The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, Guelph Township, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Submitted to Armel Corporation Suite 505 5060 Spectrum Way, Mississauga, Ontario L4W 5N5 Telephone: 905 206-8800 Facsimile: 905 206-8801 and The Ministry of Culture Prepared by 69 Langarth Street West, London, Ontario, N6J 1P5 Office 519 434-0319 Facsimile 519 434-0517 e-mail - drpoulton@rogers.com Archaeological Consulting Licence # P116 CIF # P116-129-2006 Corporate Project #06-27 August 2006
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Project Personnel Acknowledgments Executive Summary iv iv v 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2 3.0 STAGE 1: BACKGROUND RESEARCH 3 3.1 Methods 3 3.2 Results 4 4.0 STAGE 2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 7 4.1 Survey Methods and Coverage 7 4.2 Results 7 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 8 6.0 REFERENCES CITED 9 List of Tables Table 1 Cultural Chronology of South-Central Ontario 5 Table 2 Registered Archaeological Sites in the Study Area 5
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page iii List of Figures Figure 1 Location of the Subject Property 11 Figure 2 Facsimiles of the Historical Maps of 1877 and 1906 12 Figure 3 Archaeological Survey Coverage and Results 13 List of Plates Plate 1 Elmira West, Area of Test Pitting, view Northeast 15 Plate 2 Elmira West, Area of Test Pitting, view Southeast 15 Plate 3 Elmira West, Area of Surface Survey, view Northeast 15 Plate 4 Elmira West, Area of Surface Survey, view East 15 Plate 5 Elmira West, View North to Railway Berm and Fill Piles 15 Plate 6 Elmira West, View South to Homestead Ruins 15
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page iv Project Personnel Consulting Archaeologist Field Director Field Assistants Photography Report Preparation: Stage 1 Report Preparation: Stage 2 Draughting Dana R. Poulton Jim Sherratt Chris Neill Amanda Huffman Lorelyn Giese Sherri Pearce Wai Kok Jim Sherratt Chris Neill Meredith Fraser Christine F. Dodd Acknowledgments The following individuals and their agencies facilitated this assessment: Chris Corosky, Armel Corporation; and Robert von Bitter, Archaeological Data Coordinator, Heritage and Libraries Branch, Heritage Operations Unit, Ministry of Culture.
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report details the rationale, methods and results of an archaeological assessment of the proposed Elmira West development. The study area has a surface area of 16.65 hectares. A draft plan number has yet to be assigned to this property, excepting for a 2.5 hectare parcel at the northwest corner of the intersection of Paisley and Elmira Roads which was identified as Block 604 in the West Hills draft plan designated 23T-86004. The property is situated in Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Guelph Geographic Township, Wellington County, Ontario. The archaeological assessment was undertaken on behalf of Armel Corporation by D.R. Poulton & Associates Inc. It consisted of Stage 1 background research and a Stage-2 survey as defined in the technical guidelines for archaeological assessment formulated by the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation (now the Ontario Ministry of Culture) (MCTR 1993). The present assessment follows a previous Stage 1-3 archaeological assessment of the nearby 95- hectare Mitchell Farm Phase II residential development (Draft Plan 23T-88009), which lies to the north of the subject property; it is separated from the property by a CNR rail line and embankment. That assessment was carried out by D.R. Poulton & Associates on behalf of the Armel Corporation. It identified 16 sites within Draft Plan 23T-88009, one of which was considered to be a potentially significant archaeological resource worthy of more detailed investigation (D.R. Poulton 1998). That site was a lithic scatter of unknown age and cultural affiliation that was designated as the Mitchell Farm Site #7 (AjHb-44). DPA conducted Stage 3 test excavations of that site in September 1999. The results confirmed that it did not represent a significant archaeological resource (D.R. Poulton & Associates Inc. 2000). In 2005, the firm conducted a Stage 3 assessment of the Mitchell Farm Site #6 (AjHb-43), a mid- 19 th century Euro-Canadian component situated in portion of the Phase II property acquired subsequent to the 1998 assessment. Once again, the results confirmed that this site did not represent a significant archaeological resource ( 2006). The background study determined that no archaeological investigations have been carried out within the subject property. However, five archaeological sites had been registered within the 2-km study area surrounding it. Based on the results of the background study, this property was considered to have a moderate to high potential for as-yet undiscovered archaeological remains. The Stage 2 archaeological survey was conducted on April 18, 2006. It covered two-thirds of the property, including all portions that were considered to have a potential for extant archaeological remains. Apart from a scatter of 20 th century refuse, cultural remains were limited to a single piece of chert debitage. That occurrence relates to past land uses by a First Nation individual or group; it has been classified as an isolated find spot of unknown age and cultural affiliation. Neither the 20 th century refuse nor the isolated find spot is considered to represent a significant archaeological resource or planning concern. Given the negative results of the assessment, it is recommended that the Ministry of Culture provide a letter confirming that there are no outstanding archaeological concerns for the subject property, and that no further archaeological investigations are required for the property.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report details the rationale, methods and results of a Stage 1 and Stage 2 archaeological assessment of the proposed Elmira West development. The subject property is located in the City of Guelph, Guelph Geographic Township, Wellington County, Ontario (Figure 1). The archaeological assessment was undertaken by on behalf of Armel Corporation. The property is situated in Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Guelph Geographic Township, Wellington County, Ontario. A draft plan number has yet to be assigned to this property, excepting for a 2.5 hectare parcel at the north-west corner of the intersection of Paisley and Elmira Roads which was identified as Block 604 in the West Hills draft plan designated 23T-86004. The assessment involved two sequential stages, as follows: Stage 1 background research and Stage 2 field assessment. The archaeological assessment was carried out under Archaeological Consulting Licence #2006-P116, issued to Dana Poulton of by the Ontario Ministry of Culture. DPA submitted a Contract Information Form for the assessment to the Ministry of Culture on May 1, 2006. Confirmation of receipt of the form was received from the Ministry the same day; it designated the project as CIF #P116-129-2006. The assessment was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act (Government of Ontario 1980), and with the technical guidelines for archaeological assessments formulated by the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation (now Ministry of Culture) (MCTR 1993). The records and the artifact pertaining to this assessment are currently housed in the corporate storage facility of However, if the opportunity arises, the long-term curation of the material will be transferred to a suitable repository. Potential repositories include local or other museums, and the storage facilities maintained by the Ontario Ministry of Culture.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 2 2.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION The subject property is situated in the western portion of Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, Guelph Geographic Township, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario (Figure 1). Elmira Road forms the eastern boundary of the subject property. The western limit follows the top of a drumlin, encompassing all lands within the new western limit of the City of Guelph; it also includes some lands within the adjacent Guelph-Eramosa Township (Figure 3). A Canadian National Railway corridor is situated immediately north of the subject property and forms its northern boundary. Similarly, Paisley Road is situated immediately south of the subject property and delineates its southern boundary. The subject property has a total surface area of 16.65 hectares. Until 2005, a house and barn were located just north of Paisley Road in the southwestern corner of the subject lands. This disturbed area comprises 0.53 hectares, or 3% of the total surface area of the subject property. Additional disturbed areas include: a railway berm that traces the northern extent of the property and piles of fill that are situated along the eastern edge of the property, immediately to the west of Elmira Road. These disturbed areas comprise 5.23 hectares, or 31% of the total surface area of the subject property. The remainder of the subject lands comprise agricultural tablelands. These have a surface area of 10.79 hectares, which represents 66% of the total surface area of the property. Plates 1-6 illustrate conditions within the property at the time of the survey on April 18, 2006. Plate 1 shows the uncultivated area in the southwest portion of the property looking north toward the barn; Plate 2 shows the same area looking southeast toward Paisley Road. Plates 3-6 show the cultivated portion of the property. The east slope of the drumlin is evident in Plate 6 which shows a view looking southwest toward the ruins of the barn. The subject property is located in the Guelph drumlin field physiographic region (Chapman and Putnam 1984: 137). This region encompasses an area of approximately 320 square miles and includes the City of Guelph and Guelph Township. It is situated northwest of the Paris Moraine. The Guelph drumlin field contains a series of approximately 300 drumlins, which are interrupted by intervening low ground and further separated by large swampy spillways. The till that comprises the drumlins derives from dolostone of the Amabel formation; it is both loamy and calcareous (Chapman and Putnam 1984: 137).
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 3 3.0 STAGE 1: BACKGROUND RESEARCH 3.1 Methods The first stage of the assessment consisted of background research. This was conducted in order to: amass all of the readily available information on any previous archaeological surveys in the area; determine the locations of any registered and unregistered sites within and adjacent to the property; identify areas of archaeological potential which represented concerns for Stage 2 field survey; and develop an historical framework for assigning levels of potential significance to any new sites discovered during fieldwork. The framework for assigning levels of potential archaeological significance was drawn from provincial environmental assessment guidelines (Weiler 1980). It includes the identification and evaluation of any feature that has one or more of the following attributes: it has the potential through archaeological exploration, survey, or fieldwork to provide answers to substantive questions (i.e. relate to particular times and places) about events and processes that occurred in the past and therefore add to our knowledge and appreciation of history; it has the potential through archaeological exploration, survey and fieldwork to contribute to testing the validity of general anthropological principles, cultural change and ecological adaptation, and therefore to the understanding and appreciation of our man-made heritage; or it is probable that various technical, methodological, and theoretical advances are likely to occur during archaeological investigation of a feature, alone or in association with other features, and therefore contribute to the development of better scientific means of understanding and appreciating our man-made heritage (Weiler 1980:8). For purposes of context, the Stage 1 background study examined data for a two-kilometre study area surrounding the subject property. Two collective sources were examined in this assessment. One was the Archaeological Sites Database of the Ministry of Culture. It houses site record forms for registered sites as well as published and unpublished reports on past surveys, assessments and excavations.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 4 The second collective source for the Stage 1 research was the library/archives of D.R. Poulton & Associates Inc. It includes an extensive inventory of published and unpublished reports, as well as inventories of both registered and unregistered archaeological sites in the area. The above sources included some documentation of potential Euro-Canadian archaeological planning concerns. These were supplemented by reference to two other sources that contain information on the historic cultural resources of Guelph: the reprint of the Illustrated Historic Atlas of Waterloo and Wellington Counties (Walker & Miles 1877); and the reprint of the 1906 Illustrated Historical Atlas of Wellington County (Mika Silk Screening Limited 1972). Facsimiles of the 1877 and 1906 Historical Atlas maps have been reproduced here as Figure 2 of this report. 3.2 Results The results of the background Stage 1 study may be divided into two separate but related categories: information on past archaeological investigations and known sites in the study area; and information on the history of land use in the area. They will be considered in turn. Past Archaeological Investigations and Known Sites The background research confirmed that no archaeological sites had been registered within the subject property prior to this assessment. However, the study did obtain information of direct relevance to the potential of as-yet undiscovered sites within the proposed development. For reference purposes, a cultural chronology of the region is presented in Table 1. The Stage 1 study determined that five archaeological sites have been registered within the two-kilometre study area. All are located to the north of the subject property and all were discovered during the course of a Stage 2 survey of the Mitchell Farm Development of the Mitchell Farm Phase II Development (Draft Plan 23T-88009). That survey was conducted in 1998 as part of a Stage 1-3 assessment by (1998). The registered archaeological sites in the study area include both First Nations pre-contact sites and Euro-Canadian homesteads. These cover a broad chronological framework that begins during the Middle Archaic period and extends through the19 th century. Data on registered archaeological sites in the two-kilometre study area surrounding the property are presented in Table 2. Three of the sites are pre-contact sites; the remaining two are 19 th century historic Euro-Canadian sites. History of Land Use in the Vicinity of the Subject Property Reference to the 1877 Historic Atlas reprint shows that the subject property is situated immediately west of a settlement that was then known as the Town of Guelph (now the City of Guelph) (Walker & Miles 1877:52). At that time, the municipality of Guelph comprised 43,184 acres, while the town itself comprised a total of 3,480 acres (Walker & Miles 1877:52). The 1877 Historic Atlas map for the region shows that J. Mitchell owned the lands that currently comprise the subject property (Figure 2). At that time, a single building was located on the property; it was located in the northeast corner of the property, immediately south of the Grand Trunk Railway corridor.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 5 Table 1 Cultural Chronology for South-Central Ontario PERIOD GROUP TIME RANGE COMMENT PALEO-INDIAN Fluted Point 9500-8500 B.C. Big game hunters; small nomadic Hi-Lo 8300 7900 B.C. groups ARCHAIC Nettling 7700-6900 B.C. Nomadic hunters and gatherers. Early Bifurcate Based 6800-6000 B.C. Middle Laurentian 3500-2500 B.C. Transition to territorial settlements. Lamoka 2500-1800 B.C. Polished/ground stone tools Broad Point 1800-1400 B.C. Late Crawford Knoll 1500-500 B.C. Glacial Kame ca. 1000 B.C. Burial ceremonialism WOODLAND Early Meadowood 1000-400 B.C. Red Ochre 1000 500 B.C. Introduction of pottery Middle Point 300 B.C. - 500 Long distance trade networks. Peninsula A.D. Incipient horticulture Princess Point 500 800 A.D. Pickering 800-1280 A.D. Transition to village life and agriculture Late Uren 1280-1330 A.D. Large village sites Middleport 1330-1400 A.D. Widespread stylistic horizon Huron 1400-1650 A.D. Tribal differentiation and warfare HISTORIC Early Odawa, Ojibwa 1700-1875 A.D. Social displacement Late Euro-Canadian 1800 A.D. - present European settlement Table 2 Summary of the Registered Archaeological Sites in the Area SITE NAME BORDEN # SITE TYPE CULTURAL AFFILIATION AND AGE Mitchell Farm Site #1 AjHb-42 Camp Middle Archaic IF#10 (Mitchell Farm) AjHb-46 Find spot Middle Archaic (Brewerton) IF#9 (Mitchell Farm) AjHb-45 Find spot Late Archaic (Genesee) Mitchell Farm Site #6 AjHb-43 Homestead Euro-Canadian; Mid-19 th Century Mitchell Farm Site #7 AjHb-44 Indeterminate Euro-Canadian; 19 th Century IF#9 (Mitchell Farm) AjHb-45 Find spot Indeterminate Pre-Contact
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 6 The Historical Atlas of Wellington County documents the settlement of two Mitchell families in Wellington County. One of these families left Ireland in 1846 and settled in Maryborough Township in 1949 (Mika Silk Screening Limited 1972:51). The other family left Aberdeen, Scotland in 1848 and settled in the Township of Arthur in 1848 (Mika Silk Screening Limited 1972:51). Based on the available evidence, it is unclear if the J. Mitchell that occupied the subject lands in 1877 was associated with either the former or the latter Mitchell families. In fact, this individual may well represent yet another Mitchell family that is not documented in the Historical Atlas of Wellington County. The reprint of the 1906 Historical Atlas of Wellington County indicates that Jas. Mitchell was the landowner for the lands that comprise the subject property in the early part of the twentieth century. Based on these sources, it is unclear whether this is the same J. Mitchell who owned the property in 1877, or whether it is one of this individual s descendants. In addition, the building that was depicted on the 1877 map is not illustrated on the 1906 map. Rather, a new building and laneway are visible on the 1906 map (Figure 2). These features are located immediately north of the subject property s southern border and slightly east of the property s north-south midline. This building, which is presumably the main house of the farm complex, appears to date to ca. 1906. During the fall of 2005, following the preparation of plans and photographic records, this structure was dismantled/demolished and moved to a City of Guelph storage yard. Archaeological Potential of the Subject Property The potential for prehistoric and historic archaeological resources within a proposed development is generally evaluated on the basis of both known sites located in proximity to the property and the intrinsic nature of the property itself, including factors such as topography and drainage. Yet another factor is the extent to which past impacts may have decreased or altogether eradicated the extant potential of a property to contain archaeological remains. The known prehistoric archaeological sites identified within the study area indicate that the vicinity of the subjects lands were used at least on an intermittent basis as part of the hunting and gathering territories of a succession of pre-contact groups. Based on that, the subject property is considered to have a moderate to high potential for prehistoric archaeological resources. The potential for 19 th century Euro-Canadian historic archaeological planning concerns may be defined with reference to documented features in the 19 th century landscape. As summarized above, and illustrated in Figure 2, the subject property was bounded to the north by the Grand Trunk Railway (now the Canadian National Railroad) and was characterized by a building complexes dating from 1877 and 1906. Based on that, the subject property is considered to have at least a moderate potential for historic archaeological resources.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 7 4.0 STAGE 2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT 4.1 Survey Methods and Coverage As described in Section 2.0, the subject property comprises a parcel of land bounded to the north by a Canadian National Railway corridor and to the south by Paisley Road. The 2006 Stage 2 survey was conducted at a five metre interval by pedestrian surface survey and shovel test pitting. A crew of five carried out the pedestrian surface survey on April 18, 2006 under the direction of Jim Sherratt. It involved a systematic examination of the property. The lands assessed by pedestrian survey had an approximate surface area of 10.41 hectares, representing 63% of the total proposed Elmira West development property. The weather conditions were sunny and mild and conditions for the observation of cultural remains in the ploughed portions of the property were good. The southwestern corner of the property includes a laneway that is flanked by a grassy area surrounded by tree lines; that area could not be adequately assessed by pedestrian survey (Figure 3). As a result, it was assessed via test pit survey, which was conducted at a five-metre interval. All soils were screened though 6 mm mesh to maximize artifact recovery and all test pits were backfilled immediately upon completion. The lands surveyed by test pitting had a surface area of approximately 0.38 hectares. In sum, 10.79 hectares of the subject property were assessed via pedestrian and test pit survey. Disturbed areas that encompassed the railway berm, the fill piles, and the historic farm buildings were not surveyed. These areas represented a total of 5.23 hectares, or 31%, of the subject property; they were not considered to retain a potential for archaeological remains. Accordingly, they were not surveyed. 4.2 Results The Stage 2 archaeological assessment of the proposed Elmira West development resulted in the recovery of a single pre-contact First Nations artifact. This artifact is piece of chipping detritus (secondary flake) of Onondaga chert. It is marked by the pink survey flag seen in the lower right corner of Plate 3. Upon the discovery of the artifact, the survey was closed to a one-metre interval and an intensive surface examination was conducted for a 50-metre radius surrounding the find. As no other artifacts were found, this occurrence has been classified as an isolated find spot of unknown age and cultural affiliation. It is situated northeast of the barn, in the southern half of the property. The survey also resulted in the discovery of Euro-Canadian material north of the barn, in the central portion of the property. This material consists of semi-porcelain, bottle glass and other remains dating to the 20 th century. The material clearly represents refuse relating to the house that was removed in 2005. Due to the relatively recent origins of this material, these artifacts were not considered to represent an archaeological resource and were not collected.
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 8 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The Stage 1 background research determined that no archaeological sites had been previously documented within or immediately adjacent to the subject property. However, the background study revealed that five archaeological sites had been registered in the 2 km study area surrounding the subject lands. Given these results, possible archaeological planning constraints for the proposed development of the property were limited to the potential for as yet undiscovered archaeological remains. The Stage 2 archaeological survey covered all portions of the property that were considered to have a potential for extant archaeological remains. Apart from a scatter of 20 th century refuse, cultural remains were limited to a single piece of chert debitage. That occurrence relates to past land uses by a First Nation individual or group; it has been classified as an isolated find spot of unknown age and cultural affiliation. Neither the 20 th century refuse nor the isolated find spot is considered to represent a significant archaeological resource or planning concern. Given the negative results of the assessment, it is recommended that the Ministry of Culture provide a letter confirming that there are no outstanding archaeological concerns for the subject property, and that no further archaeological investigations are required for the property. The above conclude the site-specific recommendations of this report. Notwithstanding the results of the assessment, it should be emphasized that no archaeological survey can be considered to totally negate the potential for deeply buried cultural remains, including human burials. In recognition of that fact, the archaeological assessment technical guidelines formulated by the Province of Ontario require that all reports on archaeological assessments include recommendations to address the potential that deeply buried remains may be encountered during earthmoving or construction (MCTR 1993:12). In accordance with the above, in the event that deeply buried archaeological remains should be discovered during future earthmoving or construction within this property, the development proponent should immediately notify staff of the London office of the Ministry of Culture (519 675-7742) and the Registrar of the Cemeteries Section, Ministry of Consumer and Business Services (416 326-8404).
The 2003 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development, Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 9 6.0 REFERENCES CITED Chapman, L.J. and D. F Putnam 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario (Third Edition). Ontario Geological Survey Special Volume 2. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Toronto. D.R. Poulton and Associates Inc. 1998 The 1998 Stage 1-3 Archaeological Assessment of the Mitchell Farm Phase II Development, Draft Plan 23T-88009, City of Guelph, Ontario. Report on File, Ontario Ministry of Culture. 2006 Report on the 2005 Stage 3 Archaeological Investigations of the Mitchell Farm Site #6 (AjHb-43), Mitchell Farm Phase II, Draft Plan 23T-88009, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario. February 2006. Report on File, Ontario Ministry of Culture. Government of Ontario 1980 The Heritage Act RSO 1980. Queen s Printer, Toronto. 1983 The Planning Act RSO 1983. Queen s Printer, Toronto. Mika Silk Screening Limited 1972 Illustrated Historical Atlas of Wellington County, Ontario. Reprint of Historical Atlas Publishing Co. 1906 edition. Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation (MCTR) 1993 Archaeological Assessment Technical Guidelines (Stages 1-2 and Reporting Format). Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation, Cultural Programs Branch, Archaeology and Heritage Planning Unit. Walker & Miles 1877 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Wellington. Walker & Miles, Toronto. Weiler, John 1980 Guidelines on the Man Made Heritage Component of Environmental Assessments. Historical Planning and Research Branch, Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Recreation, Toronto.
FIGURES
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 11 Subject Property Figure 1 Location of Subject Property D. R. Poulton & Associates Inc.
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 12 Subject Property Subject Property Figure 2 Facsimiles of the Historical Maps of 1877 (upper) and 1906 (lower) D. R. Poulton & Associates Inc.
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 13 Figure 3 Archaeological Survey Coverage and Results D. R. Poulton & Associates Inc.
PLATES
The 2006 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment of the Proposed Elmira West Development Lot 6, Concession 1, B Division, City of Guelph, Wellington County, Ontario Page 15 Plate 1 Elmira West, Area of Test Pitting, view Northwest Plate 2 Elmira West, Area of Test Pitting, view Southeast Plate 3 Elmira West, Area of Surface Survey, view Northeast Plate 4 Elmira West, Area of Surface Survey, view East Plate 5 Elmira West, View North to Railway Berm and Fill Piles Plate 6 Elmira West, View South to Homestead Ruins and Area of Test Pitting D. R. Poulton & Associates Inc.