appendix e - peel; region · 2013-11-21 · with the municipal engineers association class...

Appendix E

Study Area Archaeological Assessment

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment (AA):

Proposed Zone 5 Sub-Transmission Main

Preliminary Alternatives

City of Brampton

Regional Municipality of Peel

Ontario

Class EA

Project #: 080-BA485-11

Licencee: Jessica Marr

PIF#: P334-169-2012

Original Report

March 27th

, 2012

Presented to:

The Municipal Infrastructure Group Ltd. 8800 Dufferin Street, Suite 200

Vaughan, Ontario L4K 0Z5

T: 905.738.5700 F: 905.738.0065

Prepared by:

Archeoworks Inc. 16715-12 Yonge Street, Suite #1029

Newmarket, Ontario L3X 1X4

T: 416.676.5597 F: 416.676.5810

AR

CH

EOW

OR

KS

INC

.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. i

Stage 1 AA: Proposed Zone 5 Sub-Transmission Main – Preliminary Alternatives, City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, Ontario

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Regional Municipality of Peel initiated a municipal class environmental assessment (EA) in support of a new Zone 5 Sub-Transmission main between the West and East Brampton Reservoir Pumping Stations (PS). To facilitate this study, Archeoworks Inc. was retained to conduct a Stage 1 archaeological assessment (AA) of four preliminary and four sub-alternative routes falling within a larger study area bounded by Mississauga Road in the west, Bovaird Drive in the north, Dixie Road in the east and Steeles Avenue in the south. The Stage 1 AA identified potential for the recovery of historic Euro-Canadian and Aboriginal archaeological remains within undisturbed portions of the study area due to the presence and proximity of watercourses (tributaries of the Credit River and the Etobicoke Creek). A total of 70 archaeological sites have also been registered within and in close proximity to the study area, suggesting that more may be encountered. In addition, a review of historic maps revealed that the area was well-settled in the 19th century, with historic roads and structures documented as having existed throughout the study area, some of which are in close proximity to the preliminary routes. This substantial background research has been done to establish that large portions of each of the alternative routes fall within areas of high archaeological potential for the location and recovery of both Aboriginal and Euro-Canadian archaeological resources. A large portion of the study area falls within extensively urbanized parts of the City of Brampton, with most of the proposed alternatives to be installed within disturbed road right-of-ways. Despite these extensive disturbances, sections of all proposed study corridors have also been assessed to be undisturbed. Due to the established high potential for the recovery of Aboriginal and/or Euro-Canadian remains within the study area limits, it is recommended that following the selection of the final route and creation of a detailed design, a Stage 2 AA be conducted along its entire length, commencing with a field review to appropriately identify and confirm disturbed areas, followed by a field assessment of all undisturbed locations. Finally, three heritage cemeteries have been identified. This first cemetery, Fourth Line (Huttonville Cemetery), located within Part of Lot 9, Concession 4, W.H.S., on the east side of Mississauga, just north of Williams Parkway, is almost directly across from the existing West Brampton Reservoir. The second cemetery, Lundys Cemetery, is located within Part of Lot 10, Concession 3, E.H.S., on the west side of Dixie Road, north of North Park Drive. The third cemetery, Mount Olivet Cemetery, is located within Part of Lot 9, Concession 3, E.H.S., on the west side of Dixie Road, north of North Park Drive. Due to the archaeological significance of these properties, if these areas are to be impacted by construction, a Stage 2 archaeological field assessment, followed by further Stage 3 investigations of these sites must be undertaken to ensure that no archaeological resources, including human remains, are located within the study area corridor.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... ii Project Personnel ...................................................................................................................... iii 1.0 Project Context.................................................................................................................. 1-8

1.1 Development Context .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Historical and Archaeological Context ..................................................................... 2-8

2.0 Confirmation of Archaeological Potential ........................................................................ 8-9 3.0 Analysis and Conclusions ............................................................................................... 9-10

3.1 Identified Deep and Extensive Disturbances ................................................................. 9 3.2 Identified Areas of Archaeological Potential .......................................................... 9-10

4.0 Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 10-11 5.0 Advice on Compliance with Legislation....................................................................... 11-12 6.0 Bibliography and Sources ................................................................................................... 13 Tables

Table 1: Registered Archaeological Sites within 250 metres of the Study Area ..................... 4-5 Table 2: History of Occupation in Southern Ontario ............................................................. 5-6 Table 3: Heritage Properties or Landscapes within 100 metres of Preliminary Routes ........ 6-7 Table 4: Checklist for Determining Archaeological Potential ............................................... 8-9 Appendices

Appendix A: Maps .............................................................................................................. 14-18 Appendix B: Images ........................................................................................................... 19-29 Appendix C: Project Plan.......................................................................................................... 30 Appendix D: Inventory of Documentary and Material Record ................................................ 31

ARCHEOWORKS INC. iii


PROJECT PERSONNEL

Project Director ................................................................... Jessica Marr – MTCS licence P334 Report Preparation ............................................................................................... Jay Villapando Report Review ...................................................................... Kim Slocki – MTCS licence P029 Graphics ................................................................................................................ Jay Villapando

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 1


1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT

1.1 Development Context

Peel Region’s lake-based municipal water service area is divided into seven pressure zones constituting two parallel water systems supplying water from south to north through a combination of treatment plants, reservoirs, pumping stations, transmission mains and distribution system. The Regional Municipality of Peel, as the government level responsible for planning, constructing, operating and maintaining the municipal water system within its boundaries, initiated a municipal class environmental assessment (EA) in support of a new Zone 5 Sub-Transmission main between the West and East Brampton Reservoir Pumping Stations (PS), which will provide an east-west transfer capacity between two parallel water systems. The project is also seen as a means to improve system capacity to efficiently service future growth, and address redundancy in the existing lake-based water system in Brampton. To facilitate this study, which is classified as a Schedule ‘C’ undertaking in accordance with the Municipal Engineers Association Class Environmental Assessment document of 2007, Archeoworks Inc. was retained by The Municipal Infrastructure Group Ltd. (TMIG) to conduct a Stage 1 archaeological assessment (AA) of four preliminary alternative routes falling within a larger study area bounded by Mississauga Road in the west, Bovaird Drive in the north, Dixie Road in the east and Steeles Avenue in the south, henceforth referred to as the study area (see Appendix C). Alternative 1 runs mostly along Bovaird Drive, with a sub-alternative diverging from the route beginning at the Bovaird Drive and Kennedy Road intersection, going southeasterly toward Williams Parkway, then northeasterly along Williams Parkway to connect with the existing watermain along Dixie Road. Alternative 2 runs along the length of Williams Parkway from Mississauga Road to Dixie Road. Alternative 3 runs southeasterly along Mississauga Road until it reaches Queen Street, at which point the route follows the said road to Dixie Road. Sub-alternative 3 diverges from the route beginning at the intersection of Queen Street and McLaughlin Road, going northwesterly to Williams Parkway then following the said thoroughfare to Dixie Road. Lastly, Alternative 4 runs south along Mississauga Road then goes northeasterly along Steeles Avenue to Dixie Road. Two Sub-alternatives for this route have also been conceptualized: one starts at the intersection of Mississauga Road and Queen Street, going northeasterly along the said road until Chinguacousy Road, at which point the route turns southeasterly to Steeles Avenue; the other diverges beginning at the intersection of Rutherford Road and Steeles Avenue, going northwesterly along the said road for some distance, then turning northeasterly along Glidden Road toward the existing watermain along Highway 410 at a point just northwest of the Beckett Sproule Reservoir. This Stage 1 AA was conducted under the project and field direction of Ms. Jessica Marr, under archaeological consulting licence P334, in accordance with the Ontario Heritage Act (1990) and under the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act (1990). Permission to investigate the study area and was provided by TMIG on October 17th, 2011.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 2


1.2 Historical and Archaeological Context

The Stage 1 background research is conducted to evaluate the study area’s potential to contain archaeological resources. Potential is assessed based on a combination of physical and historical features, as well as the proximity of previously identified archaeological sites. If potential is established anywhere within the study area limits, a Stage 2 assessment must be conducted to confirm the presence of archaeological resources. The Checklist for Determining Archaeological Potential, 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (“2011 S&G”) published by the Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS), summarizes those features which are used to assess archaeological potential, as well as the integrity of any such resources and the impact of proposed development/construction activities. The MTCS’s 2011 S&G considers areas of early Euro-Canadian settlement, including places of early military pioneer or pioneer settlement (e.g., pioneer homesteads, isolated cabins, farmstead complexes), early wharf or dock complexes, and pioneer churches and early cemeteries, as having archaeological potential. There may be commemorative markers of their history, such as local, provincial, or federal monuments or heritage parks. Early historical transportation routes (trails, passes, roads, railways, portage routes), properties listed in a municipal register or designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or a federal, provincial, or municipal historic landmark or site, and properties that local histories or informants have identified with possible archaeological sites, historical events, activities, or occupations are also considered to have archaeological potential. To establish the archaeological and historical significance of the study area, Archeoworks Inc. conducted a comprehensive review of listed and designated heritage properties, and registered archaeological sites within close proximity to its limits. Furthermore, a review of the physiography of the overall area and its correlation to locating archaeological remains, as well as consultation of available historical documentation was performed. The results of this background research are documented below.

1.2.1 Physical Features The study area is lies within the western portion of the South Slope and Peel Plain physiographic regions of Southern Ontario. The Peel Plain is described as a level-to-undulating region of clay soils, with a gradual and fairly uniform slope toward Lake Ontario. Till containing large amounts of shale and limestone underlies clay that is generally heavy in texture, this clay having been presumably brought by meltwater from the predominantly limestone regions to the north and east. Some well-drained soils are found within the Peel Plain, but the most dominant soil is Peel clay, an imperfectly drained, dark brown, stone-free clay often underlain by dull brownish grey, calcareous clay till or stone-free clay. With the underlying shales not being able to retain water well, compounded by the almost complete deforestation of the region which results in a high degree of evaporation, the Peel Plain has somewhat of a water supply problem. Practically all utilized for agriculture until 1940, the land within much of the region has been urbanized, now occupying two-thirds of the Peel Plain and

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 3


taking more than 50,000 hectares of good farmland out of production (Chapman & Putnam, 1984: pp. 174-176). The South Slope region forms the southern slope of the Oak Ridges Moraine. This region covers approximately 2400 square kilometres from the Niagara Escarpment to the Trent River. The portion west of Maple, where the study area is located, is described as having a morainic surface with limited relief. The South Slope contains a variety of soils that have been conducive to agricultural use. The soils in the west are developed upon more clayey than sandy tills, and the slopes here are less steep than in the east. Portions of the South Slope region that lay in the interior, away from the lakeshore, were mainly colonized by the “second wave” of largely British immigrants after the Napoleonic Wars. Early settlers practiced mixed subsistence agriculture, although grain exportation did confer a measure of prosperity across the region, as evidenced by the construction of many fine fieldstone houses, the building of railroads and the improvement of main haulage roads. The decline of wheat growing, however, resulted in the replacement with commercial mixed farming in which beef cattle, hogs and dairy butter were the primary income sources. The western portion of the South Slope region has preserved less of its rural character compared to the eastern portion, as large areas around Toronto are becoming more urbanized (Chapman & Putnam, 1984: pp. 172-174). In terms of archaeological potential, potable water is a highly important resource necessary for any extended human occupation or settlement. As water sources have remained relatively stable in southern Ontario since post-glacial times, proximity to water can be regarded as a useful index for the evaluation of archaeological site potential. Indeed, distance from water has been one of the most commonly used variables for predictive modeling of site location. In Southern Ontario, the 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists considers undisturbed lands in proximity to a water source to be of elevated archaeological potential. Hydrological features such as rivers, lakes, swamps, marshes and creeks would have helped supply plant and food resources to the surrounding area, and consequently support high potential for locating archaeological resources within 300 metres of its limits. Since various tributaries of the Credit River and the Etobicoke Creek traverse the study area, there is high archaeological potential to locate archaeological resources within the study area limits (see Section 2.0 and Table 4).

1.2.2 Current Land Condition and Uses The study area encompasses large portions of the built-up urban area of the City of Brampton, but also encompasses a significant amount of rural land west of Chinguacousy Road. The individual preliminary sub-transmission routes will likely be installed within or adjacent to road rights-of-way (ROWs). While sections of each alternative route have been extensively disturbed, the preliminary routes also follow segments of undisturbed grassed and fallow margins.

1.2.3 Registered Archaeological Sites In order that an inventory of archaeological resources could be compiled for this study corridor, the Ontario Archaeological Sites Database (OASD) maintained by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS) was consulted. Every archaeological site is

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 4


registered according to the Borden System, which is a numbering system used throughout Canada to track archaeological sites and their artifacts. The study area is located within Borden blocks AjGw and AkGw. According to the MTCS archaeological site database, 70 archaeological sites have been registered within or in close proximity to the study area (see Table 1). Given the large size of the study area, the MTCS only provided data for sites within a 250-metre radius. Table 1: Registered Archaeological Sites within 250 metres of the Study Area

Borden # Name Cultural Affiliation Type

AjGw-11 Hutton Woodland Campsite AjGw-15 Ostranger Aceramic Campsite AjGw-18 Fraser Archaic Campsite AjGw-35 Axelby Farm Archaic Campsite AjGw-186 Hlavek Euro-Canadian Store ? AjGw-189 Lakeview I Euro-Canadian Findspot AjGw-190 Lakeview II Middle Archaic Findspot AjGw-191 Lakeview III Middle Woodland Findspot AjGw-192 Lakeview IV Prehistoric Findspot AjGw-193 Ternoway I Prehistoric Findspot AjGw-194 Ternoway II Prehistoric Findspot AjGw-313 — Archaic Findspot AjGw-314 — Pre-Contact Findspot AjGw-315 House Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-316 Oliver Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-317 — Pre-Contact Lithic scatter AjGw-324 Greecap Early Archaic, Nettling Findspot AjGw-325 Creditview Late Archaic, Late Woodland Campsite AjGw-326 Little Creditview Late Archaic, Genesee Campsite AjGw-327 Steeles Confour Pre-Contact Lithic scatter AjGw-328 Mains Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-329 Jonathan Copeland Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-353 Sub-Area 3 Site #11-13 Early Archaic Findspot AjGw-354 14-1 Early Archaic Findspot AjGw-355 1-1 Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-361 — Pre-Contact Findspot AjGw-362 — Middle Archaic, Brewerton Findspot AjGw-363 — Pre-Contact Findspot AjGw-364 — Pre-Contact Lithic scatter AjGw-365 — Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-366 — Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-372 Bluegrass Early Archaic Camp AjGw-373 Helport 1 Paleo-Indian ? Undetermined AjGw-374 Patrick McClure Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-375 Craig McClure II Late Archaic Findspot AjGw-416 — Late Archaic Findspot AjGw-437 Calder A Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-438 Calder B Undetermined Undetermined AjGw-439 Calder C Euro-Canadian Undetermined AjGw-440 Calder D Euro-Canadian Undetermined AjGw-441 Erin Mills A Undetermined Lithic scatter AjGw-442 Erin Mills B Undetermined Lithic scatter

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 5


AjGw-460 Tesch P1 Undetermined Findspot AjGw-461 Tesch Village Late Woodland Village AjGw-472 Ashley Undetermined Lithic scatter AjGw-492 Ornstock P1 Undetermined Findspot AjGw-494 Brown House Euro-Canadian Homestead AjGw-495 Brown House Dump Euro-Canadian Dump AkGw-21 Fletcher Creek — Findspot AkGw-54 Hempfield Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-55 Robert Smith Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-56 — Prehistoric Findspot AkGw-64 — Prehistoric Findspot AkGw-67 Avida Middle Woodland Special Purpose AkGw-68 Samual McClure Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-71 Samual McClure II Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-75 Rose Prehistoric Findspot AkGw-114 Baker Lundy Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-127 Pre-Contact Findspot AkGw-128 Rowntree Farm 1 Pre-Contact Findspot AkGw-130 — Pre-Contact Findspot AkGw-233 6-4 Early, Middle Woodland Findspot AkGw-234 6-5 Middle Archaic Findspot AkGw-235 11-1 Early Archaic Findspot AkGw-236 12-2 Early Woodland Findspot AkGw-274 Helport 2 Pre-Contact Lithic scatter AkGw-275 Helport 3 Middle Archaic Findspot AkGw-276 Helport 4 Early Woodland, Meadowood Findspot AkGw-322 — Euro-Canadian Homestead AkGw-323 — Euro-Canadian Residential

Many of the sites fall within 300 metres of the preliminary routes, thereby contributing to archaeological potential (see Section 2.0 and Table 4). Having noted the presence of these sites in relation to the study area, it is useful to place them in the proper context by reviewing the cultural history of occupation in Southern Ontario provided in Table 2. This data provides an understanding of the potential cultural activity that may have occurred within the study area. Table 2: History of Occupation in Southern Ontario Period Archaeological Culture Date Range Attributes

PALEO-INDIAN Early Gainey, Barnes, Crowfield 9000-8500 BC Big game hunters. Fluted projectile

points Late Holcombe, Hi-Lo, Lanceolate 8500-7500 BC Small nomadic hunter-gatherer bands.

Lanceolate projectile points ARCHAIC Early Side-notched, corner notched,

bifurcate-base 7800-6000 BC Small nomadic hunter-gatherer bands;

first notched and stemmed points, and ground stone celts.

Middle Otter Creek , Brewerton 6000-2000 BC Transition to territorial settlements

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 6


Period Archaeological Culture Date Range Attributes

Late Narrow, Broad and Small Points Normanskill, Lamoka, Genesee, Adder Orchard etc.

2500-500 BC More numerous territorial hunter-gatherer bands; increasing use of exotic materials and artistic items for grave offerings; regional trade networks

WOODLAND Early Meadowood, Middlesex 800-400 BC Introduction of pottery, burial

ceremonialism; panregional trade networks

Middle Point Peninsula, Saugeen, Jack’s Reef Corner Notched

400 BC-AD 800 Cultural and ideological influences from Ohio Valley complex societies; incipient horticulture

Late Algonquian, Iroquoian AD 800-1300 Transition to village life and agriculture

Algonquian, Iroquoian AD 1300-1400 Establishment of large palisaded villages

Algonquian, Iroquoian AD 1400-1600 Tribal differentiation and warfare

HISTORIC Early Huron, Neutral, Petun, Odawa,

Ojibwa AD 1600 – 1650 Tribal displacements

Late Six Nations Iroquois, Ojibwa, Mississauga

AD 1650 – 1800s Migrations and resettlement

Euro-Canadian AD 1780 - present European immigrant settlements

1.2.4 Previous Archaeological Assessments Given the large coverage of the study area, it was determined that a detailed review of reports documenting previous archaeological fieldwork will only be useful in providing archaeological context after the sub-transmission main route is finalized.

1.2.5 Heritage Properties and Known Historic Features The City of Brampton’s official mapping service (City of Brampton, 2012) was accessed and consulted for the presence of listed or designated properties of cultural heritage interest or value. A total of 38 properties or landscapes are situated within 100 metres of the preliminary routes (see Table 3). Table 3: Heritage Properties or Landscapes within 100 metres of Preliminary Routes

Name Description Immediately Adjacent Route(s)

Huttonville Cemetery Pioneer cemetery along Mississauga Road; Designated Heritage Property

All alternatives; lies opposite West Brampton Reservoir

Mount Olivet Cemetery Pioneer cemetery along Dixie Road Alternative 1 Lundys Cemetery Pioneer cemetery along Dixie Road Alternative 1 Carter Homestead Heritage home on Blackthorne Lane

Designated Heritage Property Sub-Alternative 1

Downtown Brampton A total of 22 properties of historic/cultural heritage value or interest, mostly along Queen Street

Alternative 3

Creditview Road Corridor

Cultural landscape between Queen Street and Steeles Avenue

Alternatives 3 and 4

Hutton Home Historic home on Mississauga Road Alternative 4

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 7


Huttonville Five historic homes located around the intersection of Mississauga Road and Embleton Road

Alternative 4

Garett Fuller Farm Historic farm on Mississauga Road Alternative 4 Spring Farm - 1857 Historic farm on Mississauga Road Alternative 4 Gowland House Historic home along Steeles Avenue Alternative 4 Airline Pilots Associated Building

Historic property along Steeles Avenue Alternative 4

Since these historic or cultural heritage features of interest or significance are located in close proximity to the preliminary routes, they contribute to the potential to recover archaeologically significant remains (see Section 2.0 and Table 4).

1.2.6 Historical Review Through archaeological evidence, Aboriginal peoples are known to have inhabited the lands within the City of Brampton from 8000 BC, settling in camps and small villages along the Credit and Humber river valleys. Although Euro-Canadian settlement of Ontario (then known as Upper Canada) began in the early 1780s, the influx of settlers into Brampton did not begin in earnest until after the township of Chinguacousy was surveyed by a team led by Richard Bristol in 1819. The intersection of Queen and Main Streets became a crossroads settlement known as “Buffy’s Corners” with only a “handful of people” living in the community by the early 1830s. In 1834 the settlement was renamed Brampton after the town in Cumberland, England from which prominent members of the strong Methodist movement present in the area hailed. Brampton, with a population of over 500 people at this point, was officially incorporated as a village in 1853. Soon the Grand Trunk Railway was laid down and a station in Brampton was built in 1856, triggering an economic boom. The village became the seat of Peel County in 1867. Extensive land holdings surrounding the Queen and Main intersection were subdivided to build homes for newly arrived settlers. By 1873 Brampton had been incorporated as a town. During the latter part of the Victorian Era, the cultivated flower industry emerged as a major contributor to Brampton’s economy. Greenhouses were built on hundreds of acres of land to grow orchids, roses and other prized flowers which were exported around the world. After the Second World War, rapid urban growth in Toronto coupled with the growing use of the automobile made Brampton even more accessible, and subdivisions began to be developed, among which is Bramalea – the first “satellite community” in Canada. With a population of 88,820 Brampton officially became a city in 1974 (Leonard, 2011).

1.2.7 Settlement History and Past Land Use To further assess the study area’s potential for the recovery of historic pre-1900 remains, several historic maps and documents were reviewed. The study area encompasses the Lots 1 through 10, from the 4th Concession west of Hurontario Street to the 3rd Concession East of Hurontario Street, in the former Township of Chinguacousy, County of Peel. A review of the 1859 Tremaine’s Map of the County of Peel (see Map 2) revealed that the entire study area seemed to have been cleared of woodland growth and cultivated. Many

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 8


of the lots have residential or other structures depicted, and several communities have formed by this time, including the sizeable town of Brampton. Except for Alternative #2 (Williams Parkway), all of the roads along which the preliminary sub-transmission routes run had been opened by this time. Further review of the 1877 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel (see Map 3) revealed the significant expansion of Brampton’s contiguous built-up area, and the intensification of settlement and agricultural land use in the surrounding countryside. Given the documented presence of historic structures and transportation routes within the study area, especially adjacent to or along the preliminary routes, high potential for the recovery of historic Euro-Canadian archaeological resources within undisturbed portions of the study area can be established (see Section 2.0 and Table 4). 2.0 CONFIRMATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL

Based on the information gathered from background research documented in the preceding section, we confirm that there is high potential for the recovery of archaeological resources within undisturbed portions of the study area limits. Features contributing to archaeological potential are summarized in Table 4 below. Table 4: Checklist for Determining Archaeological Potential

Feature of Archaeological Potential Yes No Unknown Comment

1 Known archaeological sites within 300 m? X If Yes, potential confirmed

Physical Features Yes No Unknown Comment

2 Is there water on or near the property? X If Yes, potential confirmed 2a Presence of primary watercourse within 300

metres of the study area (lakes, rivers, large creeks)

X If Yes, potential confirmed

2b Presence of secondary watercourse within 300 metres of the study area (springs, marshes, swamps, streams)


2c Features indicating past presence of water source within 300 metres (former shorelines, relic water channels, beach ridges)


3 Elevated topography (knolls, drumlins, eskers, plateaus, etc)

X If Yes to two or more of 3-5 or 7-10, potential confirmed

4 Pockets of sandy soil in clay or rocky area X If Yes to two or more of 3-5 or 7-10, potential confirmed

5 Distinctive land formations (mounds, caverns, waterfalls, peninsulas, etc)


Cultural Features Yes No Unknown Comment

6 Is there a known burial site or cemetery that is registered with the Cemeteries Regulation Unit on or directly adjacent to the property?


ARCHEOWORKS INC. 9


7 Associated with food or scarce resource harvest areas (traditional fishing locations, agricultural/ berry extraction areas, etc)


8 Indications of early Euro-Canadian settlement (monuments, cemeteries, structures, etc) within 300 metres


9 Associated with historic transportation route (historic road, trail, portage, rail corridor, etc) within 100 metres of the property


Property-specific Information Yes No Unknown Comment

10 Contains property designated under the Ontario Heritage Act


11 Local knowledge (aboriginal communities, heritage organizations, municipal heritage committees, etc)


12 Recent ground disturbance, not including agricultural cultivation (post-1960, extensive and deep land alterations)

X (parts only)

If Yes, low archaeological potential is determined

3.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS A desktop review of current field conditions was carried out using the Google Street View feature of the Google Earth application on March 14th, 2012. Images are presented in Appendix B. 3.1 Identified Deep and Extensive Disturbances Areas identified as having been subjected to deep and extensive disturbance include the existing paved roads (see Images 1-19, Map 4). The construction of these roadways, including the installation of utilities that run immediately alongside or underneath the pavement, would have caused extensive and deep disturbance to any archaeological resources that could have been present, thus resulting in the removal of archaeological potential. No further assessment is recommended for these paved roadways. While most of the study area east of Chinguacousy Road has been converted from agricultural to industrial, residential and commercial uses and is likely disturbed (see Images 3-9, 11-12, 16-19), given the lack of detailed design mapping, the extent of disturbance in all of these locations cannot be confirmed. Finally, the limits of disturbed areas indicated within Map 4 should only be taken as a guide; actual on-site assessment during Stage 2 activities will be necessary, to define the limits of disturbance and distinguish these from areas that still contain archaeological potential.

3.2 Identified Areas of Archaeological Potential

A review of physiographic features has indicated that tributaries of the Credit River and the Etobicoke Creek (see Images 2, 16) traverse the entire study area, while a review of historic maps (see Appendix A – Maps 2-3) has identified the existence of many former historic structures lying adjacent to the preliminary alternative routes. More important,

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 10


the preliminary alternative routes (with the exception of Alternative 2) run along historic roads that contain archaeological potential within 100 m. Therefore, apart from areas that have been subjected to extensive disturbance, the study area is considered to have high archaeological potential (see Map 5). Three heritage cemeteries that could be potentially impacted by watermain construction have been identified. This first cemetery, Fourth Line (Huttonville) Cemetery, located within Part of Lot 9, Concession 4, W.H.S., on the east side of Mississauga Road, just north of Williams Parkway, is almost directly across from the existing West Brampton Reservoir. The second cemetery, Lundys Cemetery, is located within Part of Lot 10, Concession 3, E.H.S., on the west side of Dixie Road, north of North Park Drive. The third cemetery, Mount Olivet Cemetery, is located within Part of Lot 9, Concession 3, E.H.S., on the west side of Dixie Road, north of North Park Drive. Due to the archaeological significance of these three properties, a 10 metre no construction buffer encompassing these cemetery locations should be established. However, should construction extend within the 10 metre buffer, a Stage 2 archaeological field assessment, followed by further Stage 3 investigations of the cemetery lands, will be necessary. In conclusion, despite the extensively disturbed condition of the existing roadways, sections of all proposed study corridors have also been assessed to be undisturbed (see Images 1-2, 10, 13-15). Rather than exclude whole areas from further assessment, this report recommends that, due to the established high potential for the recovery of Aboriginal and/or Euro-Canadian remains within the study area limits (see Map 5), following the selection of the final route and creation of a detailed design, a Stage 2 AA be conducted along the entire length of the construction corridor, commencing with a field review to appropriately identify and confirm disturbed areas, followed by a field assessment of all undisturbed locations.

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The Stage 1 archaeological assessment of the Zone 5 Sub-Transmission Main study area, within the City of Brampton, has indicated that significant portions of all study corridors are disturbed by existing road right-of-ways. However, it must not be assumed that the existence of any of these disturbances removes all archaeological potential from the areas where they are present. Confirmation of this can only be achieved through a Stage 2 archaeological survey. Furthermore, based on historical documentation and the visual documentation of suitable physiographic features, there is potential for the recovery of sub-surface historic Euro-Canadian and prehistoric Aboriginal archaeological resources within portions of the study area. In light of these results, the following recommendations are presented:

1. The existing major roads, whose rough limits are marked in Map 4 of this report as merely a guide, are considered to have had their archaeological potential removed due to deep and extensive disturbance associated with their construction.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 11


Therefore, it is recommended that these areas be exempted from further assessment.

2. Areas lying outside the paved roadways are provisionally determined to still have

archaeological potential. Following the selection of the final route and creation of the detailed design, a Stage 2 archaeological assessment be conducted on any lands to be impacted by activities relating to the proposed construction of the preferred Zone 5 Sub-Transmission Main, prior to any construction activities, to minimize impacts to heritage resources. Should significant archaeological resources be encountered, additional background research or fieldwork may be required by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

3. Should excavation remain outside an established 10-metre no construction buffer for all cemeteries in close proximity to selected route, while no further archaeological assessment will be required, a licenced archaeologist should be on site to monitor any excavation/construction activities immediately adjacent to the Fourth Line (Huttonville) Cemetery, Lundys/Mount Olivet Cemetery, to ensure the protection of human remains.

4. Should excavation occur within 10 metres of the Fourth Line (Huttonville Cemetery), Lundys Cemetery and/or Mount Olivet Cemetery, a Stage 2 archaeological field assessment followed by detailed Stage 3 investigations, will be necessary. This would entail the use a smooth-bucket backhoe or Gradall to strip topsoil following the length of each cemetery frontage where ever construction is to occur. Once the topsoil has been removed, if it has been determined no grave shafts fall within the limits of construction, the topsoil should subsequently be returned and all excavated ditches filled in. Should grave shafts be encountered, local police, The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, and the Registrar of Cemeteries must be contacted immediately for further instruction.

The above recommendations are subject to MTCS approval. No excavation activities shall take place within the study area prior to the MTCS (Heritage Operations Unit) confirming in writing that all archaeological licensing and technical review requirements have been satisfied. 5.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION

1. This report is submitted to the MTCS 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, Culture and Sport, a letter will be issued

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 12


by the ministry stating that there are no further concerns with regard to alterations to archaeological sites by the proposed development.

2. 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 archaeological 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 completed 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.

3. 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 Section 48 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act.

4. The Cemeteries Act, R.S.O. 1990 c. C.4 and the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c.33 (when proclaimed in force) require that any person discovering human remains must notify the police or coroner and the Registrar of Cemeteries at the Ministry of Consumer Services.

Under Section 6 of Regulation 881 of the Ontario Heritage Act, Archeoworks Inc. will, “keep in safekeeping all objects of archaeological significance that are found under the authority of the licence and all field records that are made in the course of the work authorized by the licence, except where the objects and records are donated to Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario or are directed to be deposited in a public institution under subsection 66 (1) of the Act.”

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 13


6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES

Chapman, L. J. and Putnam, D. F. 1984 The Physiography of Southern Ontario. 3rd ed. Ontario Geological

Survey, Special Volume 2. Toronto: Ministry of Natural Resources. City of Brampton 2012 Brampton Maps – Heritage Inventory Layer. Retrieved from

http://maps.brampton.ca/maps/default.aspx, March 14, 2012. Energy, Mines and Resources Canada 1994 National Topographic Survey of Canada, Series A 751, Map 30 M/12.

7th ed. Ottawa. Google 2009 Google Street View Images. Retrieved from Google Earth application,

March 15, 2012. Leonard, J. 2011 Brampton’s History. Retrieved from http://www.brampton.ca/en/Arts-

Culture-Tourism/heritage/Documents/H_OS_BramHisTimLine.pdf, March 14, 2012.

Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport 2011 Criteria for Determining Archaeological Potential: A Checklist for the

Non-Specialist. Toronto. 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consulting Archaeologists. Toronto. Tremaine, G. M. and G. R 1859 Tremaine’s Map of the County of Peel, Canada West. Toronto. Walker & Miles Co. 1877 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel, Ontario. Toronto.

http://maps.brampton.ca/maps/default.aspx

http://www.brampton.ca/en/Arts-Culture-Tourism/heritage/Documents/H_OS_BramHisTimLine.pdf

http://www.brampton.ca/en/Arts-Culture-Tourism/heritage/Documents/H_OS_BramHisTimLine.pdf

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 14


APPENDIX A: MAPS

Map 1: National Topographic Survey map (Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, 1994) showing study area limits.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 15


Map 2: Study area within Tremaine’s Map of the County of Peel (Tremaine & Tremaine, 1859), with preliminary alternative routes illustrated.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 16


Map 3: Study area within the Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel (Walker & Miles, 1877), with preliminary alternative routes illustrated.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 17


Map 4: Stage 1 AA map of the study area, provisionally determining all areas outside the rough limits of the existing major paved roads as having potential. Features contributing to archaeological potential are also depicted, with buffer zones of potential marked.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 18


Map 5: Stage 1 AA map of the study area, roughly showing the paving limits of major roads, as a guide. Following the selection and finalization of the sub-transmission main design, route and construction corridor limits, the Stage 2 AA should determine the exact limits of disturbance and apply appropriate methods of testing in undisturbed areas.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 19


APPENDIX B: IMAGES (all courtesy of Google ©2009)

Image 1: Looking northeast along Bovaird Drive at intersection with Mississauga Road.

Image 2: Looking southeast along Bovaird Drive at Credit River tributary.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 20


Image 3: Looking southeast along Dixie Road at existing paved roadway.

Image 4: Looking southeast along Kennedy Road at existing paved roadway.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 21


Image 5: Looking northeast Mississauga Road at construction of Williams Parkway.

Image 6: Looking northeast along Williams Parkway at existing paved road and disturbed soil fill in the margins.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 22


Image 7: Looking northeast along Williams Parkway at intersection with Hurontario (Main) Street.

Image 8: Looking southwest along Williams Parkway at intersection with Dixie Road.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 23


Image 9: Looking southeast along Mississauga Road at intersection with Queen Street.

Image 10: Looking southwest along Queen Street at existing roadway and possible undisturbed margins.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 24


Image 11: Looking southwest along Queen Street at intersection with Centre Street.

Image 12: Looking southwest along Queen Street at intersection with Dixie Road.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 25


Image 13: Looking northwest along McLaughlin Road at existing paved roadway and possible undisturbed lawn beyond existing ROW.

Image 14: Looking north along Steeles Avenue at intersection with Mississauga Road. Possible undisturbed margins may be found at the northeast corner, abutting the agricultural field.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 26


Image 15: Looking northwest along Chinguacousy Road at existing paved road.

Image 16: Looking southwest along Steeles Avenue approaching Etobicoke Creek tributary valley lands and existing paved road.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 27


Image 17: Looking southeast along Rutherford Road at existing paved road.

Image 18: Looking northeast along Glidden Road at existing paved road and adjacent berm.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 28


Image 19: Looking southwest along Steeles Avenue at intersection with Dixie Road.

Image 20: Looking northwest along Mississauga Road at Huttonville Cemetery grounds lying just outside the right-of-way.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 29


Image 21: Looking southeast along Dixie Road at Mount Olivet and Lundys Cemetery grounds lying just outside the right-of-way.

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 30


APPENDIX C: PROJECT PLAN

ARCHEOWORKS INC. 31


APPENDIX D: INVENTORY OF DOCUMENTARY AND MATERIAL

RECORD

Project Information:

Project Number: 080-BA485-11

Licencee: Jessica Marr

MTCS PIF: P334-169-2012

Document/ Material Location Comments

1. Research/ Analysis/ Reporting Material

Archeoworks Inc., 16715-12 Yonge Street, Suite 1029, Newmarket, ON, Canada, L3X 1X4

Stored on Archeoworks network servers