR and likelihood of project impacts recommends appropriate mitigation techniques (s. 2.6, 2.6.1, 2.6.2). MCL must review report for Archaeological Resources Proceed if specific conditions apply (s. 2.3) Contingency planning after project implementation if required (section 4.4) Report recommends modification, mitigation, and/or relocation of project or resources Report recommends that project not proceed Request further info. MNR review of Cultural Heritage Assessment Report No further consideration of proposal If CHR are discovered after/during implementation Accept recommendations Rating of potential net effect of project on CHR under Class EA Note: At any point during this process, MNR or a disposition applicant may decide not to proceed with consideration of the proposed project. 7

8 2.1 Project Screening IN THE CONTEXT OF CHR, this section describes the process of determining: a) whether the project could proceed without any screening, evaluation or consultation (per MNR s Class EAs) or, b) whether the project should be subject to the screening process outlined in MNR s Class EAs, based upon criteria relating to potential significant ground disturbances (including disturbances to Crown owned beds of waterbodies) or impacts to existing buildings/structures of cultural heritage significance. 1. Define the boundaries of the land area ( the property ) associated with or affected by the project. Note: a project may comprise one or more discrete components. If so, all of the land areas should be defined at the inception of the project and considered as part of the property involved in the project. 2. If the project is listed as a pre-screened Category A project in MNR s Class EA- RSFD/PPCR and, MNR considers it will not involve significant ground disturbances (including disturbances to Crown owned beds of waterbodies) or impacts to existing buildings/structures of cultural heritage significance, the project may proceed without requirements for screening, evaluation and consultation per MNR s Class EAs. 3. If the project requires a screening as defined under MNR s Class EA- RSFD/PPCR or is listed as a pre-screened Category A project and MNR considers it will involve either significant ground disturbances (including disturbances to Crown owned beds of waterbodies) or impacts to existing buildings/structures of cultural heritage significance, follow the project screening process outlined in the applicable Class EA. CHR are included in the Social, Cultural, and Economic screening criteria to be considered when determining a proposed project category under MNR s Class EAs. Refer to Table 3.1 of the Class EA-RSFD and Table 4.1 of the Class EA-PPCR. 2.2 Identifying Known Cultural Heritage Resources and/or Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources This section outlines the process to be followed if Project Screening (Section 2.1) determines that a screening of net effects of the project is required. It is important to note that if there are known cultural heritage resources, it is still necessary to assess potential, because there may be additional resources that have not been identified. Therefore, this Section includes outlines for both: o Identifying Known Cultural Heritage Resources and, (Section 2.2.1) o Assessing Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources (Section 2.2.2) Property with known or potential CHRs generally fall into one or more of the following classifications (not mutually exclusive): 8

9 1. Areas with known CHR may include registered, designated or identified (existing evidence) sites. 2. Areas with high potential for the discovery of CHR are, based on current modeling and existing screening criteria, thought to have the greatest probability of containing CHR. 3. Areas with low potential for the discovery of CHR generally include areas that either exhibit extensive ground disturbances or areas which, due to their remoteness and/or unfavourable site conditions, would likely not have been inhabited or used by humans Identifying Known Cultural Heritage Resources Considering cultural heritage in development proposals/projects involves researching and assembling comprehensive data about CHR from a variety of sources. In order to move forward in this process, information is required on the three main CHR types: archaeological resources (terrestrial and marine); built heritage resources; and cultural heritage landscapes. To determine the existence of known cultural heritage resources the following three sources should be consulted: 1. Consult MNR s Natural Resource Values Information System (NRVIS) 2. Consult the Ministry of Culture sources 3. Consult other sources such as Aboriginal communities, local heritage organizations and nearby municipalities Consideration should also be given to obtaining oral evidence of CHRs. For example, in many Aboriginal communities, an important means of maintaining knowledge of cultural heritage resources is through oral communications. For more detailed information on the steps to be taken in this consultative process, refer to Steps to Determine the Existence of Known Cultural Heritage Resources (Appendix 3) of this Guideline. As information for CHR types is assembled, it is advisable to review it for completeness and accuracy, identifying gaps in the available data, noting specific issues surrounding data sensitivity or the significance of specific resources and providing the appropriate data to the planning teams for incorporation into the project plan. When information on CHR is collected it should be made available (e.g. through NRVIS) for use in other planning processes (e.g. FMP planning, park management planning, land use planning, etc.). Although there may not be any references to known or potential CHR in management planning documents for provincial parks and conservation reserves (such as cultural heritage inventories and background information documents), these heritage resources may still be present. 9

10 2.2.2 Assessing Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources Where a project involves or affects a building or structure that is 40 years or more old, the property should be considered to have potential cultural heritage value. The identification of other potential CHRs is somewhat more challenging, often because these resources may not be readily visible. Since CHRs involve the evidence of past human activity and settlements (long-term and short-term), predicting the potential for such resources requires an understanding of where these activities and settlements may have or did occur. While general trends can be observed, it isn t always possible to determine exactly where CHR may actually be located, but rather where there is a higher probability for discovery. Determining the potential for CHR to be discovered in a specific area is based on developing a better understanding of an area s characteristics and past human activities that may have occurred there. Area characteristics are identified on the basis of a wide range of physical attributes such as slope, hydrology, proximity to surface water bodies and water courses, surficial geology, bedrock geology, proximity to wetlands and site moisture to name a few; as well as cultural-historic features which would have directly influenced past use and settlement patterns. Thus the presence and absence of these features can provide a preliminary indicator of the probability of past human uses for the purpose of screening projects and determining the likelihood of discovering CHR during project implementation. It is important to note that oral evidence of CHR from Aboriginal communities may provide important additional information. For guidance on Aboriginal and First Nation s consultation obligations, MNR staff may wish to contact their assigned District Resource or Policy/Liaison Officers. Where MNR considers high potential for the discovery of CHR in a particular area and where a project redesign is not being considered, and, where specific conditions per Section 2.3 do not apply, further evaluation by a qualified expert is required to determine significance and vulnerability, appropriate decisions on implementation, and possible mitigation techniques. This determination in conjunction with the consideration of other screening criteria discussed in Section 2.1 (3) may have a bearing on how a project is ultimately categorized under MNR s Class EAs. The summary checklist, shown below, should be used as part of the screening documentation process to determine potential for terrestrial archaeological resources. Refer to Clarification of Draft Checklist for Determining Cultural Heritage Potential (Appendix 4) for additional information on the questions shown in the summary checklist. 10

11 Figure 2: Draft Checklist for Determining High/Low Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources 1 (Refer to Appendix 4 for further discussion) 1. Potential Feature Yes No Unk Comment Known Cultural Heritage Resources Known cultural heritage resources If Yes, high potential determined. within 250 m Physiographic Features 2. Water any within 300 metres? If Yes, proceed to questions 2a to 2c 2a. 2b. 2c Primary water source (within 300 m) (lakeshore, river, large creek) Secondary water source (200 m) (stream, spring, marsh, swamp) Ancient water source (300 m) (beach ridge, river bed) Elevated topography (knolls, drumlins, eskers, plateaux) Extensive Pockets of sandy soil in a clay or rocky area Unusual land formations (mounds, caves, waterfalls) Extractive area (for food or scarce resources) Aboriginal and/or Non-Aboriginal settlement (monuments, cemeteries, villages, etc.) Historic transportation route (road, rail, Heritage River, portage route, rapids, shipping route) 9. Designated property Heritage trail, buildings, or ruins that cannot be found through site visit or other means (e.g. flooded area) Building or structure over 40 years of age If Yes, and yes for any of 3-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and yes for any of 3-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and yes for any of 3-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 4-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 3 or 5-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 3-4 or 6-9, high potential determined. Historic Cultural Features If Yes, and Yes for any of 3-5 or 7-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 3-6 or 8-9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 3-7 or 9, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 3-8, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 2-8, or 10-12, high potential determined. If Yes, and Yes for any of 2-10, or 12, high potential determined. Application Specific Information Local knowledge of cultural heritage resources If Yes, high potential determined. Recent disturbance (confirmed extensive and intensive) If Yes, low potential. If High potential for Cultural Heritage Resources is determined to be present, proceed to Section 2.3 of this Guideline 1 While this table contains criteria that are relevant to all Cultural Heritage Resource types, the checklist was developed to determine potential for terrestrial archaeological sites. Similar criteria are being developed by the Ministry of Culture to determine potential for other Cultural Heritage Resource types and will be incorporated into this checklist when completed. See Appendix 3 for more detailed information on determining CHR potential and for clarification of the checklist. 11

12 2.3 Conditions for Proceeding with Projects in High Potential Areas If a proposed project is in an area that is determined to have high potential for the discovery of a CHR one of three options which may be considered is to determine if certain specific conditions apply to the project which would enable the project to proceed through the Class EA process without the need for a CHAR as outlined in Section 2.5 below. Refer to Appendix 5 - Conditions for Proceeding with Projects in Areas Having High Potential for Cultural Heritage Resources for further details. 2.4 Considering Project Redesign If either a known CHR or high potential for the discovery of CHR has been determined, a project redesign could be considered. Project redesign measures may include alternatives such as avoiding areas identified to have high potential for the discovery of CHR by relocating the project, modifying or revising certain components of the project to avoid potential impacts like soil sub-surface disturbances. If project redesign is considered, a re-assessment of the project in terms of determining an appropriate Category per the Class EA-RSFD/PPCR and screening of net affects should be completed. If a project redesign is not being considered and conditions for proceeding with projects in high potential areas cannot be applied (in the case of high potential areas) then, if the project is to proceed, a qualified expert should be engaged to confirm the existence of resources and assess their significance via a CHAR as discussed in Section 2.5 below. 2.5 Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment and Evaluation of the Heritage Value of Identified Resources Once a known or high potential for the discovery of CHR has been identified and documented within the project area and neither project redesign nor application of conditions for proceeding with projects in high potential areas are alternatives which can/will be considered, a qualified expert should be engaged to confirm the existence of CHR and assess their significance via a CHAR. For archaeological resources, work should be undertaken by a licensed consultant archaeologist (licensed by MCL). 2.6 Preparing a Cultural Heritage Assessment Report Known CHR and features should be evaluated and documented by appropriate qualified experts. Archaeological fieldwork should only be undertaken by licensed consultant archaeologists. These experts should provide a heritage assessment report which includes the following: 1. Historical research, site analysis and evaluation (Identifying the CHR) 2. Identification of the significance and heritage attributes of any cultural heritage resources (refer to Determining Heritage Value - Appendix 2 for further details) 12

13 3. Description of the proposed development or site alteration 4. Assessment of the development or site alteration impact (refer to Section for further details) 5. Consideration of alternatives, mitigation and conservation methods (refer to Section for further details) 6. Recommendations Known CHR and features are usually identified and documented by qualified experts working with private consultant firms, federal or provincial agencies, municipalities, Municipal Heritage Committees, formerly known as Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committees, (LACAC) or other equivalent local heritage groups, and local or regional Aboriginal communities. Refer to Appendix 6 - Cultural Heritage Consultants for further details. It is important to note that Aboriginal communities may retain their own expertise through elders and other community members as part of their culture. Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists Consultant archaeologists conduct their work under a Professional archaeological license issued by the Ministry of Culture, following standards and guidelines specifically developed for consultant archaeologists. Refer to Draft Standards & Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists - July 2004 and August 2005 (Appendix 10 References and Links) for further information on current standards and guidelines. The Ontario Heritage Act prohibits anyone from undertaking archaeological fieldwork or altering an archaeological site without a license issued by the Ministry of Culture Determining Negative Impacts to Cultural Heritage Resources Negative impacts on a cultural heritage resource can include, but are not limited to: Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes or features Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric or appearance Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of a natural feature or plantings Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or a significant relationship Direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and natural features A change in land use Land disturbances such as grading, soil removal, construction, shoreline stabilization, alteration of watercourses, extraction of aggregates, and the clearing of woodlots or forested areas that may compromise the integrity of an archaeological resource. Significant cultural heritage resources should always be conserved as part of any proposed project. Conserved means that the identification, protection, use and/or management of cultural heritage and archaeological resources are undertaken in such a way that their heritage values, attributes, and integrity are retained. 13

14 2.6.2 Determining an Appropriate Mitigation Strategy Mitigation techniques may be employed to eliminate or reduce the potential negative impacts of the proposed undertaking. In certain cases, CHR may have predictable and well known characteristics (i.e., degree of vulnerability to specific project activities is known). Generally, when applying mitigation techniques, any identification of the boundaries or location of archaeological resource should be considered as highly confidential and should not draw attention to the purpose for which the area or point has been identified. Furthermore, if more than one type of CHR is identified as part of a particular project; it may require prescriptions that apply to all types. For example, a cultural heritage landscape may also contain an identified archaeological site and therefore mitigation techniques for both types will need to be applied. Finally, it is advisable that mitigation techniques involving CHR important to Aboriginal communities be developed and implemented through consensus with the affected community. General techniques for mitigating negative effects on known or suspected cultural heritage resources include: A. Avoidance of Impact / Change of Project Design An effective way of mitigating the adverse impacts of a proposed undertaking on a heritage resource is by modifying or abandoning the project, or implementing changes in the design. With respect to buildings and structures, changes in design may involve modifications to the scale, location, massing, materials and/or details. In the case of in-use buildings and structures, where these are of cultural value, project proponents shall use their best efforts to retain their use, particularly where the use itself is of cultural heritage value. Uses, either existing or proposed, which affect heritage value shall be avoided. Uses of heritage buildings and structures that require minimal or no change to its heritage attributes or character-defining elements should be sought. Where an in-use heritage property becomes surplus to the needs of a proponent, the property should be secured and, if necessary, stabilized until any subsequent use is found. In the case of landscapes and archaeological sites (terrestrial or marine); this would most often involve changing the location of the project. Avoidance and changes in design are always the preferred mitigation measures, as they ensure complete conservation of resources on their original site and are also often the least costly measures to implement. With respect to landscapes and archaeological sites, the impact of a proposed action may be reduced by decreasing the amount of development and by using construction 14

15 practices that minimize ground disturbances. Examples include restricting the use of heavy machinery on a site and designing structures without subsurface foundations. B. Protection Heritage resources can often be protected through the use of hoarding, fences, protective coverings, and the imposition of a buffer zone, hostile plantings (e.g. thorn bushes, poison ivy) and other physical barriers that will isolate them from the direct impact of human traffic or construction activity and thereby prevent damage or destruction. Protective measures should always be temporary and reversible. Resources should also be protected from the indirect impacts of activity, which may occur from redirected traffic, drainage, erosion or slope failure. In the case of drainage-related impacts, temporary drainage paths, water-diversion channels or dykes may provide appropriate solutions. Protective interventions that are done in response to disasters (e.g. fire or storm damage) are referred to as emergency protection. They are mitigative measures in that they react to an immediate threat to prevent further deterioration or collapse. Emergency protection involves the intervention called stabilization, and may include structural reinforcing, protective coverings or any other measures necessary to protect both the resource and the people who are working in or near it. This should be as reversible as is feasible. Another indirect impact may be vandalism, which is encouraged by either the attention cast on the project or through reduced supervision. Vandalism may be addressed by means of barriers, patrolling and/or public education. C. Monitoring Monitoring is undertaken to ensure that adverse impacts that cannot be predicted or evaluated prior to project activities are addressed. It will assess whether protective measures are adequate. This may take the form of scheduled site visits and/or on-call availability during a long-term project. For buildings and structures, this may include monitoring for movement caused by adjacent excavation, blasting or the movement of heavy equipment; this is usually done by installing tell-tales (mechanical devices that indicate whether there is movement in the structure). For archaeological sites, monitoring requires the presences of a licensed consultant archaeologist. D. Documentation If it is likely that an undertaking will have an adverse impact on a heritage resource, despite the initiation of other mitigative measures, it is important that the resource be properly documented, so as to ensure a complete record of its state before changes are made. E. Salvage 15

16 In situations where the adverse impact will include partial or complete demolition of a cultural heritage resource, salvage may be indicated. This is a less desirable mitigation option than the previously described ones, since the process itself is destructive and irreversible. It should be considered only as a last resort when avoidance and protection are insufficient. The guidelines for salvage differ for the various types of resources. 1. Archaeological sites Salvage archaeology (also called rescue archaeology ) consists of the systematic investigation and recovery of data from the site by a licensed consultant archaeologist. This is a time-consuming and expensive process that will inevitably lose a considerable amount of information and precludes future opportunities for research. The systematic data recovery from archaeological sites involves: A complete or partial systematic surface collection, excavation, or both; A comparative analysis and interpretation of content and contextual information; and Production of an investigative report. All recovered data must be analyzed, interpreted and reported. Arrangements for the curation of artifacts should be made beforehand. Materials and records of the investigation should be available and accessible to future researchers. With aboriginal sites, consultation with appropriate local or regional aboriginal communities or individuals should be held prior to any work being undertaken. Aboriginal concerns should be solicited on a project-specific basis. Detailed guidelines for salvage archaeology and for cataloguing and curation can be found in the Ministry of Culture s archaeological standards and guidelines. 2. Built Heritage The salvage of buildings and structures takes a number of forms. All of them destroy the intrinsic heritage quality and context of a building, and are acceptable only as an alternative to total demolition. These interventions should be considered a last resort, and only after real efforts have been made to use less destructive kinds of intervention and those efforts have failed. In each situation, careful documentation should precede the intervention. Four alternatives are described here: Facadism Moving or relocation Dismantling and reassembly Salvage of individual components (fragmentation) 16

17 Facadism is the name given to the removal of the structure and interior fabric of a building and retention of all or part of its façade, primarily as a decorative component, in a new development. This violates much of the material value of the heritage resource, reducing it to the status of an artifact without context. Moving involves relocating a building to a new site. This destroys much of a building s intrinsic quality and all of its relationship to its setting. The process is difficult and expensive and, once moved, a building may be unstable and subject to further deterioration. In situations when a building must be moved, its existing location should be documented in detail. The new location should evoke the historical setting as much as possible, but any interpretation should clearly indicate the original site and context. Moving should be done only by an experienced moving contractor. As little intervention should be done to the building as is feasible for a safe move along available routes. If it is necessary to divide the building into multiple pieces, the cuts should be made in areas that will have relatively little impact on the components with the most heritage significance. Another last-resort action is dismantling and reassembly at a new location. This is usually done when moving is the intervention of choice but is impracticable for technical or cost reasons. Reassembly has even a greater impact than moving on the integrity of the heritage resource. Reassembly is sometimes undertaken out of structural necessity, to repair deteriorated material, in which case reassembly may be on the original site. The salvage of individual components (or fragmentation) for display as building fragments should be considered only for research, commemorative or aesthetic reasons. It, too, results in the loss of the original resource. The displayed components become sculptural artifacts and acquire an entirely new context. Work should be directed by a qualified conservation professional who will ensure that as little damage as possible occurs to the salvaged components. 3. Cultural Heritage Landscapes The salvage of historical material from threatened landscapes should include documentation and the recovery of sample plant materials. The methods of analysis and collection are similar to those for archaeological sites. Note: For proposed projects that are in areas that meet the definition of low cultural heritage potential as set out in the chart in Figure 2 and in Clarification of Draft Checklist for Determining Cultural Heritage Potential (Appendix 4) no further cultural heritage assessment is required unless CHRs are discovered during project implementation. Refer to Contingency Planning if Cultural Heritage Resources or Human Remains are Discovered During Project Implementation (Appendix 7) for further information on the steps to be taken in this event. 17

18 2.7 The Importance of Documenting Known and Potential Cultural Heritage Resources It is important to consistently document known and potential CHR, possible negative impacts and mitigation measures. A standard template for recording this information may be developed in consultation with MCL. In addition, it is important to document the decision-making process in the project file for the record that outlines the results and rationale of designating either high/low CHRs potential to a specific project. Refer to Section 3.0 for further guidance on documenting the decision-making process. 3.0 Documenting MNR Class EA Decisions on Cultural Heritage Resources This section on MNR decision-making should be considered in the context of Sections 3.0 RSFD and PPCR (Project Categories and Screening Mechanisms), Sections 4.0 RSFD and PPCR (Evaluation and Consultation Processes for Category B and C Projects), and Sections 5.0 RSFD and PPCR (Class EA Administrative Practices and Procedures). More specifically: MNR decisions addressing CHRs on a project-by-project basis should be made within the context and timeframe of the associated Class EA process; and a decision to proceed with a project will be based on a broader spectrum of considerations than just cultural heritage. Those broader considerations are identified in both Class EA RSFD/PPCR and include environmental, social, and economic factors. Given public expectations on government to ensure accountability for decisions on expenditures and transparency of decisions affecting public resources; it is important that the project manager ensures clear documentation and communication of MNR decisions. This also applies if, during project implementation after an initial decision has been made, there is a discovery of previously unknown CHR resulting in the need to proceed with contingency planning. MNR decisions revised on the basis of new information and that leads to subsequent changes in approvals or project conditions should be subject to an appropriate level of documentation. Documentation requirements for MNR decisions related the cultural heritage assessment process is provided for in the relevant Class EA. 4.0 Project Implementation 4.1 Proceeding with Projects within Five Years of Approval If MNR proceeds with project implementation within five years of filing a Statement of Completion (Refer to Section 4.2 RSFD or Section 5.2 PPCR) through the relevant Class EA process, all approval conditions identified during the project decision-making process should be followed. 18

19 In the event there is a discovery of human remains, burials, or significant CHR, contingency planning will need to be immediately initiated resulting in triggering emergency protocols, CHR re-evaluations, subsequent changes to project conditions and approvals as appropriate. Refer to Contingency Planning if Cultural Heritage Resources or Human Remains are Discovered During Project Implementation (Appendix 7) for further information. 4.2 Proceeding with Projects After Five Years of Approval According to the Class EA RSFD/PPCR, MNR may proceed with project implementation within five years of filing a Statement of Completion. If project implementation for Category B or C projects does not proceed within the five year timeframe, MNR shall review and document any changes that may have taken place since the initial approval to ensure that the project and its associated approval conditions are still valid. In this case, changes may include environmental conditions, new policies, new engineering standards or technologies, new approaches to mitigation techniques, or new information based on revised inventories. Refer to Section 5.7 Class EA -RSFD and Section 6.7 Class EA-PPCR for further information and Class EA direction on the provision of an MNR notice of intention to proceed with a project after the initial five-year timeframe. 4.3 Future Activities Once a project is complete, MNR will ensure that future maintenance and operational plans, research and minor developments associated with the area will continue to protect the significant CHRs associated with the site on an ongoing basis. Any major redevelopments or projects will be subject to Class EA procedures and will thereby reengage this process. It will be important to retain original project files and documentation for the consideration of future project managers and planning staff. 4.4 Contingency Planning As a general condition of approval, if during project implementation, MNR or the applicant 2 discovers previously unknown CHR, a contingency plan should be prepared which will address appropriate steps to be taken to protect the CHR from negative impacts. Refer to Appendix 7 for further information on the steps to be taken in this event. 5.0 Project Monitoring 2 The applicant in this Guideline may be the recipient of the disposition by MNR or delegates of certain or all rights to Crown resources through such means as permits, land sales, licences, approval, permissions, or consents. Dispositions may be in response to an application request by another government agency; a private group, individual, or business; or it may be initiated by MNR. In some cases, the applicant identifies a proposed project, for which a disposition is required for the proposal to proceed. The Class EA-PPCR defines Partnerships in Section 3.4 and the Class EA-RSFD discusses Partnership projects in Section In both cases, partners may also be considered as applicants in terms of this Guideline. 19

20 Monitoring can assist MNR in determining whether predictions on high versus low potential areas were accurate and whether conditions for implementation, and mitigation techniques were effective. The results of effective monitoring can: support future phases of individual projects; assist other project managers and planners working on similar projects in other parts of the province; and enable an adaptive management approach to project planning and implementation thereby resulting in appropriate considerations for significant CHRs in the future. Development of a heritage committee during the implementation phase is one approach that may be considered. Monitoring requirements associated with Class EA- RSFD/PPCR are identified in Sections 4.4 and 5.4 of those documents respectively. 6.0 Guideline Review and Amendment The Guideline may be amended by MNR, in consultation with the Ministry of Culture, from time to time as MNR considers appropriate. In particular, this Guideline may need to be amended in light of any policies, standards and guidelines prepared by the Minister of Culture and approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council under s.25.2 of the Ontario Heritage Act. 20

21 Appendix 1 Glossary of Terms Definition of Cultural Heritage Resources Types Both the Class EA-RSFD and Class EA-PPCR define CHR generally, as any resource or feature of archaeological, historical, cultural or traditional use significance. This may include terrestrial or marine archaeological resources, built heritage or cultural heritage landscapes. Key elements of traditional use sites are included in these cultural heritage resource types, however, it is important to note that Traditional Use Sites are generally assessed through the appropriate aboriginal consultation. It should be noted that there may be some overlap in the types of CHR being assessed amongst the different CHR types. The definitions below are based upon the definitions provided for in MNR s Class EAs. Built Heritage Resources refers to one or more buildings, structures, monuments, installations, or remains associated with architectural, cultural, social, political, economic or military history. Examples include, but are not limited to: a cabin a road stone fences a dam a mining headframe a river crossing structure a bridge Aboriginal structures (e.g. fish weir, deadfall trap, hunting blind) a cairn a timber chute a trading post Cultural Heritage Landscapes are areas of heritage significance that have been modified by human activities. Such an area is valued by a community and is of significance to the understanding of the history of a people or place. Examples include, but are not limited to: abandoned mine sites farmsteads ghost towns historic pathways portages culturally modified trees canoe routes 21

22 spiritual sites old villages places of worship cemeteries railways, spur lines and roadways that have been or continue to be used a collection of mining shafts and associated structures a group of pictographs in a given site and landscape a complex of recreational structures a river modified for driving wood remnants of a fur trade operation logging camps, depots and abandoned sawmills Terrestrial archaeological resources are defined as the remains of any building, structure, activity, place or cultural feature, which because of the passage of time is on or below the surface of the land or water. Significant archaeological resources are those which have been identified and evaluated, and determined to be significant to the understanding of the history of a people or place. The identification and evaluation of this resource is based upon an archaeological assessment. Examples include, but are not limited to: pictographs cemeteries and burial sites (the requirements of the Cemetery Act must be followed) aboriginal villages seasonal camps or habitation sites litchi scatters fur trading post site midden (ancient refuse heap) former logging camp prisoner of war camp railway construction camp Marine archaeological sites are archaeological sites that are fully or partially submerged or that lie below or partially below the high-water mark of any body of water. Examples of marine archaeological sites include, but are not limited to: shipwrecks derelict vessels aircraft crash sites remains of historic piers and wharves submerged prehistoric sites Traditional Use Sites are geographically defined areas supporting current or past human use as a gathering area, spiritual site, place of worship or cemetery. It is important to note that key elements of Traditional Use Sites have been included in the three defined cultural heritage resource types in this Guideline. 22

23 Contingency Planning in this Guideline refers to a type of planning which would be triggered by an unexpected discovery of a previously unknown CHR. In these cases, a contingency plan would be engaged to address appropriate steps to be taken. Qualified Expert in this Guideline refers to a qualified cultural heritage expert: For built heritage/cultural heritage landscapes Qualified experts may include a heritage conservation architect, an architectural conservator, an architectural or landscape historian, an historic landscape architect, or a member of another discipline with specialized training in preservation/historic materials (e.g. structural or mechanical engineer specializing in heritage conservation). It should be understood that in heritage conservation, experience resides with individuals, not necessarily with their parent firm, practice or organization. The expert should have a minimum of five years experience in the heritage conservation field and be able to demonstrate relevant, recent, successful personal experience working on projects of similar scope and scale. For Archaeological Resources Qualified experts must be a registered, practicing archaeologist with a license from the Ministry of Culture Significant Ground Disturbances in this Guideline refers to ground disturbances on Crown Land, both above or below water which may be caused by significantly altering (removing, adding to, or replacing) the naturally existing sub-soil surface structure outside of the footprint of existing development. Impacts to Existing Buidlings/Structures of Cultural Heritage Significance refers to negative impacts caused to buildings, structures, monuments, installations or remains associated with architectural, cultural, social, political, economic, or military history and identified as being important to a community. These resources may be identified through designation or heritage conservation easement under the Ontario Heritage Act, or listed by local, provincial or federal jurisdictions. 23