23.8 MB

Transcription

23.8 MB

Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport
Confirmation Letter
April 12, 2013
Ministry of Tourism, Culture
and Sport
Ministère du Tourisme, de la Culture
et du Sport
Culture Services Unit
Programs and Services Branch
Culture Division
401 Bay Street, Suite 1700
Toronto ON M7A 0A7
Tel:
416 314-7145
Fax:
416 212-1802
Unité des services culturels
Direction des programmes et des services
Division de culture
401, rue Bay, bureau 1700
Toronto ON M7A 0A7
Tél:
416 314-7145
Téléc: 416 212-1802
April 12, 2013 (by email only)
Paige Glenen
Stantec Consulting Ltd.
2791 Lancaster Road, Suite 200
Ottawa, ON K1B 1A7
Project:
Feed-in Tariff Number:
Report Title:
Applicant:
Location:
MTCS File No.:
Niagara Region Wind Farm
FIT-FLKZ509
Heritage Assessment
Niagara Region Wind Corporation
Townships of West Lincoln and Wainfleet and Town of Lincoln
in the Regional Municipality of Niagara, and portions of
Haldimand Country.
00EA080
Dear Paige Glenen:
This office has reviewed the above-mentioned report (the “Report”), which has been submitted to
this ministry as required under O. Reg. 359/09, as amended (Renewable Energy Approvals under
the Environmental Protection Act) (the “REA regulation”). This letter constitutes the Ministry of
Tourism, Culture and Sport (the “Ministry”) comments for the purposes of section 23(3)(a) of the
REA regulation regarding the heritage assessment undertaken for the above project.
The Report recommends the following:
8.0
Recommendations
Potential negative impacts identified for the 52 cultural heritage resources (listed in Table
19) are generally of three types:

Indirect impacts resulting from construction vibrations of the potential installation of new
infrastructure (i.e., access roads, collector lines) in close proximity to structures;

Direct impacts related to the damage or removal of heritage attributes (i.e., built
components such as fencing, or cultivated plants or trees) resulting from the
construction of new Project infrastructure; and

Visual impacts with respect to views from public spaces.
In order to lessen or avoid potential indirect negative impacts from construction vibrations,
the following recommendations have been made:
1 of 3
FIT-FLKZ509

In the event that new Project infrastructure is constructed in the vicinity of identified
CHRs, it is recommended that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structures
associated with these cultural heritage resources.

If construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum acceptable
vibration levels, or peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a
qualified engineer with previous experience with built heritage in similar circumstances.
Construction within the 50 m bufferzone should be monitored to ensure that PPV levels
are not exceeded. All construction activities should cease, should levels be exceeded.

It is further recommended that the final Project Description Report document which
option was chosen to mitigate the potential impact of construction vibrations, a
description of how the recommendation will be implemented, and a discussion of the
Project factors that determined that decision.
As a general recommendation, roads travelling through cultural heritage landscapes in the
communities of Smithville, St. Ann’s, Bismark, Elcho, Wellandport, and Stromness should
be avoided to the greatest extent practicable when transporting heavy machinery and
turbine components to the Project location in order to minimize the potential for accidental
or indirect damage to the high concentration of narrowly setback cultural heritage resources
and landscapes within those communities.
In order to lessen or avoid potential direct negative impacts resulting from the removal or
alteration of the heritage attributes of identified cultural heritage landscapes, the following
recommendations have been made:

removal of or damage to identified heritage attributes (i.e., root systems and above
ground vegetation of cultivated plant, canal infrastructure, landscape features and built
components of rail landscapes) should be avoided to the greatest extent practicable.

Where damage or removal is unavoidable, plantings and built features should be
restored to their pre-construction state immediately following the completion of Project
activities.
In order to minimise the potential visual impact of the Project on views from the Elcho
United Church Cemetery (CHR-49), it is recommended that the proponent work with the
Elcho Cemetery Board to design and install an appropriate visual barrier around the
cemetery to protect views from within the cemetery (e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
In order to avoid direct impacts on views of the West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery (CHR14), it is recommended that any overhead transmission infrastructure installed along Port
Davidson Road in the vicinity of the cemetery be installed along the eastern side of the
road.
Based on the information contained in the Report, the Ministry is satisfied that the heritage
assessment process and reporting are consistent with the applicable heritage assessment
requirements established in s. 23 of O. Reg. 359/09. Please note that the Ministry makes no
representation or warranty as to the completeness, accuracy or quality of the heritage assessment
report (please see Note 1).
This letter does not waive any requirements under the Ontario Heritage Act.
FIT-FLKZ509
This letter does not constitute approval of the renewable energy project. Approvals or licences for
the project may be required under other statutes and regulations. Please ensure that you obtain all
required approvals and/or licences.
Please ensure that the proponent is aware that, if new information or substantive project
changes arise after issuance of this letter, the applicant should discuss them with you to
determine if any additional assessment or reporting is required. If additional reporting or
revisions are required, they should be submitted to the Ministry for review. Upon completion of
that review, the Ministry will determine if any revisions to the content of this letter are required.
Should you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Joseph Muller
Heritage Planner
416-314-7145
[email protected]
cc.
Darren Croghan, Project Manager
Doris Dumais, Director
Environmental Approvals Access & Service Integration Branch, Ministry of the Environment
Ian Parrott, Director (A)
Environmental Approvals Branch, Ministry of the Environment
Chris Schiller, Manager
Culture Services Unit, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport
_______________________________________________________________________
Note 1: In no way will the Ministry be liable for any harm, damages, costs, expenses, losses, claims or actions that may result: (a) if the
Report or its recommendations are discovered to be inaccurate, incomplete, misleading or fraudulent; or (b) from the issuance of this
letter. Further measures may need to be taken in the event that additional heritage resources are identified or the Report is otherwise
found to be inaccurate, incomplete, misleading or fraudulent.
Heritage Assessment
FINAL REPORT
Heritage Assessment, Niagara
Region Wind Farm
Prepared for:
277 Lakeshore Road East, Suite 211
Oakville, ON L6J 6J3
Prepared by:
Stantec Consulting Ltd
2781 Lancaster Rd., Suite 200
Ottawa, ON K1B 1A7
November 29 2012
Revised March 4, 2013
Revision 2 April 5, 2013
Revision 3 April 12, 2013
FIT-FLKZ509
Project No.: 160950269
HERITAGE ASSESSMENT, NIAGARA REGION WIND FARM
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Niagara Region Wind Corporation (NRWC) is proposing to develop, construct, and operate the
230 megawatt (MW) Niagara Region Wind Farm (the Project) in response to the Government of
Ontario’s initiative to promote the development of renewable electricity in the province. The
Farm is located in Southern Ontario within the Townships of West Lincoln, and Wainfleet and
the Towns of Grimsby and Lincoln within the Regional Municipality of Niagara and within
Haldimand County.
Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Niagara Region Wind Corporation (NRWC).
to prepare a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) Application, as required under Ontario
Regulation 359/09 – Renewable Energy Approvals under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental
Protection Act (O.Reg. 359/09). Specific sections of O.Reg. 359/09 pertain to Heritage
Resources, specifically heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. In order to meet
the conditions of the Regulation, a Heritage Assessment was conducted for the location of the
proposed Project.
The Heritage Assessment included a review of historic period maps, aerial imagery and Census
data as well as records and inventories held by: Niagara Region; Haldimand County; the Town
of Grimsby; the Townships of Wainfleet, West Lincoln, and Lincoln; the Ontario Ministry of
Tourism, Culture and Sport; and the Ontario Heritage Trust.
A visual survey of the Study Area was completed in June and July, 2012 to determine the
existence of any built heritage resources within and adjacent to the Study Area. During the site
visit the Study Area was also assessed for any groupings of resources that might constitute a
cultural heritage landscape.
Resources recorded during the survey and desktop research were cross-referenced with
existing inventories and evaluated against the criteria outlined under O.Reg 9/06 Criteria for
Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest. A total of 111 cultural heritage resources have
been identified by this study as meeting the criteria for determining heritage value.
For each resource and landscape of heritage value, a heritage impact assessment (HIA) was
undertaken in order to identify potential Project-related negative impacts. Impacts evaluated
include: destruction; alteration; shadows; isolation; direct or indirect obstruction of significant
views; and changes in land use.
Potential negative impacts have been identified for 52 cultural heritage resources.
In order to lessen or avoid potential indirect negative impacts from construction vibrations, the
following recommendations have been made:

In the event that construction activities are undertaken in the vicinity of identified CHRs
(i.e., access roads, below-grade transmission lines), it is recommended that construction
i
be avoided within 50 m of any structures associated with these cultural heritage
resources.

communities of Smithville, St. Ann’s, Bismark, Elcho, Wellandport, and Stromness should be
avoided to the greatest extent practicable when transporting heavy machinery and turbine
components to the Project location in order to minimize the potential for accidental or indirect
damage to the high concentration of narrowly setback cultural heritage resources and
landscapes within those communities.
In order to lessen or avoid potential direct negative impacts resulting from the removal or
alteration of the heritage attributes of identified cultural heritage landscapes, the following
recommendations have been made:

removal of or damage to identified heritage attributes (i.e., root systems and above
ground vegetation of cultivated plants, canal infrastructure, landscape features and built
components of rail landscapes) should be avoided to the greatest extent practicable.

Where damage or removal is unavoidable, plantings and built features should be
restored to their pre-construction state immediately following the completion of Project
activities.
In order to minimise the potential visual impact of the Project on views from the Elcho United
Church Cemetery (CHR49), it is recommended that the proponent work with the Elcho
Cemetery Board to design and install an appropriate visual barrier around the cemetery to
protect views from the cemetery (e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
In order to avoid direct impacts on views of the West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery (CHR-14), it
is recommended that any overhead transmission infrastructure installed along Port Davidson
Road in the vicinity of the cemetery be installed along the eastern side of the road.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. I
1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1
1.1
O.Reg. 359/09 Requirements, Heritage Assessment ....................................... 1
1.2
Project Description ............................................................................................ 2
1.3
1.2.1
Project Location........................................................................................ 3
1.2.2
Transmission Lines .................................................................................. 3
1.2.3
Collector Lines.......................................................................................... 4
Study Methodology............................................................................................ 5
1.3.1
Resource Evaluation Methodology ........................................................... 7
1.3.2
Impact Assessment Methodology ............................................................. 7
2
CULTURAL LANDSCAPE ............................................................................................ 12
3
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND...................................................................................... 19
3.1
Pre-Contact Period Land-Use ......................................................................... 19
3.2
Euro-Canadian Period Land-Use .................................................................... 21
3.2.1
Niagara Region ...................................................................................... 21
3.2.2
Caistor Township, Lincoln County .......................................................... 24
3.2.3
Clinton Township, Lincoln County .......................................................... 24
3.2.4
Gainsborough Township, Lincoln County ............................................... 25
3.2.5
Grimsby Township, Lincoln County ........................................................ 26
3.2.6
Wainfleet Township, Lincoln County ....................................................... 28
3.2.7
Haldimand County .................................................................................. 28
4
EXISTING PROTECTED PROPERTIES ....................................................................... 47
5
EVALUATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES .......................................... 49
5.1
Policy Framework ............................................................................................ 49
5.2
Area 1................................................................................................................ 50
5.3
Area 2................................................................................................................ 60
5.4
Area 3................................................................................................................ 75
5.5
Area 4................................................................................................................ 83
5.6
Area 5................................................................................................................ 95
5.7
Area 6.............................................................................................................. 103
iii
5.8
6
Area 7, Interconnector Study Area ............................................................... 115
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................................... 134
6.1
Area 1.............................................................................................................. 134
6.2
Area 2.............................................................................................................. 138
6.3
Area 3.............................................................................................................. 144
6.4
Area 4.............................................................................................................. 149
6.5
Area 5.............................................................................................................. 154
6.6
Area 6.............................................................................................................. 159
6.7
Area 7, Interconnector Study Area ............................................................... 162
7
STUDY RESULTS....................................................................................................... 170
8
RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 169
9
CLOSURE ................................................................................................................... 171
10
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 172
10.1
Literature Cited .............................................................................................. 172
10.2
Literature Consulted ...................................................................................... 175
10.3
Personal Communications ............................................................................ 175
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Overview Draft Site Plan .............................................................................................................. 17
Figure 2: 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components ...................................... 29
Figure 4: 1879 & 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components ......................... 33
Figure 5: 1876 Page & co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components ...................................... 35
Figure 6: 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components...................................... 37
Figure 7: 1879 & 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components ......................... 39
Figure 10: 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping Overlaid by Project Components.................................... 45
Figure 11: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Area 1 ................................................................. 51
Figure 16: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Area 6 ............................................................... 105
iv
Figure 17: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Interconnector Study Area,South ..................... 117
Figure 18: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Interconnector Study Area, Central .................. 119
Figure 19: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Interconnector Study Area, North ..................... 121
Figure 20: Heritage Resources & Project Components, Interconnector Study Area, North ..................... 123
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Early Settlers in Clinton Township ................................................................................................ 25
Table 2: Early Settlers in Gainsborough Township ..................................................................................... 27
Table 3: List of Protected Properties, as outlined in Section 19, O.Reg.359/09 ......................................... 47
Table 4: List of Properties included in council-approved Heritage Registers ............................................. 48
Table 5: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Area 1 .......................................... 53
Table 6: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Area 2 ........................................... 63
Table 10: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Area 6 ....................................... 107
Table 11: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Interconnector
Study Area ...................................................................................................................... 125
Table 12: Summary of Impact Assessments, Area 1 ................................................................................ 136
Table 18: Summary of Impact Assessments, Interconnector Study Area ................................................ 164
Table 19: Summary of Potential Negative Impacts and Recommended Mitigation .................................. 166
LIST OF PLATES
Plate 1: Father Jean Louis Hennepin's View of Niagara Falls, 1698 .......................................................... 23
Plate 2: View of Niagara Falls from The Gentleman’s Magazine, 1751 ..................................................... 23
LIST OF VISUAL AIDS
Visual Aid 1: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic (124m hub height) ............................................................... 10
Visual Aid 2: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic, with trees (124m hub height) .............................................. 10
Visual Aid 3: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic (135m hub height) ............................................................... 11
Visual Aid 4: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic, with trees (135m hub height) .............................................. 11
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
Site Photos
Correspondence
v
PROJECT PERSONNEL
Project Director
Archival Research
Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A.
Nancy Oakley, M.A.
Stephen Jarrett, M.A.
Christienne Uchiyama, M.A.
Field Reconniassance Christienne Uchiyama, M.A.
Nancy Oakley, M.A.
Paige Glenen, M.Sc.
Report and Graphics
Christienne Uchiyama, M.A.
Sarah Rogers, B.Sc. (Hons), G.Dip.
Nancy Oakley, M.A.
Derek Lough, BLA
Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A.
vi
1
INTRODUCTION
Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Niagara Region Wind Corporation (NRWC) to
prepare a Renewable Energy Approval (REA) Application for the Niagara Region Wind Farm (the
Project), as required under Ontario Regulation 359/09 – Renewable Energy Approvals under Part
V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (O.Reg. 359/09). According to subsection 6.(3) of O.Reg.
359/09, the Project is classified as a Class 4 Wind Facility and will follow the requirements identified
in O.Reg.359/09 for such a facility.
This Heritage Assessment Report is one component of the REA Application for the Project, and has
been prepared in accordance with O.Reg. 359/09. The study was conducted by Christienne
Uchiyama, M.A., and Nancy Oakley, M.A., Heritage Planning Consultants with Stantec. A visual
survey was conducted in June and July, 2012 by Christienne Uchiyama, Nancy Oakley, and Paige
Glenen, M.Sc.. Colin Varley, M.A., R.P.A., Senior Archaeologist and Heritage Planning Consultant,
acted as Senior Reviewer.
1.1
O.Reg. 359/09 Requirements, Heritage Assessment
This Heritage Assessment Report has been conducted in accordance with O.Reg. 359/09, s.23 (1)
and (3). O. Reg.359/09 s.23 (1) states that:
23. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (5), a person who proposes to engage in a renewable energy
project shall ensure that a heritage assessment is conducted, consisting of the following steps:
(1) Conduct an investigation, including historical research and visual inspection, to
determine whether,
(i) there is potential for the presence of a heritage resource at the project location on
any part of the project location that is not on a property described in Column 1 of the Table in
section 19, and
(ii) any properties described in Column 1 of the Table to section 19 abut the parcel of
land on which the project location is situated.
(2) If the determination under subparagraph 1 i is that there is potential for the presence of a
heritage resource, confirm the presence or absence of a heritage resource by applying the criteria
set out in Ontario Regulation 9/06 (Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest)
mude under the Ontario Heritage Act.
Sections 4 and 5 of this report satisfies the requirements of O.Reg.359/09, s.23(1)(a)(i).
The Regulation further directs the proponent to:
1
(3) Evaluate the impact of engaging in the renewable energy project on the heritage
attributes of any heritage resources at the project location and on any abutting properties described
in subparagraph 1 ii and provide recommendations for measures to avoid, eliminate or mitigate the
impact if,
(i) the determination under subparagraph 1 ii is that there are abutting properties as
described in that subparagraph, or
(ii) the presence of a heritage resource at the project location is confirmed under
paragraph 2. O.Reg. 195/12, s.15(1).
In order to satisfy O.Reg.359/09, s.23 (3), an assessment of potential Project-related negative
impacts was carried out for each significant built heritage resource within the Study Area. This
assessment, conducted as per InfoSheet #5 in Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning
Process, Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement,
2005 (MTCS, 2006a), is presented in Section 6.
1.2
Project Description
Niagara Region Wind Corporation (NRWC) is proposing to develop, construct, and operate the
230 Megawatt (MW) Niagara Region Wind Farm (the Project) within the Townships of West Lincoln
and Wainfleet and the Town of Lincoln within the Niagara Region and within Haldimand County in
Southern Ontario, in response to the Government of Ontario’s initiative to promote the development
of renewable electricity in the province.
The basic components of the Project include 77 wind turbine generators (80 potential locations
identified) each with a rated capacity of approximately 3.0 MW for a maximum installed nameplate
capacity of 230 MW. An overhead and/or underground collection system connects each turbine to
one of two transformer substations along a series of 34.5 kilovolt (kV) lines. Turbines are grouped
into eight collector circuits that bring power (and data via fibre optic lines) to one of the transformer
substations. Voltage is stepped up from 34.5kV to 115kV at each transformer substation by means
of a 100 MVA base rated transformer with two stages of cooling (via fans). A 115kV transmission
line transports power from each of the two transformer substations north to the tap-in location
where the Project is connected to the Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI) owned transmission line,
south of the Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) in the Town of Lincoln. Power generated from this
Project will be conveyed along the existing HONI transmission line to the Beach Transformer
Station in Hamilton.
Alternate transmission and collector lines routes have been identified and assessed to provide
options during detailed design, the final selection of which route to follow will be confirmed following
the consultation process with local distribution companies, agency review and detailed design.
2
Other Project components include access roads, junction boxes (or pad-mounted disconnect
switches) and associated culverts at swales and waterbody crossings. Temporary components
during construction may include temporary laydown areas (for storage and staging areas at each
turbine location), crane pads or mats, staging areas along access roads, delivery truck turnaround
areas, central construction laydown areas and crane paths. All Project components are illustrated
on Figures 11 through 19.
1.2.1
Project Location
In accordance with O. Reg. 359/09, the "Project Location" includes all land and buildings/structures
associated with the Project and any air space in which the Project will occupy. This includes
structures such as turbines, access roads and power lines as well as any temporary work areas
(the ‘constructible area’ for the Project) which are required to be utilized during the construction of
the Project.
The "Project Study Area" was established to scope the siting of the proposed wind turbines,
collector lines, access roads and temporary work areas. Similarly, the "Interconnector Study Area"
was established to scope the location of the proposed 115kV transmission line, transformer
substations and tap-in location. These two terms are intended to assist with background data
collection and consultation, however have no formal definition or application under O.Reg. 359/09.
The Project will be entirely located within the Townships of West Lincoln, and Wainfleet and the
Town of Grimsby within the Niagara Region and within Haldimand County in Southern Ontario. The
Project Study Area covers approximately 33,747.5 ha and is generally bounded by Castor
Gainsborough Road to the West; the Queen Elizabeth Way to the North; the north shore of Lake
Erie to the South; and Balfour Street to the East (Figure 1).
Project infrastructure such as collector lines and transmission lines will be sited along the
boundaries of the Township of Pelham and Town of Grimsby, but will be sited outside of these
municipalities on the opposite side of the road.
The Project will be located on privately owned lands and within municipal rights of way. The legal
description of the parcels of land that will be used for the Project will be provided as part of the REA
Application.
1.2.2
Transmission Lines
To facilitate the Project’s connection to the provincial grid, a new 115 kV transmission line
approximately 44 km in length will be constructed as part of the Project. A preferred transmission
line route has been identified in the REA, as well as some alternate transmission line routes where
further consultation with municipalities and local distribution companies will help to select the most
3
ideal route. The configuration and routes for the preferred and alternate transmission lines are
shown in Appendix A.
The poles of the transmission line will be up to 23 m in height and vary in spacing from
approximately 60m to 150m as required. Smaller spans or taller poles may be required for some
areas where narrow rights of way, angles or unforeseen problems make construction difficult.
Wood monopoles will be used where practical and steel or concrete monopoles may be used in
some cases depending on site conditions.
Transmission lines will be installed overhead along municipal road right of ways, as well as where it
is proposed to cross the Welland River and associated wetland. Through the approval of a
Development Permit from the Niagara Escarpment Commission to be obtained prior to submission
of the REA application, the transmission line will be buried within the municipal right of way along
Mountainview Road where it crosses the Niagara Escarpment Plan Area. It will also continue
underground to the tap-in location, and may be buried along other sections of the transmission line
route. Both underground and overhead options have been considered in the Natural Heritage
Assessment and Environmental Impact Study. Details on the method of installation are provided in
the Construction Plan Report.
The transmission line will connect to the existing Hydro One Networks Inc. 115 kV transmission line
which runs parallel to the south side of the QEW and intersects Mountainview Road in Lincoln. At
this tap-in location there will be either a pole-mounted Mid Span Opener (MSO) or a pad-mounted
disconnect switch to allow for manual disconnect of the Project from the HONI line. A short access
road will be required to allow for access to the tap-in location, which will also be enclosed with
fencing and warning signage to alert the public.
1.2.3
Collector Lines
From the turbine switchgear, underground 34.5 kV collector lines carry the electricity to the
municipal road allowances along the turbine access roads or other defined routes. Along the
municipal road allowances, underground and/or overhead collector lines on new poles organized
into several circuits will transport the electricity to one of the transformer substations.
Overhead lines will be installed on poles that will be designed to meet the requirements of the local
distribution companies, and in some cases, the assets of the local distribution companies may
share the poles with the project assets. Wood monopoles will be used where feasible, but some
concrete or steel monopoles may be required to avoid guy wires spanning outside of municipal road
allowances (to be confirmed during detailed design).
The monopoles carrying the collector lines will vary in height depending on the number of circuits
installed. A minimum pole height of 19 m and maximum pole height of 30 m is expected with varied
pole spacing up to 60 m.
4
Collector lines are proposed to be installed overhead at two of the wetland crossings, specifically
over the Welland River and over the Welland Feeder Canal. However, all other collector lines on
private properties will be installed underground, including where they are proposed to cross wetland
or woodland areas. Details on the method of installation are provided in the Construction Plan
Report.
Where two or more collector lines connect and continue as one collector line, a junction box or padmounted disconnect switch will be installed. The unit is an enclosed metal box approximately 2m
high, 3m long and 2m wide. The unit is safe to touch and locked to prevent unauthorized entry. The
units are brought to site by truck and lowered onto cast-in place concrete pads. Collector lines are
fed into the box from underground.
1.3
Study Methodology
The Heritage Assessment study was composed of a program of archival research and visual
assessment of potential built heritage resources and potential components of cultural heritage
landscapes within the vicinity of the Study Area. As part of the desktop research undertaken
municipalities within the Study Area were contacted for information pertaining to Heritage Registers
and inventories. Public consultation for the project was undertaken concurrently with this study and
is outlined in the Consultation Report (Stantec, 2013a). Local non-governmental organizations were
not contacted as part of the desktop survey due to the size of the Study Area, information received
from municipalities, and the ongoing consultation process which allowed for the opportunity for local
non-governmental organizations and individuals to provide input related to Project concerns,
including those related to cultural heritage.
To familiarise the study team with the Study Area, municipalities were contacted for heritage
inventories, archival documents were reviewed and a summary historical background of the local
area was prepared. Listings of provincially and locally designated built heritage sites, districts and
easements and buildings of architectural or historical interest for each municipality were reviewed in
order to compile a catalogue of existing identified heritage resources.
The Aboriginal Engagement Strategy for the Project, as outlined in the Consultation Report, “is to
engage interested and local Aboriginal communities in a way that is meaningful and respectful of
their aboriginal and treaty rights and interests in the Project area” (Stantec, 2013a). The following
aboriginal communities have been identified by the MOE as having a potential interest in the
Project:

Six Nations of the Grand River First Nation

Six Nations of the Grand River Haudenosaunee Confederacy Council

Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation
5
Others that have or may have constitutional or treaty rights, or that may have an interest in any
negative environmental effects, included:

Niagara Region Metis Council

Métis Nation of Ontario
The Project team is involved with ongoing consultation with interested aboriginal communities which
has included participation in archaeological field studies for the project and forums for discussion of
land use in and around the Study Area including, but not limited to topics such as: traditional
gathering places; burial sites; sacred sites or special sites; berry picking; medicinal plants; birds and
fowl for hunting; larger animals, migration patterns, collection areas; fishing spots; original names;
and historical stories (Stantec, 2013a).
A visual survey was conducted in June and July, 2012. The visual survey was undertaken along
public roads within the Project Study Area. In cases where the identified resources were located on
public property (i.e., public parks, cemeteries) the property was accessed in order to record views
from the resource. The Study Area was surveyed for extant buildings, outbuildings and/or other built
heritage remains. During the site visit built heritage resources which might satisfy criteria outlined
under O.Reg. 9/06 and components of potential cultural heritage landscapes were photographed
and their locations recorded. Where municipal addresses were not available locations were
recorded using a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS).
In general, buildings and structures of more than forty years of age were evaluated during the
survey for their potential to satisfy O.Reg. 9/06 criteria. The use of the forty year threshold is
generally accepted by both the federal and provincial authorities as a preliminary screening
measure for heritage interest or values. This practice does not imply that all buildings and structures
more than forty years of age are inherently of cultural heritage value, nor does it exclude
exceptional examples constructed within the past forty years of being of cultural heritage value.
The Study Area was assessed for groupings of resources and environs that might potentially
constitute cultural heritage landscapes as defined by the Ministry of Culture’s InfoSheet #2 Cultural
Heritage Landscapes in Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process: Cultural Heritage
and Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (MTCS, 2006b).
Evaluation of potential cultural heritage resources was performed using criteria set out under
O.Reg.9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA). Resources meeting one or more of the criteria under
O.Reg.9/06 are considered by this study to be of cultural heritage value.
Identification of potential impacts on cultural heritage resources and landscapes considered the
proposed site plan for the layout of turbines and other Project infrastructure (Figure 1). Layout of
Project components was undertaken separately from this study with the understanding that
6
negative impacts on cultural heritage resources identified by this study might require mitigative
measures, up to and including the relocation of Project infrastructure.
1.3.1
Resource Evaluation Methodology
As per O.Reg. 359/09, evaluation of potentially significant built heritage resources in the Study Area
was performed using criteria set out under O.Reg 9/06 of the OHA. A property or resource meeting
one or more of the following criteria is considered significant under the OHA. Information used in
the evaluation of cultural heritage resources was based on desktop research, historic mapping,
available inventories and local histories and visual surveys.
1. The property has design value or physical value because it,
i. is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression,
material or construction method,
ii. displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or
iii. demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement.
2. The property has historical value or associative value because it,
i. has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or
institution that is significant to a community,
ii. yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding
of a community or culture, or
iii. demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or
theorist who is significant to a community.
3. The property has contextual value because it,
i. is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area,
ii. is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or
iii. is a landmark. O. Reg. 9/06, s. 1 (2).
1.3.2
Impact Assessment Methodology
Assessment of potential direct or indirect impacts of the Project on identified built heritage
resources in the Study Area considered Ministry of Tourism and Culture guidelines concerning
Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (MTCS, 2006a).
The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport outlines seven potential negative impacts on heritage
resources:
7

Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes or features;

Alteration that is not sympathetic, or is incompatible, with the historic fabric and
appearance;

Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of
a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden;

Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or 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 such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to residential use,
allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly open spaces; and

Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that
adversely affect an archaeological resource.
Land disturbances are being assessed in a separate Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment and have
not been included in the current evaluation.
Identification of potential impacts considered the proposed site plan in relation to identified cultural
heritage resources (Figures 11 through 20).
The hub height of the proposed wind turbines will be either 124 m or 135 m with a blade length of
48.5 m. In order to evaluate the potential visual impact of turbines, general topographical conditions
and land-use recorded during the site visit, aerial imagery, and comparative examples from similar
projects were reviewed. Visual modelling was also used to inform the evaluation with respect to
assessing the scale of new turbines relative to existing built features. Visual Aid 1 presents the
scale of a turbine with a 124 m hub height at a distance of 550 m and 1000 m from a typical two
storey residential building. Visual Aid 2 presents that same model with trees at various locations
and distances in order to evaluate the effectiveness of tree-cover as an effective mitigative
measure. Visual Aids 3 and 4 present similar models with a hub height of 135 m.
A Visual Assessment Study, including visual simulations, was prepared for the Niagara Escarpment
Commission to assess the impact of transmission infrastructure on the scenic values of the Niagara
Escarpment Plan Area (Stantec, 2012). The Visual Assessment Study and the visual simulations
prepared for the study were reviewed to inform the assessment of impact of Project collector and
transmission infrastructure on cultural heritage values.
In addition to direct impacts related to destruction, this assessment also evaluated the potential for
indirect impacts resulting from the vibrations of construction and the transportation of Project
components and personnel. Although the effect of traffic and construction vibrations on historic
8
period structures is not fully understood, negative effects have been demonstrated on buildings with
a setback of less than 40 m from the curbside (Crispino and D’Apuzzo, 2001; Ellis, 1987; Rainer,
1982; Wiss, 1981). The proximity of Project components to resources of cultural heritage value was
considered in this assessment, particularly those within 50 m.
One consideration of interventions on resources and landscapes of heritage value is the
reversibility of any new features. English Heritage (officially known as the Historic Buildings and
Monuments Commission for England), a governmental statutory adviser on the historic environment
in the United Kingdom, has prepared guidance on the assessment of impacts of renewable energy
projects on the Historic Environment which addresses reversibility. English Heritage states that, as
a best practice, “consideration should always be given to the reversibility of wind energy projects”
(English Heritage, 2005). Their 2005 guidance document further states that,
Planning authorities should therefore make provision, as part of any
planning permission, for the long-term protection of the landscape by requiring legal
agreements for the remediation and restoration of wind farm sites and their
infrastructure when they are decommissioned.
A Decommissioning Plan Report has been prepared for the Project, in accordance with O.Reg.
359/09, which sets out specific content requirements for the Decommission Plan Report in Table 1,
Item 3 of the Ministry of Environment’s (MOE’s) draft guidance document “Technical Guide to
Renewable Energy Approvals” (MOE, March 2012). The Decommission Plan Report provides the
following information with respect to plans for site rehabilitation or restoration following the lifespan
of the Project.
The operator of the Project will develop a Rehabilitation Plan that is designed to restore habitat in
areas affected by Project-related equipment. This plan will be developed in consultation with the
appropriate agencies prior to the decommissioning of the Project.
It is envisioned that the Rehabilitation Plan will include, but not be limited to the following;

Agricultural areas, which comprise most of the pre-developed Project Location, will be
restored such that normal farming practices may resume. Any damaged tile drains will be
fixed.

Cultural areas will be revegetated using native plant material and seeds appropriate for the
Project site or allowed to revegetate naturally.

Areas such as turbine staging areas, crane pads and access roads which may become
compacted during decommissioning will be decompacted and restored to pre-existing
conditions.
9
The Rehabilitation Plan may also involve a monitoring period which allows for the Project site to
experience seasonal changes and help determine if additional restoration is required (Stantec,
2013b).
Visual Aid 1: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic (124m hub height)
Visual Aid 2: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic, with trees (124m hub height)
10
Visual Aid 3: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic (135m hub height)
Visual Aid 4: Wind Turbine Scale Schematic, with trees (135m hub height)
11
2
CULTURAL LANDSCAPE
The Study Area is located in the Haldimand Clay Plain physiographic region, a large region that
occupies the majority of the Niagara Peninsula south of the Niagara Escarpment down to Lake Erie.
It is a region of approximately 1,350 square miles characterized by recessional moraines in the
northern part, deep river valley in the middle, and flat and low lying ground in the south (Chapman
and Putnam, 1984).
The vast majority of the surficial geology of the Study Area is silty heavy clay loam till and alluvial
deposits in flood plains spanning the length of region’s waterways. In the historic Lincoln County the
dominate soil series is Haldimand clay loam with small pockets of Lincoln clay till, predominately
along waterways (Wicklund and Mathews, 1963). The surficial geology in the historic Welland
County is similar, although Berrien and Wauseon series sandy loam soils are also found within the
Study Area (Presant and Kingston, 1989).
The Niagara Peninsula, more generally, provides a transportation link between Canada and the
United States via modern border crossings at Niagara Falls, Fort Erie and Queenston. This
proximity to the United States resulted in the strategic importance of the area as the first seat of
government for Upper Canada and, consequently, one of the first areas surveyed and settled by the
British Government towards the end of the 18th century. The area continued to be one of great
importance from a defensive standpoint and was the location of numerous pivotal battles during the
War of 1812. The Welland Canal, built between 1824 and 1830, provided a gateway between Lake
Ontario and Lake Erie and established the Niagara Peninsula as not only a transportation and
communication hub for Upper Canada, but also as an economic and commercial centre, particularly
given the superior agricultural conditions in the area.
Settlements in the general vicinity of the Project include Saint Ann’s, Silverdale, Rosendene,
Bismark, Boyle, Fenwick, Vaughn, Elcho, Perry, Becketts Bridge, Wellandport, Mount Carmel,
Forks Road, Lowbanks, Willow Bay, Beamsville, Smithville and Grimsby. Study Area land use is
primarily rural agricultural with small settlements scattered throughout the landscape, with more
urban land uses located in the north along the south shore of Lake Ontario. Many woodlands and
wetlands occur throughout the Study Area, which includes portions of the Niagara Escarpment and
Greenbelt Areas. Short Hills Provincial Park is located to the east of the Project Study Area and
Rock Point Provincial Park is located to the south.
The majority of the cultural landscape throughout the Project area can be characterized as rural;
being comprised of relatively straight, gravel and paved roads lined by widely setback farm
complexes (Plates 1 and 2). Existing transmission infrastructure is visible throughout the Study
Area and consists of wooden monopoles along alternating sides of road rights of way (Plates 1 – 4,
6 and 7). At major crossroads, along major transportation routes and in within settlements,
12
residential and commercial buildings tend to be narrowly setback (Plate 3). At several of these
same crossroads schoolhouses and religious buildings are still extant. Farm complexes within the
Study Area range in size from small to very large and tend to be widely setback (Plates 4 and 5)
although narrowly setback agricultural buildings are also found throughout the Study Area (Plate 6).
Cultivated fields tend to be extensive and are interrupted by woodlots and tree lines (Plate 7).
Plate 1: Typical rural roadscape within the Study Area (South Grimsby Road 3, 3149 South Grimsby
Road 3 on the right)
13
Plate 2: Example of paved rural road (River Road near 75229 River Road)
Plate 3: Example of narrowly setback residential building along major roads and near crossroads
(Bismark)
14
Plate 4: Example of farm complex components and configuration (5482 Elcho Road)
Plate 5: Example of widely setback farm complex (73358 River Road)
15
Plate 6: Example of narrowly setback agricultural outbuildings (73752 River Road)
Plate 7: Rural landscape, as viewed from St. Ann's Community Cemetery
16
ad
ille
ith
v
Sm
4765000
9
T54
T97 Vaughan
T75
% T39 Elcho
L
4760000
ek
Cre
T95
T78
Canboro Road
T29
nd
Ri
ve
r
Riv
ers
i
de
D
ad
Ro
T72
ad
Ro
ha
ga
n
Ma
rs
son
Ro
bin
L
%
T41
T82
T84
ad
4785000
4780000
Wainfleet
T89
Highw
ay 3 E
T96
T63
Dunnville
Ro
ad
R oa
Byng
Gr
d
d
T99
Ri
v
6
4
/*
( 8
!89) =
6
*
&
38*
6
(4
33*
( 84
6
!89) =
6
*
&
2
%
4
3*
4
+
3: *
78., &
8.4
3
_
^
$
1
L
%
"
6
&
37+
4
6
2*
6
!9' 78&
8.4
3
6
4
5
4
7*
)
"
96
' .3*
4
(&
8.4
3
T48
T05
North Shore Drive
620000
4
&
)
<
5
6
*
77;&
=
., - ;&
=
(8.: *
&
.1;&
=
'&
3) 4
3*
) &
.1;&
=
<
.78.3, !86
9( 896
*
7
"
&
5
.3
4
(&
8.4
3
$&
8*
6
(4
96
7*
4
8*
38.&
1
(*
7774
&
)
$&
8*
6
'4
)=
6
*
+
*
6
6
*
)
"
6
&
372 .77.4
34
98*
93.( .5
&
1.8=
4
;*
6
"
.*
6
<
.78.3, *
8
"
4
;*
6
<
.78.3, "
6
&
372 .77.4
3
.3*
4
11*
( 84
6
.3*
7
?
#3) *
6
,6
4
93) 4
6
: *
6
-*
&
)
$4
4
)*
)
6
*
&
18*
6
3&
8*
"
6
&
32 .77.4
34
98*
4
8*
38.&
1
4
3786
9( 8.4
3
&
=
)4
;3
6
*
&
T24
L
%
T43
T61
T14
T47
T44 Rymer Road
615000
Legend
er
Port Maitland
610000
T20
Stromness
d
tland Roa
an
Port Mai
20
T62
ast
T23
T49
Lowbanks
Highway 3
Concession 1
Lakeshore Road
Willow Bay
Ostryhon Corners
Burnaby
Long Beach
Lake Erie
Belleview Beach
0
Morgans Point
2,000
4,000
m
1:115,000
625000
630000
Other Wind Turbines
635000
Client/Project
4
-&
;0
$.3) &
6
2
<
.78.3, 4
7&
14
6
&
"
96
' .3*
<
.78.3, $&
.3+
1*
*
8
$.3) 3*
6
,=
6
4
/*
(8
6
4
5
4
7*
)
Figure No.
$.3) 3*
6
,=
6
4
/*
( 8
6
4
5
4
7*
)
Title
6
&
3) *
3*
;&
' 1*
3*
6
,=
&
6
0
6
4
5
4
7*
)
Notes
4
4
6
) .3&
8*
!=
78*
2
#"
%
4
3*
&
7*
+
*
&
896
*
7
5
6
4
) 9( *
)
93) *
6
1.( *
37*
;.8- 8- *
38&
6
.4
.3.786
=
4
+
&
896
&
1*
74
96
(*
7
>
9*
*
3
7
6
.38*
6
+
4
6
38&
6
.4
4750000
17
4745000
ham
Rain
HALDIMAND COUNTY
Ro
oa
d
Ha
ldim
and
on
ins
3
dR
TOWNSHIP OF WAINFLEET
^
_
tch
Hu
ay
T42
O'Reilly's Bridge
Chambers Corners Forks Road
y 3 Winger
Forks Road Highwa
Mount Carmel
T98
Becketts Bridge
Victoria Avenue
T10
T13
T91 T19
4775000
Webber Road
Perry
hw
ma
n
Chantler
Moulton Station
Welland Road
riv
e
Attercliffe Station
Fenwick
Foss Road
T03
lla
Ridgeville
Pelham Centre
Boyle
Oswego Park
T37
V:\01225\active\other_pc\160950269 - Niagara Region Wind\gis\mxds\Heritage\20121003\160950269_Fig_01_Draft_Site_Plan_Overview.mxd
Revised: 2012-11-28 By: zbartlett
4745000
4750000
4755000
L
%
Wellandport Road
d
Ro a
T35
Wellandport
Attercliffe
T18
We
T74
_
^
T34
T36
Canborough Road
T32
T55
T51
T09
Pelham
TOWN OF PELHAM
T33
T02
T31
T59
Victoria Avenue
T07
T01 T76
4770000
l Road 56
T38
T04 T58
Balfour Street
Winslow
T60
Regional Road 20
Bismarck
Silver Street
T08
Warner
North
r RoadPelham
Metle
Rosedene
27
Regional Road
T52 T53
T56
T06
T93
T81
T57
Effingham
4755000
ee
t
T28
T27
Victoria Avenue
Str
Ro
ad
ver
Regiona
T85
T94 T66
Sixteen Road
Silverdale
St. Anns
Roland Road
Effingham Street
Sil
T79
Cream Street
Caistor Gainsborough Road
4770000
T88
Balfour Street
T83
TOWNSHIP OF WEST LINCOLN
Centre
T80
Townline Road
Caistor Centre
Union
4765000
Maple Grove Road
Smithville
ad
Ro
rive
Tw
Pelham
Twenty Mile Road
ty
en
ad
Effingham Street
oad
Tintern
Rockway Pelham Ro
4760000
eek
R
Eighth Avenue
Street
Rd 3
et
Ro
Thirty
R
by R
rims
treet
Sprin
g Cr
Stati
on S
South
G
Stre
Campden Fly Road
lD
sse
We
Basingstoke
S Gr
oad
5
imsb
y
by R
o
Grim
s
Youn
g
oad
Jordan
Fourth Avenue
Gle
n
d So
uth
Lincoln Avenue
d
R oa
rc h
Chu
Park
R oa
Mou
nta
ad
ad
Grim
sby
Ro
oad
ie R
Russ
in R
oad
Woo
lv
Road
erton
Ro a
d
Hyse
oad
E
11Th
R
4780000
Gras
s
lp R
Vineland
TOWN OF LINCOLN
Mountain Street
4775000
Kimbo
Phi
Jordan Station
Lincoln Lincoln
Hillside Drive
st
Vineland Station
Campden Road
l Ro
ad 2
0
ad E
a
John Street
Nineteenth Street
Grimsby Centre
p Ro
East
tree
Beamsville
t
Quarry Road
iona
Kem
oad
gS
Mountain Road
Reg
ee R
Walker Road
treet
Elmtr
Seventh Louth Street
st
Gregory Road
ad W
e
Kin
Jordan Road
p Ro
st
Jordan Harbour
Greenlane
Merritt Road
Kem
ad E
a
Greenlane
Tufford Road
o
$
1
Nelles Estates
Sann Road
Tree
R
Qew Highway Qew Highway
t Ea
st
Ridg
e Ro
ad W
e st
TOWN OF GRIMSBY
Mud
S
Ha
ldi
±
Beach
Bartlett Road
Elm
tree
Lake
Grimsby
Stre
et
Mountainview Road
Grimsby
rt R o
ad
Ridge Road West
Main
S
oad
Casablanc
a Bouleva
ad
ad
ast
st
Living
ston A
venue
Main Street We
st Elm Street
Grassie
635000
Lake Ontario
Ontario Street
Ro a
d Ea
630000
eet
Street
10T
h
Olive
Str
in
Mounta
Ridg
e Ro
625000
rd
eet
ayWinona
8
50 R
o
4785000
Highw
620000
Effingham Road
615000
Hig
610000
Barto
n Str
1
Project Location
November 2012
160950269
3
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
3.1
Pre-Contact Period Land-Use
The cultural heritage of the Niagara Region and Haldimand County pre-dates the arrival of French
explorers in the area by thousands of years. The following summary of the prehistoric occupation of
Southern Ontario is based on syntheses in Archaeologix (2008), Ellis and Ferris (1990) and
Jacques Whitford (2008) and is focused on settlement patterns and cultural activities that can be
documented as part of the Heritage Assessment study process. For the most part, pre-contact
period cultural resources will be studied as part of the Archaeological Assessment process for the
Project.
The first identified human occupation of Ontario can be traced back 11,000 years, folowing the end
of the Wisconsin Glacial period. This initial occupation is referred to as the "Palaeo-Indian"
archaeological culture (11,000-10,000 Before Present (BP)). Settlement patterns suggest that small
groups followed a pattern of seasonal mobility extending over large territories in order to exploit a
variety of resources. Many (although by no means all) of the Early Palaeo-Indian sites were located
on former beach ridges associated with Lake Algonquin, the post-glacial lake occupying the Lake
Huron/Georgian Bay basin.
The transition from the Palaeo-Indian period to the Archaic archaeological culture of Ontario
prehistory is evidenced in the archaeological record by the development of new tool technologies
developed to more intensively exploit resources. Although there may have been some reduction in
the degree of seasonal movement during the Early Archaic period (10,000-8,000 BP), it is still likely
that population density during the Early Archaic was low, and band territories large.
The development of a more diversified tool technology continued into the Middle Archaic period
(8,000-4,500 BP). An increased reliance on local chert resources for chipped stone tools suggests
that in the Middle Archaic groups inhabited smaller territories that often did not encompass a source
of high quality raw material. This reduction in territory size appears to have been the result of
gradual region-wide population growth, which forced a reorganization of subsistence practices, as
more people had to be supported from the resources of a smaller area.
The trend towards decreased territory size and a broadening subsistence base continued during the
Late Archaic (4,500-2,900 BP) and Late Archaic sites are far more numerous than either Early or
Middle Archaic sites. Although the increase in numbers of sites may represent an increase in
population, the relative paucity of earlier Archaic sites may, at least in part, be due to their being
inundated under rising lake levels.
The appearance of the first true cemeteries occurs during the Late Archaic. Prior to this period,
individuals were interred close to the location where they died. However, with the advent of the Late
Archaic and local cemeteries individuals who died at a distance from the cemetery would be
19
returned for final burial at the group cemetery, often resulting in disarticulated skeletons,
occasionally missing minor bone elements (e.g. finger bones). The emergence of local group
cemeteries has been interpreted as being a response to both increased population densities and
competition between local groups for access to resources as cemeteries would have provided
symbolic claims over a local territory and its resources.
The Early Woodland period (2,900-2,200 BP) is distinguished from the Late Archaic period primarily
by the addition of ceramic technology. Other than the introduction of limited ceramic technology, the
life-ways of Early Woodland peoples show a great deal of continuity with the preceding Late Archaic
period. The trade networks which were established in the Middle and Late Archaic continued to
function and trade items were included in increasingly sophisticated burial ceremonies, some of
which involved construction of burial mounds.
At the beginning of the Middle Woodland period (2,200 B.C.-1,100 BP) rich, densely occupied sites
appear along the margins of major rivers and lakes. Unlike earlier seasonally utilized locations,
these Middle Woodland sites appear to have functioned as base camps, occupied off and on over
the course of the year. There are also numerous small upland Middle Woodland sites, many of
which can be interpreted as special purpose camps from which local resources were exploited. This
shift towards a greater degree of sedentism continues the trend witnessed from at least Middle
Archaic times, and provides a prelude to the developments that follow during the Late Woodland
period.
The relatively brief period of the Transitional Woodland period is marked by the acquisition of
cultivar plants species, such as maize and squash, from communities living south of the Great
Lakes. The appearance of these plants began a transition to food production. Sites were occupied
for longer periods and by larger numbers of people. Transitional Woodland sites in the Hamilton
area and Niagara Peninsula are part of the Princess Point Complex, named after the Princess Point
site in Cootes Paradise, at the west end of Burlington Bay on Lake Ontario.
The Late Woodland period in southern Ontario is associated with societies referred to as the
Ontario Iroquois Tradition. This period is often divided into three temporal components; Early,
Middle and Late Iroquoian. Early Iroquoian peoples continued to practice similar subsistence and
settlement patterns as the Transitional Woodland. Villages tended to be small, with small longhouse
dwellings that housed either nuclear or, with increasingly, extended families. Smaller camps and
hamlets associated with villages served as temporary bases from which wild plant and game
resources were acquired. Horticulture appears to have been for the most part a supplement to wild
foods, rather than a staple.
The Middle Iroquoian period marks the point at which a fully developed horticultural system (based
on maize, beans, and squash) emerged, and at which point cultivars became the staple food
source. In this period villages become much larger than in the Early Iroquoian period, and
20
longhouses also become much larger, housing multiple, though related, nuclear families. For the
most part Iroquoian people inhabited large, sometimes fortified villages throughout Southern
Ontario.
The Late Iroquoian period in the Niagara Peninsula, along the north shore of Lake Erie and at the
western end of Lake Ontario is marked by the emergence of the Neutral Iroquoians, one of several
discrete groups that emerge from the Middle Iroquoian period. Neutral settlements include large
villages of several longhouses and a number of associated smaller satellite villages (hamlets),
seasonally occupied sites with only one or two small “cabins” (usually associated with working
horticultural fields), and camps for specialized extractive activities such as hunting and fishing.
Discrete clusters of politically allied Neutral villages have been identified from the late prehistoric
and early historic period, and in the case of the Study Area the nearest cluster is the Lower Grand
River cluster, located on both sides of the Grand River.
3.2
Euro-Canadian Period Land-Use
3.2.1
Niagara Region
The earliest written record of the Niagara Peninsula dates to an account of Niagara Falls published
in 1604. The account had been written by Samuel de Champlain and was based on the stories of
First Nations populations he encountered during his first trip to what is now Canada in 1603 (de
Volpi, 1966). Etienne BrûIé may have visited the Niagara Region as early as 1611, but it was not
until 1615 that Champlain, personally, explored Lake Ontario. Niagara River, between Lake Ontario
and Lake Erie, was outlined in the 1632 Les Voyages de la Nouvelle France Occidentale, Dicte
Canada, Faits par le Sr. De Champlain (de Volpi, 1966). In 1678 Father Jean Louis Hennepin
sketched the Falls (de Volpi, 1966). The sketch was reproduced in 1697 in Father Hennepin’s
Nouvelle découverte d’un très grand pays situé dans l’Amerique, entre le Nouveau Mexique et la
mer glaciale (Plate 1). An illustration, showing a ladder ascending the Falls, accompanied a story in
a 1751 edition of The Gentleman’s Magazine (Plate 2). Although French explorers, missionaries
and traders would continue to pass through the area during the 17th and 18th centuries, no
concerted effort was made by the French to settle the region, although a series of forts,
blockhouses and fortified trading posts were constructed near present-day Youngstown, New York
at the mouth of Niagara River, including: Fort Conti, 1678-1679 (destroyed by fire); Fort De
Nonville, 1687-1688 (abandoned); and Fort Niagara, 1726 (captured by British forces in 1759)
(Porter, 1896).
The stone fort at Niagara was enlarged to its present-day size around 1755 in response to
increased tension in the region between the French and British. The fort was captured by the British
following a 19-day siege led by Sir William Johnson (Porter, 1896). When writing about Fort Niagara
and the Niagara Pennisula in his 1770 A General History of the British Empire in America, John
Huddlestone wrote that, “Niagara is without exception the most important post in America and
21
secures a greater number of communications, through a more extensive country, than perhaps any
other pass in the world” (Wynne, 1770). When the Province of Quebec was divided into Upper and
Lower Canada in 1791, Lieutenant-Governor John Graves Simcoe chose Niagara as the first seat
of government for Upper Canada (1792 until 1794) and began surveying the region to
accommodate settlement (de Volpi, 1966).
During the War of 1812, the Niagara Peninsula was the setting for a number of pivotal battles,
including those at Queenston Heights, Fort George, Chippewa, Fort Niagara, and Lundy’s Lane.
Owing to its close proximity to the United States, the region was one of the first settled as a result of
the war by United Empire Loyalists (UELs), German mercenaries, Pennsylvania German settlers,
First Nations, and those wishing to take advantage of generous land grants and low tax rates aimed
at stimulating settlement along the Canadian-United States border.
The Welland Canal, built between 1824 and 1830, provided a gateway between Lake Ontario and
Lake Erie and established the Niagara Peninsula as an economic and commercial centre,
particularly given the superior agricultural conditions in the area.
22
Plate 8: Father Jean Louis Hennepin's View of Niagara Falls, 1698
Plate 9: View of Niagara Falls from The Gentleman’s Magazine, 1751
23
3.2.2
Caistor Township, Lincoln County
Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe issued a proclamation in 1792 dividing Upper Canada
into nineteen counties. Lincoln County was one of these original nineteen (Lincoln County Council,
1956). Each of the townships in Lincoln County were given the names of British towns in Lincoln
County, England. Lincoln County was established through a Provincial Act in 1798 which stated
that, “the township of Clinton, Grimsby, Saltfleet, Barton, Ancaster, Glanford, Binbrook,
Gainsborough and Caistor, do form and constitute the first riding of the County of Lincoln…”
(Lincoln County Council, 1956).
The topography in Caistor Township is generally characterised by gently rolling hills, primary
watercourses such as Twenty Mile Creek, the Chippewa River (now Welland River), and a network
of smaller watercourses with fertile floodplains. Prior to European survey and settlement, Caistor
was crossed by numerous trails and portage routes, some of which have evolved into modern
roadways (Lincoln County Council, 1956). The first settler in Caistor Township was, by many
accounts, an escaped slave by the name of Diamond who had travelled up the Chippewa River to
settle along its shore in Concession 1 in 1778 (Lincoln County Council, 1956). In 1782, Henry
Dochstader, a UEL from New York, was granted Lots 2, 3, and 4, Concession 1 and “bought out the
improvements” attributed to Diamond. A number of UELs settled in Caistor in the 1790s, including
members of the Lymburner, Merritt, Dean, and Killins families. By 1817 24 families, totaling 156
residents, had settled in Caistor (Lincoln County Council, 1956).
Early settlers in Caistor Township made use of the established trails and portage routes to carry
provisions. The first saw mill was constructed in Lot 6, Concession 2 along the Chippewa River by
John Lymburner in 1799 and the first log schoolhouse was constructed in Lot 2, Concession 1 in
1816 (Lincoln County Council, 1956). Small communities such as Caistorville slowly developed over
the 19th and 20th centuries; however, swaths of forest and undeveloped land can still be found
throughout the township.
The historical Township of Caistor was amalgamated with the Townships of South Grimsby and
Gainsborough on January 1, 1970 to become the Township of West Lincoln (Township of West
Lincoln, 2012).
3.2.3
Clinton Township, Lincoln County
Clinton Township grew quickly as a result of incentives to settle in Upper Canada at the end of the
18th century. By 1800, at least 66 families were living in Clinton Township (Lincoln County Council,
1956). Among the earliest settlers in the area was Jacob Beam, a UEL and member of Butler’s
Rangers. It was after Jacob Beam that Beamsville, established as a police village only three years
after the founding of Lincoln County, was named. As a UEL, Jacob Beam was originally granted
400 acres of land in Clinton Township and an additional 500 acres in Grimsby Township (Lincoln
24
County Council, 1956). The homesteads of two early settlers, the Book and Teeter families may be
located in optioned parcels based on information provided in Page & Co.’s 1876 Illustrated Atlas of
the Counties of Lincoln and Welland (Table 1).
Agricultural land in Clinton Township is fertile, being comprised on nutrient rich sandy loam soils.
Excellent agricultural conditions, coupled with the township’s advantageous location along the
Niagara Escarpment, along the south shore of Lake Ontario made the area attractive to early
settlement. By 1876 there were 600 residents, a court, Free Mason’s lodge, Orange Hall, wine
factory and a bell factory as well as numerous specialists including a tinsmith, druggist and doctor
in the Village of Beamsville alone (Page, 1876).
Table 1: Early Settlers in Clinton Township
Settler
Date of
Matching Names from Page (1876) within
Name
Settlement
Proposed locations
Book
1788-89
Teeter
1788-89
3.2.4
Township
Lot(s)
Conc.
Clark, John, and William Book
Clinton
14-16
9, 10
Albert I. Teeter
Clinton
20, 21
9
Gainsborough Township, Lincoln County
The historic Township of Gainsborough, now part of amalgamated West Lincoln Township, was
historically the largest township in the County of Lincoln. The township is characterised by rolling
topography and is watered by two primary watercourses, the Chippewa River and Twenty Mile
Creek.
John Dochstader was the first European settler to arrive in Gainsborough in 1783. Dochstader
settled on Lots 1 and 2, along Concessions 1 and 2. The surrounding land was settled in the
following years by members of the Heaslip, Henry, Hodges, Reese, Comfort, Gee, and Hutt
families, among others (Lincoln County Council, 1956). Schoolhouses were constructed near Gee
bridge and in St. Ann’s prior to 1800 and the first log church was constructed on Lot 13, Concession
6 in 1799. Although settlement of Gainsborough Township was slower than others in the region due
to its “inland” location, several small communities developed in the 18th and 19th century which still
survive today, including: St. Ann’s, Wellandport, and Bismark.
The community of St. Ann’s was originally founded as Snyder’s Mills in the 1790s. The settlement
was named after Adam Snyder, who arrived from New Jersey in 1793 and within a year had
erected a grist mill and a saw mill along the Twenty Mile Creek. An inn and trading post were
constructed at St. Ann’s by Adam Mingle in 1816. The name St. Ann’s is said to derive from the
reputation of Ann Freas, Snyder’s wife, as a benevolent and welcoming woman (Lincoln County
Council, 1956).
25
Bismark developed at the crossroads of Highway 20 and Highway 57 during the 19th century. It was
once a busy market centre and the location of the township hall (Lincoln County Council, 1956).
Wellandport was settled around 1795 along a narrow strip of land between Beaver Creek and
Chippewa River. The settlement is located at the present-day intersection of Highway 57 and
Canborough Road. By 1820, several hotels, mills and distilleries had been constructed at
Wellandport to support the community which was developing there as a result of the increasing use
of the two rivers for the transportation of lumber and other goods (Lincoln County Council, 1956).
Page & Co.’s 1876 map of Gainsborough Township illustrates the level of development within and
around optioned properties by the second half of the 19th century (Figures 2 through 5).
In general, land-use in Gainsborough Township remains largely agricultural. The homesteads of 17
early settlers may be located with optioned parcels of land based on information provided in Page &
Co.’s 1876 Illustrated Atlas of the Counties of Lincoln and Welland (Table 2). Among these early
settlers were the Heaslip, Snyder, Lane, Gee, Johnson, Kennedy, and Dils families.
3.2.5
Grimsby Township, Lincoln County
The first European settlers arrived in Grimsby Township around 1787-1788. By 1833, the township
was sufficiently settled and developed to justify its division into South Grimsby and North Grimsby
Townships along the Niagara escarpment, which cuts through the middle of the township from the
east to the west. The settlements of Smithville and Grimsby, in South Grismby and North Grimsby
Townships, respectively, were established in the 1780s. Grimbsy Township was in the home of
John Green, in Grimsby Township, that the first municipal council meeting in Upper Canada was
held on April 5, 1790 (Lincoln County Council, 1956).
Prior to the War of 1812 the Village of Grimsby was known as The Forty. The Forty was originally
established around 1790 as settlers such as Robert Nelles, John Green and John Beamer began
constructing mills along the Forty Mile Creek. By 1812, Grismby was the site of two schools, one
church, several stores and two distilleries.
After the War of 1812 both Grimsby and Smithville became continued to develop. By 1876 Grimsby
had a population of over six hundred inhabitants, with four churches, three schools, a fruit canning
factory, a brewery and numerous mills and stores. Smithville had a population of over seven
hundred inhabitants, with five churches, two pump factories, a shingle factory, and several stores
(Lincoln County Council, 1956).
26
Table 2: Early Settlers in Gainsborough Township
Settler
Date of
Matching Names from 1876 within
Name
Settlement
Proposed locations
Township
Lot(s)
Conc.
Heaslip
1782
Leonard Heaslip
Gainsborough
11,12
1
Heaslip
1782
J.L. Heaslip, M. Heaslip
Gainsborough
13,14
4
Synder
1793-4
Jason Synder
Gainsborough
17
5
Synder
1793-4
George Synder
Gainsborough
23
6
Synder
1793-4
Rob. Synder
Gainsborough
8
2
Synder
1793-4
John Synder
Gainsborough
12
1
Lane
1793-4
N.N. Lane
Gainsborough
11
6
Lane
1793-4
Mrs. R. Lane
Gainsborough
15
3
Gee
1793-4
Abraham Gee Estate
Gainsborough
16
3
Gee
1793-4
Jacob Gee
Gainsborough
21,22
4
Gee
1793-4
C. Gee
Gainsborough
6
3
Gee
1793-4
Ezra Gee (on present-day Gee Road)
Gainsborough
20
3
Johnson
1793-4
Nathan Johnson
Gainsborough
3
5
Kenned
1793-4
Samuel Kennedy
Gainsborough
22
5
1793-4
John Kennedy
Gainsborough
21
5
1793-4
Jacob Kennedy
Gainsborough
25,26
1
1796
J.C. Dils
Gainsborough
8
1
y
Kenned
y
Kenned
y
Peter
Dils
27
3.2.6
Wainfleet Township, Lincoln County
Wainfleet Township is characterised by poorly drained, often marshy land and, as a result, was one
of the slowest in Lincoln County to be settled (Wainfleet Historical Society, 1992). Among the first
settlers in Wainfleet Township was David Morgan, who arrived from Pennsylvania during the
American Revolution. Other early settlers included William Fares, Jacob Minor, Henry Zavitz,
Abram Kinnaird, and Lawrence Furry, the founder of the community of Lowbanks (Sidey et.al.,
1887). The construction of the Feeder Canal between 1824 and 1829 further connected Wainfleet
Township with neighbouring communities, but more importantly contributed to the drainage of the
surrounding area (Wainfleet Historical Society, 1992). Page’s 1876 map of Wainfleet Township
illustrates the level of development within and around optioned properties by the second half of the
19th century (Figures 4 through 7).
3.2.7
Haldimand County
Haldimand County is located within the Haldimand Tract, an area six miles on either side of the
Grand River, from its headwaters to Lake Erie which was granted to the Six Nations in 1784. In
1792, Norfolk County was established from lands within the Haldimand Tract. Haldimand County,
named after Sir Frederick Haldimand, was established as its own county in 1800 (Brueton, 1967).
One of the oldest settlements in Moulton Township is Lowbanks which was founded in 1772 by
Lawrence Furry, originally from Pennsylavania (Paisley, 1967).
The County was officially opened for settlement by the Crown in 1832 but settlement was slow due
to heavily forested and often swampy lands. The Feeder Canal, built between 1824 and 1829, is
one of the most notable man-made features in Moulton Township. It connects the Grand River at
Dunnville in the west to the Welland Canal in Welland in the east. During the 19th century, regular
freights along the Feeder Canal made it an important route for the transportation of timber and
cordwood (Paisley, 1967). Page’s 1876 map of Moulton Township illustrates the level of
development within and around optioned properties by the second half of the 19th century (Figures 4
through 7).
28
615000
R oc
nty
R
Port Davidson Road
Woods Road
Smithville Road
Tober Road
5777
Mataseje
Road
Shurie Road
T88
!
(
4770000
Allen Road
6500
Sixteen
Road
West Lincoln
Grace United
Church Cemetery
!
(
!
(
Built Heritage Resource
/
"
Cultural Heritage Landscape
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Proposed Turbine Location
Junction Box / Pad-Mounted
Disconnect Switch
Preferred Transmission Line Route
Alternate Transmission Line Route
d
Twe nty Mile Roa
Proposed Collector Line (underground or overhead)
!
(
T83
!
(
Potential Access Road
Patterson Road
2723 Port
Davidson
Road
Legend
D rive
!
(
et
Ja ne Stre
2474
Smithville
Road
Townline Road
A lm a
Smith ville Road
±
k Stre et
Smithville
Christian
Reformed
oa
d
Proposed Fibre Optic Line
Transformer Substation
Potential Construction Laydown Area
Participating Property
5798
Sixteen
Road
Interconnector Study Area
4770000
Tw
e
620000
!
(
Sixteen Road
Project Study Area
120m Zone of Investigation
7058 Sixteen Road
es
n5
T85
Port Davidson Road
Joslin Road
s io
Mccollum Road
Co
nc
T94
T66
d
eR
oa
v ill
ith
Sm
tre
!
(
!
(
Concessio n 4
!
(
et
!
(
West Lincoln
McCaffrey
Cemetery
T52
T53
1500 Castor
Gainsborough
Townline Road
!
(
Co
nc
es
s io
Bethel United
Church and
Winslow Cemetery
6677
Silver
Street
!
(
Port David son Road
T81
Former
Rail Line
Notes
T93
1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N).
2. Base features produced under license with the
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's
Printer for Ontario, 2012.
3. Historic Maps: Moulton Twp: Page, H.R., 1879. Illustrated historical atlas of
the county of Haldimand, Ont.. Toronto: H.R. Page & Co. Sherbrooke, Wainfleet,
Gainsborough, Grimsby & Clinton Twps: Page, H.R., 1876. Illustrated
historical atlas of the counties of Lincoln and Welland, Ont. Toronto:
H.R. Page & Co..
6259
Silver
Street
!
(
Silver Street
n3
T38
Krick Roa d
T97
T54
November, 2012
160950269
ssio
n2
T08
615000
4765000
n ce
Vaughan Road
Krick Road
Co
sborough
Townline Caistor Gain
4765000
Client/Project
Churc h Road
V:\01225\active\other_pc\160950269 - Niagara Region Wind\gis\mxds\Heritage\20121003\160950269_Release_20_BHR_Historic.mxd
rS
Patterson Road
Caisto r Gainsborough Road
Sil
ve
5711
Concession
Road 4
0
500
1:30,000
620000
Figure No.
2 (Gainsborough Township)
1,000
m
Title
T75
1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping
Overlaid by Project Components
625000
630000
!
(
4586 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road
4454 Twenty
Mile
Creek Road
!
(
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Disconnect Switch
!
(
T79
Project Study Area
4326
Sixteen
Road
Silverdale
Community
Centre
Six tee n Ro ad
Mcglasha n Street
4723
Sixteen
Road
!
(
!
(
4770000
Sixteen
Road
Dengo Road
Kilman Road
Hod gkin s Roa d
Boo k Road
1940
Book
Road
Crown Road
!
(
Fifte en Road
Fiftee n Road
T56
T27
Gainsborough
S.S. no.4
4411
Concession
Road 4
Concessio n 4
Rosedene Road
!
(
Hrvatski
Park Holy Cross
Croatian Parish
Rail Line
Silve
Concessio n 4
rda le
Notes
Tice Road
T04
H.R. Page & Co..
T60
Roa d
T58
T59
Victoria Avenu e
1750
Highway 20
Metle r Road
!
(
!
( 1698 Highway 20
T06
Brady Street
Comfort Road
T57
Regio
n
al Road 20
!
( 3976
Highway 20
!
(5028
Bismark
Streetscape
T18
Boyle Road
Gee Roa d
Schram Ro ad
Highway 20
Reg ional Roa d 27
/
"
Sixtee n Road
T28
!
(
!
(
!
(
4724
!
(
!
(
2467
Moote
Road
Snyd er Road
Regional Road 569
!
(
St. Ann's
Streetscape
4770000
T80
o ad
ile R
en ty M
!
(
5293 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road
Legend
4272 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road
Rosedene Road
St. Ann's
Community Church
and Cemetery
Tw
Twenty Mile Road
Road
ad
Moote Road
Lane's
Cemetery
±
Tinte rn
Campde n
Mountain Street
Ben nett Roa d
Ro
T33
T31
4117
Vaughan
Road
!
(
Gainsborough
S.S no.5
625000
!
(
T02
1137 Gee
Road
T76
T01
November, 2012
160950269
Client/Project
Vaug han Road
!
(
Figure No.
0
500
1:30,000
630000
1,000
m
3 (Gainsborough Township)
Title
!
(
!
(
615000
n3
±
T38
T97
Krick Roa d
T54
Legend
4765000
ssio
4765000
nce
620000
Co
Vaughan Road
e ss
ion
2
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
T75
Disconnect Switch
ad 27
Regional Ro
nc
ugh
Townline Caistor Gainsboro
Co
Krick Road
T08
!
(
T39
Former
Rail Line
T07
5482
Elcho
Road
Elcho
Schoolhouse
!
(6227
!
(
Elcho Road
!
(
Project Study Area
Elcho
Road
Elcho United
Church and
Cemetery
T36
T74
So
uth
Ch
ip p
aw
aR
T51
oa
d
T09
7092 South
Chippewa
Road
5468
Canborough
Road
5753
Canborough
Road Road
Zums tein Road
!
(
!
(
Krick Road
!
(
5914
Canborough
Road
!
(
Port Davidson Road
!
(
Can boro ugh Road
Notes
H.R. Page & Co..
T95
!
(
k Ro ad
so
nR
oa
d
C re e
4760000
4760000
Diltz Road
6479
Canborough
Road
Reg ional Roa d 7
Ro
b in
Concessio n 6
65049
Highway 7
ad
Ro
tz
Hart Road
Client/Project
oa
d
rs h
ag
rR
oa
d
Du
nn
Wa
in fle
et T
ow
nlin
e
615000
620000
!
(
0
Ro
500
ad
1:30,000
Ma
Ca
rte
an
Ro
ad
Dil
Yo
un
gR
Sideroad 44 Road
Swayze Road
November, 2012
160950269
!
(
Anderson Road
Robertland
Academy
1,000
m
Figure No.
4 (Gainsborough, Wainfleet & Moulton)
Title
1879 & 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping
!
(
Vaug han Road
!
(
1187
Heaslip
Road
T32
T78
!
(
±
T34
T35
Canboro Road
Boyle Brethren
in Christ
Church
!
(
bo
Can
oa d 6
n al R
Reg io
Legend
ro ug
h Ro
ad
Farr Street
Hea slip Road
T55
630000
!
(4117 Vaughan Road
Boyle Road
4765000
Gainsborough
S.S no.5
4765000
625000
3
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
!
(3974
Gee Roa d
!
( Bethel Community Church
Canborough
Road
o ad
gh R
o ro u
Can b
Foss Road
T03
!
(
T29
4891
Canborough
Road
27
East C
Wellandport
Streetscape
!
(
84008
Highway 4
ek R
C re
!
(
o ad
Sumbler Road
Wiley Road
!
(
!
( Riverside Christian
!
( Reformed Church
United
!
( Wellandport
Reform Church
O ld
Riv
ers
id
eD
Chantler Road
Ri
ve
rR
oa
d
Ea s
t
ri v
d
Wellandport
Church of
Christ
!
(72587
Web ber Road
River
Road
Concessio n 6
o rt
dp
72170
River
Road
Riv
er
R
oa
d
Notes
H.R. Page & Co..
We
ll
Farr Road
an
Farr Street
!
(
Elsie Road
Ro
ad
Roa
ue
Melte r Road
4760000
awa
Victoria Aven
ip p
Doc hsta der Road
Sideroad 42 Road
Trave r Road
T10
Victoria Avenu e
Putman Roa d
Marr Road
Smith Road
Perry Road
T37
Wilford Road
500
1:30,000
630000
Farr Road
0
625000
November, 2012
160950269
Client/Project
Wing er Rd 32
Wellandpo rt Road
Ch
!
(
Kilts Roa d
Rob erts on Roa d
Hen derson Roa d
Grac ey Roa d
Welland port Roa d
Sideroad 42
!
(
74015
Highway 4
hip
pa w
aR
oad
e
T95
Project Study Area
83610 Old
River
Road W
Wellandport/Riverside
Cemetery
74221
Creek
Road
4760000
oa
d
Shedd en Road
gi
on
al
R
Gee Roa d
Re
Disconnect Switch
Conce ssion 1
Elcho Road
1,000
m
Figure No.
5 (Gainsborough & Wainfleet Townships)
Title
!
(
620000
625000
±
T37
rR
oa
Ro
a
Wa
in fle
et T
ow
d
nlin
e
Ro
ad
Sidero ad 44 Road
Ca
rte
ng
Anderson Road
Du
nn
Yo
u
d
!
(
Ca
lve
238
Gore A Road
oad
ad
rt R
!
(
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Disconnect Switch
Ro
re
A
Wilfo rd Road
Concessio n 5
Go
rs h
ag
Dil
an
Ro
ad
tz
Ro
ad
663 Marshagan Road
Legend
Ma
T72
T41
T11
es
Ro
ad
T91
!
(54051 Wellandport Road
Project Study Area
Zion Road
Shafley Road
!
(
Smith Road
554 Hines
Road
Hin
T12
T13
T19
Buck ner Road
4755000
Hig
3
ay
hw
!
( 44088 Hendershot Road
!
( 44067 Hendershot Road
T82
Sider Road
tch
Hu
!
(
ins
!
(1855
Flana gan Road
Hendersho t Road
T65
1943
Highway 3
R
on
d
oa
Highway 3
Ju m
o
pR
ad
w
To
ne
nli
ny
Je n
Du
le
vil
Jenny
Jump
Road
le e
in f
t
!
(
!
(
H.R. Page & Co..
Wa
T42
Notes
nn
1668
Highway 3
Bell Road
lin
gh
la u
Mc
T84
Ro
ad
T89
!
( 62RoadBooker
T98
er R
k
Bo o
ak
eR
d
ad
620000
oad
1,000
m
yR
Abbey Road
ad
T62
ad
hR
Figure No.
6 (Wainfleet & Moulton Townships)
Ro
Ro
Po t
500
et
an
0
fle
In m
a in
mb
oad
Mu
nR
!
(
W
ike
Client/Project
le
M
A
on
o ult
November, 2012
160950269
362
oa d
Booker
er R
Road Bo o k
v il
nn
Du
oa
d
d
oa
Ro
sn
a
Ro
wn
Bir
d
oa d
ttle
Ra
o
Cr
4755000
oad
Wellandpo rt Road
Co
m fo
rt R
1:30,000
625000
Title
!
(
620000
v il
nn
Du
N
ad
Ro
Legend
Sideroad 26
fle
et
Ro
de r
Fe e
ad
T63
rth
Abbey Road
a in
T62
No
o rth
W
R
ad
Ro
der
Fe e
Abbey Road
le
h
Po t
oad
±
Gilmo re Road
Wills Road
Pettit Road
der
Fe e
d
oa
e
A ik
Case Road
d
oa
n
ulto
!
(
ad
oa d
R
on
R
ke
Mo
o
nR
er R
k
Bo o
ins
362
Booker
Road
Sider Road
ad
oa d
tch
Hu
o
pR
a
sn
Ju m
ttle
Ra
ny
Je n
630000
Flana gan Road
er R
k
Bo o
625000
dN
R oa
ort h
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Disconnect Switch
ad
T96
Mo
Ro
!
(
ad
!
(
al
Can
753
Inman
Road
Concessio n 1
ad
T48
Mi
r
no
ad
Ro
rL
e
an
an k
al B
Ro
ad
T43
T46
T14
s on
ch in
ad
Project Study Area
d
T22
!
(
12698
Mittelstadt
12822
Minor
Road
Roa
an
T44
T45
T23
T49
Hut
th
So u
C
de r
F ee
Daley Ditch Road
Minor Road
e
ed
Fe
Fe
rC
T24
Gord Harry Trail
Can
!
(
228 Feeder Canal Road !
(
e
ed
5
T20
o
al R
T99
928 Canal Bank
Road
Stromness
Streetscape
oa
B an
o
kR
T16
T47
R
al
an
o ad
Welland
Feeder
Canal
rd
Bi
55 Moulton
Aiken Road
4750000
Reg
6
oa d
al R
io n
kR
4750000
ult
on
A
ike
nR
oa
d
an
al B
Can
Gibson Road
Burkett Road
Ro
Sidero ad 30
Inm an
!
(
T21
T61
Lake shore Roa d
Lowbanks
Streetscape
T05
To
w
d
nli
ne
R
oa
d
Dickhout Road
!
(
!
(
Ro
ad
Der
n er
L in e
oa
d
H.R. Page & Co..
4745000
lla
k Po
int
R
Vill
e
Hoto Line
Pyle Road
Downey Road
L ine
Notes
M oh aw
North Shore Drive
Gull
2307 North
Shore
Drive
Former schoolhouse
Farr Road
King Road
Siddall Road
Sherbrooke Baptist
Church and
Highbanks Cemetery
Niece Road
4745000
Rymer Road
November, 2012
160950269
Client/Project
Figure No.
0
500
7 (Moulton, Sherbrooke & Wainfleet)
1,000
m
Title
1:40,000
620000
625000
630000
1879 & 1876 Page & Co. Historical Mapping
4775000
y Ro a
Grimsb
So u th
Legend
±
ion
al R
Ran ge Roa d 2
oad
20
2474
Smithville
Road
d7
g
Re
Twenty Road
615000
So u th
by R
Grims
oad 7
4775000
!
(
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Disconnect Switch
gh
ro u
bo
20
in s
Ga
oa
d
od
Wo
sR
d
oa
Grims
So u th
a
by Ro
Project Study Area
na
lR
or
ist
Ca
R
d
oa
d6
Re
g io
615000
Sm ithville Road
T88
4770000
T83
t
ille
ee
t
ad
Ro
Wes
d5
N ort
hri dg
en
rive
esc
tle a
D
Cr
hv
w ell
it
Sm
Fare
a
by Ro
e D ri
ve
Grims
So u th
S tr
o
La s R
C ourt
ze
ay
S
de
n
n
y
Notes
G
ar
Smithville
Christian
Reformed
e
w
Au tu m
Driv
nue
Wal lis Ave
en t
th
rg Wa
ou
o ad S
Sara h
Circle
R
Wa d e
orth
C resc
ev ard
o ad N
ad
d en be
le B o ul
R
Wa d e
We
st
ad
Oak da
llin
Ki
ara
Ba rb
t
S tree
n
Sta tio
S tre et
H.R. Page & Co..
tr
sS
ee
t
oug
Ca nb or
h Ro ad
Gri
ffin
re
St
et
Cree k
e Street
Ro ad
St Ca tha rin
Ind ustr
ia l P ar
d
k Roa
Figure No.
en
0
ue
t
u
en
Av
re e
ry
an
Client/Project
d
et
St
er
Ch
d
Lin
re
St
ue
n Av en
Duffe ri
Av
ne
ple
Ja
November, 2012
160950269
y Ro a
Ma
ad
Ro
Ro ad
S tree t
a
Sk yw
d
oa
rie
nue
n Av e
n
Lo nd o
d
u
Sh
e
4770000
Sp ring
et
oa
ps o
Th om
d
oa
nR
treet
sS
re
R
ne
nli
so
E lli
St
Rock
w
To
Po
id
av
rt D
Former
Rail Line
Cliffo rd
!
(
nR
!
(
6500
Sixteen
Road
2723 Port
Davidson
Road
g e Stre et
en u e
tre et
tre et
Mill S
S
Silve r
t
a n Av
C olle
Mc
S tre e
Bro ck
Mo rg
m
llu
co
ad
Ro
te e
Six
Ro
ou
Van W
r
be
To
Al
a
m
D
e
riv
500
1:15,000
1,000
m
8 (Grimsby & Clinton Townships)
Title
th
So u
Grim
s by
Ro a
d7
Legend
Grim
R
s by
th
S ou
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
Disconnect Switch
6
oad
So b
4775000
th
So u
oad
±
R
Pa rk
ie R
o ad
E as
t
p
Ke m
620000
st
d Ea
Ro a
et
S tre
324
Thirty
Road
Project Study Area
!
(
Mu d
305
Thirty
Road
th
So u
Grim
Ro
s by
ad 5
!
(
ty
Th ir
R oa
d
!
(
g
You n
S tre
R oa
d
Roa
s on
d
Cla y
Notes
er
Ro
H.R. Page & Co..
ad
a lk
W
u
So
th
3262 South
Grimsby
Road 3
G
rim
ro
irb
Fa
sb
y
R
d
Aure Wines
- 3749
Walker Road
lp
ad
Ro
oad
oa
i
Ph
s by R
rR
3
Grim
th e
d
oa
!
(
So u th
3
n
Ko
kle
Ro
ad
Con
ree k
gC
Sp rin
November, 2012
160950269
ce ss
Client/Project
io n 7
d
Ro a
Figure No.
y
Fl
0
500
Ro
ad
et
ty
Th ir
1:15,000
620000
4775000
1,000
m
9 (Grimsby & Clinton Townships)
Title
4780000
620000
Elm
e
Tre
st
e
dg
Ri
Ea
Ro
am
ad
s
Ea
M
n
ou
v ie
in
ta
w
R
d
oa
Legend
rth
No
±
ad
Ro
rh
Du
ad
Ro
t
t
Elm
re e
Th
irty
R
r th
No
d
oa
Ro
ad
!
(
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
tree t
Kin g
S
4673
Mountainview
Road
E lm
ad
Ro
st
Ea
Project Study Area
w
Qe
620000
Hi
4516
Mountainview
Road
oad
oa d
4560
Mountainview
Road
rR
Wa lke
yR
ad
tre e
wa
gh
(
!
t
Th ir
4649
Mountainview
Road
Thirty R oa d
252
Thirty
Road
view
4717
Mountainview
Road
R id
ge
st
ad
Ro
ad y
Ro
Ro hwa ic e
i ce i g
rv
rv H
Se
Se ew
h
ut
Q
So
Ea
rth
No
Ro
ad
nt ain
Disconnect Switch
Andrewes
Farm
Limited
M ou
y
(
!
Va le
305
Thirty
Road
(
!
5432 King
Street
4367
Thirty
Road
o
nti n
en
re
ad
G
Ro
ne
la
Ke m
t
Ea s
(
!
o ad
pR
n
ol
nc
Li
Av
r
W
(
!
ad
Ro
592 Kemp
Road
ue
en
Rosewood
Estates
al
ke
564 Kemp
Road
n
io
Un
Angels
Gate
Ro
n ip
Ju
M
rb r
da
Ce
ue
en
at
e
t
en
esc
ltm
Ga
an
rd
en
G
ay
W
We
Cr
Av
e
N
or
te
ga
th
s
ni
en
on
C
r
co
d
e
Av
Ar
nu
e
A
ay
ej
ve
e
nu
He
yA
nr
ve
nu
0
en ue
le y
C
Client/Project
t
et
rt l
Ba
s
re
625000
St
re
et
c
ra
d
November, 2012
160950269
n
ue
e
Q
oa
e
nu
ve
er
4780000
r
Te
R
Ro
ad
o ad
ive
le R
Dr
e
nu
Ko n
k
d
e
e
Av
Ea st Av
rin
ffe
e
Figure No.
c
t
en
500
1,000
m
v
1:15,000
Be
et
S tre
H.R. Page & Co..
ue
en
et
t
n
n
Du
ue
Ce
ge
ri a
ar
Av
re
St
n
ee
et
i xo
S tr
Str e
et
n tain
Mo u
D
ue
en
Av
hn
B eam
t
re
St
H
e
an
riv
ad
m
er
e
re
St
th
D
Ro
m
s
be
ge
s
et
ue
ven
le A
Ma p
arle
za
eo
r
re
St
et
Ch
E li
t
G
W
am
illi
lA
tra
el
ha
C
Jo
re
St
e
S
ic
c
Ja
ay
iv
d Pa
rk D r
on
M
o
er
ks
et
tre
t
ur
en
Av
ue
en
un
ds
a
dr
an
Av
m
Ca
ex
Al
nt
gr
o
o
rC
he
op
u
en
Av
d
e
e
sc
a
te
es
oo
Cr
ive
M
hlan
S
ilp
m
Zi
e
ak
rtw
ge
Dr
S
t
ue
ri s
Ch
ad
Ro
lla
Vi
k
Fa
ir
io
ar
nt
e
tre
Dr
Ha
ay
Dri ve
r
au e
r
Pa
O
d
W
et
us
H ig
d
oa
en
Av
t
d e lb
S ta
R
sen
ar
ev
ul
ng
Ki
e
nu
ve
cA
ra
ue
ve n
e
c
Lo
Notes
Bo
n
a
Frie
re
St
an
tL
t
m
Ho
so
ue
en
im
m
Ta
od
Organized
Crime
ur
k
ry
Av
Cr
cle
st A
We
Co
ne
La
ne
d
oo
M
ve
Hillview Dri
er
oo
r
be
ul
La
w
ak
ad
et
Ro
Str e
n
ou
w
v ie
in
ta
O
K ing
M
Ph
ad
Thirty
Bench
625000
10(Grimsby & Gainsborough Townships)
Title
4
EXISTING PROTECTED PROPERTIES
There are a total of twelve (12) protected properties as outlined in the table in Section 19,
O.Reg.359/09 located within or adjacent to the Study Area (Table 3).
In addition to those properties protected as outlined Section 19, a total of eight (8) properties within
or abutting the Study Area are included on municipal registers which have been approved by their
respective municipal council (Table 4). The inclusion of these properties on a council-approved
Heritage Register provides some protection against the demolition or removal under Section 27 of
the Ontario Heritage Act.
There are no properties located within or adjacent to the Study Area which are subject to an
agreement, covenant, or easement with the Ontario Heritage Trust under clause 10(1)(b) of the
Ontario Heritage Act (Fraser, 2011).
The assessment of impacts on Protected Properties is outlined in a separate Protected Properties
Report.
Table 3: List of Protected Properties, as outlined in Section 19, O.Reg.359/09
Address/Property Name
Municipality or Approval
Authority
Type of
Designation under
the Ontario
Heritage Act
Figure #
2511 North Shore Drive - Furry Tavern
Haldimand County
Part IV, Section 29
16
1639 Rosedene Road - Comfort Barn
Township of West Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
12
2663 Moote Road - Former Moot House
Part IV, Section 29
12
139 St. Catherines Street, Smithville
Part IV, Section 29
17
205 Canborough Street, Smithville
Part IV, Section 29
17
288 Station Street, Smithville - Smithville Train Station
Part IV, Section 29
17
4966 Beam Street - Clinton Town Hall and Lincoln
Public Library
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
19
5499 Philp Road - Marlatt Farmstead
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
18
5567 Fly Road - Durham-Devries House
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
18
5053 King Street - Beam-Barnes House
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
19
4271 Queen Street - The Howard House
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
19
5600 King Street - The William D. Kitchen House
Town of Lincoln
Part IV, Section 29
19
47
Table 4: List of Properties included in council-approved Heritage Registers
Address/Property Name
Municipality
Figure #
Mount Carmel United Church (2083 Highway 3)
Haldimand County
15
Mount Carmel Cemetery (1300 Hutchinson Road)
Haldimand County
15
214 Gore A Road
Haldimand County
15
664 Marshagan/Regional Road 7
Haldimand County
15
498 Elm Tree Road East
Town of Grimsby
19
276 Main Street East
Town of Grimsby
20
Town of Grimsby
20
Town of Grimsby
20
48
5
EVALUATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES
A total of 111 cultural heritage resources (CHRs) have been identified which meet the criteria for
cultural heritage value or interest as per O.Reg.9/06. A number of these CHRs are comprised of a
collection of properties or individual resources which derive cultural heritage value or interest from
their inter-relatedness or interaction with the surrounding natural landscape as outlined in the
definition of cultural heritage landscape (Section 5.1). Due to the large scale of the Study Area,
discussion of cultural heritage resources evaluations has been divided into six geographical areas
presented in Sections 5.3 through 5.8. The Interconnector Study Area has been divided into three
geographical areas: south, central and north and is presented in Section 5.9.
5.1
Policy Framework
Built Heritage Resources (BHRs) are defined as "one or more significant 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
(OHA), or listed by local, provincial or federal jurisdictions” (MTCS, 2006c).
Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL) for the purposes of this study are: “a defined geographical
area of heritage significance which has been modified by human activities and is valued by a
community. A landscape involves a grouping(s) of individual heritage features such as structures,
spaces, archaeological sites and natural elements, which together form a significant type of
heritage form, distinctive from that of its constituent elements or parts” (MTCS, 2006b).
There are three widely accepted types of cultural heritage landscapes (better known internationally
as cultural landscapes). This typology was adopted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee in the 1992 revisions to their
Operational Guidelines which defines cultural landscapes as the “combined works of nature and of
man” (UNESCO, 2008). The Operation Guidelines identify the three types as:

Designed Landscapes: those which have been intentionally designed and created by man.
(e.g., historic gardens and parks);

Evolved Landscapes: this type includes both relict and continuing landscapes resulting
from social, economic, administrative, and/or religious imperative and has developed into its
present form as a result of its natural environmental context; and

Associative Landscapes: those with powerful religious, artistic or cultural associations of
the natural element rather than material or built cultural evidence.
49
All BHRs and CHLs identified during the course of this assessment have been assigned Cultural
Heritage Resource (CHR) numbers (e.g., CHR-1).
5.2
Area 1
Area 1 is roughly bounded by Smithville Road to the north, Vaughan Road to the south, Highway 30
and St. Ann’s Road to the east, and Caistor-Gainsborough Townline to the west (Figure 11). Table
5 summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 1 which satisfy the criteria for determining
cultural heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 1 includes the following
properties:

2474 Smithville Road, CHR-1;

2723 Port Davidson Road, CHR-2;

5777 Mataseje Road, CHR-3;

7058 Sixteen Road, CHR-4;



5711 Concession Road 4, CHR-7;

1500 Caistor-Gainsborough Townline Road, CHR-8;

6677 Silver Street, CHR-9;

6259 Silver Street, CHR-10;

Smithville Christian Reformed Cultural Heritage Landscape, CHR-11;

West Lincoln Grace United Church Cemetery, CHR-12;

Bethel United Church and Winslow Cemetery, CHR-13;

West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery, CHR-14; and

Former Rail Line, CHR-15.
50
615000
Port Davidson Road
T83
!
(
4770000
Allen Road
!
(
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Proposed Culvert
¥
©
!
(
Disconnect Switch
Twenty Mile Roa d
Temporary Laydown Area
5798 Sixteen
Road, CHR 6
!
(
Project Study Area
7058 Sixteen
Road, CHR 4
n5
T85
Port Davidson Road
Mccollum Road
ssi
o
5777 Mataseje
Road, CHR 3
!
(
Joslin Road
Co
nce



"
/
6500 Sixteen
Road, CHR 5
Sixtee n Road
West Lincoln Grace
United Church
Cemetery, CHR 12
Ro a
d 20
Cultural Heritage Resource
Patte rson Road
2723 Port
Davidson
Road, CHR 2
nal
Protected Property
!
(
4770000
Tober Road
Smithville Road
Reg
io
Shurie Road
T88
rive
Alma D
!
(
±
Legend
et
2474
Smithville
Road, CHR 1
Townline Road
Ja ne Stre
Smithville Road
Roc
k Street
Smithville
Christian
Reformed, CHR 11
Ro
ad
Woods Road
Tw
ent
y
620000
T94
d
Ro
a
ille
hv
Sm
it
Patte rson Road
Caisto r Gainsborough Road
Sil
ver
Str
e
5711 Concession
Road 4, CHR 7
!
(
et
T53
1500 Castor
Gainsborough Townline
Road, CHR 8
!
(
West Lincoln
McCaffrey
Cemetery, CHR 14
6677 Silver
Street,
CHR 9
!
(
T93
Port David son Road
T52
Former
Rail Line,
CHR 15
Silver Street
Notes
6259 Silver
Street,
CHR 10
!
(
Bismark
Streetscape,
CHR 37
!
(
Co
!
(
!
(
Concessio n 4
T81
nce
s
sio
Bethel United
Church and Winslow
Cemetery, CHR 13
n3
1.
Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N).
2.
Base features produced under license with the
3.
Orthoimagery source: First Base Solutions, Date: Spring 2010
T38
Krick Roa d
T97
T54
io n
2
T08
615000
Vaugh an Road
4765000
ess
April, 2013
160950269
Krick Road
Co
nc
ugh
Town line Caistor Gainsboro
4765000
Client/Project
Church Road
\\CD1190-F01\Work_Group\01225\active\other_pc\160950269 - Niagara Region Wind\gis\mxds\Heritage\20121003\160950269_Release_20_BHR_Map_Book.mxd
Revised: 2013-04-02 By: sarogers
T66
0
500
1:30,000
620000
1,000
m
T75
Figure No.
Title
11
Heritage Resources & Project Components
Area 1
Table 5: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Area 1
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
O.Reg. 9/06 Criteria
Design or Physical
CHR-1
CHR-2
CHR-3
2474 Smithville
Road
Justification
One and a half storey, ell-shaped Gothic Revival farmhouse
with associated contemporary agricultural outbuildings.
Unique example of board and batten Gothic Revival style.
Features: board and batten siding; enclosed front porch; and
shaped window trim.
Historical or Associative
No known associations which satisfy criterion 2, O.Reg.9/06.
Contextual
Consistent with character of the surrounding area.
Design or Physical
One and a half storey red brick farmhouse with bellcast
curved roof extending over porch along front façade. Porch
roof supported by four Doric columns, and features a cedarshingled multiple-windowed dormer. Unique example in
area of a bellcast roofline to create a substantial front
porch.
2723 Port
Davidson Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey Gothic Revival cottage with front
pillared porch and large lancet window. Original features
significantly modified. Not a rare, unique, early or
representative example of a particular style, use of materials
or method of construction. Does not demonstrate an
unusually high degree of craftsmanship, artistic merit or
scientific achievement.
5777 Mataseje
Road
Associated with Dr. J.W. Collver, a prominent local doctor in
the mid- to late-19th century, who owned the property.
Contextual
Rating
Thumbnail (full-size photos in Appendix A)
meets
criteria
Photo 1
meets
criteria
Photo 2
meets
criteria
Photo 3
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-4
CHR-5
CHR-6
7058 Sixteen
Road
Justification
Two storey Gothic Revival farmhouse with associated barns
and concrete block silo. Design features include shaped trim
around 3-over-3 hung windows, scalloped frieze around bay
window and gable bargeboard. Representative example of
Gothic Revival farmhouse style in area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey Dutch Colonial Revival-inspired
vernacular dwelling. Design features include: gambrel roof
with projecting verges; modest front door and covered
porch; and half-round attic ventilator. Relatively rare
example of Dutch Colonial Revival in area.
6500 Sixteen
Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey farmhouse. Design features include: hipped roof;
prominent, central front door with sidelights; two bow
windows on front façade; small balcony over front door; and
bracketed eaves. A representative example of vernacular
Edwardian Classicism.
5798 Sixteen
Road
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 4
meets
criteria
Photo 5
meets
criteria
Photo 6
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-7
CHR-8
CHR-9
Justification
One and a half storey gable-roofed cottage with one-storey
rear addition. Unique use of plaster exterior cladding in the
region.
5711 Concession
Road 4
1500 Caistor
Gainsborough
Townline Road
Rating
meets
criteria
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey brick farmhouse on a square plan. Design
features include: stone lintels; pyramidal roof; windows with
shaped trim and brick voussoirs; bracketed eaves; and highly
decorated wooden porch with second floor balcony.
Representative example of Edwardian Classicism-inspired
vernacular.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey gable-roofed vernacular cottage with
enclosed front porch. Central doorway and hipped dormer
with two window bays reminiscent of Italiante design. Rare
use of plaster siding for this area.
6677 Silver Street
Contextual
Photo 7
meets
criteria
Photo 8
meets
criteria
Photo 9
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-10
CHR-11
6259 Silver Street
Justification
Rating
Two storey red brick farmhouse on square plan with
associated agricultural outbuildings. Design features include
pyramidal roof, stone lintels, and central open decorated
porch. Boarded entrance indicates previous separate
entrances for men and women, an element of Orthodox
Mennonite design. Example of Pennsylvania Mennonite
architecture.
meets
criteria
Associated with the settlement of Pennsylvania Mennonite
families in the area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
A contemporary cultural heritage landscape which includes
several institutions related to the Christian Reformed and
Lutheran congregations. Although structures lack individual
design value, they demonstrate a variety of modern design
principles, including: use of precast concrete with facing
blocks and metal flashing (Smithville District Christian High
School, established 1980); monochromatic red brick with
vertical-banded window bays (Smithville Christian Reformed
Church, established 1975); reflections of traditional
decorative brickwork with contrasting brick banding and
quoins (Covenant Christian School, established 1988); and
polychromatic brickwork (St. Matthew's Lutheran Church).
Smithville
Christian
Reformed
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Contextual
Associated with the late 20th century expansion of the local
Christian community and the provision of its spiritual and
educational needs.
Comprises an evolved, continuing landscape which
represents a contemporary religious community. Adjacent
residential buildings are associated with the growth of
nearby Smithville and do not contribute to the religious
activity of the CHL.
Photo 10
meets
criteria
Photos 11-13
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-12
West Lincoln
Grace United
Church Cemetery
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Contextual
Justification
Rating
Clearly defined cultural landscape is an active cemetery that
features legible gravestones dating back to 1879. Characterdefining elements include: rock cairn memorial to the Great
War; an assemblage of grave markers and gravestones on a
flat terrain; and a mature willow. The cemetery boundary is
delineated by a chainlink fence and a few large trees and
bushes. There is a thickly forested area to the north and
northeast of the cemetery.
Associated with late 19th century development in the
community. Extant grave markers have the potential to
yield information about the community. The memorial rock
cairn includes a plaque stating, "In proud and grateful
memory of the men of this township who gave their lives for
us in the Great War of 1914-1919. Erected by the Caistor
Township Council of 1921. Erskine Lounsbury, Clark Swayze,
William Saunders, Lloyd Adams, William Grant, Earl
Packham, Fred Allan, James Orgar, Stanley Merritt. Greater
Love hath no man than this that a man lay down his life for
his friends."
meets
criteria
Is functionally and historically linked to its surroundings
through the interrment of the local community. Also
functions as a landmark.
Photos 14-16
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-13
CHR-14
Bethel United
Church and
Winslow
Cemetery Cultural
Heritage
Landscape
West Lincoln
McCaffrey
Cemetery
Justification
CHR-13 straddles Silver Street, with church on north side
and cemetery on south side of street. One storey gabled
church with attached garage addition at rear. Design
features of the church include: a few trees around the
exterior of the church; rare use of plaster cladding in the
area; three bay front facade featuring central wooden door
with pointed, stained glass transom; flanking 2-over-4
stained glass windows; three bay side facade with 2-over 2
hung stained glass windows; and missing label stone. The
cemetery is delineated by a chainlink fence and a few trees
and bushes, and features: several grave markers; and
relatively flat terrain.
community. Extant grave markers have the potential to
yield information about the community.
Contextual
Design or Physical
A clearly defined cultural landscape, cemetery features
legible gravestones dating back to 1832. Cemetery is
bordered by large, deciduous trees on three sides.
community. Extant grave markers have the potential to yield
information about the community.
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 17-18
meets
criteria
Photo 19
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-15
Justification
Rating
Former rail line converted into trail system. Attributes
include a flat, narrow gravel path set in a generally open
terrain. Not a rare, unique, early or representative example
of a particular style, use of materials or method of
construction. Does not demonstrate an unusually high
degree of craftsmanship, artistic merit or scientific
achievement.
meets
criteria
Former Rail Line
A linear cultural landscape associated with the
establishment of the Dunnville extension of the Toronto,
Hamilton & Buffalo Railway, completed in 1914.
Contextual
As a transportation corridor, the Former Rail Line is
historically linked to its surroundings.
Photo 20
5.3
Area 2
Area 2 is roughly bounded by Twenty Mile Creek Road to the north, Vaughan Road to the south,
Victoria Avenue to the east, and Highway 30/Regional Road 27 to the west (Figure 12). Table 6
summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 2 which satisfy the criteria for determining cultural
heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 2 includes the following properties:

5028 Highway 20, CHR-16;



Gainsborough S.S. No. 5, CHR-19;

1137 Gee Road, CHR-20;

4117 Vaughan Road, CHR-21;


4411 Concession Road 4, CHR-23;

Gainsborough S.S. No. 4, CHR-24;



Silverdale Community Centre, CHR-27;


4272 Twenty Mile Creek Road, CHR-29;




2467 Moote Road, CHR-33;

Hrvatski Park, CHR-34;

Lane’s Cemetery, CHR-35;

St. Ann’s Community Church and Cemetery, CHR-36;

Bismark Streetscape, CHR-37;

St. Ann’s Streetscape, CHR-38; and

Rail Line, CHR-39.
60
625000
630000
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Proposed Culvert
T79
2467 Moote
Road,
CHR 33
4326 Sixteen
Road, CHR 28
Sixtee n Ro ad
!
(
Silverdale Road
Deng o Road
Fiftee n Road
Hodg kins Roa d
Book Roa d
T56
T57
Rose dene Road
Crown Road
T27
Kilman Road
Fiftee n Road
Gainsborough
S.S. no.4,
CHR 24
T58
Rosedene Road
T04
Comfort Barn,
PP 2
Victoria Avenu e
Concessio n 4
!
(
Rail Line,
CHR 39
Metle r Road
!
(
4411 Concession
Road 4, CHR 23
Concessio n 4
Project Study Area
Notes
Tice Road
T60
T59
!
(
Brady Street
rt Road
C omfo
T28
4770000
4723 Sixteen
Road, CHR 25
Hrvatski Park Holy Cross
Croatian Parish, CHR 34
!
( 1750 Highway
20, CHR 18
1698 Highway
!
( 20, CHR 18
!
( Silverdale
Community
4724 Sixteen
Centre, CHR 27
Road, CHR 26
!
(



"
/
Sixtee n Road
!
(
!
(
4770000
!
(
¥
©
!
(
Protected Property
!
(
T80
!
(
d
R oa
Legend
Mcglasha n Stree t
Regional Road 569
St. Ann's Community
Church and
Cemetery, CHR 36
4454 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road, CHR 30
4272 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road, CHR 29
Snyd er Road
St. Ann's
Streetscape,
CHR 38
!
(
Former Moot
!
House, PP 3 (
Rose dene Road
ile
Twe nty M
!
(
Lane's
Cemetery,
CHR 35
±
Twen ty Mile Road
Road
Moote Road
Mountain Stre et
4586 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road, CHR 30
5293 Twenty
Mile Creek
Road, CHR 32
T06
1.
2.
3.
Region al Road 20
Bismark
Streetscape,
CHR 37
!
(
3976 Highway
20, CHR 22
Regional Road 20
5028 Highway
20, CHR 16
T33
T31
T76
!
(
Gainsborough S.S no.5,
CHR 19
Vaug han Road
625000
!
(
Boyle Road
Gee Roa d
T01
Schram Ro ad
Regional Roa d 27
Tintern
Campde n
Bennett Road
R oa d
T02
1137 Gee Road,
CHR 20
4117 Vaughan
Road, CHR 21
!
(
T18
Client/Project
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
0
!
(
500
1:30,000
630000
1,000
m
Title
12
Area 2
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-16
CHR-17
CHR-18
5028 Highway 20
One and a half storey Gothic Revival cottage. Design
features include: 2-over-2 hung gable window with
semicircular glazing on head of upper sash; two interior
chimneys at either end of the building; decorated
bargeboard around central front porch and gables; faux
brick cladding; and an offset front door. Representative
example of the Gothic Revival vernacular style.
Contextual
Consistent with the character of the surrounding landscape.
Design or Physical
Large, mid-19th century one and a half storey Gothic Revival
farmhouse. Representative example of Gothic Revivalinspired design in area, which features: lancet window with
sidelights; a half-round glassed attic window; highly
decorative garden wall-style brickwork; and offset, enclosed
porch with stone foundation and 3-over-1 windows.
1698 Highway 20
1750 Highway 20
Justification
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 21
meets
criteria
Contextual
Design or Physical
Small, one storey brick public utility building on a square
footprint. Building features hipped roof, central door and
minor brick detailing at corners.
Associated with the 20th century rural electrification or
development of telecommunications infrastructure. There is
cannot be
sufficient potential for it to possess historical or associative
excluded
value to warrant its exclusion as a built heritage resource.
Contextual
Does not contribute or maintain character of surrounding
area in an integral way. Not physically, functionally, visually
or historically linked to its surroundings in a demonstrable
way. Not a landmark.
Photo 22
Photo 23
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-19
Gainsborough S.S. Historical or Associative
No. 5
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-20
1137 Gee Road
Justification
Rating
One and a half storey gable-roofed red brick school house
built 1883, now a residence. Design features include: crossgabled belfry with bargeboard and finials; half-round label
stone; round window with ornate mullion; and separate
entrances for boys and girls.
Associated with the development and education of the local
community.
meets
criteria
Important in defining the character of the intersection of
Vaughn Road and Schram Road as a place of conversion and
of the rural landscape. Schools and other public buildings
were often located at crossroads, transforming intersections
into gathering places. Is historically linked to these
surroundings. Functions as a landmark.
Ell-shaped farmhouse with associated agricultural
outbuildings, including several wooden barns and early 20th
century concrete silos, on a wide setback. Not a rare,
unique, early or representative example of a particular style,
use of materials or method of construction. Does not
demonstrate an unusually high degree of craftsmanship,
artistic merit or scientific achievement.
Directly associated with Ezra Gee, an early settler to the
area, historical owner of the property, and for whom Gee
Road is named after. Associated with the early settlement of
the area.
Contextual
Photo 24
meets
criteria
Photo 25
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-21
Property
4117 Vaughan
Road
Design or Physical
One storey workshop with frontier-style façade, 3-over-2
hung windows, and a faux brick cladding over horizontal
shiplap wooden siding. Rare example of early to mid-20th
century workshop in area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-22
Justification
3976 Highway 20
Two storey, T-shaped, gable-roofed brick farmhouse and
associated agricultural outbuildings form an ell-shaped
complex set on gentle slope. House design features include
five bay front façade with 3-over-3 hung windows and skirt
roof. Large, gambrel-roofed barn includes: four shed
dormers with double doors and several window bays along
ground floor. Massing and proximity to farmhouse make it a
unique construction for the area.
Contextual
Given the massing and historical age of the buildings, as well
as the prominent setting of the property, it could be
considered a landmark.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 26
meets
criteria
Photos 27 and 28
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-23
4411 Concession
Road 4
Two storey crescent-shaped Modernist residence, set back
from road with a circular driveway. Central wing with
wraparound balcony extends from second floor over
carport. Full use of modern construction materials. A rare
and representative example of Modernist architecture in
area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-24
Justification
Gainsborough S.S.
No. 4
One and a half storey gable-roofed red brick school house
built 1893. Design features include half-round label stone,
shingled roof and overhanging eaves. Front façade features
separate entrances for boys and girls, pair of rounded lancet
windows stacked on trio of rounded lancet windows on first
floor with stone lintels, pale brick voussoirs, and shaped
transoms with stained glass lights. Side elevations features
three 3-over-3 hung window bays with pale brick detailing
around window heads.
community.
Contextual
Quintessential one room schoolhouse defines and is
historically linked to the rural landscape. Landmark.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 29
meets
criteria
Photos 30 and 31
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-25
Property
4723 Sixteen
Road
Justification
Design or Physical
Two storey multi-gabled house. Design features include
minor gable ornamentation with returned eaves, and rare
use in area of fish scale-banded shingles.
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 32
Design or Physical
CHR-26
4724 Sixteen
Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-27
Silverdale
Community
Centre
Two storey house on square plan with hipped roof. Design
features include: wraparound porch with Doric pillars and
decorated pediment over doorway; shaped trim around
hung wooden windows; gabled attic dormer with decorated
trim; decorated frieze; and hipped roof. Representative
example of Edwardian Classicism vernacular.
Contextual
One and a half storey gable-roofed building with extended
front entrance, likely former schoolhouse or church.
Building features cupola with finials, a stone foundation.
Representative example of public institution building.
Community centre is directly associated with public
gatherings and other activities of significance to the
community.
Is functionally linked to its surroundings as a place of
congregation for the community. Landmark.
meets
criteria
Photo 33
meets
criteria
Photo 34
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-28
CHR-29
CHR-30
4326 Sixteen
Road
Justification
Farm complex includes two storey Gothic Revival-inspired ellshaped farmhouse and drive-up/bank barn and silo. Barn is
monumental in scale and features a stone foundation,
gambrel roof and horizontal wood siding. A rare and early
example of large bank barn construction in area.
Contextual
Farmscape is functionally and historically linked to its
surroundings through rural, agricultural activities.
Design or Physical
One and a half storey ell-shaped Gothic Revival cottage and
associated agricultural outbuildings. Design features include:
unique diamond shingled roof; central brick chimney;
bargeboard at gable and front porch; and 4-over-3 windows.
Representative example of Gothic Revival vernacular.
4272 Twenty Mile
Creek Road
Associated with the Comfort family, historical owners of the
property and early settlers to the area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
U-shaped two storey, multiple-gabled brick farmhouse, built
1874. Design features include covered central porch, and 2over-2 windows with rounded heads.
4454 Twenty Mile
Creek Road
Contextual
Associated with N.N. Lane, an early settler to the area,
historical owner of the property, and after whom Lane
Cemetery is named.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 35
meets
criteria
Photo 36
meets
criteria
Photo 37
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-31
4586 Twenty Mile
Creek Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-32
CHR-33
5293 Twenty Mile
Creek Road
Justification
One and a half storey Dutch Revival-inspired cottage with
associated wooden barns, split rail fence and paddock.
House design features include: gambrel roof; central three
window shedded dormer; plain pediment above central
doorway supported by two sets of columns; and plaster
cladding. Door features shaped transom and is flanked by
set of double 3-over-3 hung windows on either side. Rare
use of plaster cladding on a representative example of Dutch
Revival.
Rating
meets
criteria
Two storey hipped roof brick farmhouse with associated
garage. Design features include: stone foundation; three
bays across second floor above central door with large
flanking bay windows on front facade; decorated frieze; and
plain stone lintels. Early example of Edwardian Classicisminspired vernacular.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Large farm complex featuring a one and a half storey,
multiple gable farmhouse with bellcast and skirt roof. Rare
example of bellcast roof on vernacular farmhouse.
2467 Moote Road
Contextual
Photo 38
meets
criteria
Photo 39
meets
criteria
Photo 40
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-34
Hrvatski Park
Holy Cross
Croatian Parish
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-35
Lane's Cemetery
Contextual
Justification
Parish picnic ground for Holy Cross Roman Catholic Church
in Hamilton. Fenced-in complex of contemporary buildings
with wide setback. Front gate features a modest stone and
concrete cross monument.
Directly associated with the Holy Cross Roman Catholic
Church in Hamilton. Has the potential to yield information
on the Croatian community and religious network based on
use of the site.
Cemetery set on rolling hillside, used 1791-1959. A line of
young, deciduous trees demarcates cemetery boundary.
Landscape elements include: a stone mausoleum set into
hill; several deciduous trees of varying maturity; winding
gravel roadways throughout the cemetery; and
gravemarkers.
Historically associated with John Lane, historic owner of the
property. Further associated with the late 18th and 19th
century development of the local community. Extant grave
markers have the potential to yield information about the
community.
Landmark.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 41
meets
criteria
Photos 42 and 43
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-36
Justification
Rating
Large, multiple-gabled one and a half to two-storey church
constructed in 1970s on or near site of former church on
Twenty Mile Creek Road at St. Ann's. Design features include
rectangular front elevation with large central peak and
projecting square bell tower which originally housed an
entrance. Cemetery located across the street from church
on gently rolling terrain, delineated by a line of mature trees
and bushes.
St. Ann's
Community
Church and
Cemetery
meets
criteria
Associated with 19th century development of the local
community, and in particular the St. Ann's Streetscape
Cultural Heritage Landscape. Also associated with the
Mennonite religious community.
Contextual
Landmark. Functionally and historically linked to the
surrounding community as a religious and social gathering
place.
Photos 44-47
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-37
Bismark
Streetscape
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Justification
Rating
A primarily residential cultural landscape centred on the
intersection of Silver Street and Highway 27. The Settlement
includes: a church and associated cemetery (Bismark United
Church, founded 1841); several 19th century residential and
agricultural buildings; contemporary infill that includes
residential; and agricultural structures and a school
(Gainsborough Public School, built 1965). Other characterdefining elements include a road diversion constructed in
1933.
meets
criteria
Associated with the settlement of German immigrants in the
area in mid-19th century, including Christian Sunday who
founded the settlement in 1830.
Contextual
A continuing evolved landscape which defines the character
of Bismark as crossroads settlement and a social hub for the
surrounding rural community, although its importance as a
commercial centre has lapsed. The Bismark Streetscape is
both functionally and historically linked to its surroundings.
Photos 48-51
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-38
St. Ann's
Streetscape
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Justification
Rating
A primarily residential streetscape located along St. Ann's
Road south of Twenty Mile Creek Road. Topography is
characterized by generally flat terrain which slopes down to
Twenty Mile Creek. The former Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo
Rail line intersects the streetscape at an angle south of the
Creek. Character defining elements include several narrowly
setback 19th century residential buildings located along St.
Ann's Road on either side of Twenty Mile Creek, including a
large barn associated with a 19th century inn. A
contemporary subdivision has been constructed to the east
of the streetscape along Twenty Mile Creek Road. Although
not part of the streetscape, the St. Ann's Community Church
and Cemetery located nearby on Twenty Mile Creek Road
are associated with the settlement.
Associated with Ann Frease Snyder, wife of Adam Snyder,
who first settled in the area, built a gristmill, and named the
settlement after her. Also associated with late 18th century
German immigration from the United States and local
historical settlement and development. Has the potential to
yield information about early settlement and development
patterns in region through generally intact composition and
character of streetscape.
Contextual
Streetscape comprises an evolved cultural landscape.
Although historical industrial and commercial activity has
ceased, the streetscape continues to reflect the residential
character of a small village which contrasts with the rural,
agricultural character of the neighbouring area.
meets
criteria
Photos 52-54
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-39
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
Active rail line, featuring a single set of tracks on a gravel
bed. Not a rare, unique, early or representative example of a
particular style, use of materials or method of construction.
Does not demonstrate an unusually high degree of
craftsmanship, artistic merit or scientific achievement.
A linear cultural landscape, the railway is historically
associated with the former Toronto Hamilton & Buffalo
Railroad and related themes of local economic
development, nation-building, and transportation.
Contextual
As a transportation route, the rail line is historically linked to
its surroundings.
Rail line
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 55
5.4
Area 3
Area 3 is roughly bounded by Vaughan Road to the north, Canborough Road and Dunn-Wainfleet
Townline Road to the south, Regional Road 27 and Sideroad 44 to the east, and CaistorGainsborough Townline and Marshagan Road to the west (Figure13). Table 7 summarizes the
evaluations of properties in Area 3 which satisfy the criteria for determining cultural heritage value
or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 3 includes the following properties:

7092 South Chippewa Road, CHR-40;

6479 Canborough Road, CHR-41;





6227 Elcho Road, CHR-46;

Elcho Schoolhouse, CHR-47;

5482 Elcho Road, CHR-48;

Elcho United Church and Cemetery, CHR-49; and

Robertland Academy, CHR-50.
75
76
!
(
615000
±
T38
T54
Krick Roa d
T97
Protected Property
!
(



"
/
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Proposed Culvert
¥
©
Vaugh an Road
T08
Legend
4765000
3
Krick Road
ssi
on
4765000
n ce
620000
Co
T75
T39
Co
nc
ess
ion
Former
Rail Line,
CHR 15
2
T07
!
(
oa d
Port Davidson Road
paw
aR
gh
Townline Caisto r Gainsborou
So
uth
Ch
ip
6227
Elcho Road,
Elcho United
CHR 46
Church and
Cemetery, CHR 49
T36
7092 South
Chippewa
Road, CHR 40
T09
5753 Canborough
Road, CHR 43
5468 Canborough
Road, CHR 45
!
(
!
(
Zumstein Road
5914 Canborough
Road, CHR 43
!
(
!
(
6479 Canborough
Road, CHR 41
oa d
ek R
d
on
Ro
a
Ro
bin
s
ad
Dil
tz
Ro
ga
n
et T
ow
n
ha
Wa
infle
Ma
rs
d
gR
oa
d
615000
620000
!
(
line
Ro
ad
0
Sideroad 44 Road
Ro
ad
!
(
Du
nn
1.
2.
3.
Concessio n 6
Anderson Road
Hart Road
oad
Regional Roa d 7
4760000
Cre
65049
Highway 7,
CHR 42
Yo
un
Notes
T95
Diltz Road
!
(
4760000
Ca nb
o rou g
hR
Ro
a
Project Study Area
T51
Robertland
Academy,
CHR 50
Ca
rte
r
Elcho
Schoolhouse,
CHR 47
Krick Road
Elcho Road
!
(
!
(
T74
!
(
Swayze Road
5482 Elcho
Road,
CHR 48
500
1:30,000
1,000
m
Client/Project
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
Title
13
Area 3
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-40
CHR-41
CHR-42
7092 South
Chippewa Road
Justification
Two storey T-shaped farmhouse. Design features include:
chimney in centre of roof; wraparound porch with minor
bargeboard detailing; kneewall windows; and a cluster of
three small attic windows in a closed gable. An early and
representative example of Edwardian Classicism-inspired
vernacular housing.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey gabled Georgian with associated
outbuilding. Design features include: two gable-end
chimneys; returned eaves; five bays across front facade
featuring central door with multiple transom lights; and two
bays along side elevations. A rare example of Georgian-style
architecture in the area.
6479 Canborough
Road
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 56
Contextual
Design or Physical
One storey, hipped roof barn and associated residential and
agricultural buildings. Rare example of a one storey, hipped
roof barn with vertical beam and plaster cladding and
overhanging, bracketed eaves.
65049 Highway 7
Contextual
meets
criteria
Photo 57
meets
criteria
Photo 58
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-43
CHR-44
CHR-45
5914 Canborough
Road
Justification
One and a half storey Gothic Revival cottage. Design
features include bargeboarding, and shaped trim around
windows and doors. Dual front entrances are a design
features associated with Pennsylvania Mennonites. Rare
example of Pennsylvania Mennonite design.
Associated with local settlement of Pennsylvania
Mennonites.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey brick Gothic Revival cottage. Design
features include: porch across front facade with bargeboard
and wooden columns; and stone lintels and keystones on
window. Presence of bricked up second front door is a
design feature associated with Pennsylvania Mennonites. A
rare example of Pennsylvania Mennonite design.
5753 Canborough
Road
Associated with local settlement of Pennsylvania
Mennonites.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey multiple-gabled brick farmhouse on narrow lot
along Chippewa Creek (Welland River), near Wellandport.
Design features include white stone quoins, wraparound
porch, and associated outbuilding. Rare use of stone quoin
detailing in the area.
5468 Canborough
Road
Associated with the Dils family, historic owners of the
property and early settlers in the area.
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 59
meets
criteria
Photo 60
meets
criteria
Photo 61
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-46
CHR-47
CHR-48
6227 Elcho Road
Justification
One and a half storey ell-shaped Gothic Revival farmhouse
with associated agricultural outbuilding. Design features
include: a bay window with bracketed eaves; gable
bargeboarding; and shaped trim around windows and bay
window. Representative example of Gothic Revival
vernacular.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One storey gable-roofed schoolhouse with wooden belfry,
brick chimney, and four bay side elevations. Front façade
features a central window, and offset front door suggests
there may have been two doors originally. Representative
example of educational institution design.
Elcho
Schoolhouse
community.
Contextual
Landmark.
Design or Physical
Two storey stone farmhouse on square plan with associated
agricultural outbuildings. Rare use of stone in construction
of residence.
5482 Elcho Road Historical or Associative
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 62
meets
criteria
Photo 63
meets
criteria
Photo 64
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-49
CHR-50
Elcho United
Church and
Cemetery
Justification
One and a half storey brick church with one storey side
addition to rear, and associated cemetery, situated on the
banks of Beaver Creek. Features three bay front façade with
rounded windows and set of wooden double doors with
shaped transom. Representative and early example of
religious architecture in area. Cemetery features headstones
set in a terrain which gently slopes to creek, and is bounded
by line of deciduous trees and bushes which provide
moderate to heavy tree cover along the northern and
eastern boundaries of the cemetery, moderate tree cover
along the southern and southwest boundaries, and little to
no tree cover along the northwestern boundary of the
cemetery.
Contextual
Landmark.
Design or Physical
Canada's only military-style private boarding school for
boys, Robertland Academy was established in 1978. Site
features complex of several low, long, barrack-style
buildings set in generally flat, open, terrain with a few trees.
A unique example of private boarding school modeled after
a military complex. Site is bounded by agricultural fields, a
large wooded lot, and the Chippewa Creek (Welland River).
Robertland
Academy
Contextual
As a large educational complex located along a small rural
road, the property functions as a landmark.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 65-67
meets
criteria
Photo 68
5.5
Area 4
Area 4 is roughly bounded by Vaughan Road to the north, Riverside Drive and Concession 6 to the
south, Victoria Avenue to the east, and Regional Road 27 to the west (Figure 14). Table 8
summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 4 which satisfy the criteria for determining cultural
heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 4 includes the following properties:

74221 Creek Road, CHR-51;

1187 Heaslip Road, CHR-52;

Bethel Community Church, CHR-53;


Boyle Brethren in Christ Church, CHR-55;

5205 Freure Road, CHR-56;


Riverside Christian Reformed Church, CHR-58;

Wellandport United Reform Church, CHR-59;


83610 Old River Road West, CHR-61;

Wellandport Church of Christ, CHR-62;

72587 River Road, CHR-63;

72170 River Road, CHR-64;

Wellandport Streetscape, CHR-65;

Wellandport/Riverside Cemetery, CHR-66; and

4891 Canborough Road, CHR-67.
83
84
!
(
630000
1187 Heaslip
Road, CHR 52
Heaslip Road
T55
T32
!
(
T78
T34
T35
±
Boyle Brethren
in Christ
Church, CHR 55
Elcho Road
E as t C
hip
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Proposed Culvert
!
(
Old Riv
er R
Project Study Area
Wiley Road
Sumbler Road
oa d
Riv
ers
i
de
Dr
iv
Ol
dR
i ve
Chantler Road
rR
e
oa
d
Eas
t
!
(
Melte r Road
Kilts Roa d
Robertson Road
Henderson Road
Gracey Road
Wellandport
Church of
Christ, CHR 62
C hip
paw
aR
oad
72587 River
Road, CHR 63
!
(
Web ber Roa d
Farr Street
Dochstader Road
72170 River
Road, CHR 64
We
lla
nd
po
rt
Traver Road
Farr Road
Elsie Road
Concessio n 6
Victoria Avenu e
Putman Road
Marr Road
Smith Road
0
Wilford Road
625000
Farr Road
Wing er Rd 32
Wella ndport Road
Perry Road
T10
Victoria Avenu e
!
(
Ro
ad
!
(
paw
aR
oad
Church, CHR 58
74015
Highway 4,
CHR 60
500
1:30,000
630000
Riv
er
Ro
a
d
Notes
4760000
83610 Old
River Road
W, CHR 61
Welland port Roa d
Sideroad 42 Roa d
T37
Foss Road
T29
Wellandport
United Reform
Church, CHR 59
T95
4760000
Community
Church, CHR 53
!
( Riverside
!
( Christian Reformed
!
(
Sideroad 42
!
(



"
/
Victoria Avenu e
oad
ek R
Cre
Conce ssion 1
Boyle Road
84008 Highway
4, CHR 57
ad
h Ro
oug
bo r
n
Ca
4891
Canborough
Road, CHR 67
Wellandport/Riverside
Cemetery, CHR 66
74221 Creek
Road,
CHR 51
d 63
Shedd en Road
5205 Freure
!
( Road, CHR 56
Wellandport
Streetscape, CHR 65
!
(
d
3974 Canborough
Road, CHR 54
Gee Roa d
io Fre
na
ure R
o ad
lR
oa
d
27
a
al R o
R oa
Protected Property
!
(
T03
Collver Road
R
eg
ugh
b o ro
Ca n
Legend
!
(
!
( Bethel
Gee Roa d
!
(
Canbo ro Road
!
(
n
Re gio
4765000
!
(
¥
©
(
4117 Vaughan !
Road, CHR 21
Boyle Road
4765000
Gainsborough S.S
no.5,
Vaug han Road
CHR 19
Farr Street
625000
1.
2.
3.
Client/Project
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
1,000
m
Title
14
Area 4
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-51
CHR-52
Justification
One and a half storey Gothic Revival cottage, central front
porch with pediment and gable bargeboarding. Rare use of 2over-4 lancet window with dual sidelights in area.
meets
criteria
74221 Creek Road
1187 Heaslip
Road
Rating
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey, irregular-shaped hipped roof brick farmhouse.
Design features include: porches with bargeboard detailing;
decorated frieze; bracketed eaves; and unique brickwork
pattern detailing on front of house. Unique example of
brickwork and bargeboard detailing on vernacular
farmhouse in study area.
Contextual
Photo 69
meets
criteria
Photo 70
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-53
Property
Bethel
Community
Church
Justification
Design or Physical
One storey gabled-roofed church located at the intersection
of Gee and Elcho Roads, established 1885. Design features
include: three bay front façade; central double front doors
with shaped transom; and 2-over-2 hung rounded wooden
windows with paneled trim. Representative example of rural
religious institution design in the area.
Associated with the 19th century development and religious
education of the local community. Potential to reveal
information on the local religious community through
exterior and interior architectural design.
Contextual
Defines the character of the intersection as a place of
conversion and of the rural landscape: schools and other
public buildings were often located at crossroads,
transforming intersections into gathering places. Is
historically linked to these surroundings by its location at
the intersection of Gee and Elcho Roads. Functions as a
landmark.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 71
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-54
3974 Canborough
Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-55
CHR-56
Justification
Rating
One and a half storey gable-roofed cottage featuring three
bay shed dormer, 1-over-1 windows and plaster siding. Rare
use of plaster cladding in the study area.
meets
criteria
Photo 72
Single storey gable-roofed church. Relocated to current
position: originally the Zion Church, built 1899 in Pelham.
Representative example of Pennsylvania Mennonite
Meetinghouse architecture.
Boyle Brethren in
Christ Church
meets
criteria
Associated with the local Mennonite community.
Contextual
Landmark.
Design or Physical
Two storey gabled-roofed farmhouse. Design features
include two bay front façade, large wraparound porch and
exterior plaster cladding. Rare use of plaster cladding in the
area.
5205 Freure Road
Contextual
Photo 73
meets
criteria
Photo 74
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-57
CHR-58
CHR-59
84004 Highway 4
Rating
Former Wellandport Christian School, closed in 2009.
Established in 1958, it was affiliated with nearby Riverside
Christian Reformed Church. Central two storey gable-roofed
hall with one storey flanking wings with modern windows
and cladding. Playground and sports fields to rear of
property.
meets
criteria
Associated with the development and education of local
Christian community.
Contextual
Functions as a landmark.
Design or Physical
Established 1952, T-shaped church features belfry, five bay
lancet windows along side elevation, and one storey rear
extension. Church was affiliated with the former
Wellandport Christian School, located nearby.
Riverside
Christian
Reformed Church Historical or Associative
Wellandport
United Reform
Church
Justification
Associated with the settlement and development of Dutch
Calvinists in the local community.
Contextual
Landmark
Design or Physical
Modern brick church consisting of one storey hexagonal
front hall with pyramidal roof, central spire and gabled front
section, with one storey rear wing.
Associated with the development of a local religious
community.
Contextual
Photo 75
meets
criteria
Photo 76
meets
criteria
Photo 77
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-60
CHR-61
CHR-62
Justification
One storey gabled-roofed structure, board and batten
construction with wood cladding. Appears to be two
boarded up front doors which suggest former use by
Pennsylvania Mennonites. There is sufficient potential for it
to possess design value to warrant its exclusion as a built
heritage resource.
74015 Highway 4
83610 Old River
Road West
There is sufficient potential for it to possess historical or
associative value with regard to the Mennonite community
to warrant its exclusion as a built heritage resource.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey gable-roofed brick house in the style of Colonial
Revival. Three bay front facade featuring central front door
with modest portico and 3-over-2 hung windows. Relatively
rare and representative example of Colonial Revival design.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Modest one storey gable-roof church with extended,
covered front entrance. Features chimney to rear of
building, 3-over-2 hung lancet windows, and three bay side
facades. May date to 19th century.
Wellandport
Church of Christ
Associated with the development and religious education of
the local community.
Contextual
Landmark
Rating
cannot be
excluded
Photo 78
meets
criteria
Photo 79
meets
criteria
Photo 80
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-63
CHR-64
72587 River Road
72170 River Road
Justification
Two storey brick farmhouse. Design features include hipped
roof with widow's walk, bracketed eaves, broken pediment
surrounding round attic window, and central front porch
with bargeboarding. Rare example of Italianate design in the
area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey Gothic Revival style duplex with two
front gables. Features 2-over-2 hung windows, and porch
across front façade with bargeboarding. Rare example of
double length house in the area.
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 81
meets
criteria
Photo 82
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-65
Wellandport
Streetscape
Justification
Rating
The streetscape includes a number of buildings of individual
design value on the north shore of the Welland River at the
intersection of Canborough Road and Highway 27. The
streetscape includes examples of mid-19th century
commercial architecture, a mid-20th century community
centre (Wellandport Community Centre), and a range of
residential architectural styles ranging from modest one
storey cottages to two storey Georgian, Victorian, and
Edwardian Classicism-inspired houses.
Associated with the early settlement of Welland Township,
and commercial and industrial development of Wellandport
community due to construction and operation of the
Welland Canals.
Contextual
Comprises a designed landscape which represents a 19th
century riverside community. Although residential buildings
have been added throughout the history of the community,
they are generally compatible with their surrounding
landscape and represent the continuing evolution of the
CHL.
meets
criteria
Photos 83-87
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-66
Wellandport
(Riverside)
Cemetery
Rating
Active cemetery dating back to late 18th century. Set on
bank of Chippewa Creek (Welland River), landscape is
characterized by gravemarkers set on a gently rolling terrain
and bordered by a fence and line of mature trees. The site
may also include the location of one of the first, logconstructed schools in Wellandport (Welland History, 2012).
meets
criteria
Associated with the historical development of the local
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-67
Justification
4891 Canborough
Road
Contextual
Clark Agricultural Services. A modern agricultural complex
with several large steel silos constructed for the storage and
distribution of grain, fertilizer and other agricultural
products. Not a rare, unique, early or representative
example of a particular style, use of materials or method of
construction. Does not demonstrate an unusually high
degree of craftsmanship, artistic merit or scientific
achievement.
Represents the contemporary activity of feed and crop seed
sales, a historic and continuing function associated with
Wellandport as a centre of activity for the local agricultural
community.
As a large commercial agricultural complex located just
outside Wellandport on an otherwise predominantly rural
road, property functions as a landmark.
Photos 88 and 89
meets
criteria
Photo 90
5.6
Area 5
Area 5 is roughly bounded by Dunn Wainfleet Townline Road and Concession 5 to the north,
Booker Road to the south, Hendershot Road to the east, and Marshagan Road to the west (Figure
15). Table 9 summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 5 which satisfy the criteria for
determining cultural heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 5 includes the
following properties:

663 Marshagan Road, CHR-68;

238 Gore A Road, CHR-69;

554 Hines Road, CHR-70;

54051 Wellandport Road, CHR-71;

44088 Hendershot Road, CHR-72;


365 Jenny Jump Road, CHR-74;




62 Booker Road, CHR-78;

362 Booker Road, CHR-79;

Mount Caramel United Brethren Church, CHR-112;

Mount Caramel Cemetery, CHR-113;

214 Gore A Road, CHR-114; and

664 Marshagan Road, CHR-115.
95
96
!
(
620000
d
t To
wn
line
663 Marshagan
Road, CHR 68
!
(
Dil
tz
664 Marshagan
Road, CHR 115
Ca
lve
rt
Ro
Ro
ad
238 Gore
A Road,
CHR 69
ad
Legend



"
/
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
!
(
!
( 214 Gore
A Road,
CHR 114
!
(
Protected Property
!
(
Proposed Culvert
¥
©
d
Ro
ad
Ro
a
flee
Sidero ad 44 Road
Ca
rte
r
±
T37
Wa
in
Anderson Road
Yo
un
gR
oa
Du
nn
625000
Wilford Road
Concessio n 5
T72
oa
d
T41
54051
Wellandport
Road, CHR 71
re
Go
Shafley Road
T11
T91
Hin
es
Ro
a
d
T12
Zion Road
Wella ndport Road
AR
!
(
Smith Road
554 Hines
Road,
CHR 70
!
(
Project Study Area
for
t
Ro
ad
T19
4755000
T82
!
(
44067
Hendershot
Road, CHR 73
!
(
Sider Road
Flana gan Road
li
wn
To
o
ins
tch
Hu
Hend ersho t Road
T65
!
(
Mount
Carmel Cemetery,
CHR 113
il
nv
d
oa
n
Du
nR
ne
!
(
44088
Hendershot
Road, CHR 72
Buckn er Road
y3
Mount Carmel United
Brethren Church, CHR 112 !
(
1943 Highway
1855
3, CHR 75
Highway 3,
!
(
CHR 76
le
in f
Wa
!
(
o
Cr
n
hli
a
Ro
wn
Ju
ny
Jen
R
mp
oad
!
(
Jenny Jump
Road,
CHR 74
t
T42
lee
1668
Highway 3,
CHR 77
g
lau
Mc
Notes
Bell Road
T84
ad
d
Ro
T89
T98
!
(
k
Boo
ad
Ro
Mu
mb
y
0
an
Ro
ad
T62
620000
R oa
d
500
d
oa
h
Pot
1,000
m
1:30,000
625000
2.
3.
April, 2013
160950269
tR
d
Roa
!
(
1.
Client/Project
lee
en
A ik
362 Booker
d
Road,
R oa
ker
CHR 79 Boo
f
ain
W
on
oad
ille
d
oa
Inm
ult
Mo
er R
62 Booker
Road,
CHR 78
v
nn
Du
ad
eR
Ro
k
na
Bir
d
s
ttle
Ra
hw a
Hig
4755000
Co
m
Ma
rs
ha
ga
n
Ro
ad
T13
Abbey Road
Figure No.
Title
15
Area 5
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-68
CHR-69
CHR-70
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
One storey gable-roofed cottage with wooden siding and
original windows. Property includes wooden vertical board
barn at rear of property and modern one-storey bungalow.
An early example of simple cottage-style construction in
area.
Associated with the establishment and growth of Moulton
Station, the Canada Southern Railway and the Great
Western Loop Line Railway.
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey ell-shaped farmhouse, features
enclosed front porch with wood framing and wine bottles
set in plaster. Unique employment of wine bottle and
plaster detailing.
663 Marshagan
Road
238 Gore A Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey vernacular farmhouse. Design features
include enclosed front porch with 3-over-1 windows and
plaster cladding. Rare use of plaster cladding in area.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 91
meets
criteria
Photo 92
meets
criteria
554 Hines Road
Contextual
Photo 93
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-71
CHR-72
CHR-73
54051
Wellandport
Road
Justification
Two storey ell-shaped farmhouse. Design features include:
wraparound porch; uniquely shingled gable pediment; and
faux stone cladding. Unique use of gable and exterior
cladding materials in area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey multiple-gabled brick farmhouse. Design
features include large wraparound porch with pediment
over doorway and columns set on stone pillars. Unique
example in area of large, dominant porch on farmhouse.
44088
Hendershot Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
One storey gable-roofed cottage with additions. Features
rare use of plaster cladding.
44067
Hendershot Road
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 94
meets
criteria
Photo 95
meets
criteria
Photo 96
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-74
365 Jenny Jump
Road
Justification
One and a half storey vernacular residence with rear wing.
Design features include 2-over-5 windows, and plaster
cladding with half timbering detail. Rare example of plaster
cladding.
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 97
Design or Physical
CHR-75
CHR-76
1943 Highway 3
Two storey, ell-shaped brick farmhouse with gabled roof.
Design features include: dentils on bay windows and front
porch, alternating pale and red brick voussoirs on windows,
and bargeboard detailing on porch. Representative example
of Edwardian Classicism-inspired vernacular, and rare
example of dichromatic brickwork in general area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey multiple-gabled farmhouse. Design features
include: wraparound porch; 2-over-2 hung windows; and
pair of small, narrow windows in attic gables. Rare example
of small attic windows which may suggest a Pennsylvania
German design.
1855 Highway 3
Possibly associated with Pennsylvania German settlement in
the area.
Contextual
meets
criteria
Photo 98
meets
criteria
Photo 99
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-77
CHR-78
CHR-79
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
One storey cinder block commercial or industrial building,
features large 4-over-3 picture window. Appears to be a rare
example of early- or mid-20th century garage.
Set on Highway 3 (the former Talbot Trail route), a pioneer
settlement road constructed in the mid-19th century.
Property is associated with the widespread adoption of the
automobile and evolution of the historic transportation
route, most significantly after the 1927 construction of the
Peace Bridge between Fort Erie and Buffalo which increased
traffic along road to Dunnville.
Contextual
Supports the character and function of area as
transportation route.
Design or Physical
Two storey ell-shaped Gothic Revival farmhouse and
associated agricultural outbuildings. Design features include:
stucco or plaster siding; minor bargeboard detailing on
porch; and shaped window trim. Rare use of plaster exterior
cladding.
1668 Highway 3
62 Booker Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
One and a half storey gabled roof vernacular cottage. Design
features include: plaster siding; offset front door; small attic
window with triangular attic vent above. Rare use of plaster
exterior cladding in the area.
362 Booker Road
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 100
meets
criteria
Photo 101
meets
criteria
Photo 102
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
The one and a half storey brick building is constructed on a
rectangular plan, with a gabled roof. Design features
include: a labelstone; multiple-paned hung windows with
round brick headers and stone sills; and a brick chimney
Haldimands County's Heritage Register, Approved by
Coluncil on October 20, 2004.
Contextual
CHR-112 2083 Highway 3
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 103 - 107
Design or Physical
CHR-113
1300 Hutchinson
Road
Contextual
The property consists of a small cemetery bordered by a
wire fence with brick corner posts, gravemarkers dating to
the late 19th century, and several large trees along
Hutchinson Road
meets
Haldimands County's Heritage Register, Approved by Council criteria
on October 20, 2004.
Photos 108 - 114
Design or Physical
The wooden vertical board barn is constucted on an "L"
shape plan, with a gambrel roof.
Haldimands County's Heritage Register, Approved by Council
Contextual
CHR-114 214 Gore A Road
meets
criteria
Photo 115 - 118
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
664 Marshagan
CHR-115
Road
Justification
Design or Physical
One and a half storey gable-roofed cottage with wooden
siding and original windows. An early example of simple
cottage-style construction in area. Modern addition added
to rear of cottage.
Haldimands County's Heritage Register, Approved by Council
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 119 - 122
5.7
Area 6
Area 6 is roughly bounded by Highway 3 and Bell Road to the north, Rymer Road and Lakeshore
Road to the south, Burkett Road and Dunnville Wainfleet Townline to the east, and Moulton Aiken
Road to the west (Figure 16). Table 10 summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 6 which
satisfy the criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06.
Area 6 includes the following properties:

55 Moulton Aiken Road, CHR-80;

753 Inman Road, CHR-81;

928 Canal Bank Road, CHR-82;

228 Feeder Bank Road, CHR-83;

Former Schoolhouse, CHR-84;

2307 North Shore Drive, CHR-85;

12698 Mittelstadt Road, CHR-86;

12822 Minor Road, CHR-87;

Stromness Streetscape, CHR-88;

Sherbrook Baptist Church and Highbanks Cemetery, CHR-89;

Welland Feeder Canal, CHR-90;

Lowbanks Streetscape, CHR-91; and

Gord Harry Trail CHL, CHR-92.
103
104
d
ille
f
ain
W
rL
e
an
T45
T44
To
wn
l in
e
!
(
North Shore Drive
4750000
d
T49
T23
!
(
12698
Mittelstadt
Road, CHR 86
12822 Minor
Road, CHR 87
!
(
Lak esh ore Ro ad
Ro
ad
De r
ne r
L
in e
!
(
2307 North
Shore Drive,
CHR 85
Furry
Tavern,
PP 1
Notes
d
oa
4745000
lla
d
!
(
Hoto Line
Vil
le
Ro
a
Former
schoolhouse,
CHR 84
Pyle Road
ine
Project Study Area
Mo haw
k Po
int
R
Dickhout Road
King Road
Downey Road
Siddall Road
Sherbrooke Baptist
Church and
Highbanks Cemetery,
CHR 89
Niece Road
L
Gu ll
T61
Farr Road
Stromness
Streetscape,
CHR 88
Proposed Culvert
Lowbanks
Streetscape,
CHR 91
T22
T05
Rymer Road
4745000
e
Fe
rC
de
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Concessio n 1
Gord Harry
Trail, CHR 92
T21
!
(
Disconnect Switch
T24
T14
!
(
228 Feeder Bank
Road,
ad
Ro
l
a
CHR 83
an
oa
rR
no
Mi
T48
T43
T46
T47



"
/
Burkett Road
d
nR
oa
ike
4750000
Mo
ult
o
nA
d
d
ad
l Ro
ana
er C
eed
F
th
Sou
Daley Ditch Road
R oa
C
Minor Road
ank
al B
Can
e
ed
Fe
928 Canal
Bank Road,
CHR 82
R oa
T16
T20
Protected Property
!
(
ad
!
(
T99
Legend
Gibson Road
Ro
ank
al B
Can
5
der
Fee
ad
l Ro
ana
son
chin
Hut
an
753 Inman
Road, CHR 81
th
Nor
ad
Abbey Road
Sidero ad 30
io
Reg
d6
R oa
nal
ad
Ro
!
(
55 Moulton
Aiken Road,
CHR 80
oad
h
h
Nort
d
oa
Welland Feeder
Canal, CHR 90
I nm
rR
R
t
Sou
oad
Ro
tR
d
oa
T96
ad
nR
Ro
lee
o
ins
tch
Hu
Bir
d
T63
de
F ee
der
th Fee
Nor
oad
der
Fee
Sideroad 26
R oa
Abbey Road
v
nn
Du
h
Pot
R
der
Fee
±
Gilmo re Road
d
362 Booker
Road,
CHR 79
T62
Wills Road
!
(
d
R oa
Pettit Road
d
oa
d
Roa
eR
a
Ro
wn
en
A ik
Case Road
k
na
o
Cr
n
ulto
Mo
ker
Boo
ad
Sider Road
oad
s
ttle
Ra
Ju
ny
Jen
R
mp
Ro
630000
Flana gan Road
ker
Boo
625000
¥
©
!
(
620000
1.
2.
3.
Client/Project
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
0
500
1,000
m
Title
1:40,000
620000
625000
630000
16
Area 6
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-80
CHR-81
CHR-82
55 Moulton Aiken
Road
Justification
Two storey farmhouse on square footprint. Design features
include: hipped roof with unique asphalt shingling; three bay
front façade with second floor central door and balcony;
entabulature window trim; and stucco or plaster cladding.
Rare use of plaster cladding in general area.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey brick farmhouse on square footprint. Design
features include: a three bay front façade with central door
and balcony on second floor; shaped window trim; and
bracketed eaves. Balcony features Classically-inspired
pediment with carved tympanum, decorated eaves and
ornate capitals. Representative example of Edwardian
Classicism-inspired vernacular, featuring rare and unique
use of ornate balcony pediment.
753 Inman Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey ell-shaped brick farmhouse. Design features
include: highly contrasting brick and mortarwork; decorated
fascia; three bay front facade; offset front door with side
and transom lights; and tall, narrow attic window. Rare and
early example of Italianate-inspired design.
928 Canal Bank
Road
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 103
meets
criteria
Photo 104
meets
criteria
Photo 105
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-83
228 Feeder Canal
Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-84
CHR-85
Former
Schoolhouse
2307 North Shore
Drive
Justification
Two storey gable roof building featuring hortizonal wood
siding on gable end, with board and batten. Design features
include a round wooden attic ventilator, and addition of
enclosed front entrance and windows. Currently a
residence, but appears to be former warehouse. Early
example of commercial building construction for the area.
Rating
meets
criteria
Associated with the 19th century commercial activities of
Stromness and the historic development of the Welland
Feeder Canal.
Contributes to the character of the area around Stromness
as a 19th century commercial hub.
One storey hipped roof brick building. Features central
triangular dormer with projecting bellfry and spire. Original
structure heavily modified with introduction of new
entrances and windows. Representative example of rural
school institution.
community.
Contextual
Landmark.
Design or Physical
One and a half storey Gothic Revival cottage. Features three
bay front façade, 3-over-2 hung windows with shaped trim,
and tiled siding. Unique example of large, square,
overlapping exterior shingle cladding.
Contextual
Photo 106
meets
criteria
Photo 107
meets
criteria
Photo 108
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-86
CHR-87
Property
Justification
Rating
Design or Physical
Farm complex at end of a long driveway includes two storey
multiple-gabled house and two storey gambrel roof barn.
House design features include: pedimented front porch; set
of three windows in front gable; shaped window trim; and
board and batten siding. Associated barn appears to be
adapted for residential use and features: extended covered
front entryway with central door; large 2-over-2 windows
cannot be
with curved pediments; and board and batten siding. There excluded
is sufficient potential for it to possess design value to
warrant its exclusion as a built heritage resource.
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey farmhouse on square footprint with faux stone
cladding. Design features include large, pedimented front
porch with columns set on fieldstone base and supports.
Rare example of faux stone cladding and dominant
fieldstone and column porch on farmhouse in the area.
12698 Mittelstadt
Road
12822 Minor
Road
Contextual
Photo 109
meets
criteria
Photo 110
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-88
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
CHL 17 is a streetscape on the south side of the Welland
Feeder Canal at the intersection of North Shore Road and
Feeder Canal Road, where the canals from Dunnville and
Port Maitland converge. Characterized by a mix of building
design and types with narrow setbacks along North Shore
Road, and extends approximately halfway to Rymer Road.
While most buildings are residential, CHL also includes a two
storey gable-roofed 19th century commercial building with
front porch across front facade, and a large, two storey brick
building with hipped roof (Sherbrooke Community Centre).
Associated with the mid-19th century development of
Stromness, originally known as Broad Creek, which was
established during the construction of the Welland Feeder
Canal. Streetscape is further associated with Lachlan
McCallum, a Canadian MP and Senator, who settled in
Stromness in 1855 and started several businesses there
including a hotel, cheese factory and store, mills, and a
shipbuilding business. Streetscape is also historically
associated with a larger cultural heritage landscape, the
Welland Feeder Canal, constructed 1832.
Contextual
Streetscape comprises an evolved cultural landscape.
Although historical industrial and commercial activity has
ceased, the streetscape continues to reflect the residential
character of a small settlement.
Stromness
Streetscape
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 111-113
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-89
Sherbrooke
Baptist Church
and Highbanks
Cemetery Cultural
Heritage
Landscape
Justification
Rating
CHL 18 straddles North Shore Drive, with the church on the
north side and cemetery on the south. Established in 1842,
the one storey gable roof brick church features: one storey
addition to rear; labelstone; four bay side elevation; three
bay front façade; central door with pointed transom and
tracery, and projecting front entryway. Cross hung windows
feature pointed heads with Y tracery. Cemetery boundary is
clearly delineated by line of trees and bushes, and features
headstones set on a generally open, gently sloping terrain.
Representative example of rural religious architecture.
meets
criteria
community. Potential to yield information as a result of the
extant grave markers.
Contextual
A defined landscape whose design and construction is a
distinct reflection of religious practice. Landmark.
Photos 114 and 115
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-90
Welland Feeder
Canal Cultural
Heritage
Landscape
Justification
Constructed in conjunction with the first Welland Canal
beginning in 1829, the Welland Feeder Canal CHL is a 40
kilometer waterway built to convey water from the Grand
River at Dunville to the Welland Canal. It was later enlarged
to function as a shipping channel, and an additional
terminus at Port Maitland was constructed, merging with
the canal at Stromness. No longer in use, the Welland
Feeder Canal features an excavated waterway with roads
running along either side, now generally overgrown with
vegetation. Parts of the canal have been filled in to allow for
the construction of roads. The Feeder Canal extends beyond
the boundaries of the Study Area to terminate at Dunnville
and Port Maitland to the southwest, and at Welland to the
northeast.
The Feeder Canal is associated with the construction of the
Welland canal system as part of the 19th century
development of the Great Lakes transportation system. The
Feeder Canal is further associated with the establishment
and growth of several settlements and heritage properties
along the Feeder Canal, including the Stromness Streetscape
CHL.
Contextual
As a manmade engineering work, the Feeder Canal
constitutes a clearly defined linear landscape.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 116-118
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-91
Lowbanks
Streetscape
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Contextual
Justification
Lowbanks is one of the oldest settlements in Moulton
Township, having been founded in 1772 by Lawrence Furry
from Pennsylvania. Settlement was named Lowbanks with
the establishment of a post office in 1865 and refers to the
lowlying shoreline of the area, as compared to the higher
banks in Sherbrooke Township. Streetscape is located on the
shore of Lake Erie and extends along Lakeshore Road, from
North Shore Drive to beyond the Study Area boundaries.
Area has been increasingly used as a summer cottage and
tourist destination, which is primarily reflected in the
lowscale character and narrow lots of properties on both
sides of the road. Cottages reflect a mix of design and
construction dates (many appear to have been built in the
early 20th century), and are generally of simple design, and
one to two stories in height. Streetscape features beach
stone retaining walls and significant vegetation along
variating terrain. Institutions include: some tourist-related
businesses; the contemporary Lowbanks Community Centre;
several churches (Lowbanks Community of Christ and Bethel
United Reform Church); and the Lowbanks Cemetery,
located on the southern side of the road on the shoreline.
the Lowbanks Streetscape also features more substantial
buildings associated with the historic settlement and
agricultural development of area, including the two storey
wood Furry Tavern (a designated property, built 1821) and
the two storey brick Moses Minor Century Farm.
Associated with the late 18th century settlement of United
Empire Loyalists. Primarily associated with the growth of
recreation, tourism and cottaging since the early 20th
century.
A continuing evolved landscape which reflects both historic
and contemporary functions as a primarily cottaging
community. Shoreline is generally rocky, with a few small,
gravel beaches, and still reflects the low shorebanks for
which the area is named.
Rating
meets
criteria
Photos 119-127
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-92
Gord Harry Trail
Cultural Heritage
Landscape
Justification
Rating
Former rail line converted into trail system. Features
include: flat, gravel or dirt pathway; gated entrances where
trail crosses roadways; and thick vegetation cover from
trees and bushes along each side of the trail. Not a rare,
unique, early or representative example of a particular style,
use of materials or method of construction. Does not
demonstrate an unusually high degree of craftsmanship,
artistic merit or scientific achievement.
A linear cultural landscape, the trail is associated with the
former Buffalo and Lake Huron (Grand Trunk) Railroad and
historical themes of local economic development, nationbuilding, and transportation.
Contextual
As a transportation corridor which has been in use since the
mid-19th century, the Gord Harry Trail is functionally and
historically linked to its surroundings.
meets
criteria
Photo 128
5.8
Area 7, Interconnector Study Area
Area 7 is roughly bounded by Lake Ontario to the north, Townline Road to the south, Sann Road to
the east, and Park Road South to the west (Figures 17 through 20). Given that impacts from the
proposed interconnector line are more localized than those of other Project components, such as
the wind turbine generators, survey of the Interconnector Study Area was limited to potential
transmission routes. Table 11 summarizes the evaluations of properties in Area 7 which satisfy the
criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06. Area 7,
Interconnector Study includes the following properties:

564 Kemp Road, CHR-93;

592 Kemp Road, CHR-94;

4516 Mountainview Road, CHR-95;


5432 King Road, CHR-97;

3263 South Grimsby Road 3, CHR-98;

Organized Crime Winery, CHR-99;

Angels Gate Winery, CHR-100;

Thirty Bench Winemakers, CHR-101;

Rosewood Estates, CHR-102;





Andrewes Farm Limited, CHR-107;

324 Thirty Road, CHR-108;



Aure Wines (3749 Walker Road), CHR-111;

498 Elm Tree Road East, CHR-116;

276 Main Street East, CHR-117;

321 Main Street East, CHR-118; and

326 Main Street East, CHR-119.
115
116
4775000
Twenty Road
±
R oa
Range Road 2
b
Grims
So uth
d7
y R oa
ill
4775000
hv



"
/
!
(
it
Sm
oa
eR
Protected Property
!
(
d 20
2474
Smithville
Road, CHR 1
Legend
o ad 7
l
na
g io
Re
yR
Grimsb
So uth
d
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
Proposed Culvert
¥
©
615000
od
Wo
s
20
ad
Ro
oa
d
ins
ad
Ro
al R
isto
Ca
a
rG
gh
ro u
bo
ad 6
by R o
Grims
So uth
Re
gio
n
615000
Project Study Area
T88
4770000
T83
dg e
Drive
Driv
e
Sw
n
de
G
ar
!
(
et
re
Stre et
Bro ck
Sp rin g
ue
S
Cliffo rd
ee t
St Ca tharin e
Str
e
ree
St
n
da
3.
t
en
Av
ue
Al
a
m
ive
Dr
n R o ad
u
en
Av
et
ple
Ma
ry
er
Ch
Lin
tre
e
Ave nu
d
y R oa
ad
4770000
eS
Du ffe rin
a
Skyw
!
(
Ro
!
(
uri
Sh
n
Ja
d
oa
eR
nue
n Ave
2.
Lo n do
ad
Ro
tre e t
d
n
so
a
Ro
Po
id
av
rt D
p so
Th om
1.
Ro a d
Cre ek
A ve n
Former Rail
Line, CHR 15
ne
n
ee
6500 Sixteen
Road, CHR 5
2723 Port
Davidson
Road, CHR 2
Notes
Smithville
et
n S tre
Sta tio
Train
Station, PP 6
Co lle
g e S tre et
!
(
et
Stre
tree t
sS
Elli
tree t
Ro ck S
li
wn
To
is
Dav
St
ent
Cres c
f in
Gr if
139
St. Catherines Street,
PP 4
t
Stre e
Silver
Wa y
an
Mo rg
205 Canborough
ad Street, PP 5
oug h Ro
C an bor
k
Ho rna
ay
b erg W
d
n
!
(
t
ee
Str
t
ee
a
Ro
A utum
e
r
lve
Co
tree t
a ra S
Ba rb
Str
um
Dr iv
ad
ou d en
Van W
en ue
Wallis Av
s
llin
Ki
ll
co
Mc
uth
rth
Circle
o
oa d S
5
S arah
We
e
R
Wa d e
R o ad
No rt
h ri
ll C
ew e
F ar
D riv
st S
tr e
et
d
Smithville
Christian
Reformed, CHR 11
va rd
o
oa d N
Co urt
a
Ro
Acre s
ille
To
r
be
ad
Ro
B ou le
R
Wa d e
o
La s R
ay
ze
hv
le
Oa kd a
t
Six
it
Sm
n
Gold e
Wes
tlea
res
ce
nt
by
Grims
So uth
Client/Project
d
rk Ro a
ial P a
In d ustr
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
0
500
1:15,000
1,000
m
Title
17
Interconnector Study Area, South
sby
Grim
So uth
d7
R oa
th
So u
oa d
Legend
±
R
Pa rk
Protected Property
!
(



"
/
Disconnect Switch
Existing Met Tower
L
%
by R
Proposed Culvert
¥
©
o ad
6
ie
So b
4775000
s
Grim
So uth
d
Ro a
t
Eas
620000
p
Ke m
d
Ro a
E ast
t
tre e
!
(
S
Mu d
324 Thirty
Road,
CHR 108
Project Study Area
305 Thirty
Road
CHR 109
th
So u
s
Grim
by R
o ad
5
!
(
Th irty
d
Ro a
!
(
g
You n
d
Ro a
s
Cla y
on R
oa d
Notes
a
W
h
ut
So
3263 South
Grimsby Road
3, CHR 98
r im
G
y
sb
a
Ro
ro
irb
Fa
the
rR
ad
Ro
3
o ad
le
nk
Ko
3.
ad
Ro
!
(
7
d
Ro a
!
(
y
Fl
0
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
ad
Ro
500
1:15,000
4775000
2.
Client/Project
n
ssio
e ek
g Cr
ce
Co n
Marlatt
Farmstead,
PP 8
Durham-Devries
House, PP 9
620000
1.
lp
by R
d
i
Ph
Aure Wines 3749 Walker
Road, CHR 111
3
s
Grim
oa
rR
lk e
d
oa
d
!
(
So uth
Sp rin
et
Stre
ty
Th ir
1,000
m
Title
18
Interconnector Study Area, Central
4780000
620000
Elm
e
Tre
d
Ri
ge
t
a
Ro
d
st
Ea
The William
D. Kitchen
House, PP 12
tre e
Elm
Ro
tre e t
rv
ad
Se
Ro
h
e
ut
y So
wa
gh
Hi
Kin g
S
Proposed Culvert
vic
Rid
ge
Existing Met Tower
r
Se
ice
a
Ro
d
!
(
Project Study Area
w
Qe
Ro a d
Wa lker
620000
Disconnect Switch
th
t
Eas
ad
Hi
y
wa
gh
d
!
(
!
(
tin
l en
Va
nt
ou
M
a
Ro
w
v ie
ain
L
%
4649
Mountainview
Road, CHR 104
4516
Mountainview
Road, CHR 95
5432 King
Street,
CHR 97
4367 Thirty
Road,
CHR 110



"
/
rt h
No
ad
Ro
r
No
Ro
!
(
oad
yR
4717
Mountainview
Road, CHR 106
4560
Mountainview
Road, CHR 103
Thirty Ro ad
ad
Ro
in vie w
M ounta
4673
Mountainview
Road, CHR 105
Protected Property
!
(
Andrewes Farm
Limited,
CHR 107
w
Qe
tre e
Elm
oa
a st
dE
w
ie
i rty
Th
!
(
ad
498 Elm Tree
Road East,
CHR 116
oR
305 Thirty
Road
CHR 109
re
G
d
oa
l
en
e
an
564 Kemp
Road,
CHR 93
Li
dw
oo
ed
d
C
a
Ro
M
ea
ne
La
on
Thirty Bench
Winemakers,
CHR 101
k
oo
br
ar
i
Un
nip
Ju
d
La
ne
M
ul
ne
La
be
r ry
d
oa
r ra
Te
ce
rd
ay
W
t
en
esc
Cr
R
en
G
at
e
ge
e
nu
N
th
or
ga
1.
2.
3.
te
d
Ar
y
eja
u
en
Av
e
y
nr
He
ey
e rl
ev
d
e
Av
e
rtl
tt
625000
r
co
Ba
et
ue
0
on
re
St
n
Ave
C
ue
en
Av
Client/Project
Ro
a
n
St
re
et
r in
fe
uf
D
h
Jo
le
Ma p
Q
ue
en
ive
le R
oad
Dr
Kon
k
d
ne
La
a
te
s
e
e
Av
e
nu
i
nn
De
ue
Ca
a
rri
ue
B
4780000
e
Av
n
ic
M
en
Av
el
ha
ue
en
Av
n
ve
o
ks
et
ist
a
lA
tr a
en ue
E as t Av
et
Stre
t
dr
n
Ce
Clinton Town Hall
and Lincoln Public
Library, PP 7
t
ee
r
ou
on
an
ex
Beam-Barnes
House,
PP 10
c
Ja
re
St
r
Ch
he
op
rC
u
en
Av
Al
s
t
ta in
nd
e
re
et
re
et
n
Mo u
n
xo
!
(
St
re
St
Hi
Str
r ou
St
et
re
er
m
Ca
d
ue
irg
ay
M
St
es
ad
Ro
an
am
illi
W
a rl
Ch
h
be t
za
St
ilp
Ph
m
er
r iv
e
en
Av
nt
!
(
iv e
Park Dr
D
e
Cr
e
sc
The Howard
House,
PP 11
E li
!
(
m
m
Zi
e
et
re
ke
oo
g
lla
Vi
e
e
St
a
Dr
tw
ar
r D riv
iv
Dr
Fa
d
e
bau
rk
Pa
ue
en
ue
oa
R
and
G
eo
rg
es
d
oa
ven
st A
We
!
(
Hig
hl
R
Av
io
ar
nt
O
rd
va
H
et
re
del
St a
Marlatt
Farmstead,
PP 8
ch Lane
bir
er
le
ay
W
lv
Si
y
or
e
u
Bo
ng
Ki
nu
ve
cA
St
us
e
e
Notes
se n
ck
Hi
e
n
a
ar
m
Ta
Frie
es
m
Ho
u
en
Av
so
im
Cr
d
eo
c
Lo
an
tL
t
ur
od
tre e t
o
kw
Oa
S
Kin g
cl
M
Organized
Crime Winery,
CHR 99
Hillview Dr iv
Co
er
We
lt m
an
Angels Gate
Winery,
CHR 100
ue
Ga
d
en
Av
e
nu
a
Ro
n
ol
nc
e
Av
er
!
(
592 Kemp
Road,
CHR 94
Rosewood
Estates,
CHR 102
W
a lk
!
(
n
ou
M
v
in
ta
Legend
th
or
¥
©
E as
R
252 Thirty
Road,
CHR 109
t
Thir
R
N
ad
Ro
±
ad
Ro
am
rh
Du
d
oa
e
nu
nt
ce
es
Cr
500
1,000
m
1:15,000
625000
April, 2013
160950269
Figure No.
Title
19
Interconnector Study Area, North
620000
Qe
Av e
nue
Legend
±
tlet t
ay
w
Bar
h
ig
e
er
De
th
Nor
H
nu
Av
en
oa d
w
ve
ll
k
Pa r
Pa r
ue
k
B oo
en
tt Av
R
oad
ue
tle
Ba r
So
mu
Sa
oa d
n tr a
kR
Ce
el
l Av
Pa r
u th
en u
Ro
ad
!
(
!
(
Protected Property
/
"
L
%
Existing Met Tower
¥
©
A
er
Tu
Be
kR
t
ur
Co
Lak
tr
eS
ra d
P la
ce
e
Driv
oo
ryw
e et
C on
ca t
(
!
a ne
rs L
oa d
Hi
ri
k D
ve
ay
Tom
w
aha
w
gh
kR
Bo o
w
V
Qe
e
intn
r
Che
ue
ve n
dA
Disconnect Switch
Proposed Culvert
e
Mus
276 Main
Street East,
CHR 117
Project Study Area
s
Go
lf W
oo d
e
Driv
M
n
ai
St
h
Ea
ut
et
So
re
rv
Se
st
e
La n
ice
ad
ad
Ro
wh e
Arr o
yon
sce
Cre
nt
a ce
r
Te r
Ke n
D riv
e
ce
ren
Law
Ave
nu e
(
!
net
b er
Dr
ive
al C
Vid
Ca
ou
326 Main
Street East,
CHR 119
rt
(
!
Notes
gS
sli n
Rie
Iroqu ois Tr
et
t re
ail
ra D
1.
2.
3.
riv e
620000
fe
Vina
ce
nay Pla
Cha rdon
April, 2013
160950269
Client/Project
King Street
V:\01225\active\other_pc\160950269 - Niagara Region Wind\gis\mxds\Heritage\20121003\160950269_Release_20_BHR_Map_Book_fig20.mxd
321 Main
Street East,
CHR 118
Figure No.
0
50
1:5,000
100
m
20
Title
Interconnector Study Area, Northwest
Table 11: Evaluation of Cultural Heritage Resources and Landscapes, Interconnector Study Area
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
CHR-93
Property
Justification
Design or Physical
The Villa Bacchus bed and breakfast, built in 1976 as the
former residence of the Comisso family. Character-defining
features include the large, two storey estate house and the
manicured gardens in its immediate setting which
contribute to its Italian Villa design.
Associated with the Comisso family, who operated one of
the largest supermarket chains in southern Ontario in the
mid to late-20th century.
Contextual
Although the style of architecture is not consistent with
typical rural Ontario, its setback, scale and soft landscaping
elements are consistent with the character of the
immediately surrounding vineyard landscape.
564 Kemp Road
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 149
CHR-94
592 Kemp Road
Design or Physical
Two storey gable-roofed house. Design features include five
bay front façade with central portico and wide doorway,
suggesting Georgian design. Representative example of
Georgian-influenced architecture.
Contextual
meets
criteria
Photo 150
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-95
CHR-96
CHR-97
4516
Mountainview
Road
Justification
Rating
Niagara Presents Specialty Foods store and processing plant.
Multiple-gabled brick building appears to incorporate
former schoolhouse. Design elements include: brickwork
detailing around eaves, gable, and windows of front
elevation; and labelstone which reads "School Section No. 2
Clinton 1902". School facade a unique example in area of
early 20th century rural schoolhouse design.
meets
criteria
Associated with the provision of education to the local early
20th century settlement.
Contextual
Historically linked to its surroundings as a former
schoolhouse location.
Design or Physical
Large, one and a half storey Gothic Revival brick house.
Design features include: finials and gable bargeboard
bargeboarding; prominent central doorway with side and
transom lights; and a biforate rounded lancet window. A
unique and representative example of Gothic Revival
vernacular design with three front gables.
252 Thirty Road
Contextual
Design or Physical
Two storey hipped roof farmhouse on a square footprint.
Design features include: three bay front façade with central
first and second storey doors and 3-over-2 hung windows;
wraparound porch; chimneys on opposing exterior walls;
and plaster cladding. Rare use of plaster exterior cladding in
area.
5432 King Street
Contextual
Photo 151
meets
criteria
Photo 152
meets
criteria
Photo 153
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-98
3263 South
Grimsby Road 3
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-99
Organized Crime
Winery CHL (4043
Mountainview
Road)
Contextual
Design or Physical
Angels Gate
Winery CHL (4260
CHR-100 and 4262
Mountainview
Road)
Contextual
Justification
Rating
Former Grimsby Union school Section 7, built 1865.
Currently being converted into residence. One storey stone
building with gabled roof and small, one storey rear
addition, set among mature deciduous trees on a small rise.
Design features include: three bay front facade with central
meets
doorway; original wood frame windows and wood label
criteria
plate on front facade; and a simple cornice.
community.
Quintessential one room schoolhouse defines and is
historically linked to the rural landscape. Functions as a
landmark.
Organized Crime Winery (4043 Mountainview Road)
includes one and a half storey modern residence and wine
bar and associated vineyards. Landscape characterized by
the rolling terrain of the Niagara Escarpment, and is located
in the Beamsville Bench wine-growing sub-appellation.
Associated with the development of the wine-making and
meets
other fruit-growing industries in the Niagara area, one of the
criteria
oldest and largest wine-growing regions in Canada.
As an evolved landscape, CHL 22 demonstrates a unique
relationship between the natural environment and the socioeconomic practices associated with wine-growing through
its cultivated vineyards. Supports character of the area as a
wine-making and fruit-growing region.
Angels Gate Winery CHL (4260 and 4262 Mountainview
Road) includes one storey gabled-roof residence, large
Italian Villa-inspired winery estate house and associated
vineyards. Landscape characterized by the rolling terrain of
the Niagara Escarpment, and is located in the Beamsville
Bench wine-growing sub-appellation.
meets
other fruit-growing industries in the Niagara area, one of the criteria
wine-making region.
Photo 154
Photo 155
Photos 156 and 157
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
Thirty Bench
Winemakers CHL
CHR-101 (4281
Mountainview
Road)
Contextual
Design or Physical
Rosewood Estates
CHL (4352
CHR-102
Mountainview
Road)
Contextual
Justification
Rating
Thirty Bench Winemakers CHL (4281 Mountainview Road)
includes one storey cottage and large, one storey gableroofed winery estate house, and associated vineyards.
Landscape characterized by the rolling terrain of the Niagara
Escarpment, and is located in the Beamsville Bench winegrowing sub-appellation.
meets
criteria
Photo 158
Rosewood Estates (4352 Mountainview Road) includes
several buildings which form an estate, and associated
vineyards. Landscape characterized by the rolling terrain of
the Niagara Escarpment, and is located in the Beamsville
Bench wine-growing sub-appellation.
As an evolved landscape, Rosewood Estates (4352
Mountainview Road) demonstrates a unique relationship
between the natural environment and the socio-economic
practices associated with wine-growing through its
cultivated vineyards. Supports character of the area as a
meets
criteria
Photo 159
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
4560
CHR-103 Mountainview
Road CHL
Design or Physical
Agricultural CHL includes two storey hipped-roof brick
farmhouse and associated orchards. Landscape
characterized by the flat terrain of the Lincoln Lakeshore subappellation and the glacial Lake Iroquois Plain, a distinctive
micro-climate in the Niagara Region, located between the
Escarpment and Lake Ontario.
Contextual
Design or Physical
4649
Road CHL
Justification
Rating
meets
criteria
As an evolved landscape, 4560 Mountainview Road
demonstrates a unique relationship between the natural
environment and the socio-economic practices associated
with fruit-growing through its cultivated orchards. Supports
character of the area as a wine-making and fruit-growing
region.
Agricultural landscape includes one and a half storey
multiple-gabled farmhouse with plaster cladding, an
outbuilding and associated orchards. Landscape
characterized by the flat terrain of the Lincoln Lakeshore subappellation and the glacial Lake Iroquois Plain, a distinctive
micro-climate in the Niagara Region, located between the
Escarpment and Lake Ontario.
Contextual
region.
Photo 160
meets
criteria
Photo 161
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
Agricultural landscape includes one and a half storey
gambrel-roofed vernacular house and associated orchards.
Landscape characterized by the flat terrain of the Lincoln
Lakeshore sub-appellation and the glacial Lake Iroquois
Plain, a distinctive micro-climate in the Niagara Region,
located between the Escarpment and Lake Ontario.
Contextual
with fruit-growing through its cultivated orchards. Suppors
region.
4673
Road CHL
Justification
Design or Physical
Agricultural landscape includes: one and a half storey crossgambrel roof house; a one and a half store ell-shaped
vernacular farmhouse; various outbuildings; and associated
orchards. Landscape characterized by the flat terrain of the
Lincoln Lakeshore sub-appellation and the glacial Lake
Iroquois Plain, a distinctive micro-climate in the Niagara
Region, located between the Escarpment and Lake Ontario.
Contextual
region.
4717
Road CHL
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 162
meets
criteria
Photo 163
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
Andrewes Farm
Limited CHL (4764
CHR-107
Mountainview
Road)
324 Thirty Road
CHR-108
CHL
Justification
Rating
Agricultural landscape consists of a primarily fruit-producing
625 acre farm. Landscape characterized by the flat terrain of
the Lincoln Lakeshore sub-appellation and the glacial Lake
Iroquois Plain, a distinctive micro-climate in the Niagara
Region, located between the Escarpment and Lake Ontario.
oldest and largest wine-growing regions in Canada. Further
associated with Scotch Block, a historic, mid-19th century
settlement of Scots in which the farm is located.
Contextual
As an evolved landscape, this CHL demonstrates a unique
relationship between the natural environment and the socioeconomic practices associated with fruit-growing through its
cultivated fields and orchards. Supports character of the
area as a wine-making and fruit-growing region.
Design or Physical
CHL includes one and a half storey plaster cladded Gothic
Revival cottage and associated vineyards. Landscape
characterized by the rolling terrain of the Niagara
escarpment, and is located in the Vinemount Ridge winegrowing sub-appellation.
Contextual
As an evolved landscape, 324 Thirty Road demonstrates a
unique relationship between the natural environment and
the socio-economic practices associated with wine-growing
through its cultivated vineyards. Supports character of the
meets
criteria
Photo 164
meets
criteria
Photo 165
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
305 Thirty Road
CHR-109
CHL
Design or Physical
CHL 32 includes two storey vernacular farmhouse and
associated orchards and vineyards. Landscape characterized
by the rolling terrain of the Niagara Escarpment, and is
located in the Vinemount Ridge wine-growing subappellation.
Contextual
the socio-economic practices associated with wine-growing
through its cultivated vineyards. Supports character of the
Design or Physical
CHR-110
Justification
4367 Thirty Road
CHL
Contextual
Rating
meets
criteria
Photo 166
CHL 33 includes two storey vernacular farmhouse,
agricultural outbuildings including a one storey gabled stone
shed and associated vineyards. Landscape characterized by
the rolling terrain of the Niagara Escarpment, and is located
in the Beamsville Bench wine-growing sub-appellation.
the socio-economic practices associated with fruit-growing
through its cultivated fields and orchards. Supports
region.
meets
criteria
Photo 167
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-111
Aure Wines (3749
Walker Road)
Contextual
Design or Physical
CHR-116
498 Elm Tree
Road East
Justification
Rating
Cultural heritage landscape. Aure Winery is a small winery
which has been in operation since 2007. The landscapes
include a small vineyard, the remains of a concrete silo and
stone foundation building, and several barns and other
buildings associated with wine production. Landscape
characterized by the gently rolling terrain of the Niagara
Escarpment, and is located in the Vinemount Ridge winegrowing sub-appellation.
meets
criteria
As an evolved landscape, the Aure Wines Cultural Heritage
Landscape demonstrates a unique relationship between the
natural environment and the socio-economic practices
associated with wine-growing through its cultivated
vineyards. Helps to support character of the area as a winemaking and fruit-growing region.
The two storey brick building is a former schoolhouse or
church, now converted into a residence. The building
consists of a main structure, constructed on a rectangular
plan with a hipped roof, and a two storey square addition
with a hipped roof. Value defining features include a
rounded bell tower; a front door with sidelights and a
returned eave portico; and stone banding, sills, and lintels
Town of Grimsby’s Heritage Register, approved by Council
on February 4, 2008
Contextual
Photo 168
meets
criteria
Photo 169
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-117
276 Main Street
East
Justification
Rating
The property includes a two storey building on a square
plan, with a hipped roof, large front porch, and frontispiece
on February 4, 2008
Contextual
meets
criteria
Photo 170
Design or Physical
CHR-118
321 Main Street
East
This property appears to have recently been replaced with a
TSC Store.
on February 4, 2008
Contextual
Removed
meets
criteria
Photo 171
Cultural
Heritage
Resource
Number
Property
Design or Physical
CHR-119
Justification
Rating
The property features a two storey brick building on a wide
setback. Value defining features include an irregular,
multiple-gabled roof, attic window with rounded transom
and sidelights, and a large, wraparound porch.
326 Main Street
East
meets
criteria
on February 4, 2008
Contextual
Photo 172
6
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
A total of 111 cultural heritage resources have been identified which satisfy the criteria for
determining cultural heritage value or interest as outlined under O.Reg.9/06 (Tables 5 through 11).
Potential Project-related negative impacts have been assessed for each of the resources that have
been evaluated as meeting the criteria for cultural value or interest. Methodology for this
assessment is outlined in Section 1.3.2.
6.1
Area 1
Area 1 is roughly bounded by Smithville Road to the north, Vaughan Road to the south, Highway 30
and St. Ann’s Road to the east, and Caistor-Gainsborough Townline to the west (Figure 11). Table
12 summarizes the assessment of potential Project impacts on identified built heritage resources
and cultural heritage landscapes in Area 1.
No potential visual impacts have been identified with respect to significant views of or from cultural
heritage resources or views from public spaces, such as cemetery grounds which directly or
indirectly obstruct cultural heritage values of identified resources. Three cemeteries have been
noted within Area 1: Winslow Cemetery; West Lincoln Grace United Church Cemetery; and West
Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery. Winslow Cemetery and West Lincoln Grace United Church cemetery
are considered to have sufficient tree cover around their perimeters to provide a visual barrier
between the cemetery grounds and Project components (see Appendix A, Photos 16, 17 and 19).
This assessment considered the potential for overhead transmission infrastructure to have a
negative visual impact on adjacent structures, specifically: 6500 Sixteen Road (CHR-5); 5711
Concession Road 4 (CHR-7); and 6677 Silver Street (CHR-9) (Figure 11). Transmission lines
supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located throughout the general Study Area (Appendix
A, Photo 9). This type of transmission line has become a ubiquitous feature of the rural landscapes
in Southern Ontario. Although additional poles, if required, will be taller than existing poles, the
introduction of transmission infrastructure which is generally consistent with existing infrastructure
will not have a negative impact on the overall character of the area. With respect to the obstruction
of views from any additional poles which may be required, these visual impacts would be localized
to specific vantage points where additional poles would be situated directly between the viewer and
the landscape. As such, any direct obstruction from overhead transmission infrastructure is not
considered to be of significant magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
In the case of West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery (CHR-14), there is a potential for new above
ground transmission infrastructure to directly obstruct views of the cemetery. At present, the
cemetery is characterized by its treed perimeter along its northern, western, and southern edges
which provide a backdrop for the gravemakers – the sole built components of the cemetery. The
eastern edge of the cemetery, fronting on Port Davidson Road, is completely open (Appendix A,
134
Photo 19). In order to best preserve views of the cemetery landscape, it is recommended that any
overhead transmission infrastructure installed along Port Davidson Road in the vicinity of the West
Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery be installed on the east side of the road.
Potential indirect impacts related to damage from construction vibrations were identified for 6500
Sixteen Road (CHR-5), 5711 Concession Road 4 (CHR-7), and 6677 Silver Street (CHR-9). The
effect of traffic and construction vibrations on historic period structures is not fully understood;
however, negative effects have been demonstrated on buildings with a setback of less than 40 m
from the curbside (Crispino and D’Apuzzo, 2001; Ellis, 1987; Rainer, 1982; Wiss, 1981). In this
case, the former Mount Carmel United Brethren Church is narrowly setback and falls within the 50
m bufferzone used by this assessment to identify potential indirect impacts resulting from Projectrelated construction vibrations within the road allowance. Although not planned at present, in the
event that collector and/or transmission lines are installed below-grade, it is recommended that
construction be avoided within 50 m of any structure on these properties. If construction within a 50
m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum acceptable vibration levels, or peak particle velocity
(PPV) levels, should be determined by a qualified engineer with built heritage experience under
similar circumstances. Construction within 50 m of CHR-5, CHR-7 and CHR-9 should be monitored
to ensure that PPV levels are not exceeded. All construction activities should cease, should levels
be exceeded.
Potential direct impacts related to alteration or damage to the Former Rail Line (CHR-15) were
identified for instances where Project components (i.e., collector lines) intersect the rail line (Figures
11 and 13). There is a potential for the installation of any new collector or transmission
infrastructure to alter the heritage character of the former rail line and associated components (i.e.,
extant bridges or culverts, areas where rail ties may remain). Alteration to the former rail corridor
should be avoided to the greatest extent possible.
135
Table 12: Summary of Impact Assessments, Area 1
Destruction
Alteration
Shadows
Isolation
Obstruction of Views
Change in Land Use
Potential Negative Impact
CHR-1
2474 Smithville Road
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
No further mitigation recommended.
CHR-2
2723 Port Davidson Road
1
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-3
5777 Mataseje Road
1
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-4
7058 Sixteen Road
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR #
Address/Name
Area #
CHR-5
6500 Sixteen Road
1
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-6
5798 Sixteen Road
1
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-7
5711 Concession Road 4
1
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-8
1500 Caistor-Gainsborough Townline Road
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
Recommended Mitigation
• Avoid construction within a 50 m bufferzone of
structures on the property;
• in the event that construction within a 50 m
bufferzone cannot be avoided, it is recommended that
maximum acceptable vibration, or peak particle
velocity (PPV), levels be determined by a qualified
engineer prior to Project construction and that
construction activities be monitored to ensure that
maximum PPV levels are not exceeded.
I = potential negative impact, irreversible; R = potential negative impact, reversible; N = no identified negative impact
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-9
6677 Silver Street
1
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-10
6259 Silver Street
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-11
Smithville Christian Reformed Cultural Heritage Landscape
1
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-12
West Lincoln Grace United Church Cemetery
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-13
Bethel United Church and Winslow Cemetery
1
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-14
West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery
1
N
N
N
N
I
N
CHR-15
Former Rail Line
1
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Overhead transmission lines along Port Davidson
should be installed on the east side of the road in the
vicinity of the West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery
• Ensure construction avoids damage to or removal of
identified heritage attributes.
6.2
Area 2
Area 2 is roughly bounded by Twenty Mile Creek Road to the north, Vaughan Road to the south,
Victoria Avenue to the east, and Highway 30/Regional Road 27 to the west (Figure 12). Table 13
summarizes the assessment of potential Project impacts on built heritage resources and cultural
heritage landscapes in Area 2.
The majority of built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes in Area 2 are situated in
locations where no negative Project-related impacts are expected. No potential visual impacts have
been identified with respect to significant views of cultural heritage resources or views from public
spaces, such as cemetery grounds. Although two cemeteries have been noted within Area 2,
Lane’s Cemetery and St. Ann’s Community Cemetery, both are located far from visible Project
components; Lane’s Cemetery is approximately 3000 m north of Turbine 52 and St. Ann’s
Cemetery is approximately 2000 m north of Turbine 27. At distances of greater than 2000 m, the
Project will not have a significant visual impact on views from either cemetery (Figure 12).
Potential indirect impacts on structural integrity of cultural heritage resources or attributes resulting
from construction vibrations were identified for five built heritage resources and components of
three cultural heritage resources, including:

5028 Highway 20 (CHR-16);



1137 Gee Road (CHR-20);

4411 Concession Road 4 (CHR-23);

Hrvatski Park (CHR-34);

The Bismark Streetscape (CHR-37); and

The St. Ann’s Streetscape (CHR-38).
All of the cultural heritage resources and landscapes noted above are located along proposed
collector lines (Figure 12). At present, transmission lines supported on monopoles of varying sizes
are located throughout the general Study Area (Appendix A, Photos 21 through 23, 44 and 46, 48
through 51, and 53 through 54). This type of transmission line has become a ubiquitous feature of
the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario. Although additional poles, if required, will be taller than
existing poles, the introduction of transmission infrastructure which is generally consistent with
138
existing infrastructure will not have a negative impact on the overall character of the area. With
respect to the obstruction of views from any additional poles which may be required, these visual
impacts would be localized to specific vantage points where additional poles would be situated
directly between the viewer and the landscape. As such, any direct obstruction from overhead
transmission infrastructure is not considered to be of significant magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
Although not expected, in the event that new collector lines are installed below-grade, it is
recommended that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structures associated with these
cultural heritage resources. If construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum
acceptable vibration levels, or peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a
qualified engineer with built heritage experience under similar circumstances. Construction within
the 50 m bufferzone should be monitored to ensure that PPV levels are not exceeded. All
construction activities should cease, should levels be exceeded.
Potential direct impacts related to alteration or damage to the Rail Line were identified for instances
where Project components (i.e., collector lines) intersect the rail line (Figure 12). There is a potential
for the installation of any new collector infrastructure to alter the heritage character of the rail line
and associated components (i.e., bridges or culverts, rail ties). Alteration to the rail corridor should
be avoided to the greatest extent practicable.
139
CHR-16
CHR-17
5028 Highway 20
1698 Highway 20
2
2
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
R
R
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
CHR-18
1750 Highway 20
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-19
Gainsborough S.S. No. 5
2
N
N
N
N
R
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-20
1137 Gee Road
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-21
4117 Vaughan Road
2
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-22
3976 Highway 20
2
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-23
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-24
Gainsborough S.S. No. 4
2
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-25
4723 Sixteen Road
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-26
4724 Sixteen Road
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-27
Silverdale Community Centre
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-28
4326 Sixteen Road
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-29
4272 Twenty Mile Creek Road
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-30
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-31
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-32
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
2
Isolation
2467 Moote Road
Area #
Shadows
CHR-33
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
structures within the Cultural Heritage Landscape;
CHR-34
Hrvatski Park
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-35
Lane’s Cemetery
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-36
St. Ann’s Community Church and Cemetery
2
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-37
Bismark Streetscape
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-38
St. Ann’s Streetscape
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-39
Rail Line
2
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Ensure construction avoids negative impacts to
identified heritage attributes
6.3
Area 3
Area 3 is roughly bounded by Vaughan Road to the north, Canborough Road and Dunn-Wainfleet
Townline Road to the south, Regional Road 27 and Sideroad 44 to the east, and CaistorGainsborough Townline and Marshagan Road to the west (Figure13). Table 14 summarizes the
assessment of potential Project impacts on built heritage resources and cultural heritage
landscapes in Area 3.
Potential visual impacts have been identified for views from the cemetery at Elcho United Church.
Project components in the vicinity of the church and cemetery include:

Turbine 7 approximately 900 m to the northeast;

Turbine 39 approximately 1100 m to the northwest; and

Turbines 09 and 51 are located approximately 1500 m and 1250 m to the southwest,
respectively (Figure 13).
Although there is moderate tree cover to the southwest of the church and cemetery (Appendix A,
Photo 65), the northeast and northwest of the cemetery are generally open, with little tree cover
(Appendix A, Photo 66). There is a potential for Turbines 7 and 39 to cause a visual obstruction for
users of the cemetery. In order to minimise the potential visual impact on views from the Elcho
United Church Cemetery (CHR-49), it is recommended that the proponent work with the Elcho
Cemetery Board to design and install an appropriate visual barrier around the cemetery to protect
views from within the cemetery (e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
Potential visual impacts were considered for six built heritage resources and components of one
cultural heritage resource located along proposed transmission lines, including:

6479 Canborough Road (CHR-41);



6227 Elcho Road (CHR-46);

The Elcho Schoolhouse (CHR-47);

5482 Elcho Road (CHR-48); and

The Elcho United Church (a component of CHR-49).
144
Presently, transmission lines supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located throughout the
general Study Area (Appendix A, Photo 65 and 68). This type of transmission line has become a
ubiquitous feature of the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario. Although additional poles, if
required, will be taller than existing poles, the introduction of transmission infrastructure which is
generally consistent with existing infrastructure will not have a noticeable negative impact on the
overall character of the area. With respect to the obstruction of views from any additional poles
which may be required, these visual impacts would be localized to specific vantage points where
additional poles would be situated directly between the viewer and the landscape. As such, any
direct obstruction from overhead transmission infrastructure is not considered to be of significant
magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
Potential indirect impacts with respect to construction vibrations have been identified for these six
resources located along potential transmission and collector infrastructure and as a result of the
potential construction lay-down site directly east of 5753 Canborough Road (CHR-44). It is
recommended that construction activities be avoided within 50 m of any structures associated with
these cultural heritage resources. If construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided,
maximum acceptable vibration levels, or peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined
by a qualified engineer with experience working with built heritage resources under similar
circumstances. Construction within the 50 m bufferzone should be monitored to ensure that PPV
levels are not exceeded. All construction activities should cease, should levels be exceeded.
145
Change in Land Use
3
Isolation
7092 South Chippewa Road
Area #
Shadows
CHR-40
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-41
6479 Canborough Road
3
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-42
65049 Highway 7
3
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-43
CHR-44
3
3
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
N
R
N
N
CHR-46
CHR-47
CHR-48
6227 Elcho Road
Elcho Schoolhouse
5482 Elcho Road
3
3
3
Change in Land Use
3
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
CHR-45
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
N
N
R
R
R
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-49
Elcho United Church and Cemetery
3
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Work with the Elcho Cemetery Board to design and
install an appropriate visual barrier around the
cemetery to protect views from within the cemetery
(e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
structures on the church;
CHR-50
Robertland Academy
3
N
N
N
N
R
N
6.4
Area 4
Area 4 is roughly bounded by Vaughan Road to the north, Riverside Drive and Concession 6 to the
south, Victoria Avenue to the east, and Regional Road 27 to the west (Figure 14). Table 15
summarizes the assessment of potential Project impacts on built heritage resources and cultural
heritage landscapes in Area 4.
No potential visual impacts have been identified with respect to significant views of cultural heritage
resources or views from public spaces, such as cemetery grounds. Although one cemetery is
located within Area 4, the Wellandport (Riverside) Cemetery, the nearest visible Project component
is Turbine 95, located approximately 1500 m southwest of the cemetery (Figure 14). The cemetery
is surrounded by trees to the south and west (Appendix A, Photo 88). Given the distance of the
cemetery to the Project and the visual barrier created by trees to the south and west, the Project will
not have a negative impact on views from the cemetery.
Potential negative impacts related to proposed transmission lines were identified for seven
resources:

74221 Creek Road (CHR-51);

Bethel Community Church (CHR-53);



Riverside Christian Reformed Church (CHR-58);

Wellandport United Reform Church (CHR-59); and

Wellandport (Riverside) Cemetery (CHR-66).
Transmission lines supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located throughout the general
Study Area (Appendix A, Photo 72). This type of transmission line has become a ubiquitous feature
of the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario. Although additional poles, if required, will be taller than
existing poles, the introduction of transmission infrastructure which is generally consistent with
existing infrastructure will not have a negative impact on the overall character of the area. With
respect to the obstruction of views from any additional poles which may be required, these visual
impacts would be localized to specific vantage points where additional poles would be situated
directly between the viewer and the landscape. As such, any direct obstruction from overhead
transmission infrastructure is not considered to be of significant magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
149
Although not expected, in the event that collector lines are installed below-grade, it is recommended
that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structure on these two properties. If construction
within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum acceptable vibration levels, or peak particle
velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a qualified engineer with built heritage conservation
experience under similar circumstances. Construction within 50 m of CHRs 51, 53, 54, 57, 58, 59
and 66 should be monitored to ensure that PPV levels are not exceeded. All construction activities
should cease, should levels be exceeded.
150
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-51
74221 Creek Road
4
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-52
1187 Heaslip Road
4
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-53
Bethel Community Church
4
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-54
4
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-55
Boyle Brethren in Christ Church
4
N
N
N
N
R
N
No further mitigation required.
CHR-57
CHR-58
84004 Highway 4
Riverside Christian Reformed Church
4
4
Change in Land Use
4
Isolation
5205 Freure Road
Area #
Shadows
CHR-56
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
R
R
N
N
CHR-59
Wellandport United Reform Church
4
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-60
74015 Highway 4
4
N
N
N
N
N
N
Destruction
Alteration
Shadows
Isolation
Change in Land Use
CHR-61
83610 Old River Road West
4
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-62
Wellandport Church of Christ
4
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-63
72587 River Road
4
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-64
72170 River Road
4
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-65
Wellandport Streetscape
4
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR #
Address/Name
Area #
CHR-66
Wellandport/Riverside Cemetery
4
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-67
4
N
N
N
N
R
N
6.5
Area 5
Area 5 is roughly bounded by Dunn Wainfleet Townline Road and Concession 5 to the north,
Booker Road to the south, Hendershot Road to the east, and Marshagan Road to the west (Figure
15). Table 16 summarizes the assessment of potential Project impacts on built heritage resources
and cultural heritage landscapes in Area 5.
from construction vibrations were identified for seven built heritage resources, including:

54051 Wellandport Road, CHR-71;



365 Jenny Jump Road, CHR-47;


1855 Highway 3, CHR-76 and

1668 Highway 3, CHR-77.
The above-noted built heritage resources are located along proposed collector and transmission
lines and 1855 Highway 3 is also adjacent to a proposed access road and the below-grade
transmission infrastructure for Turbine 82 (Figure 15). It is recommended that construction be
avoided within 50 m of any structures associated with these cultural heritage resources. If
construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum acceptable vibration levels, or
peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a qualified engineer with experience
working with built heritage resources under similar circumstances. Construction within the 50 m
bufferzone should be monitored to ensure that PPV levels are not exceeded. All construction
activities should cease, should levels be exceeded.
Potential visual impacts related to transmission infrastructure have also been considered.
Transmission lines supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located throughout the general
Study Area (Appendix A, Photo 97 and 99). This type of transmission line has become a ubiquitous
feature of the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario. Although additional poles, if required, may be
taller than existing poles, the introduction of transmission infrastructure which is generally
consistent with existing infrastructure will not have a negative impact on the overall character of the
area. With respect to the obstruction of views from any additional poles which may be required,
these visual impacts would be localized to specific vantage points where additional poles would be
154
situated directly between the viewer and the landscape. As such, any direct obstruction from
overhead transmission infrastructure is not considered to be of significant magnitude as to warrant
mitigation.
A junction box, measuring 2 m high, 3 m long, and 2 m wide, is proposed to be located within the
road Right-of-Way on the south side of Highway 3 connecting Turbine 82 to the existing
transmission lines along the road (Figure 15). If located on the south side of the road, the junction
box will not obstruct views of the property.
155
Destruction
Alteration
Shadows
Isolation
Change in Land Use
CHR-68
663 Marshagan Road
5
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-69
238 Gore A Road
5
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-70
554 Hines Road
5
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
• Avoid construction within a 50 m bufferzone of structures on the
property;
• in the event that construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be
avoided, it is recommended that maximum acceptable vibration, or
peak particle velocity (PPV), levels be determined by a qualified
engineer prior to Project construction and that construction activities
be monitored to ensure that maximum PPV levels are not exceeded.
N
property;
N
property;
CHR #
CHR-71
CHR-72
CHR-73
Address/Name
54051 Wellandport Road
44088 Hendershot Road
Area #
5
5
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-74
CHR-75
CHR-76
365 Jenny Jump Road
1943 Highway 3
1855 Highway 3
5
5
5
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
N
N
R
R
R
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
property;
N
property;
N
property;
CHR-77
1668 Highway 3
5
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-78
62 Booker Road
5
N
N
N
N
R
N
property;
CHR-112
2083 Highway 3, Mount Carmel United
Brethren Church
5
Change in Land Use
5
Isolation
362 Booker Road
Area #
Shadows
CHR-79
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
I
N
N
N
R
N
property;
CHR-113
1300 Hutchinson Road, Mount Carmel
Cemetery
5
I
N
N
N
I
N
CHR-114
214 Gore A Road
5
N
N
N
N
R
N
• any construction along the road Right-of-Way in the vicinity of the
cemetery be planned to avoid removal of, or damage to, characterdefining attributes along Hutchinson Road (i.e., fencing, grave
markers, tree-plantings).
• the proponent work with the municipality and cemetery board to
design and erect an appropriate visual barrier (i.e., tree plantings,
fencing) around the northern, western, and southern boundaries of
the cemetery.
CHR-115
664 Marshagan Road
5
N
N
N
N
N
N
6.6
Area 6
Area 6 is roughly bounded by Highway 3 and Bell Road to the north, Rymer Road and Lakeshore
Road to the south, Burkett Road and Dunnville Wainfleet Townline to the east, and Moulton Aiken
Road to the west (Figure 16). Table 17 summarizes the assessment of potential Project impacts on
built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes in Area 6.
No potential visual impacts have been identified with respect to significant views of cultural heritage
resources or views from public spaces, such as cemetery grounds. One cemetery, Highbanks
Cemetery, has been identified within Area 6. The nearest visible Project component is Turbine 5,
located approximately 1750 m north of the cemetery (Figure 16). Tree cover directly north of the
cemetery, is considered to be sufficient to provide a visual barrier between the cemetery grounds
and Project components and, as a result, the Project will not obstruct views from the cemetery (see
Appendix A, Photo 115).
Potential visual impacts resulting from above ground transmission infrastructure in the vicinity of
753 Inman Road (CHR-81) were considered as part of this assessment. Transmission lines
supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located throughout the general Study Area. This type
of transmission line has become a ubiquitous feature of the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario.
Although additional poles, if required, will be taller than existing poles, the introduction of
transmission infrastructure which is generally consistent with existing infrastructure will not have a
negative impact on the overall character of the area. With respect to the obstruction of views from
any additional poles which may be required, these visual impacts would be localized to specific
vantage points where additional poles would be situated directly between the viewer and the
landscape. As such, any direct obstruction from overhead transmission infrastructure is not
considered to be of significant magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
from construction vibrations were identified for one resource, 753 Inman Road (CHR-81). The
farmhouse is adjacent to a proposed access road and below-grade transmission infrastructure for
Turbine 99 (Figure 16). In the event that new construction is required in the vicinity of CHR-81, it is
recommended that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structure on the property. If
construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum acceptable vibration levels, or
peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a qualified engineer with experience
working with built heritage resources under similar circumstances. Construction within 50 m of
CHR-81 should be monitored to ensure that PPV levels are not exceeded. All construction activities
should cease, should levels be exceeded.
Potential direct impacts related to alteration of or damage to the Gordon Harry Trail (CHR-92) and
the Welland Feeder Canal (CHR-90) have been identified for instances where Project components
(i.e., collector lines) intersect the rail line (Figure 16). There is a potential for the installation of any
159
new collector infrastructure to alter the heritage character of the former rail line and associated
components (i.e., extant bridges or culverts, areas where rail ties may remain). Alteration to the
former rail corridor should be avoided to the greatest extent practicable and any landscape
elements altered by the Project should be restored to their former state following construction
activities. Because the cultural heritage value of the trail is derived not only from its association with
the former railway, but also from its present-day use, it is recommended that disruption of the trail
for extended periods of time be avoided. Construction activity in the vicinity of the Welland Feeder
Canal should be limited to existing road crossings and alteration or damage to the canal walls
should be avoided.
160
Change in Land Use
6
Isolation
55 Moulton Aiken Road
Area #
Shadows
CHR-80
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-81
753 Inman Road
6
I
I
N
N
R
N
CHR-82
928 Canal Bank Road
6
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-83
228 Feeder Bank Road
6
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-84
Former Schoolhouse
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-85
2307 North Shore Drive
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-86
12698 Mittelstadt Road
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-87
12822 Minor Road
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-88
Stromness Streetscape
6
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-89
Sherbrook Baptist Church and Highbanks Cemetery
6
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-90
Welland Feeder Canal
6
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Ensure construction activities remain within existing
roadways and avoid damage to or alteration of the
Canal.
CHR-91
Lowbanks Streetscape
6
N
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-92
Gord Harry Trail
6
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Ensure construction avoids the destruction, removal,
or alteration of identified heritage attributes;
• Avoid disrupting use of trail for extended periods of
time;
• Ensure any landscape elements (i.e., pathway,
vegetation) altered by the Project are restored to their
original state following construction activities.
6.7
Area 7, Interconnector Study Area
Area 7 is roughly bounded by Lake Ontario to the north, Townline Road to the south, Sann Road to
the east, and Park Road South to the west (Figures 17 through 20). Table 18 summarizes the
assessment of potential Project impacts on built heritage resources and cultural heritage
landscapes in Area 7.
The majority of cultural heritage resources identified during the survey of the potential
interconnector routes are located in close proximity to Project infrastructure (Figures 17 through
20). Potential negative impacts related to construction vibrations or the damage or removal of
landscape components have been identified for a total of four built heritage resources and ten
cultural heritage landscapes, including:

564 Kemp Road (CHR-93);


4516 Mountainview Road (CHR-95);

3263 South Grimsby Road 3 (CHR-98);

Organized Crime Winery (CHR-99);

Angels Gate Winery (CHR-100);

Thirty Bench Winemakers (CHR-101);

Rosewood Estates (CHR-102);




324 Thirty Road (CHR-108);

305 Thirty Road (CHR-109); and

Aure Wines (CHR-111).
All of the cultural heritage resources noted above are located along preferred and alternative
transmission lines (Figures 17 through 20). At present, the proposed transmission line will consist of
162
overhead transmission lines supported on a series of 23 m high monopoles. This assessment
considered the potential for above ground transmission infrastructure to have a negative visual
impact on built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes.
At present, transmission lines supported on monopoles of varying sizes are located along both
sides of the road Right-of-Way along the length of the preferred and alternative transmission routes
(Appendix A, Photos 131 through 133, 137). This type of transmission line has become a ubiquitous
feature of the rural landscapes in Southern Ontario. Although the proposed poles are taller than
existing poles and will, as such be visible, the introduction of additional transmission infrastructure
which is generally consistent with existing infrastructure will not have a negative impact on the
overall character of the area. With respect to the obstruction of views from any additional poles
which may be required, these visual impacts would be localized to specific vantage points where
additional poles would be situated directly between the viewer and the landscape. As such, any
direct obstruction from overhead transmission infrastructure is not considered to be of significant
magnitude as to warrant mitigation.
It is recommended that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structures associated with these
cultural heritage resources. If construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot be avoided, maximum
acceptable vibration levels, or peak particle velocity (PPV) levels, should be determined by a
qualified engineer with experience working with built heritage resources under similar
circumstances. Construction within the 50 m bufferzone should be monitored to ensure that PPV
levels are not exceeded. All construction activities should cease, should levels be exceeded.
Some of the heritage value of the majority of cultural heritage landscapes noted above is related to
their association with the development of wine-making and fruit-growing industries characteristic of
the Niagara area. Cultural resources associated with this theme include CHRs 99 through 111. As a
result, it is recommended that removal of or damage to root systems and above ground vegetation
of vineyards and orchards along the interconnector route should be avoided to the greatest extent
practicable. Risk of damage to or removal of existing vineyards and orchards is considered to be
low as Project activities will be limited to the road Right-of-Way. Where damage or removal is
accidental or unavoidable, the vegetation should be restored to its pre-Project state.
As a general recommendation, the use of Mountainview Road for the transportation of heavy
machinery, large Project components, and staff be avoided to the greatest extent practicable, in
order to best protect the cultural heritage landscapes and their patterns of use (i.e., tourism,
viticulture, transportation of agricultural products).
163
Table 18: Summary of Impact Assessments, Area 7 (Interconnector Study Area)
CHR-93
CHR-94
564 Kemp Road
592 Kemp Road
7 (Figure 19)
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
I
I
N
N
N
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
N
CHR-95
4516 Mountainview Road
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-96
252 Thirty Road
7 (Figure 19)
CHR-97
5432 King Street
7 (Figure 19)
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
7 (Figure 18)
I
I
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
CHR-98
3263 South Grimsby Road 3
CHR-99
Organized Crime Winery CHL
(4043 Mountainview Road)
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-100
Angels Gate Winery CHL
(4260 and 4262 Mountainview Road)
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-101
Thirty Bench Winemakers CHL
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
• Avoid removal or damage to cultivated vines,
including root systems and above ground vegetation;
and
• provide compensation or replacement in the event
that cultivated vines are removed or damaged.
CHR-103
4560 Mountainview Road CHL
7 (Figure 19)
Change in Land Use
7 (Figure 19)
Isolation
Rosewood Estates CHL
Area #
Shadows
CHR-102
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
I
I
N
N
N
N
I
I
N
N
N
N
maximum PPV levels are not exceeded;
• avoid removal or damage to cultivated orchards,
that cultivated orchards are removed or damaged.
CHR-104
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
N
CHR-105
7 (Figure 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-106
7 (Figure 19)
N
N
N
N
N
N
Destruction
Alteration
Shadows
Isolation
Change in Land Use
CHR-107
Andrewes Farm Limited CHL
7 (Figure 19)
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-108
324 Thirty Road CHL
7 (Figure 18)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR #
Address/Name
Area #
CHR-109
305 Thirty Road CHL
7 (Figures 18
and 19)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-110
4367 Thirty Road CHL
7 (Figure 19)
N
N
N
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Area #
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
CHR #
Destruction
CHR-111
Aure Wines
(3749 Walker Road)
7 (Figure 18)
I
I
N
N
N
N
CHR-116
498 Elm Tree Road East
7 (Figure 19)
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-117
outside of study
area, west of
Figure 19
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-118
outside of study
area, west of
Figure 19
N
N
N
N
N
N
CHR-119
outside of study
area, west of
Figure 19
N
N
N
N
N
N
7
STUDY RESULTS
A total of 111 cultural heritage resources within the Study Area were evaluated as meeting the
criteria for heritage value or interest under O.Reg.9/06. All of these cultural heritage resources and
landscapes were assessed for potential Project-related negative impacts.
Although no cultural heritage resources are planned to be destroyed by the proposed Project,
potential negative impacts have been identified for 52 cultural heritage resources (listed in Table
19), including:

6500 Sixteen Road (CHR-5);


6677 Silver Street (CHR-9);




1137 Gee Road (CHR-20);






The Elcho Schoolhouse (CHR-47);


74221 Creek Road (CHR-51);

Bethel Community Church (CHR-53);


753 Inman Road (CHR-81);




3263 South Grimsby Road 3 (CHR98);

(CHR-14);

Former Rail Line (CHR-15);

Hrvatski Park (CHR-34);

The Bismark Streetscape (CHR-37);

The St. Ann’s Streetscape (CHR-38);

Rail Line (CHR-39);

(CHR-49);

Wellandport (Riverside) Cemetery
(CHR-66);

the Welland Feeder Canal (CHR-90);


Gordon Harry Trail (CHR-92;

Riverside Christian Reformed Church
(CHR-45);

Organized Crime Winery (CHR-99);

(CHR-59);

Angels Gate Winery (CHR-100);

Thirty Bench Winemakers (CHR-101);

54051 Wellandport Road (CHR-71);

Rosewood Estates (CHR-102);

44088 Hendershot Road (CHR-72);


44067 Hendershot Road (CHR-73);


365 Jenny Jump Road, (CHR-74);


1943 Highway 3, (CHR-75);

324 Thirty Road (CHR-108);


305 Thirty Road (CHR-109); and


Aure Wines (CHR-111).
170
Table 19: Summary of Potential Negative Impacts and Recommended Mitigation
CHR-5
6500 Sixteen Road
CHR-7
CHR-9
6677 Silver Street
CHR-16
5028 Highway 20
CHR-17
1698 Highway 20
CHR-18
1750 Highway 20
CHR-20
1137 Gee Road
CHR-23
CHR-41
CHR-43
CHR-44
CHR-46
6227 Elcho Road
CHR-47
Elcho Schoolhouse
CHR-48
5482 Elcho Road
CHR-51
74221 Creek Road
CHR-53
Bethel Community Church
CHR-54
CHR-57
84004 Highway 4
Riverside Christian Reformed
Church
CHR-58
CHR-59
CHR-71
54051 Wellandport Road
CHR-72
CHR-73
CHR-74
365 Jenny Jump Road
CHR-75
1943 Highway 3
CHR-76
1855 Highway 3
CHR-77
1668 Highway 3
CRH-81
753 Inman Road
CHR-93
564 Kemp Road
CHR-94
592 Kemp Road
CHR-95
4516 Mountainview Road
CHR-98
3263 South Grimsby Road 3
I
N
N
N
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
BHR/CHL #
Destruction
N
• Avoid construction within a 50 m bufferzone of structures on
the property;
• In the event that construction within a 50 m bufferzone
cannot be avoided, it is recommended that maximum
acceptable vibration, or peak particle velocity (PPV), levels be
determined by a qualified engineer prior to Project construction
and that construction activities be monitored to ensure that
I = potential negative impact, irreversible; R = potential negative impact, reversible; N = no identified negative
impact
CHR-14
CHR-34
Hrvatski Park
CHR-37
Bismark Streetscape
CHR-38
St. Ann’s Streetscape
CHR-66
Wellandport (Riverside) Cemetery
N
I
CHR-49
CHR-99
Organized Crime Winery CHL (4043
Mountainview Road)
CHR-100
Angels Gate Winery CHL (4260 and
4262 Mountainview Road)
CHR-101
Thirty Bench Winemakers CHL
CHR-102
Rosewood Estates CHL (4352
Mountainview Road)
CHR-103
CHR-104
CHR-105
CHR-108
324 Thirty Road CHL
CHR-109
305 Thirty Road CHL
CHR-111
Aure Wines CHL
CHR-15
Former Rail Line
CHR-39
Rail Line
I
I
N
N
N
I
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
I
R
R
N
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
BHR/CHL #
Destruction
N
• Overhead tranmission infrastructure should be installed on the
east side of Port Davidson Road in the vicinity of the West
Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery in order to conserve open views of
the cemetery.
N
• Avoid construction within a 50 m bufferzone of structures
within the Cultural Heritage Landscape;
N
N
I
I
N
N
N
N
I
I
N
N
R
N
• Work with the Elcho Cemetery Board to design and install an
appropriate visual barrier around the cemetery to protect views
from within the cemetery (e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
the church;
• Avoid removal or damage to cultivated vines, including root
systems and above ground vegetation; and
• Provide compensation or replacement in the event that
cultivated vines are removed or damaged.
• Avoid construction within a 50 m bufferzone of structures
within the Cultural Heritage Landscape;
• Avoid removal or damage to cultivated vines, orchards, trees,
and plants (including root systems and above ground
vegetation);
• Provide compensation in the event that cultivated plants are
removed or damaged
• Ensure construction avoids damage to or removal of identified
heritage attributes;
• Restore Project-crossings to pre-construction state following
Project activities
impact
CHR-90
Welland Feeder Canal
I
N
N
N
R
Change in Land Use
Isolation
Shadows
Address/Name
Alteration
BHR/CHL #
Destruction
N
CHR-92
Gord Harry Trail
I
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-112
2083 Highway 3, Mount Carmel
United Brethren Church
I
N
N
N
R
N
CHR-113
1300 Hutchinson Road, Mount
Carmel Cemetery
I
N
N
N
I
N
• Ensure construction activities remain within existing road
crossings;
• Avoid damage to or alteration to Canal infrastructure
• Avoid destruction, removal, or alteration of identified heritage
attributes ;
• Avoid disrupting use of trail for extended periods of time;
• Ensure any landscape elements (i.e., pathway, vegetation)
altered by the Project are restored to their pre-construction
state following construction activities.
the property;
• in the event that construction within a 50 m bufferzone cannot
be avoided, it is recommended that maximum acceptable
vibration, or peak particle velocity (PPV), levels be determined
by a qualified engineer prior to Project construction and that
construction activities be monitored to ensure that maximum
PPV levels are not exceeded.
• any construction along the road Right-of-Way in the vicinity of
the cemetery be planned to avoid removal of, or damage to,
character-defining attributes along Hutchinson Road (i.e.,
fencing, grave markers, tree-plantings).
• the proponent work with the municipality and cemetery board
to design and erect an appropriate visual barrier (i.e., tree
plantings, fencing) around the northern, western, and southern
boundaries of the cemetery.
impact
8
RECOMMENDATIONS
Potential negative impacts identified for the 52 cultural heritage resources (listed in Table 19)
are generally of three types:

Indirect impacts resulting from construction vibrations of the potential installation of new
infrastructure (i.e., access roads, collector lines) in close proximity to structures;

Direct impacts related to the damage or removal of heritage attributes (i.e., built
components such as fencing, or cultivated plants or trees) resulting from the construction
of new Project infrastructure; and

Visual impacts with respect to views from public spaces.
In order to lessen or avoid potential indirect negative impacts from construction vibrations, the
following recommendations have been made:

In the event that new Project infrastructure is constructed in the vicinity of identified
CHRs, it is recommended that construction be avoided within 50 m of any structures
associated with these cultural heritage resources.


It is further recommended that the final Project Description Report document which
option was chosen to mitigate the potential impact of construction vibrations, a
description of how the recommendation will be implemented, and a discussion of the
Project factors that determined that decision.
communities of Smithville, St. Ann’s, Bismark, Elcho, Wellandport, and Stromness should be
avoided to the greatest extent practicable when transporting heavy machinery and turbine
components to the Project location in order to minimize the potential for accidental or indirect
damage to the high concentration of narrowly setback cultural heritage resources and
landscapes within those communities.
169
In order to lessen or avoid potential direct negative impacts resulting from the removal or alteration
of the heritage attributes of identified cultural heritage landscapes, the following recommendations
have been made:

removal of or damage to identified heritage attributes (i.e., root systems and above ground
vegetation of cultivated plant, canal infrastructure, landscape features and built components
of rail landscapes) should be avoided to the greatest extent practicable.

Where damage or removal is unavoidable, plantings and built features should be restored to
their pre-construction state immediately following the completion of Project activities.
In order to minimise the potential visual impact of the Project on views from the Elcho United
Church Cemetery (CHR-49), it is recommended that the proponent work with the Elcho Cemetery
Board to design and install an appropriate visual barrier around the cemetery to protect views from
within the cemetery (e.g., fencing, shrubbery or trees).
In order to avoid direct impacts on views of the West Lincoln McCaffrey Cemetery (CHR-14), it is
recommended that any overhead transmission infrastructure installed along Port Davidson Road in
the vicinity of the cemetery be installed along the eastern side of the road.
170
10
REFERENCES
10.1
Literature Cited
Archaeologix, 2008. Archaeological Assessment (Stage 1) Shell Proposed Refinery Project,
St. Clair Township, Lambton County, Ontario. Report prepared for Jacques Whitford Limited,
Markham, Ontario
Brueton, Kenneth. 1967. Walpole Township Centennial History. Jarvis, Ontario.
Chapman, L.J., and D.F. Putnam, 1984. The Physiography of Southern Ontario (3rd Edition).
Ontario Geological Survey, Special Volume 2. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.
Cox, Steven L., 1989. Report on the Phase 1 Archaeological Survey of the Bangor HydroElectric Second 345 KV Tie Line Project Route. Report on file, Maine State Museum, Bangor,
Maine.
Crispino, M. and M. D’Apuzzo, 2001, Measurement and Prediction of Traffic-induced Vibrations in a
Heritage Building. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 246, 2: 319-335.
De Volpi, Charles Patrick, 1966. The Niagara Peninsula: A Pictorial Record. Montreal: Dev-Sco
Publications Ltd.
Ellis, Chris J., and Neal Ferris (eds.), 1990. The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650.
Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, Ontario Archaeological Society, No. 5.
Ellis, Patricia, 1987, Effects of Traffic Vibration on Historic Buildings. The Science of the Total
Environment. 59, 37-45.
English Heritage, 2005. Wind Energy and the Historic Environment. Accessed October, 2012 at
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/publications/publicationsNew/guidelines-standards/windenergy-and-the-historic-environment/windenergyfinal.pdf.
Finlayson, William D., Don McQuay, Bernie Neary and Ian Williams, 2009. Integrating DGPS and
GIS in Archaeology: A Case Study From the Pickering Airport Lands, in Painting The Past With a
Broad Brush: Papers in Honour of James Valliere Wright, David L. Keenlyside and Jean-Luc
Pilon (eds.). Mercury Series, Archaeology Paper 170. Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Civilization.
Fox, William A., 2009. Ontario Cherts Revisitied, in Painting The Past With a Broad Brush:
Papers in Honour of James Valliere Wright, David L. Keenlyside and Jean-Luc Pilon (eds.).
Mercury Series, Archaeology Paper 170. Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Civilization.
Jacques Whitford, 2008. Stage 1 Archaeological Impact Assessment - Interconnecting and
Third Party Pipelines. Report prepared for Shell Canada Products, Sarnia, ON.
Lincoln County Council, 1956. Lincoln County, 1865-1956. R. Janet Powell and Barbara F.
Coffman, eds., St. Catharines: Lincoln County Council.
Library and Archives Canada
172
1698, A Facsimile View of Niagara Falls by Father Louis Hennepin, 1698 (LAC item
number 2197).
1751, A View of the Fall of Niagara from Gentleman Magazine Vol. XXI, p. 18 (LAC item
number 2182).
Ministry of Environment (MOE), 2012. Technical Guide to Renewable Energy Approvals.
Accessed
August,
2012
at
http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/groups/lr/@ene/@resources/documents/resource/stdpro
d_088422.pdf.
Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport (MTCS), 2011. Protected Properties, Archaeological and
Heritage Resources: An information bulletin for applicants addressing the cultural heritage
component of projects subject to Ontario Regulation 359/09 Renewable Energy Approvals.
Accessed
March,
2012
at
http://www.mtc.gov.on.ca/en/publications/Info_BulletinSelfAssessment.pdf.
---, 2006a. InfoSheet #5 Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans. Sheet
No. 5, Information Sheet Series from Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process:
Cultural Heritage and Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Statement, 2005. Toronto:
Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
---, 2006b. InfoSheet #2 Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Sheet No. 2, Information Sheet
Series from Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process: Cultural Heritage and
Archaeology Policies of the Ontario Provincial Statement, 2005. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for
Ontario.
---, 2006c. InfoSheet #1 Built Heritage Resources. Sheet No. 1, Information Sheet Series
from Heritage Resources in the Land Use Planning Process: Cultural Heritage and Archaeology
Policies of the Ontario Provincial Statement, 2005. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
Nelles, Robert Bertram. 1905. County of Haldimand in the days of auld lang syne. Hamly Press
Book Printers, Port Hope, Ontario.
Ontario Regulation 9/06, Criteria for Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest, Under the
Ontario Heritage Act, 2006.
Ontario Regulation 359/09, Renewable Energy Approvals Under Part V.0.1 Of The Environmental
Protection Act, 2009.
Page, H.R., 1876. Illustrated Atlas of the Counties of Lincoln and Welland. Toronto: H.R. Page
and Co..
Paisley, Gladys B., 1967. Gleanings, memories and sketches of Moulton Township. Port
Colborne, ON: Port Colborne Citizen Press.
Porter, Peter Augustus, 1896. A Brief History of Old Fort Niagara. Niagara Falls. Reprinted 2008,
Crawford Press.
173
Presant, E.W. and M.S. Kingston, 1989. The Soils of the Regional Municipality of Niagara, Vol.
1 and 2. Report No. 60 of the Ontario Soils Survey. Guelph: Research Branch Agriculture Canada,
Soil and Water Management Branch Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Department of Land
Resource Science University of Guelph.
Rainer, J.H., 1982, Effect of Vibrations on Historic Buildings. The Association for Preservation
Technology Bulletin. XIV, No. 1: 2-10.
Sidey, J.J., A.B. Rice and E.R. Langs, 1887. History of the County of Welland. Welland: Welland
Tribune Printing House.
Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec), 2013a. Niagara Region Wind Farm, Consultation Report.
Prepared for Niagara Region Wind Corporation.
---, 2013b. Niagara Region Wind Farm, Decommissioning Plan Report. Prepared for
Niagara Region Wind Corporation.
---, 2012. Visual Assessment Study, Transmission line for the Niagara Region Wind
Farm NEC Development Permit Application. Report prepared for the Niagara Escarpment
Commission.
Township of West Lincoln, 2012. Township of West Lincoln, Biography. Accessed July, 2012 at
http://www.westlincoln.ca/township/biography.
United Empire Loyalist Centennial Committee (UELCC), 1885. The Centennial of the Settlement
of Upper Canada by the United Empire Loyalists, 1784-1884: The Celebrations of
Adolphustown, Toronto and Niagara. Toronto: Rose Publishing Company.
UNESCO, 2008. Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage
Convention. Accessed online at http://whc.unesco.org/archive/opguide08-en.pdf#annex3 last
accessed September, 2011.
Wainfleet Historical Society, 1992. Chronicles of Wainfleet Township, 200 Years of History.
Wainfleet, ON: Wainfleet Historical Society.
WellandHistory,
2012.
History
of
Wellandport.
Accessed
http://tales.wellandhistory.ca/2012/03/25/history-of-wellandport/.
August
2012
at
Wicklund, R.E. and B.C. Mathews, 1963. Soil Survey of Lincoln County. Report No. 34 of the
Ontario Soil Survey. Guelph, ON: Research Branch, Canadian Department of Agriculture and the
Ontario Agricultural College.
Wiss, J.F., 1981. Construction Vibrations: State-of-the-Art. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Division 107:167-181.
Wynne, John Huddlestone, 1770, A General History of the British Empire in America, Volume
II. London: W. Richardson and L. Urquhart, under the Royal Exchange.
174
10.2
Literature Consulted
Burdkholder, L.J., 1934. The Early Mennonite Settlements in Ontario. Mennonite Quarterly 8, No.
3: 103-122.
MTCS, 2006. Heritage Property Evaluation: A Guide to Listing, Researching and Evaluating
Cultural Heritage Property in Ontario Communities. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
10.3
Personal Communications
Fraser, Sean, Manager, Conservation Services, Ontario Heritage Trust. Letter dated August 3,
2011.
Hogg, Janice. Planner I, Planning Department, Town of Grimsby. Email August 16, 2012.
Kolasa, William. Director of Corporate Services/Clerk, Town of Lincoln. Email August 13, 2012.
Larocque, Rachelle. Planner II, Township of West Lincoln. Email July 24, 2012.
Munday, Grant. Manager of Planning. Township of Wainfleet. Telephone Conversation September
4, 2012.
Unyi, Anne. Head Curator, Community Development and Partnerships Division. Haldimand County.
Email July 13, 2012.
175

23.8 MB

Transcription

Similar documents

Xero House

Heritage Committee Monday, November 16, 2015 7:00 p.m. Council

enREDo International Design Network

Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Work on

From: Lee Sexsmith [mailto:hecubuspg@telus

family matters summer 2016 - Heritage Family Credit Union

Flyer

Thank You! - PenFinancial Credit Union

Jackie: 204-895-2519 E-mail: [email protected]

Matsumoto-toge Pass Kumano Streets