cultural heritage landscapes in waterloo region

Transcription

PLANNING, HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
Community Services
Date: June 2, 2009
MEMORANDUM
Subject:
Cultural Heritage Landscapes Background Report
_______________________________________________________________________________
The report, “Cultural Heritage Landscapes in Waterloo Region: A Framework for Inventory,
Assessment and Policy Development” was prepared for the Region of Waterloo Community
Services Division by the Envision Consulting Group and Andre Scheinman Heritage
Preservation Consultant. The work was undertaken in 2005-2006 to provide background
information for the future identification of potential cultural heritage landscapes in the region,
and the development of appropriate policies.
Following receipt of the report, Regional staff shared the document with Area Municipal planning
staff as the basis for further discussion of potential CHLs identified by the consultants, and the
appropriate policy tools. The results of these conversations were reflected in the draft policies
of the Regional Official Plan, currently being finalized. Following approval of the Regional
Official Plan, further work will be required by both Area Municipal and Regional staff to
implement policies 3.G.5 through 3.G.7.
This report has not been received by Regional Council. However, the contents, including the
candidate CHLs, are considered to provide useful background material to assist in further
discussions regarding CHL identification and conservation. If you have any questions about the
use of this document, please contact Lucille Bish at 519-575-4499.
633064
JUNE 2006
CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES
IN WATERLOO REGION:
A Framework for Inventory,
Assessment and Policy Development
Background Document prepared for Region of Waterloo by
André Scheinman Heritage Preservation Consultant
Cultural Heritage Landscapes in Waterloo Region: A Framework for Inventory, Assessment and Policy Development
CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES IN WATERLOO REGION:
A Framework for Inventory, Assessment and Policy Development
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1.0 OVERVIEW
p.1
2.0 REGION OF WATERLOO HISTORICAL CONTEXT
2.1 Township of Waterloo
2.2 Township of Woolwich
2.3 Township of North Dumfries
2.4 Township of Wilmot
2.5 Township of Wellesley
p.2
3.0 REGIONAL HISTORICAL THEMES
p.8
4.0 CHL IDENTIFICATION PROCESS
4.1 Contemporary Approaches in Practice
4.2 Inventory and Evaluation Approach
4.3 Recommended Regional CHL Evaluation Process and Criteria
p.10
5.0 REGION OF WATERLOO CANDIDATE CHLS
5.1 Identification Process
5.2 Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes
5.3 Other Sites for Consideration
5.4 Priorities for Evaluating Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes
p.2
p.3
p.4
p.6
p.7
p.10
p.13
p.13
p.19
p.19
p.20
p.28
p.30
6.0 CONSERVATION TOOLS
6.1 Existing Heritage Policy Framework
6.2 CHL Identification and Conservation Tools
6.3 CHL Designation Tools
6.4 The Regional CHL Identification and Conservation Process
p.32
p.34
p.35
p.36
7.0 GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR THE CONSERVATION OF CHLS
p.37
p.32
8.0 REGIONAL CHL CASE STUDIES
8.1 West Montrose, Township of Woolwich
8.2 The Village of Ayr, Township of North Dumfries
p.40
9.0 SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS
p.59
LIST OF SOURCES
p.61
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Waterloo Region: Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes
Figure 2: Village of West Montrose: Cultural Heritage Landscape
Figure 3: Village of Ayr: Cultural Heritage Landscape
p.31
p.49
p.58
LIST OF TABLES (following page listed)
Table 1: Region of Waterloo – General Historical Themes
Table 2: CHL Evaluation Process and Criteria
Table 3: Spectrum of CHL Conservation and Protection Measures
p.9
p.18
p.36
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Suggested Candidate CHLs Listed By Municipality
APPENDIX B: Regional and Municipal Policy Review
Cover Photos (clockwise from top right):
Barn complex, Township of Woolwich
The Grand River through Galt, City of Cambridge
The West Montrose Covered Bridge, Township of Woolwich
Hespeler industrial heritage, City of Cambridge
p.40
p.50
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Waterloo Region has a diverse range of cultural heritage
resources that provide an important means of defining and
confirming regional identity, enhancing the quality of life of the
community, supporting social development and promoting
economic prosperity (ROPP, Heritage Conservation
Preamble).
The Region of Waterloo is committed to conserving cultural
heritage resources including Cultural Heritage Landscapes.
According to the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), a Cultural
Heritage Landscape (CHL) is “a defined geographical area of
heritage significance which has been modified by human
activities and is valued by the community”. The PPS states
that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural
heritage landscapes shall be conserved.
As part of the Regional Growth Management Strategy
(RGMS) the Region is undertaking Cultural Heritage
Landscape Assessments for rural and urban areas.
The research summarized in Cultural Heritage Landscapes in
Waterloo Region: A Framework for Inventory, Assessment
and Policy Development was commissioned by the Region to
set the foundation for the primary identification of candidate
CHLs and the further inventory and evaluation of Regionally
Significant CHLs; and to make recommendations on
developing a formal Regional process for addressing the
conservation of cultural heritage landscape resources in the
Region of Waterloo.
The report begins in section 2.0 by providing a synopsis of
local history focusing on early European settlement and
subsequent development within the five original Townships of
Waterloo County.
The historical summary is followed in section 3.0 by the
identification of Regional Historical Themes (Table 1). These
themes are essential to understanding the evolution of the
Region and underpin its identity. The Regional Themes have
been used in the Primary CHL Identification Process to
distinguish CHLs that have Regional Significance from CHLs
with local significance.
Section 4.0 documents the CHL Identification Process
developed by the consultants based on their research. The
process begins with the Primary Identification Process which
uses 6 Key Steps to identify and pre-screen landscapes with
potential heritage value. The Primary Identification process
resulted in a list of 25 Candidate CHLs within the Region of
Waterloo (listed in Section 5.0).
Once Candidate Sites have been identified, the
recommended process continues to further inventory and
evaluate the sites as potential Regionally Significant CHLs.
Table 2 provides a summary of the CHL Evaluation Process
and Criteria.
The proposed Inventory and Evaluation process was tested
with two local case studies as detailed in Section 8.0 (West
Montrose and the Village of Ayr). After undertaking the
secondary process for these two candidate CHLs, the
consultants recommend that both sites be identified as
cultural heritage landscapes with regional significance.
The report also provides recommended policies and
processes for conserving cultural heritage landscapes that
the Region could adopt (Sections 6.0 and 7.0).
Finally, section 9.0 summarizes the consultant’s findings and
recommends next steps for developing a formal Regional
process for addressing the conservation of cultural heritage
landscape resources in the Region of Waterloo.
1.0
OVERVIEW
The Waterloo Region has a diverse range of cultural heritage
resources that are of historic significance and valued by its
residents. They exist within both urban and rural contexts,
and include built heritage features, archaeological sites, and
landscape elements. Of those identified to date, heritage
resources include: more than 260 heritage properties
designated under the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA); six
heritage conservation districts designated under part V of the
OHA; four historic bridges recognized on the Ontario Heritage
Bridge List; the Grand River – a Canadian Heritage River;
and six national historic sites. Within the spectrum of cultural
heritage resources, Cultural heritage landscapes (CHLs) are
an additional and distinct heritage feature, which are now
being examined and documented by the Region of Waterloo,
in consultation with local Municipalities.
Although the practice of identifying and conserving CHLs has
been in place for sometime in the US, this component of
heritage resource management is somewhat new to Canada.
It is receiving increased attention within the Ontario policy
framework with recent amendments to the Provincial Policy
Statement (PPS) that now states:
“significant built heritage resources and significant cultural
heritage landscapes shall be conserved”.
Prior to this, most municipalities across Ontario have focused
efforts on the protection of heritage buildings, structures and
heritage conservation districts through policies in their official
plans, and by encouraging designations under the Ontario
Heritage Act. This is also true of the municipalities within the
Region of Waterloo.
The 1995 Regional Official Policies Plan (ROPP) states that it
is the Region’s responsibility to:
“provide a framework for the identification, protection,
interpretation and stewardship of heritage resources, so that
heritage resource conservation is considered early in the
planning process, and public awareness of its importance is
increased”.
In its current review of the ROPP, the Region is seeking to
include cultural heritage landscapes in its heritage
conservation policies. With this objective, the Region is one of
the few jurisdictions in Ontario at the leading edge of
implementing the provincial directive to identify and conserve
CHLs.
Hespeler mill pond
Since 2005, Ontario’s Provincial Policy Statement (PPS),
which provides direction to the Planning Act and the Ontario
Heritage Act, defines “Cultural heritage landscapes” as:
“a defined geographical area of heritage significance which
has been modified by human activities and is valued by a
community. It 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. Examples may include, but are not limited to,
heritage conservation districts designated under the Ontario
Heritage Act; and villages, parks, gardens, battlefields,
mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries, trailways and
industrial complexes of cultural heritage value.”
Pursuant to the PPS there are a number of tools for the
conservation of CHLs available under provincial statutes.
Cultural heritage landscapes may be listed by jurisdictions
using evaluation criteria; protected by heritage conservation
easements; and identified and protected through measures
within the Planning Act such as secondary plans, special
zoning bylaws, heritage impact assessments; conservation
plans and management plans.
The recent update to the Ontario Heritage Act and the
accompanying guidelines contained within the Ontario
Heritage Toolbox provide for cultural heritage landscapes to
be designated and protected through the enactment of a
municipal by-law as individual sites, under Section 29, Part IV
of the Ontario Heritage Act, or as heritage conservation
districts under Part V.
1
The challenge for the conservation of cultural heritage
landscapes lies not only in public/governmental
understanding and acceptance of the concept. This is
particularly of issue in rural areas where CHLs can be
complex and encompass large areas of land. With this in
mind, the Region commissioned this study in 2005 to develop
criteria for the identification of CHLs, along with a preliminary
inventory of regionally significant Cultural Heritage
Landscapes, and a review of potential policy directives.
European contact in the area in the late 1700s was by
transient fur traders.
The study is prefaced by a compilation of Cultural Heritage
Background Resources (Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
2004), which provides an overview of approaches and
implementation tools pertaining to CHLs and related heritage
resources, in other jurisdictions, and the Cultural Heritage
Landscapes Discussion Paper (Regional Municipality of
Waterloo, 2005).
The latter document provides background on the concept and
value of CHLs; an evaluation process; an overview of
possible policies and processes that could be used for CHL
conservation; and an implementation process for further
studies. Specifically, the implementation process calls for: the
development of: criteria by which to identify cultural heritage
landscapes; a comprehensive and prioritized list of identified
CHLs based on the criteria; and a process to further inventory
and designate, or otherwise provide protection of, cultural
heritage landscapes within the Region. The Regional
discussion paper served as background to this study.
2.0
REGION OF WATERLOO
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Primary Source: Regional History: Historical Place
Names of Waterloo County, as compiled by staff at Doon
Heritage Crossroads, www.region.waterloo.on.ca
The Region of Waterloo is an extensive geographical area
comprised of the former Townships of Waterloo, Woolwich,
Wellesley, Wilmot and North Dumfries. It is traversed by the
Grand River and its tributaries, the Conestogo River, the
Speed River, and the Nith.
View of the Grand River
The origins of the current day Region of Waterloo begin in
1784 with a grant of lands along the Grand River by the
British to the Six Nations First Peoples in recognition of their
loyalty to the Crown during the American Revolutionary Wars.
These lands comprised Block One (Dumfries Township)
Block Two (Waterloo Township) and Block Three (Woolwich
Township). In the late 1790’s Joseph Brant sold substantial
portions of the land grant to new immigrants, including
extensive parcels of land to the German Company, which was
established by Mennonites from Pennsylvania seeking
farmland and security in the newly developing north.
Unlike Waterloo and Woolwich Townships, Wilmot Township
was originally an area of land comprised of Crown and Clergy
Reserves, and generally divided into the German Block, and
Blocks ‘A’ and ‘B’ that were controlled by the Canada Lands
Company. Settlement of the area was initiated around 1824,
and increased rapidly with migration from the adjacent settled
townships, particularly Waterloo.
Also an area of the Clergy Reserves, and known as the
Queen’s Bush, settlement of Wellesley Township lagged
behind that of the others. Formal survey of the area was
delayed until the mid-1800s, although a number of squatters
inhabited the area well before its settlement.
Human habitation in Waterloo Region can be traced back
thousands of years with aboriginal peoples, from nomadic
hunters and gatherers to agriculturalists, establishing
seasonal campsites and trails along the great rivers of the
area. One of the earliest archaeological sites, along what is
now Blair Road, dates back to 9,500 years ago. Early
2
Although the sale of land to the German Company facilitated
the emigration of many Mennonite settlers to the central and
northern parts of the region, substantial areas were also
purchased by European Germans, Swiss, English, and Scots,
who also settled in Waterloo, Woolwich, and North Dumfries
Townships.
With the passing of the Hincks Act of 1862, Waterloo County
was created. The final boundaries severed Dumfries
Township, with the northern half included as part of Waterloo
Township, along with the townships of Waterloo, Wilmot,
Wellesley, and Woolwich, and the southern half becoming
part of Brant Township.
2.1
Township of Waterloo
In 1796 Joseph Brant on behalf of the Six Nations sold the
94,012 acre tract along the Grand River to Colonel Richard
Beasley, a United Empire Loyalist. Known as Block Two, the
extensive lands included the present-day sites of Kitchener
and Waterloo. Although Beasley was prohibited from
subdividing or selling the land until the Six Nations received
full payment, he sold off large portions of the land anyway.
One of these earliest sales around 1800 was to a group of
Mennonite settlers from Pennsylvania. Upon finding that
Beasley did not as yet hold title to the land, the settlers
complained and an agreement was struck between Brant and
Beasley allowing the formal sale of land to cover mortgage
obligations.
Beasley subsequently sold a 60,000 acre tract of land to the
German Company of Pennsylvania, which was comprised of
a group of Mennonite shareholders mainly from Lancaster
County Pennsylvania, led by Daniel Erb and Samuel Bricker.
Historical documentation indicates that the German Company
landholdings were divided into equal lots of roughly 200 acres
each. The survey layout was not based on a conventional
survey grid of roads and concession lots, consequently the lot
layout was heavily influenced by natural boundaries such as
the Grand River and roads that were later built in the
township were often inconsistent with others in this area. The
German Company landholdings became a large Mennonite
colony, divided mostly into 350 to 450-acre farm lots.
Remaining farmstead in the Pioneer Tower Area on one
of the earliest settled lots in Waterloo Township
In 1816 part of the German Company Tract along the Grand
River became Waterloo Township.
Beasley’s sale to the German Company cleared him of
mortgage debt, and left him with 10,000 acres of Block Two
land, which he continued to sell into the 1830s. This area was
called the Lower Block (of Block Two). Although much of the
land along the Grand River was sold to settlers from
Pennsylvania, substantial areas throughout the Lower Block
were also sold to settlers originating from Britain and
Germany. These land sales gave rise to such communities as
Freeport, New Germany, the English Settlement, and
Hespeler.
Prior to 1830, the majority of settlers in Waterloo Township,
including those of the German Company, were Mennonites
- mainly from Lancaster and Montgomery Counties in
Pennsylvania - who were seeking less expensive land for
farming and a greater guarantee of religious freedom, as well
as an exemption from bearing arms. Although a smaller
number of other immigrant groups settled in the area at this
time including Pennsylvanian River Brethren (also known as
Dunkers or Tunkers), the Mennonite population was dominant
in the formative years of the Township.
Although granted the right to build grist and sawmills, the
early Mennonite settlers were predominantly farmers, with
settlement concentrated along the Grand River. By 1818 the
Township had reached a modest population of 850. With the
advent of roads and rail lines settlement extended to other
areas of the Township and by the early 1830’s essentially all
of Block Two had been sold, and the Township’s population
had more than doubled. As the Township’s population grew
along with cultural and religious diversity, proportionately the
Mennonite population began to decline.
3
The second half of the nineteenth century saw a marked
increase in industry, with new settlers arriving to work as
labourers in the mills, or to establish businesses in the
developing communities of the area. Groups or individuals
interested in buying land moved into townships elsewhere in
the County, including Wilmot and Woolwich, where vacant
land was still available.
2.2
Township of Woolwich
Woolwich Township was established on an area of the Grand
River Six Nations land grant known as Block Three,
comprised of 86,078 acres. In 1798, acting on behalf of the
Six Nations, Joseph Brant sold Block Three to William
Wallace, a carpenter from Niagara. Wallace subsequently
sold portions of Block Three to a number of people including
Robert Pilkington, who purchased 15,000 acres on the
eastern edge sometime before 1803. This area became
Pilkington Township in Wellington County.
In 1806 Wallace forfeited much of his landholdings, ostensibly
for failing to honour his contract, although he was allowed to
retain some 7,000 acres in the southeastern corner. After
siding with the Americans in the War of 1812, the remainder
of Wallace’s lands were seized and resold.
Although Woolwich was one of the earliest townships secured
for settlement in Waterloo County, the process of settlement
was slow. The German Company, which had already secured
substantial lands in what would become Waterloo Township,
purchased approximately 45,000 acres in the western portion
of Wallace’s forfeited Block Three lands.
The land purchase was led by John and Jacob Erb, of the
German Company, and Augustus Jones, a government
surveyor. The German Company lands were surveyed by
Jones into 130 lots of about 350 acres each which were
primarily sold to Mennonites from Pennyslvania, who, like
their Waterloo counterparts recognized the value of the land
offerings. The land purchases ranged in size from 350 to as
large as 1,400 acres, although settlement was sparse, with
many of the Mennonites who purchased the land preferring to
settle in the more established areas of Waterloo Township, or
close by in the southern parts of Woolwich Township.
Woolwich Township farm complex
An additional 7,000 acres of the forfeited lands were
purchased by William Crooks, who divided the land and sold
lots to new settlers, many from Scotland. Known as the
Crook’s Tract, the name has given rise to present day Crook’s
Tract Road.
At the time of the development of the Grand Trunk Railway
through Waterloo County during the mid-1850s, Woolwich
Township was noticeably settled, if not as extensively as
Waterloo Township. However, a railway connection was not
established until 1891, when a branch of the Grand Trunk
was laid from Waterloo to St. Jacobs and Elmira. In 1907,
there was also a branch of the Canadian Pacific line running
east and west through the township.
By this time the industrial boom that accompanied the railway
had passed and the industrial development seen in Waterloo
and North Dumfries Township was never achieved in
Woolwich. By the turn of the twentieth century it had,
however, become an important farming community within
Waterloo County. Supporting commercial centres sprang up
along the Grand River where water power supported mills.
Elmira in particular would later become one of the leading
centres of business in Woolwich Township. It was founded as
early as 1834 by Edward Bristow (Bristow’s Corners), coming
in to its own by the mid 1800s when it was formally laid out for
settlement by Joel Good, the major landowner of the area.
Conestoga and St. Jacobs, the other predominant
communities of the area were primarily Germanic
settlements. The earliest settlers were predominantly
Mennonite, but later settlers included German Roman
Catholics and Lutherans. Without the pressures of industrial
development, Old Order Mennonites and other conservative
Mennonite groups were encouraged to stay and farm in this
4
area, creating the unique rural character, which exists in the
northern reaches of the Township.
2.3
Township of North Dumfries
As with other townships in the Region, Dumfries Township
was originally part of Block One of the tract of land donated to
the Six Nations during the late eighteenth century for their
loyalty to the British Crown in the American Revolutionary
wars. On behalf of the Six Nations, Joseph Brant sold Block
One (94,035 acres) to Philip Steadman in 1795. Steadman
died in 1799, and Block One switched ownership several
times over the next number of years. It was purchased by
William Dickson a lawyer from Niagara, in 1816, becoming
part of the Gore District. Dickson named the township
Dumfries, presumably after his hometown in Scotland.
Not long after his purchase, Dickson set out to review the
township for suitable settlement sites, accompanied by one
Absalom Shade, a young carpenter from Pennsylvania. The
abandoned mill site of Alexander Miller, located near the
confluence of the Grand River and Mill Creek, was selected.
Miller who was from the Niagara District, had some years
before, bartered with the local natives for several hundred
acres of land and begun the construction of a small grist mill.
He later abandoned the land when it came to light that his title
was worthless.
Shade would later return and build both a saw mill and grist
mill, which became known as Dumfries Mills. The site was
located a few miles from Nathaniel Dodge’s homestead.
Dodge, a Pennsylvanian, was a fur trader and one of the first
settlers to the area prior to 1800, purchasing land and
building a cabin along the Indian trail on the flats of the Grand
River, in the area of what is now Cruickston Park.
In addition to his milling operations Absalom Shade served as
William Dickson’s land agent, and later became a prominent
local business entrepreneur establishing the infamous ‘Red
Store’ in 1824, in what would become Galt. The original frame
structure was replaced around 1849. The building, which is a
designated heritage structure, remains today at 11 Main
Street.
Dumfries Township was uniformly laid out into twelve
concessions, twelve miles in length and one mile apart.
Allowances were provided between each concession and
every sixth lot, with most lots comprised of 200 acres of land.
Significant settlement of the township did not begin until the
later years of the 1820s, with many of the township’s first
settlers migrating southward from Waterloo Township.
Dickson’s promotion of the area to Scottish immigrants
proved successful, with a substantial number settling initially
in the area surrounding Shade’s Mills. The township remained
predominantly Presbyterian Scottish from the 1820s onward,
however a small number of Pennsylvanian Mennonite settlers
from Waterloo Township also bought land and settled in North
Dumfries. They settled mainly in the northern reaches of the
township in the vicinity of Roseville.
The first post office at Shade’s Mills was named Galt by
William Dickson, a former classmate and friend of John Galt,
who was acting Commissioner of the Canada Company. In
1827 Galt ordered the construction of a road between
Shade’s Mills and Canada Company land to the north and
east in the area that would later become Guelph. The
construction of the roadway further opened up the township,
and by 1834 the population had reached about 4, 177. Galt
and Ayr, were the two main villages in the township with Galt
achieving a population of 250.
The natural terrain of the township, which included numerous
wetlands and bogs, proved challenging for settlement. The
completion of the Dundas and Waterloo road across the
Beverly Swamp aided growth and development throughout
the 1840s, which was further stimulated by the coming of the
railway in the 1850s. With the county seat established in
Berlin (Kitchener), Galt and North Dumfries were relegated to
branch lines of the Grand Trunk Railway when it opened in
1856. By the 1970s, the Credit Valley Railway (later part of
the Canadian Pacific Railway) also connected Ayr and
surrounding rural areas to other towns and cities.
Historic sketch of Shade’s Mills (Galt), c. 1820
5
The railways benefited farmers and milling enterprises,
providing access to markets further afield. Grain and a variety
of farm produce were grown for export. By the late 1840s
John Watson of Ayr had begun producing and exporting
agricultural machinery, which would later be exported and
nation-wide. In support of its flourishing agricultural society,
the Dumfries Agricultural Society was established, the first of
its kind in the county.
At the same time the textile and heavy machinery industry
th
was booming, and by the late 19 century Galt, Hespeler and
Ayr were thriving, both economically and socially, and
competing with neighbouring Berlin.
View westward along the Huron Road in Wilmot
Township
Industrial heritage in Hespeler
2.4
Township of Wilmot
Unlike Woolwich, Waterloo, and North Dumfries townships,
Wilmot Township was originally an area of land comprised of
Crown and Clergy Reserves. Settlement of the township
began in 1824, and occurred rapidly in part due to the
development of an organized roadway system, which
provided easy access to and from previously developed
townships of Waterloo County. This included the development
of Huron Road by the Canada Company.
The Huron Road extended from Goderich to Guelph,
connecting to other roads to the east to form a continuous
route between Lake Huron and Lake Ontario. It was the
predominant means of transportation and communication in
Upper Canada until the building of the railway in the mid19th
century.
Wilmot Township was divided horizontally into three tracts of
land: the German Block, which was controlled by the Crown
and settled primarily by immigrants of German heritage from
Pennsylvania, Europe, and Waterloo Township; Block B in
the north, and Block A in the South which were controlled by
the Canada Land Company. Although Blocks A and B were
also settled by immigrants of German heritage, they also
included a mix of other immigrants of Scottish, English, and
Irish. When Blocks A and B were acquired by the Canada
Land Company in 1825, they were incorporated with the
German Block and given the name Wilmot Township,
ostensibly after Sir Robert Wilmot-Horton who was Under
Secretary of State for War and the Colonies and was involved
with the Canada Land Company when it purchased Blocks A
and B.
The earliest settlement of Wilmot Township occurred in the
German Block, and is attributed to the efforts of Christian
Nafziger, an Amish Mennonite from Bavaria, Germany.
Nafziger first came to Pennsylvania in 1822 with the intent of
purchasing land for a large number of Amish families in his
homeland. Discovering that the land there was too expensive,
he moved northward aided by other Pennsylvania German
Mennonites, including Jacob Erb and Jacob Snider. Nafziger
secured the German Block, which was then divided into 200
acre lots.
By 1830, Wilmot Township had reached a population of 1,272
comprised mostly of Amish Mennonite groups in the German
Block. Subsequently however a number of immigrant groups
settled in the township. They included Anglican and Methodist
immigrants from the British Isles in the Block A-areas of
Haysville and New Dundee, and a large number of Roman
Catholic immigrants from Alsace Lorraine in areas of the
German Block and Block B, including St. Agatha, New
Prussia, and Josephsburg.
6
German Lutheran immigrants also settled in a number of
communities throughout the township. Other settlers included
second and third generation Mennonites from Waterloo.
By the 1830s and 1840s, a number of settlements had
developed along the four major roadways, including:
Philipsburg and St. Agatha along Erb’s Road; Baden and
Petersburg along Snyder’s Road; New Hamburg and
Mannheim along Bleams Road; and Haysville and Rosebank
along the Huron Road. Although serviced by the railway in the
th
mid 19 century, the area remained primarily agricultural. The
settlements of Baden, Petersburg and New Hamburg
received railway stops, and developed as commercial centres
to serve the farming community. Baden in particular
possessed several mills, an iron foundry, distillery and other
factories.
Shrine of the Sorrowful Mother, St Agatha
The railway however, had less impact on this area than
others in the County, and primarily helped to sustain the
agricultural markets. Today, Wilmot Township is still home to
a large farming community including Amish and Mennonite
farmers who, depending on their level of conservatism,
maintain a range of traditional farming practices.
2.5
Township of Wellesley
The origin of Wellesley Township was a large tract of land
contained within Clergy Reserves known as the Queen’s
Bush, which extended from Wellesley Township through to
Lake Huron. Originally, the Crown had set aside Clergy
Reserves for the preservation of the Protestant faith in Upper
Canada. This was the last area to be settled in the Region,
with the official survey by William Walker, taking place in
1843. The Queen’s Bush was controlled by the Crown with
lots purchased directly from the government.
Because this area was not opened when the first settlers
arrived in the region, many began their tenure as squatters,
including a significant number of freed or escaped black
slaves from the United States. In general, the Black settlers
dispersed themselves throughout several areas within the
Queen’s Bush including what would become Wellesley and
Peel Townships. Sources indicate that together these
townships had a Black population of between 500 and 900 by
the time the first white settlers arrived in the early 1830s. This
is assumed to be an unofficial count, as other documentation
indicates that in 1837 there were only 63 residents in total in
the area; and by 1841, only 254.
Other squatters who settled in the township were of German
heritage, settling primarily in the southeast corner of the
township in the Heidelberg and St. Clements area. However,
the late survey of the area significantly curtailed settlement
until the mid-1800s. From this point forward, growth occurred
rapidly and by the mid-1860s the Township was completely
settled.
The majority of new settlers were of German heritage
although there were also other immigrants of Irish, English,
and Scottish descent. With its origin as a Clergy Reserve,
early residents of the Township were predominantly
th
Protestant, although by the late 19 century there were also a
large number of Roman Catholics as well. Farming was the
mainstay of the township, with mills and other industries also
established to support the agricultural community. Wellesley
Township was formally named for the eldest brother of the
Duke of Wellington, Englishman Richard Wellesley, in 1840.
At the time of the formal survey, Walker divided the Township
in two distinct blocks, with the existing squatters offered the
opportunity to purchase and improve their lands. Some were
able to meet the criteria and remained, while others who
could not, relocated to other areas. By the 1850s, although
the population of the township was increasingly quickly, the
Black population was decreasing. This is attributed in part to
racial prejudices by both new settlers to the area and the
Government of Upper Canada, with promises of land grants
for loyalty to the Crown during the Mackenzie Rebellion
reportedly not being fulfilled. Faced with these difficulties,
many disillusioned Black settlers returned to the United
States following the conclusion of the American Civil War in
1865.
7
3.0 REGIONAL HISTORICAL THEMES
A necessary component of all heritage resource studies is the
identification of the historic themes, patterns and trends that
have influenced historic development of the site or area. With
cultural heritage landscapes, which may encompass a larger
area with multiple land uses, there may be a number of
themes which factor into its evolution. An understanding of
the historic themes or contexts of a place will help to guide
the identification of historic features and characteristics and to
ascertain their relative significance. In the case of a regionally
significant site it is necessary to distinguish those aspects of
history that are characteristic of, or of most importance to, the
region as a whole, from those that may be of local
significance.
It has to be accepted that many of the essential historical
themes of any ‘place’ in Southern Ontario will be superficially
very similar. Broadly speaking there is a typical pattern that
characterizes the evolution of Euro-Canadian society over
this large area and, to a significant extent, the built-form and
landscape modifications by which this evolution has been
made manifest.
The Pioneer Memorial Tower, a national historic site,
commemorates the earliest settlers of Waterloo
Township
As an example - the first settlement in a Region is both
significant to the actual locale of that settlement and also to
the whole administrative jurisdiction that has evolved from it.
This would not necessarily be true of every subsequent
settlement of each community within the Region, though
factors such as the unique nature of that settlement, or the
eventual importance to the Region of that settlement, or the
unusually high level of heritage integrity surviving in that
settlement, may indeed make it worthy of being considered
Regionally Significant.
Thus themes of Regional Significance are those that are
essential to understanding the evolution of the Region
and underpin its identity.
Farm complexes in the Region of Waterloo are typical of
many across Southern Ontario
Thus in the 1970s the Province was able to readily develop
the Topical Organization of Ontario’s History to assist with the
heritage component of its provincial park planning. The
document provides a useful, though by no means absolute,
framework/checklist for historic themes not only at the
provincial level but for regional and local strata as well. The
difference between these strata is often one of degree of
significance, with the higher levels typically containing the
levels ‘below’.
While the major themes from one Region (or even
municipality) to the next across the Province may be similar,
this in no way diminishes their importance within each area
nor negates the unique nature of the specific manifestation of
that theme. Survey and Pioneer Settlement will be an
important theme in every jurisdiction and the associated
stories of the difficulty of land-clearing, shanty building and
early subsistence will be Regionally Significant within each
Region with many potential variations in terms of date, ethnic
background, circumstances, specific geography of the
settlement landscape etc. Being a hinterland Township with
no direct access to the Great Lakes, and one of the earliest
European settled inland areas, immediately differentiates
Waterloo’s story from that of many other Southern Ontario
places.
8
The ‘Topical Organization of Ontario’s History’ was used in
1997 in the development of a framework for evaluating
candidates for Canadian Heritage Rivers (A Cultural
nd
Framework for Canadian Heritage Rivers, 2 Edition, 2000).
It was referenced not only for thematic concepts, but in
developing a format for the framework. The resulting cultural
framework for Canadian Rivers identifies five major historic
themes, fifteen sub-themes and sixty elements associated
with river-related human activities. The themes include
Resource Harvesting; Water Transportation; Riparian
Settlement; Culture and Recreation; and Jurisdictional Uses.
Not surprisingly given the Grand River’s designation as a
Canadian Heritage River, variations on these themes are
closely associated with regional historic themes identified
through this study as being relevant to cultural heritage
landscapes.
In developing an exhibition framework for a potential Regional
History Museum, the Region of Waterloo identified a number
of statements or themes to be captured or represented.
These include: 10,000 years of prehistoric habitation, cultural
diversity; the Grand River; Mennonite settlement; history of
agriculture; innovation in industrial and socio-economic
advancements; leadership in industry and commerce; and the
growth and establishment of the local communities that now
comprise the Region.
Drawing on these thematic historic references and those of
the ‘Topical Organization of Ontario’s History’, a series of
regional themes were identified for the Region of Waterloo.
For each main theme, details or examples of sub-themes are
provided. These could be refined or added to through further
research. At the local level, there is also potential for
Municipalities to carry out similar processes and studies to
further identify additional local themes.
Table 1, following, summarizes these general historical
themes, which are relevant to the Region of Waterloo’s
history, and specifically to the identification of cultural heritage
landscapes
The Grand River through Galt
9
i
ii
iii
4.0
THE CHL IDENTIFICATION
PROCESS
In laying the groundwork for the assessment of cultural
heritage landscapes within the Region of Waterloo, it is
important to establish a set of criteria whereby such places
can be identified. In the development of a formal Regional
CHL identification and evaluation process, other
contemporary approaches in practice in North America
today were reviewed, along with the updated Ontario
Heritage Act, and guidelines contained within the new
Ontario Heritage Toolkit. These approaches are discussed
below, followed by a recommended inventory and
evaluation process for use in the identification of Cultural
Heritage Landscapes within the Region of Waterloo.
4.1
Contemporary
Approaches in Practice
components, which are the tangible features that are
evident on the land.
Processes include categories of:
• land use and activities;
• patterns of spatial organization;
• response to the natural environment; and,
• cultural traditions.
Components include categories of:
• circulation networks;
• boundary demarcations;
• vegetation related to land use;
• buildings, structures and objects;
• clusters (groupings of buildings, as in farm
complexes or settlement areas);
• archaeological sites; and,
• small-scale elements (such as fences, gateposts,
trees, or other repeated elements).
The U.S. Parks Service is likely the earliest organization in
North America to develop comprehensive criteria for the
identification and evaluation of historic landscapes. In
particular the National Register Bulletin #30 ‘Guidelines for
Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes’
can be most closely identified with the concept of cultural
heritage landscapes, as they have been discussed by the
Region of Waterloo.
The identification of rural historic landscapes in the U.S.
Parks Services National Register, which may include sites
or historic districts, are listed using a process that includes:
identification of historic landscape characteristics;
evaluation according to the National Register criteria; and
documentation on a registration form.
Steps to Identify a rural historic landscape are:
• develop historical context,
• conduct historical research,
• survey the landscape.
Steps to Evaluate eligibility for the National Register
include:
• define significance;
• assess historic integrity; and,
• select boundaries.
Historic landscape characteristics are examined within a
series of eleven categories, which are classified as historic
processes, those uses and activities that have shaped and
organized the physical landscape; and historic
Mill ruins form part of an interpretive trail in Upper
Doon
The Ontario Realty Corporation / Ontario Ministry of
Culture Cultural Heritage Process, the City of London and,
more recently, the Town of Caledon have all adopted CHL
identification methodologies that are essentially
modifications of the original model developed and adopted
by the U.S. Parks Service.
The strengths of that model are: the primary insistence that
the candidate CHL be directly associated with the broad
historic themes of the area; the setting out of an inventory
process through which the evolution, elements, qualities,
context and boundaries of the candidate CHL can be
examined; and the final analysis, whereby the results of the
Study are considered against broad heritage significance
criteria.
10
As of 2005, Ontario’s Provincial Policy Statement (PPS),
which provides direction to the Planning Act and the
Ontario Heritage Act includes references to cultural
heritage landscapes.
identification of heritage values and character-defining
elements. The document states:
“Cultural heritage landscapes” are defined within the PPS
as:
“a defined geographical area of heritage significance which
has been modified by human activities and is valued by a
community. It 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. Examples may include, but are not
limited to, heritage conservation districts designated under
the Ontario Heritage Act; and villages, parks, gardens,
battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries,
trailways and industrial complexes of cultural heritage
value.”
Village of New Dundee
At the federal level in Canada, the most comprehensive
document pertaining to the conservation of cultural heritage
resources is provided by the Parks Canada - Standards
and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in
Canada. Like the U.S Parks Services model, underpinning
the recommendations is the assumption that the
identification of appropriate treatments is predicted on the
Castle Kilbride, a National Historic Site
“A historic place’s heritage value and character-defining
elements are usually identified when it is formally
recognized by an authority or when it is nominated to the
Canadian Register of Historic Places. If the characterdefining elements of a historic place have not been
identified, the first and absolutely essential step in any
project is to identify and describe the elements that are
important in defining the overall heritage value of the
historic place. The essence of these elements is usually
captured in a “statement of significance” or equivalent
document.”
The Ontario Realty Corporation, in modifying the U.S.
Parks Services approach, has actually developed an
Evaluation Form under a series of ‘ Attribute Headings’,
which allows for a ‘weighted’ rating system for final
determination of the status of the candidate Study Area. At
Caledon, while this rating system was considered, it was
decided that it was too proscriptive/artificial and somewhat
overly orientated to designed rather than organic
landscapes. Instead an evaluation approach closer to that
originally set out by the Parks Service was recommended,
i.e., considering whether the Candidate area fulfilled at
least one of 6 essential historic Significance Criteria (9 for
Designed Landscapes) and whether it had sufficient,
contiguous Integrity. Of course it is the Integrity factor
which often dictates the final Boundaries of the CHL, where
the consistent level of historic landscape quality has been
found to break down at a Study Area’s edges, and cannot
be included in the final CHL.
In the Provincial, City of London, and Town of Caledon
examples the identification of the CHL culminates with the
11
preparation of a Statement of Significance for the CHL
intended to clearly and concisely articulate the nature of
the area and the reasoning behind its selection, and, in
association, the setting out of the Character-Defining
Elements of the Area – those actual features which are the
essential components of its heritage character.
Evaluate properties for protection, including a
determination of Integrity, and determine best means
of conservation
Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest
describing physical features and heritage attributes
Protect properties under the Ontario Heritage Act or
other conservation measures
For the purposes of evaluating Cultural Heritage Value or
Interest, Regulation 9/06 requires that a property meet one
or more of the following criteria:
Upper mill pond in Ayr
The identification and evaluation process and criteria under
the Ontario Heritage Act has strong similarities to the U.S.
National Parks Service ‘Guidelines for Evaluating and
Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes’, which is not
surprising given the leadership role that the U.S. Parks
Service has taken in identifying and protecting broader
geographic areas of cultural heritage value.
The 2006 guidelines contained within Ontario Heritage
Toolkit: Heritage Property Evaluation (p. 6) identify the
following critical steps toward surveying and protecting
heritage resources, including site-specific cultural heritage
landscapes.
Learn about the cultural heritage of the community
Survey properties in the community
Screen the surveyed properties using preliminary
criteria
List screened properties of cultural heritage value or
interest on the municipal register of cultural heritage
properties
Research properties including:
•
Community Context: history, achievements,
aspirations of the community
•
Historical Research: land records, maps,
photographs, publications, site visit
•
Site Analysis: examination and interpretation of
physical evidence
The property has design value or physical value
because it is:
• rare, unique, representative or early example of a
style, type or construction method; or,
• displays a high degree of craftsmanship or
artistic merit; or,
• demonstrates a high degree of technical of
scientific achievement.
The property has historical value or associative value
because it has direct associations with a theme, event,
belief, person, organization, or institution that is significant
to a community.
The property has contextual value because it:
• is important in defining, maintaining, or
supporting the character of an area;
• is physically, functionally, visually or historically
linked to its surroundings; or,
• is a landmark.
Similar to an Ontario Heritage Act Section 29 (Part IV)
designation, the recommended identification and
evaluation process for Heritage Conservation Districts
contained within the Ontario Heritage Toolkit, includes:
Historical and documentary research
Field studies
Public participation
Evaluation of heritage attributes including:
• historical association
• architecture
• vernacular design
• integrity
• architectural materials
• landmark status or group value
• landscapes and public open spaces
• overall spatial pattern
• land-use
• circulation networks
12
•
•
•
•
boundary and other linear features
site arrangements
vegetation patterns
historic views
4.2 Inventory and Evaluation Approach
The identification of cultural heritage landscapes is still a
new area of heritage conservation in Ontario, and as
discussed in the previous sections, there are a number of
inventory and evaluation methodologies emerging. As with
other evaluation processes, such as natural heritage
assessments, the methods that will stand out as being the
most credible are those that are consistent with ones
endorsed by higher tier levels of government.
In reviewing the practices in place in other jurisdictions, as
well as the guidelines established within the Ontario
Heritage Toolkit, there are a number of common elements
within the methodologies. In general terms these are, most
notably: the undertaking of historical research to identify
the Historic Themes of the area and the community
Context, a general Survey of area sites to determine
eligible candidates that are closely associated with the
historic themes and which demonstrate heritage attributes;
an Inventory Process that examines historic evolution,
elements, context and boundaries of the candidate CHL;
and finally, a confirmation of both Significance and
demonstration of Integrity.
and economic benefit; alert interested parties in the site’s
potential, either for the purposes of pre-screening prior to
designation, or to flag sites during the development
approval process that will require further investigation. In
the case of the latter, and to satisfy a formal designation
process, a second stage of more detailed evaluation would
be needed to confirm the presence of a CHL.
In developing an appropriate inventory and evaluation
process for Regional Cultural Heritage Landscapes, the
following concepts were incorporated:
• the initial candidacy of a CHL is based on its
association with one of the identified Regional
historic themes;
• the areas being considered must, by virtue of
their quality, integrity and/or historic importance,
transcend municipal/local significance to be
recognized as significant to the Region as a
whole;
• the study methodology/process is based on
similar ones proven in other jurisdictions to
properly examine and inventory a candidate
CHL, and is consistent with Ministry of Culture
guidelines;
• the initial pre-screening through a primary
identification process can be used to establish
the candidacy of a potential CHL, for the
purposes of ‘listing’ but a more detailed
inventory and evaluation process is needed to
conclude the presence of a CHL for the purposes
of designation or protection using other
conservation tools;
• in its final determination, to be consistent with
provincial policy, a cultural heritage landscape
must be valued by the community.
4.3
Recommended Regional CHL
Evaluation Process and Criteria
The development of a Primary Identification Process, and
listing of Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes was an
objective of this study, along with the establishment of a
methodology to further evaluate and confirm the potential
sites as cultural heritage landscapes.
The Ministry guidelines support the ‘listing’ of heritage sites
as a first step toward evaluation and protection, and based
on generally known information and limited investigation.
The Primary Identification Process and recommended
Inventory and Evaluation process are described below.
The resultant list of Candidate Cultural Heritage
Landscapes is derived from the Primary Identification
Process described in Section 5.0.
This primary identification of cultural heritage landscapes
can serve to heighten community interest and awareness
of cultural heritage values for both heritage conservation
In consultation with the Region, and local heritage groups,
two of the candidate sites, Ayr and West Montrose, were
selected for testing and confirmation of the recommended
Speed River, Hespeler
13
Inventory and Evaluation Methodology. The selected sites
and their evaluation are provided in Section 8.0.
The proposed methodology is consistent both with applied
practices for the identification and evaluation of cultural
heritage landscapes in place in other jurisdictions, and with
the Ministry of Culture approach for the evaluation of sites
for the purpose of a registry of properties of heritage value
or interest, and/or for designation of either individual
heritage properties or districts. As such, the methodology is
suited both for use at the regional or local level. It also
includes components of the documentation required for
listing a property on the Canadian Register of Historic
Places, that is a Statement of significance that includes a
description of the historic place; identification of heritage
value and character-defining elements. Tailoring of the
documentation will be needed however to match the
specific protocols for listing.
4.3.1
Primary Identification Process
A primary identification process incorporates the early
stages of a complete Inventory and Evaluation process,
and can be used as a tool for identifying and pre-screening
sites with potential heritage values.
Key steps in the primary identification process are:
• the undertaking of historical research, using
secondary sources or archival material;
• establishment of the historical context of the
area to determine the historic themes or
associations;
• visual survey of the landscape to confirm the
presence of heritage features;
• consultation with the community, to determine
places of value;
• screening of potential sites against preliminary
criteria such as historic themes;
• listing of candidate cultural heritage
landscapes.
In subsequent and more detailed stages of investigation,
candidate sites are then subject to a more comprehensive
examination and evaluation process in order to Inventory,
confirm Significance/Integrity and further define
Boundaries. Following this process an area for which
Significance and Integrity has been confirmed is then
identified as a Cultural Heritage Landscape.
4.3.2
Inventory and Evaluation
The inventory process involves examining the both the
historical context of the ‘candidate CHL’, or ‘study area’,
and its physical attributes in more detail. The area is
described under a range of landscape characteristics. The
results of the inventory and analysis form the basis of the
evaluation report with associated mapping that delineates
the preliminary boundaries of the study area, and which
includes representative photographs of both the present
and historical condition.
The landscape characteristics that should be examined in
the inventory process are outlined below.
Physiographic Description
This is a general description of the natural processes and
landscape that shapes the area, and has influenced human
activity.
Processes
This comprises an examination of human interaction with
the natural environment, the form(s) this interaction has
taken and how it has influenced the settlement patterns
and traditions.
Key processes to be examined and documented include:
• land uses and activities;
• patterns of spatial organization;
• response to the natural environment; and,
• cultural traditions.
For Designed Landscapes also to be considered are:
• the landscape architect/designer if known;
• the historical style/ tradition represented by the
original design and/or subsequent alterations.
Elements
A description of the physical elements which
together constitute ‘the place’ and their inter
relationship
• circulation networks
• boundary demarcations
• vegetation related to land use
• buildings, structures, and other man-made
objects or land alterations
• settlement clusters
• archaeological sites
These steps are described in more detail in the following
section.
14
Significance Criteria
Cottages in Ayr
Site Context
This component of the inventory comprises a description of
the relationship between the ‘study area’ and the lands
adjacent including links on the one hand, and essential
differences in topography, architecture etc. on the other. It
includes a discussion of viewscapes and viewsheds, both
to and from the site, which remain essentially unaltered
from the historic period.
For Organically Evolved Landscapes and Associative
Cultural Landscapes
A. Is associated with events that made significant
contributions to the broad patterns of history (at any
level - local, regional, national, etc.) i.e., strong
association with central themes; or,
B. Is closely associated with the lives of individuals
and/or families who are considered significant to the
history of the area; or,
C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a
particular settlement pattern or lifeway whether
derived from ethnic background, imposed by
the landscape, was the practice of a specific
historic period or a combination of the above;
or,
D. Manifests a particularly close and harmonious longstanding relationship between the natural and
domestic landscape; or,
E. Has yielded or is likely to yield information important
to prehistory or history; or,
F. Is strongly associated with the cultural and/or
spiritual traditions of First Nations or any
other ethnic and/or religious group.
For Designed Landscapes the following criteria
would additionally apply.
G. Is a representative example of a distinctive style
(trend, movement, or school of theory) tradition,
time period, or a method of construction; or,
H. Represents the work of a recognized master
gardener, landscape architect, planner, architect, or
horticulturalist; or,
I. Possesses high artistic values or, as a whole,
represents a significant and distinguishable entity
whose components may lack individual distinction.
Demonstration of Integrity
View of Hespeler dam and village beyond
Statement of Significance
Any landscape upon which humankind has left their imprint
is a cultural landscape. However, only those cultural
landscapes that have an associated and a visual continuity
to the history of the jurisdiction can be identified as cultural
heritage landscapes. To be considered significant from a
heritage perspective it must be demonstrated through the
Inventory Report that the candidate CHL meets one or
more of the following criteria:
Integral to the identification of all heritage resources is a
discussion of the quality of integrity. For cultural
landscapes the assessment of integrity can be somewhat
more difficult and complex than for individual structures or
sites. Factors influencing this include the size of the area,
the number and inter-relationship of elements, the range of
land uses, and the extent of vegetative change.
The use of experts who are knowledge about the heritage
of a community, and have experience in the identification
and evaluation of cultural heritage resources will be
important in determining the integrity of a cultural heritage
landscape.
15
Within most cultural heritage landscapes, some loss of
historic integrity can be accepted as inevitable. The natural
organic process may result in the maturing of vegetation,
alterations to field use, and the extent and location of
natural areas.
Nonetheless, there must remain key individual
elements, both built and landscape which still clearly
reflect the historic period and/or the organic evolution
from which their heritage significance derives.
For example the continuing presence of broader
physiographic features (e.g. landform, water features) in an
unchanged relationship to building complexes, yards,
fields, fences, lane, concession roads and sideroads,
suggests integrity.
However, the substantial loss of historic features or the
encroachment of new or infill development that has
changed the timeless relationships between landscape
elements, might seriously undermine the integrity of a site.
A demonstration of integrity in the relationship
between heritage elements can be seen throughout
rural Mennonite areas (Woolwich Township)
Historic commercial buildings in Ayr still form the
backdrop to the millpond
In determining the integrity of Organically Evolved
Landscapes and Associative Cultural Landscapes, there
are a series of qualitative considerations. Key questions to
be reflected on include:
• Is the site continuing in the same use and/or
compatible use? Compatible here refers to a use
that doesn’t require the altering of key elements
and their inter-relationship.
• Is there continuity of ownership or occupation of
the site, dating to an historic period?
• Have buildings and other built elements such as
survived in their original form and in relatively
sound condition?
• Are historic complexes and their relationships to
other elements such as yards and fields intact?
To what extent have other built elements such as
fences, walls, paths, bridges, corrals, pens
survived?
• Does the historical relationship to prominent
natural features, e.g. cliff, stream, still exist both
for the site as a whole and within the site?
• Are ‘designed’ plantings such as hedgerows,
windrows, gardens, shade trees still discernible
and is their traditional relationship to buildings,
lanes, roadways, walks and fields still
discernible?
• How closely does the existing view of the site
compare to the same view captured in a historic
photo?
Can ruins and overgrown elements still convey a
clear ‘message’?
For Designed Landscapes, the following question
should also be considered.
•
Are changes to the landscape irrevocable or
can they be corrected so that the property
retains integrity?
16
List of Character Defining Elements
The integrity of a CHL may be examined, in part, through
an analysis of the integrity of its character-defining
elements. Character defining elements are those key
resources that most clearly reflect and contribute to the
heritage significance of the site. These should be listed and
described along with the Statement of Significance.
Character defining elements will of course vary with the
nature of the CHL and the reasons for its being considered
significant.
Dam and mill pond, Hespeler
At the conclusion of the evaluation, those areas which
clearly embody both heritage significance and integrity
deserve to be recognized as cultural heritage landscapes.
The rationale for designation, and/or other official
recognition as a CHL, should be formalized into a concise
Statement of Significance, which will include a list of
Character Defining Elements, and be compiled with the
Inventory to form the evaluation report.
Cemetery, St. Agatha
While all of the elements outlined in the Inventory serve to
establish its historical context and significance, the purpose
of the list of Character Defining Elements is to identify
those features that are most critical to the CHL. In the
absence of protection of the entire CHL (i.e. through
designation), these features would be most critical for
conservation measures, to maintain integrity.
Recommendation for Register or Designation
After reviewing the proposed CHL in relation to all of the
above criteria, and determining its integrity it should be
clear as to whether the site has the appropriate heritage
significance to be considered a cultural Heritage
Landscape and, if so, the reason(s) for its heritage
significance.
Boundary Identification
At the initiation of the cultural heritage landscape inventory
process a general geographic area is defined as ‘the study
area’. Through the process of examination and the review
of all aspects, considering both significance and integrity,
these boundaries may be modified or refined. The
modification may result from a deeper understanding of the
true parameters of certain types and/or forms of settlement
or from the perceived loss of integrity at certain locations of
the study area. In any event at the conclusion of ‘the
process’ relatively accurate boundaries for the cultural
heritage landscape need to be delineated and mapped.
Boundary delineation may be based on:
• historic legal boundaries, or current legal
boundaries when they are coincidental or greater
than the historic boundaries;
• boundary demarcations of some permanence
that are based on historic land uses, i.e. fences
and fencerows, hedgerows, tree lines, drainage
ditches;
• roads, rights-of way, rail lines or established
paths - both historic and active, that serve as
separators to significant sites or areas;
17
•
•
•
•
natural features, i.e. rivers, water bodies, ridges
or landforms, forested areas, that have served as
historic visual or physical separators, or
viewshed limits;
mature vegetation that mark the edges of the
cultural historic landscape, i.e. tree-lined road or
lane, woodlot or stand of trees;
changes in pattern of development or spatial
organization;
edges of new development, i.e. roads, buildings.
As finally established, the boundaries of the CHL
must encompass an area of historic integrity.
In some instances, establishing a buffer to the CHL may be
considered for planning and protection purposes, and to
retain the visual qualities of the site. The setback, location,
and type of buffer will vary depending on the nature of the
CHL, but may include natural features or lands that, while
outside of the historic land ownership or management,
either fall within historic viewsheds, contribute to the
historic setting, or were formerly part of the active uses of
the land.
Table 2, following, provides an overview of the
recommended Inventory and Evaluation process, suitable
for use as a ‘checklist’ in reviewing Candidate CHL sites.
cultural values, and the buildings, open spaces and
traditions that embody them. However there are other
signals that can also serve to identify historic places
and associations that are of value to the community.
Places that are valued by the community might include
those that:
• are closely identified with the community
image – e.g. appearing in local business
promotions, or in the marketing materials of the
municipality;
• are widely recognized as landmarks within the
local municipality or region;
• demonstrate a high degree of community pride
and stewardship through heritage designations,
historic plaques, or voluntary upkeep of heritage
features;
• are celebrated in the naming of local places,
e.g. a street, a neighbourhood, or a park;
• are widely photographed or depicted in works
of art by local artists;
• are written about in local histories or spoken
about through local stories and lore;
• house frequent or longstanding public
gatherings and events, or are favourite places
for community celebrations, e.g. wedding
photographs.
The West Montrose Bridge is a landmark in Waterloo
4.3.3
Community Values
A demonstration of ‘valued by the community’ is an
essential component of identifying cultural heritage
landscapes, and is required by definition in the Provincial
Policy Statement. The notion of heritage conveys a legacy
of natural and cultural elements that provide a sense of
community and place. The heritage resources of a
community include its distinctive cultures, traditions,
landmarks, landscapes and built structures. All of these
attributes are embodied in cultural heritage landscapes.
Individual communities exhibit unique cultural and heritage
qualities that define their local character, and reflect the
stories of the people and events that have shaped it. The
identification of those special places that hold aesthetic,
historical, social, or spiritual values for past, present or
future generations, is key to the determination of cultural
heritage landscapes that are ‘valued by the community’.
Ongoing consultation with local heritage associations,
cultural organizations and members of the public
throughout the identification and designation process
is, of course, a key method of ascertaining community
Region
These criteria are only noted in conjunction with the
identification of community values, and evaluation of sites
against the full range of significance criteria is, of course,
needed in the final determination as a Cultural Heritage
Landscape.
18
Table 2: CHL Evaluation Process and Criteria
CONFIRMATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE FOR REGISTER OR DESIGNATION PURPOSES
To be recommended for listing or designation as a Regional Cultural Heritage Landscape, a candidate site must further be
based on a full examination and inventory process, comprised of the following:
HISTORIC THEMES
Indicates association with one of the Region’s Historic Themes (refer to Table 1 for sub-themes in each
category):
Prehistoric Land-use/ritual
First Exploration
Pioneer Settlement
Farming
Early Industry
Urban Development
Transportation
Lifeways (Religion/Ethnicity/Education)
Governance and Policy
INVENTORY
Examines the following elements or attributes (as relevant to the study area):
Processes
-Land Uses and Activities
-Patterns of Spatial Organization
-Cultural Traditions
Site Context
Elements
-Circulation Networks
-Buildings, Structures and Objects
-Vegetation Related to Land Use
-Settlement Clusters
-Archaeological Sites
STATEMENT OF
SIGNIFICANCE
Provides a concise summary identifying how the site meets the following significance criteria, and including its
association with regional historical themes:
For Organically Evolved Landscapes and Associative Cultural Landscapes
A. Is associated with events that made significant contributions to the broad patterns of history (at any
level - local, regional, national, etc.) i.e., strong association with central themes; or,
B. Is closely associated with the lives of individuals and/or families who are considered significant to the
C. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a particular settlement pattern or lifeway whether derived
from ethnic background, imposed by the landscape, was the practice of a specific historic period or a
combination of the above; or,
D. Manifests a particularly close and harmonious long-standing relationship between the natural and
E. Has yielded or is likely to yield information important to prehistory or history; or,
F. Is strongly associated with the cultural and/or spiritual traditions of First Nations or any other ethnic
and/or religious group.
ii
Table 2: CHL Evaluation Process and Criteria (cont’d)
STATEMENT OF
SIGNIFICANCE (CONT’D)
For Designed Landscapes the following criteria would additionally apply.
G. Is a representative example of a distinctive style (trend, movement, or school of theory) tradition,
time period, or a method of construction; or,
H. Represents the work of a recognized master gardener, landscape architect, planner, architect, or
horticulturalist; or,
I. Possesses high artistic values or, as a whole, represents a significant and distinguishable entity
whose components may lack individual distinction.
DEMONSTRATION OF
INTEGRITY
Considers the following questions:
How clearly does the resource reflect and contribute to the heritage significance of the site?
Is the site continuing in the same use and/or compatible use? Compatible refers to a use that doesn’t
require the altering of key elements and their inter-relationship.
Is there an actual continuity of ownership of the site?
Have buildings survived in their original form and in relatively sound condition?
Are historic complexes and their relationships to other elements such as yards and fields intact?
To what extent have other built elements such as fences, walls, paths, bridges, corrals, pens survived?
Does the historical relationship to prominent natural features, e.g. cliff, stream, still exist both for the site
as a whole and within the site?
Are ‘designed’ plantings such as hedgerows and windrows still discernible and is their traditional
relationship to lanes, roadways, walks and fields still discernible?
How closely does the existing view of the site compare to the same view captured in a historic photo?
Can ruins and overgrown elements still convey a clear ‘message’?
Are changes to the landscape irrevocable or can they be corrected so that the property retains integrity?
LIST OF CHARACTER
DEFINING ELEMENTS
Lists Character Defining Elements including those key resources which most clearly manifest the heritage
significance of the site, and may include:
Buildings, e.g. residences, institutional, industrial, farm complexes
Structures and objects, e.g. mill ruins, bridges, memorials, fences
Human-made site alterations, e.g. dams, mill ponds, berms
Landscape features, e.g. hedgerows, orchards, sugarbush or woodlot
Circulation networks, e.g. roads, railroads, waterways
Archaeological sites
BOUNDARY
IDENTIFICATION
Establishes the boundaries of the CHL. Boundaries must encompass an area of historic integrity and may
include:
Historic legal boundaries, or current legal boundaries coincidental to or greater than historic boundaries;
Boundary demarcations of some permanence that are based on historic land uses, i.e. fences and
fencerows, hedgerows, tree lines, drainage ditches;
Roads, rights-of way, rail lines or established paths - both historic and active, that serve as separators to
significant sites or areas;
Natural features, i.e. rivers, water bodies, ridges or landforms, forested areas, that have served as
historic visual or physical separators, or viewshed limits;
Mature vegetation marking edges of the cultural landscape, i.e. tree-lined road /lane, woodlot;
Changes in pattern of development or spatial organization;
Edges of new development, i.e. roads, buildings.
iii
5.0 REGION OF WATERLOO
CANDIDATE CHLS
5.1
Identification Process
The following section describes the recommended list of
Regional Candidate CHL sites that were reviewed as part of
the Primary Identification Process, as described in Section
4.1.3, using the following key steps:
Historical research
General research on the history of Waterloo Region, its
origins and its member municipalities, was undertaken using
secondary and archival sources of historical data, to
determine the area’s historical context and potential
historic themes or associations.
Visual survey of the landscape
In undertaking the preliminary CHL identification process,
the areas examined were initially identified through a
windshield survey of the overall Region, to confirm the
presence of heritage features. In seeking cultural heritage
landscapes, the Provincial Policy Statement provided the
guiding definition.
Consultation with the community, to determine places of
value
Some candidate sites were suggested by Regional and local
municipal staff, and through consultation activities with the
Region’s Heritage Planning Advisory Committee, and local
Municipal Heritage Advisory Committees.
Screening of potential sites against preliminary criteria
Additional research on each area was undertaken using
secondary sources, both historic and contemporary, to
understand the history and evolution of the area, and to
identify regional historic thematic associations. The physical
presence of heritage features in the prospective areas, both
built and landscape, were further reviewed in the field. Maps
from the County Atlas of 1881 were used, as being the most
accessible means of initially reviewing existing sites relative
th
to their 19 century context (while acknowledging that this
assessment tool is of limited use for very early and/or much
more recent sites).
Representative photographs of the areas were taken, where
accessibility wasn’t an issue.
Both the suggested list of regional themes, and the
proposed list of candidate CHLs were reviewed with
Regional heritage personnel, who further consulted with the
local heritage staff and committees.
Listing of candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes
Based on the foregoing, a list of candidate Cultural Heritage
Landscapes was developed. Preliminary conclusions
suggest that they reflect Regional Themes as well as
Community Values (as suggested through consultation with
local heritage staff and committees), and are generally
consistent with one or more of the Significance Criteria.
Notwithstanding that, confirmation of the latter can only be
finally confirmed by screening through the full Inventory and
Evaluation process.
Other sites that were considered, and have merits as
candidate CHLs, but are questioned as to their regional
thematic association or extent of historical integrity, were
also noted. A closer investigation of these sites might reveal
additional information that would warrant a more detailed
investigation of their candidacy as Regional Cultural
Heritage Landscapes. The potential of these sites as locally
significant cultural heritage landscapes should also be
further examined.
As a broader regional assessment, the level of detail
undertaken for this study did not include primary archival
research, detailed investigation of individual heritage
properties, or in-depth consultation with local residents. For
some of the identified regional historic themes, there was no
readily apparent evidence, from a visual or physical sense,
which is key to the identification of a cultural heritage
landscape. However, further detailed site investigations, or
input from the community about local stories, events and
persons, might reveal additional sites that could be
considered as cultural heritage landscapes based on the
regional historic themes. As suggested by the Ministry of
Culture, a register or listing of heritage resources is not
intended to be static, but may be added to or edited, as
additional information comes to light.
Apart from the above, the primary identification process
revealed a substantial number of candidate cultural heritage
landscapes, which should be considered for further
evaluation in the development of a register or list of
regionally significant heritage resources using the
19
recommended Inventory and Evaluation Process.
A total of twenty-five Candidate CHLs have been identified
through the course of this study, with several others noted
for further research as to their regional thematic connections
and/or integrity. The Candidate CHLs reflect many of the
Region’s Historical Themes and will be further evaluated
and inventoried as potential Regionally Significant CHLs. It
is anticipated that local Municipalities would each consider
identification of additional CHLs significant in the local
context.
5.2
Candidate Cultural
Heritage Landscapes
Refer to Figure 1, for locations of the following Candidate
CHLs within the Region of Waterloo.
The Grand River
intact. In 1983 the 10.2 acre J. Steckle Heritage Homestead
was designated a heritage property in the City of Kitchener
under the Ontario Heritage Act. In 1988 a non-profit
corporation was established to operate and manage the site
for education and recreation purposes.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement
Farming: Early subsistence and Mennonite
Lifeways: Mennonite
Pioneer Tower and Environs
Between 1800 and 1803, more than twenty families traveled
from Pennsylvania and settled on lots sold to them by the
German Company in this area of the Grand River. These
included Mennonite families such as the Schoergs (later
Sherk) and Betzners. The Schoergs and Betzners are
believed to be the first Mennonite families who established
permanent residence in inland Upper Canada, in the area
that is now part of Waterloo Region.
Traversing cultural, political, and economic boundaries, the
Grand River is the key natural heritage feature of the
Region, inspiring a legacy of Aboriginal and European
cultures that have shaped the settlement of the area. The
river’s historic influence is evident in the many
archaeological sites, mill ruins, industrial complexes, rural
villages, and diverse communities that lie along its length.
As it winds its way through marshes, woodlands, Carolinian
forests, parkland and urban areas, the river provides a
common thread that links the natural and cultural features
from pre-historic times to today. The Grand is the
quintessential cultural heritage landscape that has been
celebrated in legend and lore, and commemorated as a
Canadian Heritage River. From a practical standpoint, the
identification and protection of cultural heritage landscapes
within the Grand is likely best established as a series of
cultural pockets, rather than as a singular entity
encompassing the river corridor, although its significance as
a linking element should be recognized. A number of key
cultural heritage sites along the Grand River are included in
the list of Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes below.
City of Kitchener
Steckle House and Farm
The J. Steckle Heritage Homestead is the original
homestead of John Steckle (Stoeckle), a farmer, and
Mennonite pastor from Switzerland. Built in 1833, near an
artesian well with a history of aboriginal use, the Homestead
remained in the hands of the Steckle family since the time of
the original settlers. Many of the original buildings are still
Pioneer Tower
In 1923 descendants of the founding families and members
of the Waterloo Historical Society, constructed the tower on
an acre of land on the old Betzner homestead to honour the
first settlers. The site includes the graves of several family
20
members, and has been designated a National Historic Site.
Notwithstanding the National Historic Site designation of the
Pioneer Tower, suburban development has significantly
encroached on the area. Several farm structures dating from
approximately 1830 remain on adjacent properties, including
the family farmhouses, the Betzner barn and drive shed and
the Schoerg springhouse1. The farmsteads were located on
a high bluff overlooking the Grand River, across from Doon,
and are linked along the river valley to a heritage farm
owned by the GRCA. The historic relationships of these
significant heritage buildings, to one another, and to their
landscape setting are important components of this
candidate cultural heritage landscape, which contribute to an
understanding of the early founding of Waterloo Region, and
settlement on the Grand River.
Although the City of Kitchener are not pursuing a CHL
and/or a Heritage Conservation District*, several of the
properties have been individually designated.
a lake, strolling paths, and the reconstructed clock tower
from old City Hall.
The area was designated a Heritage Conservation District*
in 1997.
Themes:
Urban Development: Kitchener
Berlin Industrial / Warehouse District
Located in the west end of downtown Kitchener; this area
encompasses the remaining factories along King St, Victoria
St., including Kaufman Rubber, Berlin Felt & Boot Co., Lang
Tanning Co., Rumpel Felt Co., Berlin Interior Hardwood Co.
The District also includes and the railway tracks and the
train station.
Themes:
-Urban Development: Kitchener
-Industry: manufacturing (various)
-Transportation: the Railway
Civic Centre
This area is generally bounded by Weber, Victoria,
Lancaster and Frederick Streets includes significant
locations such as the Governor’s House and Gaol on Queen
Street – the birthplace of the Region formerly Waterloo
nd
County, Hibner Park (2 oldest in Kitchener), homes where
many prominent citizens lived such as Mackenzie King, the
Breithaupts (i.e. Sonneck House). This area has been
identified as a potential Heritage Conservation District*.
Themes:
-Urban Development: Kitchener, Waterloo County, the
Region; founding families
Pioneer Tower Cemetery
Village of Upper Doon Heritage Conservation
District
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: German Company settlement,
founding families of Waterloo County
Lifeways: Mennonite
Located in the vicinity of Doon Village Road, Tilt Road, and
the Strasburg Creek, the former village area includes former
mill ruins (now interpretive site, two single lane bridges,
heritage residential and commercial buildings. This area has
been identified as a Heritage Conservation District*.
Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District
Adjacent to the downtown core the neighbourhood
surrounding the Victoria Park in the vicinity of Courtland
Avenue, Victoria Street South and Queen Street South
contains many fine heritage homes. The District includes the
Joeseph Schneider Haus, a National Historic Site. A centre
of recreation activity for the downtown for more than a
century, the designated landscape of Victoria Park includes
1
Doon Pioneer Tower, CHL Report to P&W Committee, July 2005
21
includes orchards a treed farm lane, ‘schnitz’ house, spring
house, kitchen garden, creek, bridge, fence line and some
farm fields, all of which compromise an excellent example of
an Early Waterloo County Mennonite Farm.
Themes:
founding families of Waterloo County
Lifeways: Mennonite
City of Cambridge
Core of Galt
Village of Upper Doon
Themes:
- Pioneer Settlement: Richard Beasley, Block 2
land holdings
- Grist Mills and Sawmills
- Industry: Doon Twine (first of its kind in
Dominion of Canada)
Lower Doon
With close historical ties to the nearby Doon Pioneer Tower,
the heritage resources found in Lower Doon are largely
associated with the first Mennonite settlers from
Pennsylvania, and represent a part of the initial nuclei for
settlement throughout the Waterloo Region. The area is
generally located around the area of Doon Village Road,
extending from Doon Mills Drive in the east to Doon South
Drive in the east. This area of Kitchener includes Homer
Watson House, the Doon Presbyterian Church and other
pioneer buildings. Doon Heritage Crossroads Museum is
also found in this area.
The Main Street Heritage Conservation District is located in
the heart of the former city of Galt and bounded by Main
Street, Ainslie Street, Imperial Lane and Water Street.
Visually striking, and tied to the origins of the Township
(North Dumfries), the area contains a number of
picturesque, early buildings that together with the Grand
River, bridge and adjacent Queens Square collectively form
an outstanding historic district which may well be of
provincial significance.
The area bounded by Main Street, Ainslie Street, Imperial
Lane and Water Street is designated as a Heritage
Conservation District*.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Richard
Beasley, Block 2 land
holdings
Grist Mills and Sawmills
City of Waterloo
Elam Martin Heritage Farmstead
A sixth generation Mennonite family farm, the Martin Farm is
located on 11.8 acres of land along the Grand River, within
the heart of what is now RIM Park, a 500-acre multiuse park
located in Northeast Waterloo. Originally settled by David
Martin of Pennsylvania in 1820, the current farmhouse dates
to 1856, with a bank barn dating to the 1860s, and an
accompanying doddy house, c. 1870s. The property
Historic commercial block in Galt
Themes:
- Urban Development: Galt/ Cambridge,
settlement on the Grand River
- Industry: manufacturing (various)
- Transportation: the Railway, Great Western, the
Grand River
Core of Hespeler
The abundance of water power attracted settlement on the
Speed River in what would later become the village of
22
Hespeler. Early mill sites were established by Pennsylvania
German and continental German settlers around 1835. Early
and unofficial names for the village were Bergeytown and
New Hope. Jacob Hespeler later established the textile mills
that made Hespeler a leading textile centre in Canada until
well into the mid-twentieth century. Strong evidence of the
milling history is evident in the area of Guelph Avenue and
Milling Road where the historic mill pond and dam, industrial
buildings, worker housing and residences are still present
along the banks of the Speed River, set against a backdrop
of church spires, and the business district.
-
Industry: flour, agricultural implements, furniture,
textiles, resort hotels (mineral springs)
Blair Village Heritage Conservation District
The point of earliest European settlement in Waterloo
County in the 1700s, the low flat lands near Blair have also
been identified as an early pre-historic First Nations
encampment site. Waterloo County’s first school and first
cemetery were located in Blair, which received its name with
the establishment of a post office in 1858. Earlier names for
Blair were Covered Bridge, Durhamville, and Carlisle.
Sawmills and flour mills along Bowman Creek and Bechtel
Creek were built by Mennonite settlers, providing water
power for Bowman’s flour mill, and electric power for local
use and in nearby Preston. In 1873, a branch line of the
Grand Trunk Railway was built, connecting Blair to Galt and
Berlin.
The core of Blair Village and a contextual landscape area is
designated as a Heritage Conservation District*.
Industrial buildings along the Speed River, Hespeler
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Block 2, German settlement
Industry: textiles
Core of Preston
In 1805 John Erb established the first sawmill in Block Two,
at the confluence of the Speed and Grand Rivers, followed a
few years later by a flour mill, which he called Cambridge
Mills. The first post office was established in 1837 with the
name of Preston.
The village was incorporated in 1853. Settled initially by
Pennsylvania Germans, the settlement attracted continental
German immigration from the 1830s onwards. Its location on
the Dundas Road, which ran north through Berlin, and early
railway connections gave rise to a variety of industries
including flour, agricultural implements, furniture, and
textiles. For a period of time in the late nineteenth century,
Preston became world-famous for its five hotels, centred
around the mineral springs.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Block 2, German settlement
Blair Village
Themes:
- Prehistoric Land Use: early first Nations
encampment site
- Pioneer Settlement: earliest settlement in Waterloo
County
- Grist Mills and Sawmills
Black Bridge Road / Holm’s Mills
The junction of Blackbridge Road and Townline Road in
Cambridge near the Black Bridge, was once known as
Holm’s Mills after Niels Peterson Holm, a Dane. Holm
acquired land on the stream feeding from Puslinch Lake into
the Speed River in 1829 and built and operated the local
mill. In 1856, he dammed the Speed River to power a flour
mill which continued to produce into the twentieth century.
23
The mill was later operated by W.A. Kribs. The present
name for the area is Speedslee.
Township of Wilmot
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement
Core of New Hamburg
Cruickston Park, Blair
The site has documented archaeological sites that
ostensibly date back some 9,500 years ago. Early European
contact in the area in the late 1700s was by transient fur
traders. Prior to 1800, one of the first settlers in the region,
fur trader Nathaniel Dodge, purchased land and built a cabin
on what is now the rare Charitable Research Reserve. In
1853, William Ashton purchased about 230 acres of land
along the Galt-Blair Road, to raise cattle. He is said to have
named his property, Cruickston Park, in honour of the
Cruickston Castle, the ship that brought him from England.
The earliest community in the area of New Hamburg was
called Cassel, which was devastated by a cholera epidemic
in the 1830s. The re-built community was later called
Hamburgh, reflecting settlement of the area by German
immigrants in the mid-nineteenth century. A post office was
established in 1851. When the Grand Trunk Railway was
built through New Hamburg in 1856, the village experienced
substantial growth. By 1858, New Hamburg was newly
incorporated and had reached a population of 1,000.
Industry had grown significantly and the village housed two
German newspapers, a number of mills and factories,
several general stores, and eight taverns.
The original village area of New Hamburg is designated as a
Heritage Conservation District*.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: German settlement of Wilmot
Township
Transportation: Railway (Grand Trunk)
Philipsburg Crossroads
Gateposts at Cruickston Park
By 1858, Ashton had sold the unfinished house and property
to Matthew Wilks. Wilks eventually completed the building of
the mansion and accumulated lands for farming totalling
about a thousand acres on which he raised pure bred cattle.
The property is now owned by a not-for-profit organization
and managed as an environmental research farm for
educational purposes. Historic structures include two
limestone buildings (circa 1840) – a 1½-storey farmhouse
with a one-storey side wing and a rare slit-window stone
barn adjacent to the farmhouse.
Located at the present-day intersection of Erb’s Road and
Nafziger Road in Wilmot Township, Philipsburg has its
origins in the 1840s as a German Lutheran settlement. The
Zion Evangelical Lutheran Church has been active there
from 1843. The first school in the area opened in 1844. A
post office opened in 1851, closing in 1915. Although
significant road improvements have been undertaken
through this area, a distinctive collection of heritage
buildings, both residential and commercial, remain in close
proximity to the crossroads.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: German Lutheran
Themes:
- Prehistoric Land Use: early First Nations
encampment site
- Pioneer Settlement: earliest settlement in Waterloo
County
Phillipsburg
24
Core of New Dundee
Named after the town of Dundee in Scotland, New Dundee
was settled from 1826 on Wilmot Township land purchased
by John Millar from the Canada Land Company. Millar built a
dam and sawmill on Alder Creek. New Dundee’s post office
was established in 1852.
Situated in the south-east area of the township and remote
from principal lines of transportation, New Dundee grew
slowly, serving mainly the local agricultural community. A
large flour mill and creamery cooperative were the principal
industries in the village. The area of interest is the old village
centre where the former hotel and several other commercial
buildings remain in proximity to the mill pond, and heritage
homes.
Shrine of Our Sorrowful Mother Cemetery at St. Agatha
Historic core of New Dundee
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Scottish
Sawmills and Gristmills
Core of St. Agatha
The earliest settlers to arrive in the St. Agatha area, around
1824 were Amish Mennonites from both Pennsylvania and
Alsace-Lorraine. However with the arrival of the German
Roman Catholics, St. Agatha became known both in Wilmot
Township and throughout Waterloo County, as the centre of
Catholicism. The early influence of the church, and the
presence of Jesuit missionaries contributed to the early
establishment of schools, which exceeded those in most
other areas of Waterloo County. The main crossroads
includes St. Agatha Catholic Church and manse, former inn,
stone house, and the Shrine of Our Sorrowful Mother chapel
and cemetery (both pioneer and contemporary, where many
th
th
Catholic order nuns are buried). Several 19 and early 20
century residences extend north of the main intersection.
St Agatha Catholic Church
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Amish-Mennonite &
German settlement of Wilmot Township
Lifeways: German Catholic
Township of Woolwich
Old Order Mennonite Country
Due to its northerly location Woolwich Township was slow to
25
be settled, although major landholdings were acquired by
the German Company in the late 1790s not long after
Waterloo Township. A railway connection was not
established until 1891, when a branch of the Grand Trunk
was laid from Waterloo to St. Jacobs and Elmira. In 1907,
there was also a branch of the Canadian Pacific line running
east and west through the township. By this time the
industrial boom that accompanied the railway had passed
and the industrial development seen in Waterloo and North
Dumfries Township was never achieved in Woolwich.
By the turn of the twentieth century Woolwich Township had
however become an important farming community within
Waterloo County. Commercial centres sprang up along the
Grand River where water-power supported the
establishment of mills.
candidate CHL is likely to be a series of cultural pockets that
are found throughout Woolwich and Wellesley Township.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Mennonite settlement of
Woolwich and Wellesley Township
Farming: Mennonite traditional
Lifeways: Old Order Mennonite
Village of West Montrose
West Montrose was established along the Grand River, in
an area encompassing Lots Seventy, Seventy-one, and
Seventy-four of the German Company survey in Woolwich
Township. These lots were purchased from the German
Company sometime after 1807, although it is believed that
significant settlement in West Montrose did not begin until
about the 1850s. Like much of Woolwich Township West
Montrose was settled by both Pennyslvania German
Mennonites, and Scottish/English settlers. Many traditional
Mennonite farmers remain in the area today.
The covered bridge of West Montrose was built in 1881. It is
known locally as the “Kissing Bridge” About a half-mile north
of the village, the east-west line of the Canadian Pacific
Railway was constructed in 1907. A station was built in this
area known as West Montrose Station, which was used as a
shipping centre serving local farms.
Barn complex, Woolwich Township
Elmira in particular would later become one of the leading
centres of business in Woolwich Township. Conestoga and
St. Jacobs, the other predominant communities of the area
were primarily Germanic settlements. The earliest settlers
were predominantly Mennonite, but later settlers included
German Roman Catholics and Lutherans. Without the
pressures of industrial development, Old Order Mennonites
and other conservative Mennonite groups were encouraged
to stay and farm in this area, creating the unique rural
character that exists in the northern reaches of the
Township.
Of particular interest is an area surrounding Elmira and
extending Into Wellesley Twp. Specifically the stretch of
Ament Line #17, from Linwood to Steffler Road, and Steffler
Road to Floradale Road, demonstrates strong Mennonite
heritage with two meeting houses and several traditional
farmsteads. Other areas, as yet to be found, may
demonstrate similar or greater historic integrity. This
Village Street, West Montrose
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Mennonite settlement of
Woolwich Township
Farming: Mennonite traditional
Lifeways: Old Order Mennonite
Transportation: Bridges
26
Village of Maryhill
The village of Maryhill is located near the Woolwich Guelph
Townline Road on Maryhill Road. The land on which it is
situated was originally part of the German Company Block
Two lands purchased by Pennsylvania German Mennonites.
Other settlers to the area in the late 1820s included Alsatian
Germans, most of them Roman Catholics. The settlement
was called New Germany up until 1941. Perched high on a
hill and central to the village the Catholic Church of St.
Boniface built in 1877, is a focal point of the village and can
be seen from the surrounding rural landscape.
Themes:
origins of Woolwich Township -Lifeways: German,
Roman Catholic
Township of Wellesley
Village of Wellesley
Wellesley Township was an area of Crown land contained
within Clergy Reserves known as the Queen’s Bush, which
extended from Wellesley Township through to Lake Huron.
Until the land was formally surveyed the area attracted a lot
of squatters, many of them freed or escaped black slaves
from the States who for the most part moved on when the
land was subdivided and settled. Wellesley village earliest
settlers consisted of a small number of squatters who
arrived sometime before 1843, when the township was
officially surveyed and opened for settlement.
Township of North Dumfries
Village of Ayr
Ayr was originally the three closely adjoined villages of
Mudge’s Mills, Jedburgh, and Nithvale. Essentially, these
villages grew to form one large village which was renamed
in the 1840s. Although there was initially resistant to this
historic form of amalgamation, by the turn of the twentieth
century, Ayr had become one of the most flourishing
agricultural and economic centres in North Dumfries
Township. Only Galt, a separately administered municipality,
surpassed it in population and economic activity. John
Watson’s foundry was one of the largest enterprises in the
township.
At its peak in the 1860s, its products were well renowned not
only throughout the township, but also throughout the
Dominion of Canada. By the 1870s, the foundry was
producing high quality mowers, reapers, and threshing
machines, and was one of the largest employers in the
township. Ayr is under consideration as a Heritage
Conservation District*.
Themes:
Urban Development: economic centre of North
Dumfries
Sawmills and Gristmills
Industry: Watson Foundry
Transportation: the Railway
Once the land was formally surveyed, settlement quickly
followed with the majority of settlers of German heritage,
most of them Lutherans. Because of its location along one of
the few significant tributaries of Smith’s Creek (now the Nith
River), Wellesley emerged as the Township’s largest centre
of commerce, with a wide variety of businesses and
industries. Originally, Wellesley village was named
Schmidtville (or Smithville) after its founding settler John
Schmidt (or Smith). However, when a post office was
opened in the village in 1851, the village was renamed
Wellesley
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Queen’s Bush, origins of
Wellesley Township, black squatters
Sawmills and Gristmills Ferris Mill, first in the
Township
Lifeways: German Lutheran
Heritage Streetscape, Ayr
Seaton Road / Scheffield Road
A representative Scottish farmstead settlement landscape.
Includes several stone farmhouses and barns which exhibit
Scottish origins. Somewhat fragmented by new
development.
Themes:
Pioneer Settlement: Scottish settlement of North
27
Dumfries
* Note: Several Candidate CHL sites are noted as Heritage
Conservation Districts or potential Heritage Conservation
Districts. Given the broader range of landscape elements
that are considered in CHLs, boundaries may or may not be
coincidental with those of the HCD, and should be confirmed
through the Inventory and Evaluation process.
5.3
Other sites for Consideration
The following are cultural landscapes that either have
sufficient visual evidence of heritage fabric but not
clearly linked to regional themes, or requiring a closer
review to confirm the overall integrity of the site and/or
its elements. Further investigations are required before
definitively listing these sites as Candidate Cultural
Heritage Landscapes.
tree-lined rural road with a nice collection of heritage farms
lining the west side on the valley, within rolling pastureland.
Declining heritage trees have been replaced with new infill
tree planting. Located in proximity to the urban areas of
Cambridge and Kitchener, this area exhibits some fine
heritage features, both landscape and built heritage.
This area of Chilligo Road should be further investigated as
a Candidate CHL, to determine whether it has Regional or
Local associations.
Local associations.
University of Waterloo
When first established in the 1950s, the University of
Waterloo was located at the edge of the urban area of
Waterloo, and by design created a separate University
enclave, encircled by earth berms and tree planting
alongside an internal ring road. The first university buildings
date from the late 1950s, with the majority of the building
stock constructed in the 1960s through 1970s, based on a
Master Plan by Shore Moffatt Architects, who also designed
most of the buildings.
Depending on the degree of integrity, this area of the South
Campus may well be of historic significance as a designed
modernist landscape. Since that time period Waterloo has
expanded around the campus, leaving it as the largest open
space area within the City.
The undeveloped portions of the North Campus include
rolling farmland, woodlands and hedgerows, the Laurel
Creek system, several heritage farmsteads with orchards
and outbuildings, and a mill ruins. The campus also features
a man-made recreational lake. Although clearly a cultural
landscape of some prominence, the most recent master plan
(2001), notes that “previous patterns of land-use have been
lost or hidden on campus, preventing formation of a sense of
a continuity and individuality”.
Farmstead along Chilligo Road
Langdon Hall, City of Cambridge
Set on 200 acres amidst woodlands meadows and restored
Victorian gardens, the house was designed and built as a
summerhouse for the granddaughter of John Jacob Astor of
New York City. Currently house and grounds are conserved
and used as a country inn.
A fine example of a heritage estate, Langdon Hall should be
further investigated as a Candidate CHL, to determine
whether it has Regional or Local associations, or should
rather be considered as a built heritage site.
Further investigation is required to determine the extent to
which the campus or portions of the campus retain the
original designed elements, and/or whether the overall
campus sufficiently reflects its overall historic evolution to be
considered a Cultural Heritage Landscape.
Chilligo Road, City of Cambridge
Just north of the hamlet of Fishers Mills between Kossuth
Road and Rider Road, Chilligo Road becomes a scenic,
Langdon Hall
28
Woolner Farmstead, City of Kitchener
Located at 748 Zeller Dr in the City of Kitchener this early
farmstead is protected by a conservation easement with the
City, and was recommended as a Candidate site by HPAC.
The close relationship of this site to the Huron Road, and its
heritage qualities suggest that this area should be further
investigated as a Candidate CHL, to determine whether it
has Regional or Local associations.
Further investigation is required to identify the regional
significance of Woolner Farmstead and its merits as a
cultural heritage landscape vs. a built heritage site.
Commercial Area of Waterloo
Important built heritage within the commercial area of
Waterloo includes the Huether Hotel, the Waterloo Hotel, the
post office, commercial block (Jacob Bricker – 1857),
Carnegie Library, Market Hotel, Bank of Montreal. A larger
area could include other elements such as Waterloo Park,
the mill pond, the Kuntz Brewery, Seagram lands, and the
First United Church, however this area might lack a clear
boundary and internal integrity.
Further investigation is needed to determine whether this is
a contiguous CHL, or a series of built heritage pockets.
Lockie Road (south of Town Line), North Dumfries
Scenic road with long views to the south particularly
between Cheese Factory Road and the Grand River, with
several interesting early structures and wooded sections,
although somewhat fragmented by new construction.
Greenfield Village, North Dumfries
Former mill on the Nith River, with worker cottages. It is
currently being researched as to its regional thematic links
and merits as a Site of Regional Heritage Significance.
Pinehill Cemetery and Environs, Township of
Wilmot
Located a little to the east of Haysville on Huron Road at the
junction of present-day Wilmot Centre Road, Pinehill is said
to derive its name from a ridge of pine forest in the locality,
once called ‘The Pinery’. These pine forests were cleared,
beginning in the 1830s, and a sawmill was developed to
produce lumber for home building. A Methodist church and a
school (Wilmot Township S.S. No. 7) were built on the crest
of the hill from which Pinehill took its name.
Pinehill Cemetery
Castle Kilbride, Township of Wilmot
Although this is a National Historic Site, and the magnificent
building is restored, there have been major alterations to the
site due to the addition of the municipal offices, parking and
entrance road. The front yard remains as a heritage
landscape, said to be one of the most authentic Victorian
landscapes in the province, albeit simple in style. The yard is
however but a small vestige of what was a much larger
property.
This is unquestionably a significant built heritage resource,
but somewhat lacking in landscape context to be classified
as a CHL.
The Methodist chapel was disbanded around the turn of the
twentieth century; the Pinehill School closed in 1964, and
remains as a residence today. The Pinehill Pioneer
Cemetery is perched high on a knoll adjacent to the Huron
Road overlooking several heritage farms and the former
school. Huron Road is a designated Heritage Road.
Castle Kilbride
29
5.4 Priorities for Evaluating Candidate
Cultural Heritage Landscapes
A complete Inventory and Evaluation of each of the
candidate sites is needed to confirm their status as CHLs.
This might be undertaken as part of an inventory of regional
cultural heritage resources or a cultural heritage Master
Plan, or on a case-by-case basis, as needed.
In the event that a comprehensive inventory is not
undertaken, the following criteria is suggested in determining
the Highest Priority for inventory and evaluation of the list
Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes:
1. Contains or is representative of heritage elements that
are rare or unique, for example: the West Montrose
covered bridge is the last remaining covered bridge in
Ontario; the Doon Pioneer Tower is a National Historic
Site, but the surrounding context was not included in the
site, and is threatened by development.
2. Is under threat from significant alterations or land
use change, e.g. urban development encroachment, or
resource extraction.
3. Is in a jurisdiction without municipal heritage
policies and/or a Municipal Heritage Committee, e.g.
Woolwich Township, Wellesley Township.
4. Is most valued by the community – as identified by
Heritage Committees and the public through a
consultative process. For example consultation during
the 2002 Arts, Heritage and Culture Master Plan noted
that preservation of the Mennonite community way of life
was important, as one of the Region’s unique cultural
elements. Individual heritage committees may have
specific priorities, particularly with respect to ongoing
efforts toward the identification of cultural heritage
districts.
Heritage Farmstead, Pioneer Tower area
Priority 2 – Core urban areas that are not presently
protected through HCD designations. Urban areas are
considered to have a higher probability of redevelopment
or land use change.
Core of Preston
Core of Hespeler
Core of New Dundee
Priority 3 – Areas located in jurisdictions not presently
represented by Heritage Committees, e.g. Woolwich
Township, Wellesley Township.
Old Order Mennonite Country (i.e. along route
noted on Figure 1)
-Village of Maryhill
-Village of Wellesley
Using the above criteria, the following is a list of priority
Candidate CHLs for early consideration in undertaking a
complete Inventory and Evaluation to confirm their status
as Cultural Heritage Landscapes, and the development of
conservation plans.
Priority 1 – Areas that are rare, unique or under threat
Doon Pioneer Tower area (this is the only candidate site at
present that has been identified as under threat from
encroaching development and land use change. Other sites
may become a Priority 1 if their status changes).
30
6.0 CONSERVATION TOOLS
6.1
Existing Heritage Policy
Framework
As part of its ongoing efforts toward heritage conservation,
the Region of Waterloo has begun a process of identifying
and documenting cultural heritage landscapes, and the
development of supporting policies within the Regional
Official Plan. These efforts are, in part, directed by provincial
policies which now recognize cultural heritage landscapes.
At the Region, support for heritage policies can be found in
the Regional Growth Management Strategy, and other
related plans and studies.
The following sections provide a review of existing provincial
and regional policies that set the framework for the
establishment of policies to conserve cultural heritage
landscapes.
The heritage policy review comprised three main
components:
•
•
•
Identification of possible directions for the inclusion of
policies pertaining to Cultural Heritage Landscapes in
the current Regional Official Plan;
A review of the existing policies with respect to
cultural heritage landscapes in the Provincial
context;
A review of background documents and reports
prepared by the Region with influence on and directives
for cultural heritage landscape policies.
Policy Directives Contained Within
Regional Documents
In 2003 the Region in its Regional Growth Management
Strategy (2003) identified the following goals:
Goal 2.6 – Conduct an urban cultural heritage landscape
assessment
The identification and assessment of areas valued by
the community and of significance to the
understanding of history and place. By identifying and
assessing these cultural heritage landscapes, there is
opportunity to encourage good stewardship of the
land, sites, and structures to ensure the unique
character of our community is preserved; and,
Goal 4.5 – Conduct a rural cultural heritage landscape
assessment
Through the completion of a cultural heritage
landscape assessment we can identify and protect
portions of our community which have been altered by
human activity, which are valued for the role they play
in defining and illustrating the history of the rural
residents. Of particular interest in such an assessment
would be the Mennonite and Amish communities.
The existing Regional Official Plan contains policies
pertaining to heritage resources but does not specifically
address cultural heritage landscapes. As a preamble to the
development of a new Regional Official Plan, the Region
has undertaken several initiatives that address the
strengthening of cultural heritage landscape resource
policies. These include the preparation of an Arts Culture
and Heritage Master Plan, several working sessions on
Cultural Heritage Landscapes, and the preparation of a
Cultural Heritage Landscapes Discussion Paper.
A working definition of Cultural Heritage has been adopted
by the Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan Advisory
Committee. Cultural Heritage is defined as: “encompasses
material culture in the form of objects, structures, sites and
landscapes, natural heritage and infrastructure as well as
living or expressive culture as evidenced by in forms such as
visual arts, crafts, performing arts, literary arts, oral
traditions, and language. The emphasis is on cultural
continuity from the past through the present and into the
future, with the recognition that culture is organic and
evolving”.
For the purposes of defining Cultural Heritage Landscape,
the Provincial Policy Statement definition is used.
The Arts, Culture and Heritage Master Plan includes the
following heritage policy directives with potential implications
for CHLs:
•
Broaden designation of heritage districts;
•
Establish heritage corridors defined as extended
tracts of natural or human-made features that have
historical significance to the region;
•
Promote a greater understanding of the region as a
unique place (history architecture, character and
unique visual and natural features). Active role for
the region in promotion, research, facilitation,
funding;
•
Implement the identification and protection of sites of
regional heritage significance;
•
Coordinate policies, clarify guidelines and streamline
funding among the Region and its constituent
municipalities;
•
Maintain and periodically update a region-wide list of
designated properties;
32
•
•
Development of strategies to preserve unique Old
Order Mennonite cultural population, their traditions,
and their culture;
Identification of specific implementation tools.
Provincial Policy Statement
The current Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) came into
effect in March, 2005. The policies with respect to cultural
heritage resources are set out in Part IV Vision and Part IV,
Section 2.6 Cultural Heritage and Archaeology.
Section 2.6.1 of the PPS requires that: “significant built
heritage resources and significant cultural heritage
landscapes shall be conserved”.
Section 2.6.3 of the PPS states that:
“Development and site alteration may be permitted on
adjacent lands to protected heritage property where the
proposed development and site alteration has been
evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage
attributes of the protected heritage property will be
conserved.
Mitigative measures and/or alternative development
approaches may be required in order to conserve the
heritage attributes of the protected heritage property
affected by the adjacent development or site alteration”.
“Conserved” within the PPS means “the identification,
protection, use and/or management of cultural heritage and
archaeological resources in such a way that their heritage
values, attributes and integrity are retained. This may be
addressed through a conservation plan or heritage impact
assessment.”
of development applications, prior to review, which would
support a policy for requiring HIAs.
Ontario Heritage Act
The Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) is the principle piece of
legislation governing the protection and preservation of
cultural heritage resources in the Province. The Act enables
municipalities to identify, list and protect properties of
cultural heritage value or interest. It provides regulatory tools
for the protection of heritage resources including Part IV,
Section 29: Regulation 9/06 for the designation of individual
properties and Part V designation of heritage conservation
districts.
Following changes to the Act in 2002, the OHA was further
updated in 2005 through Bill 60, to strengthen policies
pertaining to the preservation of heritage resources. The
OHA now more broadly addresses and treats equally all
property that is of cultural heritage value or interest, which
us defined as follows.
“Cultural heritage property is generally understood as
encompassing real property that is of aesthetic, historic,
architectural, scientific, archaeological, social, spiritual or
other cultural significance for past, present or future
generations.”
A heritage impact assessment may be used as an
immediate measure to evaluate a proposed development
plan or site alteration, to ensure that a significant heritage
resource will be conserved. A conservation plan may be
used to establish a strategy for future protection and
management of the resource, over the longer term.
Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that land use
decisions by municipalities and approval authorities shall be
consistent with the PPS, 2005. The Planning Act also
requires that a local area Official Plan must conform to the
policies of a regional Official Plan. Consequently, the Region
of Waterloo Official Plan may set the direction for local
municipalities with respect to heritage resource conservation
matters.
As well, the proposed Bill 51 (2005) appears to provide more
support for local planning decisions, including requirements
that Council and OMB decisions be consistent with
provincial policies at the time of decision-making. Bill 51 will
allow municipalities to request additional studies at the time
Heritage property in Ayr
The Ministry subsequently released Ontario Heritage Toolkit,
in 2006, a comprehensive series of documents that address
the full range of heritage resources and heritage resource
conservation in Ontario including: the establishment of
heritage committees; the evaluation of heritage resources;
guidelines for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act,
33
and other planning and conservation tools available to
municipalities and policy makers. The Toolkit specifically
addresses the significance of cultural heritage landscapes,
and includes them in all aspects of its recommended tools
for evaluation, conservation and protection.
Following amendments to the OHA, municipalities must now
keep a register of properties that are of cultural heritage
value or interest. The register must include all properties
designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, but can also
include properties that are deemed to be of cultural heritage
value or interest, otherwise commonly referred to as ‘listed’.
The register is intended to be periodically updated, as new
information about properties is uncovered, or as new
properties are added.
The Ontario Heritage Toolkit notes that while nondesignated heritage properties are not afforded the
protection of the policies of the Ontario Heritage Act, they
are nonetheless noted in the policies of the Provincial Policy,
which proposes that:
“resources may be identified through designation or
heritage conservation easements under the Ontario
Heritage Act, or listed by local, provincial, or federal
jurisdictions.”
With respect to the specific designation of cultural heritage
landscapes, the provision for this is included in Heritage
Conservation Districts: A Guide to District Designation
Under the Ontario Heritage Act. Pursuant to the definition of
the Provincial Policy Statements, cultural heritage
landscapes can be designated as individual sites, under
Section 29 Ontario Heritage Act, or as heritage conservation
districts under Part V.
6.2
CHL Identification and
Conservation Tools
The Planning Act provides for a range of tools that can be
applied, through regional and municipal Official Plans, to
heritage resource identification and conservation including
cultural heritage landscapes. Pursuant to updating the
Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), in 2005, the Province
released a series of Information Sheets in 2006 to clarify the
intent of heritage policies contained in Policy 2.6 of the PPS.
These include general guidelines pertaining to the
identification and conservation of cultural heritage
landscapes (InfoSheet #2); implications for undertaking
development or site alterations on lands adjacent to
protected heritage property (InfoSheet #4); and
considerations for the undertaking of heritage impact
assessments and conservation plans (InfoSheet #5).
In support of the PPS policies for the conservation of
significant cultural heritage landscapes, the Ministry
information supports the inclusion of objectives and policies
pertaining to cultural heritage landscapes into Official Plans,
land use planning documents, and related development
procedures and approval processes.
With respect to the identification of CHLs, Info Sheet #2 on
Cultural Heritage Landscapes notes that CHLs may be:
•
listed using evaluation criteria;
•
an OHA protected heritage property (designated
under Part IV, V or VI, subject to a conservation
easement, or the subject of a covenant or
agreement); or,
•
newly identified as part of a proposal for
development or site alteration.
‘Listed’ according to 27(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA)
involves a register of all heritage properties that are
designated under the OHA, as well as properties that have
not been designated, but are considered by a municipal
Council to be properties of cultural heritage value or interest
to a municipality. A description sufficient to identify the
property is required, through an initial survey. The register is
intended to be a planning document that can be consulted
by municipal decision makers when development proposals
or permits are considered, and a first step in the
identification and evaluation of a property that may warrant
some form of heritage conservation, recognition and/or long
term protection.
The Ministry InfoSheet #2 further cites a number of planning
tools that can be used for conservation purposes, as follows:
•
Heritage Impact Assessments;
•
Conservation plans;
•
Community improvement plans;
•
Secondary Plan policies;
•
Special zoning by-laws;
•
Site plan controls;
•
Subdivision agreements;
•
Management Plans (e.g. for parks, nature areas or
corridors);
•
Voluntary stewardship initiatives;
•
Financial incentives.
With respect to roles and responsibilities under the Planning
Act, as an upper-tier municipality, the Region may only
comment on larger planning applications (e.g. plans of
34
subdivision, zone changes, OP amendments, consents and
plans of condominium). The initiatives contained within
these types of applications could significantly affect cultural
heritage landscapes.
6.3 CHL Designation Tools
With recent amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act, and
following discussions and revisions to the guidelines for the
identification and designation of Heritage Conservation
Districts (HCDs) (Heritage Conservation Districts: A Guide to
District Designation Under the Ontario Heritage Act), it is
now apparent that the position of the Ministry of Culture is
that formal designation of cultural heritage landscapes
should fall within the existing conservation tools, those being
under Section 29, Part IV, as site specific designated
heritage properties, or under Part V, as Heritage
Conservation Districts.
A Part IV designation will be most appropriate for designed
cultural heritage landscapes, which are most likely found as
individual properties, often in association with built heritage
structures, or as parks or open space areas.
Subsection 41(1) in Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act,
enables the council of a municipality to designate the entire
municipality or any defined area or areas of the municipality
as a Heritage Conservation District. Such a designation then
is the formal mechanism which legislatively provides for the
protection of the heritage character of CHL’s consisting of
more than one property, and which could then be applied to
rural landscapes, as well as to urban or settlement areas.
The Ministry guidelines for HCDs (Heritage Conservation
Districts: A Guide to District Designation Under the Ontario
Heritage Act), now discuss the types of Heritage
Conservation Districts in similar language as cultural
heritage landscapes, using Designed, Evolved and
Associative categories to reflect their evolutionary process.
The identification process includes a thorough investigation
of the inherent cultural heritage values and characteristics
of HCDs. The benefits of developing a Statement of
Significance, which is also a fundamental component of the
National Historic Places inventory, are also noted.
designated as HCDs under the Act, although increasingly,
HCD studies are examining and encompassing a broader
contextual landscape area within their boundaries.
One example of this is the former Village of Rockcliffe Park,
now part of the City of Ottawa. The designation of the
Village as a Heritage Conservation District respects the
existing road and lot pattern established in 1864, which is
strongly influenced by the topography and woodland areas.
The ensuing development form includes a winding road
network, and park-like surroundings, which include an
escarpment overlooking the Ottawa River, MacKay Lake,
and the Pond.
In Vaughan, the Kleinburg-Nashville Heritage Conservation
District encompasses two distinct former mill villages, linked
by a road network, and the Humber River. The district
boundaries include a substantial area of the natural valley.
Through amendments to the City’s Site Plan Control By-law,
all development located within the Kleinburg-Nashville
Heritage Conservation District is subjected to site plan
approval.
Within the Region of Waterloo, the HCD Plan for Blair
Village in Cambridge includes the historic village area, and a
surrounding “primary area”, as well as a broader contextual
“area of secondary importance”, which includes a new
business park. The inclusion of the primary and secondary
areas within the designated district, allows a range of design
guidelines to be applied to ensure that there will be
appropriate landscape screening and buffers established.
The HCD includes landscape areas and water features such
as the millpond and creek. The guidelines address overall
design, details and choice of materials of new development to ensure compatibility and integration with the rural
character of the Village, as well as conservation guidelines
for the important character defining elements of the district,
which include both built heritage and landscape heritage
features.
While the original model for a HCD was a historic village,
neighbourhood or civic precinct, the concept has been
broadened, particularly in recent years, to encompass the
full range of potential CHLs including rural properties,
trailways, ruins and associative landscapes. At this time,
however, no CHLS of these specific types have been
35
6.4
The Regional CHL Identification
and Conservation Process
With this study, and previous ones, the Region of Waterloo
has embarked on a process for the identification of the CHLs
within its boundaries. The CHL identification process
undertaken through this study in essence results in
recommendations for the ‘listing’ of areas which are
considered Candidate CHLs, i.e. they appear to have the
potential but have not yet been examined through the full
Inventory and Evaluation criteria. The confirmation of two of
these Candidate CHLs was achieved with the case studies
that applied the full inventory and evaluation process to two
candidate areas, West Montrose and Ayr (refer to Section
8.0). The listing of the Candidate CHL areas, as delineated
by the associated mapping should indicate that they are of
‘special interest’ to the Region and that future planning
decisions, both regional and local, must take into account
the conservation of their special heritage character, using
available planning tools (refer to Sections 6.2 and 6.3). The
general guidelines identified in Section 7.0, following,
suggest the type of considerations that should be
addressed.
Both local and regional governments make use of the
discussed CHL designation tools. It is important to note that
the highest protection is available to local municipalities
through designations under the Ontario Heritage Act
(Section IV). The Region is limited in its abilities to exercise
some of the conservation and protection tools, either under
the Planning Act or the Ontario Heritage Act. The Ministry
makes a clear distinction throughout its Tool Kit guidelines
between ‘identification’ and ‘listing’ of CHLs, which can
occur at either or both the regional and local level, and
‘conservation’ and ‘protection’ measures for CHLs. The latter
of which can only be implemented by municipalities (i.e.
through the designation process, or other planning tools,
e.g. plans of subdivision, Secondary Plan policies, etc.), and
for which the Region may have a commenting role. The
Ministry further makes a distinction in its guidelines between
the ‘conservation’ tools that are provided through the
Planning Act, and ‘protection’ tools for all heritage resources
that are provided through designation under the Ontario
Heritage Act. It should be noted that CHLs are afforded the
highest degree of protection when designated under Section
29 (Part IV), and Section V as Heritage Conservation
Districts.
This ‘listing’ of Cultural Heritage Landscapes, can serve as
the basis of a dialogue with municipalities regarding the
conservation of CHLs using all possible planning tools, as
outlined in Section 6.2 including the future potential for
designation of all or part of the CHLs within each of their
jurisdictions under Part IV or Part V of the Ontario Heritage
Act. Following the formal recognition and listing of Candidate
CHLs (i.e. through Council endorsement), the Region and/or
its member municipalities may wish to continue with the
detailed Inventory and Evaluation process. The Region and
its member municipalities may also elect to enact policies to
require, as part of a development application, a heritage
impact assessment as part of a development application that
will evaluate the impacts of a proposed initiative on the
identified cultural heritage landscape resources, and
recommend specific mitigative measures or a plan for their
conservation and long term management. Depending on the
degree of evaluation that has taken place through other
means, the scope of the site-specific heritage impact
assessment will vary.
Where completed, this CHL Inventory report and boundary
delineation can serve as the outline and/or basis for a
heritage impact assessment or HCD investigations, with the
CHL Statement of Significance either adopted in whole or in
part and/or modified to suit the municipality’s perspective. To
this end the Statement of Significance, which is the
culmination of the full CHL identification process is a
valuable tool as it best articulates and summarizes the
nature of each CHL.
The HCD designation process, as set out in the Ontario
Heritage Act, is much more detailed than the CHL
identification process, involving both a thorough Study of the
area and the preparation of an integrated Plan with
architectural, landscape and streetscape guidelines to direct
future development or redevelopment issues. Though the
actual steps/criteria of both the HCD process and the CHL
Inventory initiatives have much in common, including the
importance of the Statement of Significance, they are best
viewed as reinforcing and complementing one another. In
the case of existing HCDs that are present in areas that
have also been identified as CHLs, the undertaking of a CHL
Inventory will allow further consideration to be given to the
cultural heritage landscape criteria, to confirm whether
boundaries are coincidental.
The conservation and protection of CHLs then, is best
attained through a collaborative approach between the
Region and the local municipalities, using the range of tools
that are available. The interrelationship of these measures,
and the steps toward CHL identification and conservation is
illustrated on Table 3, following.
36
Table 3: Spectrum of CHL Conservation and Protection Measures
REGIONAL OR LOCAL MUNICIPALITY
LOCAL
MUNICIPALITY
Step 5
No Status
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
STATUS OF CHL
IDENTIFICATION
Potential CHL
identified, e.g. as
part of a
development
proposal (Not
presently
identified on list of
Candidate CHLs)
Identified as
Candidate CHL
based on criteria
(Identified through
CHL study)
Endorsed and
listed as a
Candidate CHL
by Council
Inventoried and
adopted by
Council as a
Significant
Regional CHL
Significant
Regional CHL with
a Conservation Plan
Ontario Heritage
Act protected
LEVEL OF
RECOGNITION &
PROTECTION
No Status
Community
awareness
(municipalities &
developers have a
sense of the
resources)
Community
awareness
(municipalities &
developers have a
sense of the
resources)
Formal recognition
and register
(regional and/or
local level)
Conservation
guidelines
established
Designation under
OHA Part IV or Part
V, or conservation
easement, with
guidelines
STEPS
UNDERTAKEN
Regional themes, and CHL inventory and evaluation process identified
Preliminary evaluation criteria applied: historical research/context; historic themes; visual survey to confirm
presence of heritage features; sense of community value; preliminary screening for CCHL purposes.
Assessment of “Valued by Community”
Full Inventory and Evaluation completed; inkling Statement of
Significance
Detailed Conservation Guidelines
established, to inform planning decisions
Designation
CONSERVATION
AND PROTECTION
MEASURES
Confirm CHL (through Inventory and/or HIA)
Previously confirmed CHLs
Implement policies to address CHLs in Regional/Local Official Plans
Require Heritage Impact Assessment & Conservation Plan (in response to development applications)
Consider designation & protection under Ontario Heritage Act
HERITAGE IMPACT
ASSESSMENT (HIA)
PARAMETERS (in
response to
development
application on or
adjacent to identified
CHL)
Slated for
designation
Heritage Impact Assessment Required. Guidelines for HIA completion must be pre-set. To be complete the HIA process must: be
informed by a full CHL inventory process including boundary identification; and result in the measurement of impacts, the identification
of mitigative measures, and the establishment of Guidelines for CHL Conservation.
No inventory of CHL exists; HIA must include CHL Inventory
HIA based on existing CHL Inventory.
No CHL Conservation Plan; HIA must establish guidelines for CHL conservation.
HIA based on existing Conservation Plan.
OTHER APPROVALS
Heritage Permit
Required
i
7.0 GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR THE
CONSERVATION OF CHLS
Conserving the integrity of the overall CHL is a primary
objective of the identification process. In all types of cultural
heritage landscapes, whether evolved, associative or
designed, the character defining elements as defined within
the significance report are most sensitive to change and
alteration, and represent the highest priority for conservation
measures.
Inherent in the CHL concept is the acknowledgement that
these areas are dynamic. Change will, and must occur, but
identification as a CHL increases the chances that the
special character of the place will remain intact. The
character defining elements as identified within the inventory
and integral to the Statement of Significance are essential to
the understanding of a particular CHL and, as such, most
sensitive to change.
Thus they represent the highest priority for conservation.
This is most effectively accomplished with the will of the
property owners whose lands constitute the place. This will
involve a campaign of public education regarding the
meaning/implications of CHL identification, and attempting to
assuage the fears that inevitably arise where any possible
restrictions on property rights are seen to be involved.
The following are suggested general guidelines for the
conservation of CHLs, based on the types of conservation
measures recommended by Parks Canada (Standards and
Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in
Canada) and the U.S. Parks Service. They are not intended
to replace, but to be complementary to other policies
pertaining to heritage resources, such as those contained
within the Regional Official Plan, municipal Official Plans,
the Ontario Heritage Act, or the Cemeteries Act.
arrangement and interrelationship of topography, forests,
fields, woodlots, farmsteads, water features, hedgerows and
laneway and road systems, is integral to its significance and
should be protected from major alterations.
Subdivision or amalgamation of properties
fragmentation of land patterns must be avoided.
and
New development within hamlets and settlement areas
should respect the existing street patterns in both size and
character.
Landform and Physiographic Features
Landforms including naturally occurring hills, valleys,
slopes, plains and other topographical features, as well
as terraces, embankments, berms, dams, swales,
ponds and other human-engineered topographical
changes that are important in defining the overall
heritage value of the CHL should be protected from
major alterations.
Mill pond, Ayr
With respect to specific built heritage and archaeological
resources, they may be supplemented by more specific
guidelines that may be developed through the designation of
heritage properties or districts under Section 29 or Part V of
the Ontario Heritage Act, or the application of guidelines,
recommendations or policies developed in conjunction with
such tools as a Heritage Impact Assessment.
Roads and Circulation Networks
Land Patterns
Other circulation systems — such as paths, walkways,
parking lots, roads, highways, railways and canals that are
important in defining the overall heritage value of the
The overall land pattern of the CHL as defined by the overall
Existing road widths and alignments including jogs, offset
intersections, curves and varying road allowance widths,
should be protected.
Unpaved road surfaces should be preserved where they
exist.
37
landscape should also be preserved wherever possible.
Country Road in Woolwich Township
Land Use
To maintain the continuum of character defining elements or
associations that are reflected in a CHL, the maintenance of
long-standing uses is encouraged.
alteration of existing buildings within a Cultural Heritage
Landscape, the process should be guided by the following
general principles, as well as any specific recommendations
such as may be provided through the designation of heritage
buildings or structures under Section 29 of the Ontario
Heritage Act, or through a Heritage Conservation District
Study and designation as a Heritage Conservation District.
a)
heritage buildings and archaeological sites including
their surroundings should be protected from any
adverse effects of the development;
b)
original building fabric and architectural features
should be retained and repaired; and,
c)
new construction and/or infilling should fit the
immediate physical context and streetscape and be
consistent with the existing heritage architecture by,
among other things: being generally of the same
height, width and orientation as adjacent buildings; of
similar setback; of like materials and colours; and
using similarly proportioned windows, doors and roof
shape.
Significant urbanization, landform changes, major road
widening and re-grading, quarrying, and other land-use
alterations that are visually or physically intrusive are
significant threats to the integrity of a CHL, and must be
avoided.
When new uses are to be introduced they should be visually
compatible with the character of the CHL.
New buildings and structures should be located to minimize
their visual impact on the character defining elements of the
CHL.
Where necessary, visual screening of adjacent land uses
should be provided.
Old and new elements on a heritage farm
Buildings, Structures and Objects
Vegetation Relating to Land Use
Retaining the historic relationships between the landscape
and its built features is encouraged.
Removing or radically changing vegetation that is important
in defining the overall character of the landscape should be
avoided.
Demolition of existing historic buildings, structures,
monuments, landscape features or designed elements that
represent the character defining elements of the CHL should
be avoided. In reviewing proposals for the construction,
demolition or removal of buildings and structures or the
Mature trees, hedgerows and other woodlots that define the
land patterns should be retained and managed through
adequate, professional arboricultural care to extend their
lives as long as possible.
38
Where removal of mature trees and other vegetation is
deemed necessary due to disease, damage or health and
safety, replacement planting should be undertaken to ensure
the protection of significant areas of vegetation, i.e. historic
treelines, hedgerows and windrows, gardens, and
landscaped areas.
Infill tree planting along Chilligo Road, City of
Cambridge
When new plantings are introduced the use of plants that
reflect the species, habit, form, and scale of historic
vegetation should be encouraged.
Views and Viewsheds
The preservation of views, viewsheds, and the scenic
context is important to the conservation of the overall
character of the CHL and the preservation of the character
defining elements.
Any proposed alterations that will visually impact the
significant features of the CHL should be subject to a Visual
Assessment using a recognized methodology.
Hespeler mill pond
39
8.0
REGIONAL CHL CASE STUDIES
The following are two Candidate CHL cases studies
selected by the Region of Waterloo to demonstrate the
application of the inventory and evaluation process.
8.1
West Montrose, Township of
Woolwich: Cultural Heritage
Landscape Inventory
Overview
The village of West Montrose is in the Regional Municipality
of Waterloo, Township of Woolwich. It is located south of
Road 86 between Elmira and Guelph, and straddles the east
and west banks of the Grand River on Lots Seventy,
Seventy-one, and Seventy-four of the German Company
Survey. The Study Area is an Organically Evolved Village
landscape that is representative of the settlement patterns
along the Grand River, which occurred through Woolwich
th
Township in the mid-19 century.
historic themes. There is visual evidence in West Montrose
and the surrounding farms of Old Order Mennonites still
inhabiting the area today.
The associated historic themes of West Montrose are:
Pioneer Settlement – Scottish and Mennonite
settlement of Woolwich Township;
Transportation – Bridges; and,
Lifeways – Old Order Mennonite culture.
In the central part of the watershed, through the Region of
Waterloo, the Grand River flows through a wide, winding
valley carved through gravel glacial deposits. The area is
characterized by the Waterloo hills, which contain highly
productive aquifers. Urban and rural development has
resulted in fragmentation of the original natural forest cover,
comprised of the mixed deciduous forests of the Great
Lakes-St. Lawrence Region (Alleghenian Zone). North of the
urban areas of Kitchener-Waterloo, the woodlands and
wetlands of the Grand River Valley support provincially
significant flora and fauna, including a brown trout fishery.
Processes
Land Uses and Activities
The origins of Woolwich Township lie in the Grand River Six
Nations land grant known as Block Three, sold to William
Wallace, around 1798. Following early forfeiture by Wallace
the land was resold around 1807 to the German Company,
which was established by a group of German
Mennonites from Pennsylvania, seeking agricultural land
further north. A number of Pennyslvania Germans had
already purchased land and settled in Waterloo Township.
The Block Three land purchase was led by John and Jacob
Erb, of the German Company and Augustus Jones, a
government surveyor.
Present day aerial photo of West Montrose
The hamlet is best known as the site of Ontario's sole
remaining covered bridge, and is within a broader rural
agricultural area that supports the well known Mennonite
communities of Elmira and St. Jacob’s. However, the origins
of West Montrose lie within both Scottish and Mennonite
settlement, which is characteristic of Woolwich Township.
West Montrose is considered an excellent candidate CHL in
that it is linked to settlement in the Township by German
Mennonites from Pennsylvania, one of the region’s central
The German Company lands were surveyed by Jones into
130 lots of about 350 acres each which were primarily sold
to Mennonites from Pennyslvania, who, like their Waterloo
counterparts recognized the value of the land offerings. The
land purchases ranged in size from 350 to as large as 1,400
acres, although settlement was sparse, with many of the
Mennonites who purchased the land preferring still to settle
in the more established areas of Waterloo Township. In the
area of West Montrose along the Grand River, Lots Seventy,
Seventy-one, and Seventy-four of the Germany Company
survey in Woolwich Township were purchased from the
German Company sometime after 1807: Lot Seventy by
40
Daniel Erb, Lot Seventy-one by David Eby, and Lot Seventyfour by Christian Stauffer. Although land purchase occurred
early, settlement of this area would not take place until
around the 1830s, with records indicating that key parcels of
land changed hands several times before settlement took
place.
One of the earliest known settlers to the West Montrose
area was Jacob Benner who owned the majority of land in
Lot Seventy-one and portions of Seventy-two. Ezra Eby,
who in 1895 wrote a biographical history of the Pennsylvania
Germans in Waterloo and other township, notes that Benner
was born August 25th, 1808, and “in 1825 he came to
Canada and settled in Berlin where he was engaged in
blacksmithing until 1839 when he went to West Montrose
where he erected a saw mill and woollen mills, and also was
proprietor of a beautiful farm”.
population of West Montrose had been reduced to as few as
50 residents, with only a blacksmith, a chopping mill, a
mason, a cooper, a general store, and the train station which
served as a shipping centre for the area farmers.
Patterns of Spatial Organization
A notable exception to the customary Southern Ontario
survey of lots and concessions occurs within the German
Company Tracts, and some of the associated smaller tracts
of Waterloo and Woolwich townships. In these locations the
surveyor laid out 350 to 400 acre lots based on providing
access to a stream or river on each lot, without road
allowances. With the interests of most Mennonites lying in
farming, rather than industry, this settlement in large blocks
ensured the availability of land for subsequent generations.
In 1858, Benner established a woollen factory on Spring
Creek. This factory was the community’s first industry. By
1861, Benner also ran a steamed-powered sawmill. As with
other areas the presence of Benner’s mills initially
encouraged settlement in the West Montrose area, although
the mills only remained in operation until 1873. West
Montrose received its first post office in 1866, managed by
post-master J.B. Kilbourne, and became the postal village
for the surrounding areas of Woolwich Township.
Andrew L. Anderson, a native of Scotland, arrived in the
area sometime after 1845. He is believed to have named the
village after his hometown of Montrose, Scotland, later
adding West to the name to distinguish it from another
community near Niagara Falls. The name Montrose of
Woolwich Township appears as early as 1861 with West
Montrose in common use by about 1865.
By 1869, West Montrose is said to have been a small
settlement of about 100 inhabitants, with a post office,
blacksmith, woollen mill, lumber yard, a gunsmith, a
carpenter, a hotel, a stock dealer, general merchant, several
coopers, and a minister. Although the mills had closed some
years earlier, by 1890 West Montrose had reached a
population of about 200, and serviced the surrounding
farming area.
West Montrose did not benefit from the railway boom of the
1850s and 1860s that other communities of Waterloo
County had. The railway through the area was established in
1907 about half mile north of the village, on the east west
Canadian Pacific line. A station was built in this area, which
became known as West Montrose Station. By then the
Map of German Company Tract, Woolwich Township,
1852
The resulting pattern of settlement in the German Company
survey areas of Woolwich Township was somewhat
haphazard, and is evident both in the larger farm parcels
and in the existing road network that surrounds West
Montrose, which does not reflect a traditional grid pattern.
The settlement patterns are also evident in the forest
remnants, which throughout Southern Ontario often occur
mid-concession, while through this area are found most
often on the land least suited to cultivation.
Cultural Traditions
The origins of the Mennonites lie in the European Anabaptist
movement of the 16th century led, and the teachings of
Menno Simons, an Anabaptist leader. In search of
agricultural land, and freedom to pursue their religious
41
beliefs, Mennonites from Switzerland and southern Germany
immigrated to Pennsylvania in the late 1600s. Following the
American Revolution in 1776, a number of Mennonites
moved northward into Ontario to settle on the Niagara
Peninsula and along the Grand River, in Waterloo and later
Woolwich Township. The Regional Municipality of Waterloo
is now home to one of the largest Mennonite communities in
Canada.
The earliest church congregation in West Montrose was the
United Brethren. It is believed that the first services were in
the blacksmith shop of Jacob Benner, with a number of
denominations attending including Mennonites, Methodists,
and Baptists. In 1862, the first United Brethren church was
built with the West Montrose congregation sharing a circuit
preacher among other communities of Woolwich Township
and Waterloo County. It later became part of the United
Church of Canada in 1925.
In 1950 the Markham-Waterloo conference group of
Mennonites built its first meetinghouse about two kilometers
north of West Montrose. This meetinghouse was unique in
that it deviated from the traditional Old Order amphitheatre
seating arrangement in which the pulpit was midway along
the long wall of the building. Rather the interior of the West
Montrose Meeting House resembled Mennonite Conference
of Ontario churches that had the pulpit at the gable-end of
the building facing pews rather than benches. The
Winterbourne Mennonite Meeting House and cemetery is
located a short distance south of West Montrose at 1118
Letson Drive. This traditional woodframe meeting house was
constructed in 1965 by other Woolwich Old Order Mennonite
congregations, in response to expanding numbers of
members.
The first school of West Montrose began sometime before
1865. It was a one-room stone school located about one
mile west of the community along Elmira Road. In 1865, a
new stone school was built. Children of both the community
and surrounding areas attended the school. The school was
apparently located in the floodplain and was subjected to the
annual spring flooding of the Grand River. In 1874 another
stone school was built just east of the community in an area
known as Zubers Corners, on land donated by William
Veitch. This was a two room school which, depending upon
attendance, used one or both rooms for lessons. The school
remained open until 1967.
Traditional transportation methods are still in use
There is strong visual evidence of Old Order Mennonite
farms and continued traditions and practices throughout the
study area, and beyond. This is evident both through
physical manifestations, such as the continued use of
traditional meeting houses as well as in the cultural and
social practices of every day living.
Site Context
Former West Montrose schoolhouse
At the core of the village, where the road crosses the Grand
River, the historic context remains relatively intact. The West
Montrose Bridge, with its distinctive red painted wood
cladding, is the focal point, offset against the surrounding
pastoral setting of the river and its floodplain. To the north of
th
th
the bridge, several 19 and early 20 century residences,
the former blacksmith shop, the general store and the West
Montrose United Church recall the village history. Further to
the northeast within the village boundaries a modern
subdivision has been established, to the east of the main
street. Still, the historical essence of the village remains,
with traditional views on entry to the village from all
42
Edge Drive marks the entrance to the road to West
Montrose.
directions.
th
Immediately to the south, along Bridge Street are 19
century stone houses which overlook the river and which
together with the views of the river and bridge provide the
well-known West Montrose setting. The modern bridge on
Line 86 over the Grand River terminates the easterly view,
contrasting with the historic bridge and demonstrating the
ongoing evolution of the area’s transportation network. The
broad green floodplain on the north side of the river keeps
views of the newer residential area, and a trailer park at a
distance.
Elements
Circulation Networks
The road passing through West Montrose was originally
Highway 86 until the present by-pass was completed. A
bridge across the Grand River at West Montrose may have
been present as early as 1843. Historical research has
indicated that when a petition was presented to local
authorities in 1844 by landowners of the area, mention was
made of a road crossing the Grand River in the West
Montrose area. What is well known is that the existing twospan covered bridge was designed and constructed by John
and Benjamin Bear in 1881, following a contract to inspect
several existing bridges in Woolwich Township. The total
cost, including design and construction was $3,557.65. John
Bear had experience in building local barns, but the West
Montrose bridge was his first bridge, and only the second
covered bridge in all of the County.
Stone cottage, Rivers Edge Drive
To the south-east and northwest, the village fabric quickly
gives way to surrounding farmlands where there is still much
evidence of the Old Order Mennonite community that settled
the area. At the south end, Letson Park, at the corner of
Letson Drive and Rivers Edge Drive, bears the name of one
of the early founding families. As one progresses southward
along Letson Drive, the road turns at a dense cedar bush,
and proceeds easterly toward the community of
Winterboune, passing the Winterbourne Old Order
Mennonite meeting house and cemetery, as further
evidence of the area’s continuing Mennonite heritage.
The most significant built feature of the West Montrose area
is the West Montrose Bridge itself, which is the last
remaining covered bridge in Ontario. Constructed of pine,
the Queen Post bridge supports measure 9" by 18" by 50
feet, which is said to be at the time, the largest Queen Post
truss ever built. The full bridge measured approximately 208
feet long, 17 feet wide and 13 feet high. The original pier
and abutments were cedar cribs filled with loose stone.
The Grand River Trail passes through West Montrose,
utilizing the unopened road allowance along Buggy Lane,
and proceeding northward along Letson Drive, and Rivers
Edge Drive, before connecting to the Kissing Bridge
Trailway, which utilizes the east-west former railway line.
To the east of the village, Rivers Edge Drive winds along the
Grand River to Zubers Corners. Although there are a
number of modern residences along the road, they are well
hidden by the wooded hillside setting, which includes a
dense cedar grove along the river valley. Just west of
Zubers Corners, the former stone schoolhouse on Rivers
West Montrose covered bridge
43
The flooring was oak with 7 inch wrought iron spikes, while
the rafters were pine. The timbers were milled at the West
Montrose sawmill, owned by W.J. Letson. Bear’s original
design called for 20 shutter type windows, although fewer
were installed. The interior of the bridge was lit by coal oil
lanterns from 1885 to about 1950 when electric lights were
installed. This cloistered setting, as with many covered
bridges, gave the bridge at West Montrose its reputation as
the ‘kissing bridge’. Over the years, stronger materials have
been used to replace the abutments, piers and deck. Today,
the bridge is made of a combination of steel, wood concrete,
asphalt and stone. Despite these alterations, the bridge still
maintains its original form and character.
Township, was later established amidst much local
controversy.
The striking West Montrose United Church (former
Congregational Church), c. 1907, and its cemetery establish
a visual marker to the village core on entry from the north
along Covered Bridge Road, while the westerly approach
along Hill Street includes several noteworthy residences.
South of the covered bridge, two picturesque stone cottages
remain at 1238 and 1242 River’s Edge Drive.
th
There is evidence of the 19 century settlement of West
Montrose remaining on both the north and the south sides of
the river. In the core of the village are several fine Victorian
residences, including the manor house of what is now Olde
Bridge Place Bed & Breakfast, which overlooks the covered
bridge north of the river. On this property is a wood-sided
frame building, albeit altered, which once housed the
blacksmith shop of Charles Mansfield.
West Montrose United Church
Former West Montrose blacksmith shop
The shop was later rented by Leander Gole, an employee of
Mansfield’s. Gole later bought a building on the SE corner of
Hill, Church & Bridge (the latter now Covered Bridge Drive),
across from the general store and established the village
blacksmith and later a carpentry shop. Gole was well-known
locally as the ‘Blacksmith of West Montrose’, and was the
subject of newspaper columns, Bill Brahmas Ontario on
Global TV, a Canadian photographic essay, and a painting,
living to the age of 104. He maintained his business until
age 98, when in 1985 the house was destroyed by fire. The
property was purchased by the County in 1987 for a park,
and the existing parking lot, listed as ‘Gole Park’, by the
In the village centre, the general store still operates as the
Lost Acre Variety at the intersection of Hill Street and
Covered Bridge Drive (12 Covered Bridge Drive), the horse
and buggies in its parking lot evidence that it still serves the
local Mennonite farming community, as well as village
residents and visitors.
To the east of the hamlet, the later stone schoolhouse, c.
1874, which served both Zubers Corners and West
Montrose, remains at 1060 Rivers Edge Drive, now an
elegant residence. To the south of the village on Letson
Drive as it proceeds easterly to Winterbourne is a traditional
Mennonite meeting house, with hitching posts, and a
pioneer cemetery.
44
Contextually, West Montrose is set in a broader agricultural
landscape of century farms with clear evidence of a strongly
Mennonite community to the south and west along Letson
Drive, Hill Street and Jiggs Hollow Road. Most farms in the
area are set well back from the road on traditional large
acreages, with the large collection of barns and outbuildings
reflecting their farming traditions.
A fine collection of heritage farm properties exists to the
west of the bend in Hill Street, in proximity to a single lane
bridge. Here the stone farmhouse at 381 Hill Street is
nestled into the side of the hill with the road narrowly
passing between it and the barns of 388 Hill Street. The
farmhouse at number 388 is perched high on the hill
th
beyond. Another small 19 century stone house lies further
to the east at 245 Hill Street, also close to the road edge.
Vegetation Related to Land Use
The landscape setting of the West Montrose comprises
open agricultural lands, bisected by the generally steepsided valley of the Grand River, and several creek
tributaries. Through the West Montrose area, the shallower
valley provided fording for the historic bridge crossing.
Remnant woodland areas remain in association with the
valley corridor. A limited number of woodlots remain on farm
properties. Common tree species in the upland forests of
this portion of the central Grand River watershed, include
sugar maple, beech, hemlock, and soft maple.
The lowland areas of the Grand River valley and along the
lesser creek tributaries, which feed it are cedar swamps, as
well as stands of ash, birch, hemlock, balsam fir, hard and
soft maple, aspen, and balsam poplar. Vegetation along
Rivers Edge Road between West Montrose and Zubers
Corners is characteristic of this typology.
The farm complexes surrounding West Montrose include
various windbreaks and hedgerows of mature oak, maple
and spruce. Mature trees and well established landscapes
are present on the heritage properties within the village
limits.
Settlement Clusters
The village of West Montrose is the primary settlement area
within the boundaries of the agriculturally based West
Montrose Candidate CHL. Physically and historically the
village is closely linked to Zubers Corners, a crossroads
settlement to the west, which housed the local school, and
to West Montrose Station which was established for a brief
period of time approximately 1/2km to the north at the CP
rail line.
Archaeological Sites
Based on the Region of Waterloo archaeological mapping
and database, there are no known archaeological sites
(registered or non-registered) within the boundaries of the
West Montrose Candidate CHL. However, given the
presence of the Grand River, and its tributaries and the
number of built heritage resources in the area, there is a
high probability that archaeological sites, both pre-historic
and post European-settlement are present.
Continuing Uses
In addition to maintaining its agricultural profile, and village
centre for the farming community, West Montrose has
evolved to be a popular visitor/tourist destination for day
trips, weekend retreats, picnicking, and trails use.
While any landscape upon which humankind has left their
imprint is a cultural landscape, only those cultural
landscapes that have a deep connection with the history of
the jurisdiction can be identified as cultural heritage
landscapes. To be considered significant from a heritage
perspective it must be demonstrated through the Inventory
Report that the candidate CHL meets one or more of the
following criteria:
For Organically Evolved Landscapes and Associative
Cultural Landscapes
A.
Is associated with events that made significant
contributions to the broad patterns of history (at any
level - local, regional, national, etc.) i.e., strong
association with central themes; or,
B.
Is closely associated with the lives of individuals
derived from ethnic background, imposed by the
landscape, was the practice of a specific historic
period or a combination of the above; or,
E.
Has yielded or is likely to yield information important
to prehistory or history; or,
F.
Is strongly associated with the cultural and/or
45
spiritual traditions of First Nations or any other
ethnic and/or religious group.
A CHL must be able to be justified as distinct area of
contiguous heritage integrity. The key individual elements
which constitute the cultural heritage landscape and the way
in which their interweaving makes a ‘unique’ place must still
clearly reflect the historic period and/or organic evolution
from which the heritage significance derives.
West Montrose is now best known as the site of Ontario's
sole remaining covered bridge. The West Montrose Bridge is
a provincially significant historic structure and a well-known
landmark in the Region. It is the focal point for a community
that retains strong visual and cultural links to its origins as
an early settlement along the Grand River
Road leading to West Montrose Covered Bridge
As settlers migrated northward from Waterloo Township, the
West Montrose area was one of the earliest settled in
Woolwich Township. The setting of the Grand River
attracted settlement of the area, and the establishment of
the milling industries that spawned the village. Reflecting the
general settlement of the Township, its origins lie with both
the early Scottish and Mennonite immigrants. Although
actual settlement on the land did not occur for some years
lots in the West Montrose area were purchased in 1807 by
Daniel Erb and David Eby, early supporters of the German
Land Company. The original German Company survey of
350-400 acre lots is still evident in the road patterns and the
large century farms that surround West Montrose. Although
industrialization was never achieved, the area, like much of
Woolwich Township, attracted and has held many
Mennonite families who today maintain traditional farming
lifestyles in the areas surrounding the village.
Some modern development has taken place at the northern
limits of the village, however the historic integrity of the
village core remains, with the former Congregational Church
th
th
(c. 1907), a number of 19 and early 20 century homes still
present, and the general store still serving the community.
The village fabric extends eastward along Rivers Edge Drive
toward Zubers Corners where the stone schoolhouse c.
1874 remains. The contextual setting for the village includes
the surrounding broader agricultural area, with strong
indications still of a predominantly Old Order Mennonite
community apparent both in the farms and the meeting
house on Letson Drive.
Character Defining Elements of the West Montrose
CHL are:
•
The West Montrose Covered Bridge
th
•
19 century stone cottages (245 Hill Street,
1238 & 1242 Rivers Edge Drive)
•
two-room stone schoolhouse, c. 1874 (1060
Rivers Edge Drive)
th
•
former Blacksmith shop, and 19 century
Victorian farmhouse (9 Covered Bridge Drive)
•
West Montrose United Church and Cemetery, c.
1907
•
Mennonite Meeting House and Cemetery
(Letson Drive)
•
Surrounding contextual rural area including Old
Order Mennonite farms
•
Cluster of heritage farms & single lane bridge on
Hill Street (381 Hill Street, 388 Hill Street)
•
Grand River and floodplain
•
Views on entry to the village core, from all
directions; additional views to the West
Montrose Bridge from Rivers Edge Road, Hwy.
86, and high point on Jigg’s Hollow Road.
Conclusions
The preceding Inventory Report clearly demonstrates that
the West Montrose CHL Study Area fulfills Significance
Criteria A, B and in particular Criteria C. The continued
presence of the West Montrose covered bridge has
encouraged the retention of other historic elements and has
entrenched the community as a valued place in Waterloo
County. The village maintains its historic setting on the
Grand River, and its relationship both socially and physically
46
to the surrounding agricultural area.
There is strong visual evidence of Old Order Mennonite
farms and continued traditions and practices throughout the
study area, and beyond. This is evident both through
physical manifestations, such as farming practices, and the
continued use of traditional meeting houses, complete with
hitching posts, as well as in the cultural and social practices
of everyday living, which are apparent even through a
cursory driving tour.
formers a definitive physical boundary to the CHL on the
north, although associatively it extends at least 2km
northward to the former CPR line (West Montrose Station)
and the West Montrose Meeting House and cemetery. The
road layout is such that on the west, Northfield Road forms a
clear boundary. The southern boundary follows the Grand
River and extends along Letson Drive to Katherine Street,
which generally forms the most easterly boundary. The
described boundaries are illustrated on Figure 2, attached.
General Guidelines for Conservation
One lane bridge and heritage farms on Hill Street
Although further dialogue with the Mennonite community
would be needed to fully understand their social culture and
to confirm the valued features and elements of the
community’s heritage, it is fair to assume that protection of
the remaining heritage characteristics and features of the
West Montrose area would help to support the continuation
of Mennonite cultural traditions. Significant change to the
physical landscape, such as road improvements, or further
urban expansion would undoubtedly influence and impact
current cultural practices.
It is thus recommended that the West Montrose Village
candidate CHL be identified as a CHL with
generalboundaries as identified below.
Boundary Demarcations
The core of the area is the village centre from the West
Montrose United Church on the north to the intersection of
Letson Drive and Rivers Edge Drive on the south. However
the associations of the village with the surrounding
Mennonite community suggest that the boundary should be
extended to include the agricultural area beyond. Line 86
The Inventory and Evaluation process, confirms the
significance of the hamlet of West Montrose and its
contextual rural environs as a cultural heritage landscape.
As such, the identification of measures to conserve both the
visible heritage features of the area, and its historic cultural
and social traditions, including the Old Order Mennonite way
of life is key to its protection. There are a range of
conservation measures for a cultural heritage landscape
provided for within provincial planning and heritage policies,
including listing on a register of heritage resources, heritage
easements for specific properties, requirement for a heritage
impact assessment, site control by-laws, designation of
heritage properties under Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario
Heritage Act, or designation of a broader area under Part V
as a Heritage Conservation District.
The hamlet of West Montrose and its environs as described
in the CHL inventory and evaluation is a significant heritage
resource, both regionally and locally and consideration
should be given to pursuing its designation as a Heritage
Conservation District, to afford it the maximum protection
available under the Ontario Heritage Act.
The formal designation processes under the Ontario
Heritage Act require the approval of the local council, a more
stringent evaluation process and documentation of specific
heritage attributes, as well as direct consultation with the
community, and the development of specific guidelines to
direct land-use change, landscape and built form alterations.
However, in the absence of, or prior to this more detailed
undertaking, the following key considerations for the
conservation of the West Montrose Cultural Heritage
Landscape are proposed for reference in the planning and
decision making process.
The recommendations are broad in nature, and not intended
to replace the need for more stringent architectural and
urban design guidelines as might be established through an
47
HCD study, or a heritage impact assessment study, or
required in conjunction with a development proposal or
building permit application. Reference should also be made
to the Character Defining Elements identified in the
Statement of Significance, and to the Conservation
Guidelines outlined in Section 7.0 of the Region of Waterloo
Cultural Heritage Landscape floodplain, Letson Park, rural
wooded character of Assessment Study. River’s Edge Drive
to Zuber’s Corners.
scale and form with heritage features for any new
building or development, through the development of
architectural and streetscape design guidelines.
-
Preserve landscape character and features
surrounding West Montrose Bridge including
Heritage property in village
Protection of views and viewsheds
-
Heritage property in village
-
Key considerations include, but are not limited to:
-
Protection of village form
-
Establishment of a defined heritage district as
identified by the CHL boundaries, and/or (potentially)
confirmed through a Heritage Conservation District
Study, and designation under Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act.
-
Maintain the existing urban settlement area
boundary.
-
Any proposed development within the urban area
should respect the existing topography, and
landscape features, and the scale and character of
the existing road pattern and built-form.
Protection of heritage features: built and
landscape
-
Preserve heritage features, including scale and
character of the roads, heritage buildings, and the
West Montrose Bridge.
-
Consider architectural styling and compatibility in
Preserve views, viewsheds, and the scenic
landscape context in the area of the West Montrose
Bridge, on both sides of the river - including views to
and from the historic bridge, the road, the park, and
the Highway 86 bridge.
Maintain village, bridge and river views on approach
to West Montrose from all direction
Provide screening, buffering of new or intrusive land
uses to protect views.
Protection of agricultural context
-
-
-
-
Maintain agricultural uses in the broader contextual
area as defined by the boundaries, Line 86 on the
north, Northfield Road on the west, Grand River on
the south, and Katherine Street, on the east.
Protect the overall land patterns within the
boundaries of the CHL as defined by the general
arrangement and interrelationship of topography,
forests, fields, woodlots, farmsteads, water features,
hedgerows and laneway and road systems.
Avoid subdivision or amalgamation of properties and
fragmentation of rural land patterns.
Preserve significant heritage features - stone
houses, heritage farms and building clusters, single
lane bridges, Mennonite meetinghouses and
cemetery (including consideration for designation of
individual properties under section 29, of the Ontario
Heritage Act).
Preserve rural roads and character, and
accommodation of Mennonite way of life.
48
8.2
The Village of Ayr, Township of
North Dumfries: Cultural
Heritage Landscape Inventory
Overview
known as Smith’s Creek) made the location very desirable
as a millseat. The milling opportunity was first exploited by
Abel Mudge, almost directly at this location (Northumberland
Streeet), who by 1824 had erected a saw mill and flour mill
at the site. This became the catalyst for settlement in the
immediate vicinity in what became known as Mudge’s Mill.
The Study Area is an Organically Evolved Mill Village
landscape focused on the milling heritage which developed
at the confluence of the Nith River and Cedar Creek. It is
considered an excellent candidate CHL in that it is closely
associated with a number of the Region’s major historic
themes. Most particularly it is associated with:
The associated historic themes of Ayr are:
Pioneer Settlement;
Early Industry – mills;
Urban Development; and
Transportation – the Railway.
Former industrial buildings on Piper Street
In 1832 John Hall, newly arrived from Scotland, purchased
75 acres further east along Cedar Creek and eventually
developed a separate milling complex, originally a flour mill,
and a ‘Glenlivit’ Distillery. Around this hub further industries
grew including a second distillery, woolen mill, peg factory,
store and blacksmith shop, the basis for the hamlet of
Jedburgh.
Present day aerial photo of Ayr
The Ayr area is dominated by the Nith River Valley. The Nith
River is a tributary of the vast Grand River watershed. In the
vicinity of Ayr the Nith meanders widely. Just below
Plattsville (west of Ayr) it meets one of the broad gravel
spillways by which glacial drainage escaped from the Grand
River basin into the Thames. The river extends up this
spillway up to Ayr where it turns down another ancient
spillway to the southwest.
Processes
Land Uses and Activities
The confluence of Cedar Creek with the Nith River (originally
Mills were also established just west of Mudge’s Mill along
the Nith itself and this gave rise to the small settlement of
Nithvale. These nascent communities, as well as the
surrounding farmlands, proved attractive to the Scottish
immigrants that William Dickson was hoping to resettle on to
his holdings in the area, a number of whom hailed from
Ayrshire. In 1840 the opportunity of establishing a post office
united the highly competitive adjacent hamlets into, for
postal purposes, the Village of Ayr. This amalgamation,
though for a long time one of convenience rather than spirit,
created a relatively highly ‘industrialized’ entity for that
period given its scale.
Nithvale, the least significant of the settlements, is however
closely associated with one of the most dramatic episodes in
Ontario history – the Mackenzie Rebellion of 1837.
Apparently the local rebel contingent was meeting and
drilling in the location of the mills and was surprised by a
corps of the Galt and Guelph volunteers sent to arrest the
ringleaders. A number of local Mackenzie supporters were
50
imprisoned including Sylvanus Wrigley who survived to later
become an area tax collector and after whom Wrigley Road
is named.
Through the 1840’s industry further increased with the
establishment of more water powered mills and factories
most notably the Ayr Machinery Works founded by John
Watson (later the John Watson Manufacturing Company)
specializing in the manufacturing of agricultural implements.
The Watson Company was a leading player in this industry
up until the end of the WWI and during the 1880’s their fourstorey factory (at the current location) was the largest
agricultural works in Canada.
and the shape of settlement within the village.
The Roseville Road, (Northumberland Street within the
village) was laid out in 1826 at the request of Abel Mudge
and 22 others to lead to his mill while the main east west
street Piper/Stanley made its way between the north and
south sections of the Nith. At the western edge of the village
the steep bank of the Nith at the south side of Piper
terminates the line of residences at that point. Swan Street
developed as the toll road to Paris.
Despite the general village name of Ayr having been
adopted for postal purposes in the 1840’s as late as 1852
John Hall was having village lots surveyed and roads laid
out as part of a Jedburgh village plan. As well he wanted to
ensure that there was ready access from the ‘highways’
(Northumberland Street, Swan Street) to his milling complex
(Hall Street.) That road network is still in place.
John Watson Manufacturing Company
The quality of the Watson Company’s work received
international recognition, winning awards at important
exhibitions including the “Exposition Universelle
Internationale de 1878” in France. It expanded its facilities
constantly from 1848 until 1884 and was the largest
employer in the area.
While industry was the basis of the community and spurred
on much of the commercial development along
Northumberland and Stanley Streets the village was also the
market for the surrounding agricultural area. Until 1871 the
annual South Waterloo agricultural fair was held at Victoria
Park.
Patterns of Spatial Organization
The origin of Ayr as three separate entities is still clearly
discernible today in its unusual three-node form (a fourth
new subdivision node has been added as well to the
northwest). The major determinant for the development of
the village was Cedar Creek and its entry into the oxbow
winding of the Nith River. These streams and the damming
of Cedar Creek to form millponds dictated the road network
Village of Ayr, Tremaine Map 1861
Cultural Traditions
The lowland Scottish roots of the community gave rise to a
number of institutions including the Presbyterian Church.
The Stanley Street Church was a community focus from
1843 until 1914 when the church was amalgamated into
Knox United Church with services being held in a new
structure. The congregation itself dates back to 1834 when
worship commenced in a log structure just to the east of the
village. Knox United evolved as well from the Scottish Free
Church also active from the early 1840’s. Their first building,
the original Knox Presbyterian, was located close to the
Piper Street Bridge, the site now commemorated with a
plaque. The Stanley Street Cemetery, adjacent to the former
church property, is still very much in use.
51
Site Context
For the most part the historic site context for the village
remains intact. Essentially the urban fabric still gradually
gives way to the surrounding farmlands to the east and
west, while to the southwest the Nith River gorge provides
dramatic views from Piper Street through the wooded bank.
To the north along Northumberland the landscape has
become more built up with subdivisions and severances so
that what was originally a farmstead landscape is now
largely urban residential in character.
Along Piper Street, the prime residential street of the core
village, there is a range of architectural styles from Regency
Cottage to eclectic late Victorian. A number of the structures
(45 Piper, c.1844; 87 Piper, c. 1860; 128 Piper, 1876; 166
Piper c. 1897) are closely associated with the Watson
family. South of Piper Street there are a number of relatively
early dwellings including the home of Robert Wylie.
Elements
Circulation Networks
The origin of the road system within the village has been
discussed above (see Patterns of Spatial Organization).
Essentially that system, seemingly idiosyncratic by typical
grid layout standards (closer in form (but not feeling) to a
modern subdivision), but rooted in the historic evolution of
the village, remains an important aspect of its character.
Bridges have always been critical to the survival of the
village, particularly the Piper Street Bridge. It seems to have
been destroyed and rebuilt many times through the early
decades of settlement. In 1884 a steel truss bridge was built
which lasted until 1967 when the current version was
constructed. The Nithvale Bridge, now closed while its future
is being decided, has taken many forms since the original
wooden structure in 1847. The bridge along Main Street has
always been linked to the Jedburgh dam.
The coming of the Great Western Railway to Paris (1854)
increased the importance of the old toll road (Swan Street)
for the movement of the goods being produced in Ayr,
particularly the Watson products. Finally in 1879 the Credit
Valley Railway actually came through town greatly
simplifying the shipping issue and expanding potential
markets. The track alignment and station location have not
altered significantly since that time though now part of the
C.P.R.
Ayr heritage residence
At the Village centre (literally and figuratively), the Watson
Factory, key to the Village’s prosperity for almost a century,
remains, though in the relatively modest form in which it was
rebuilt following the 1920 fire.
The commercial area retains its low scale and several
original shop fronts. The brick range extending along the
west side of Northumberland is particularly notable as is the
surviving hotel (formerly the Hillborn House now the
Queen’s).
The village is rich in built heritage, rare for its coherence and
diversity. Residential, commercial and industrial structures
spanning the period 1840 – 1920 still form the essential
village fabric.
Commercial buildings on Northumberland Street
52
The homes of the Jedburgh area, are typically more modest
and arranged more densely (in the northern blocks) than
th
those of Piper Street. At 64 Main Street is the mid 19
century home of John Hall, the founder of Jedburgh, a
relatively simple frame structure while at 142 Main there is
another home associated with the Hall family.
Although somewhat removed from the village centre,
Victoria Park remains in its longstanding role as the primary
greenspace and recreation site, supporting local concerts
and sports events. Evidence of the parks evolution remain in
the entrance pillars and park structures, daring from the
early 1920s and built with stones from local farmers fields.
Key heritage institutional buildings remain in place, though
th
th
mostly from the later 19 and early 20 century, including
the Ayr (Carnegie) Library on Stanley Street, 1910, the Ayr
Public School, 1890 and the Knox united church on
Northumberland, 1887-1888.
The village has a number of public monuments important to
the commemoration of local history including the plaque to
the original Knox Church, and the memorial cross at the
main village crossroads at the site of the original village hay
scales, honouring those who died during WWI.
Within the Village there is also the early (1866) designed
landscape of Victoria Park, which originated as a drilling
ground during the period of the Fenian raids, and as an
agricultural fairground.
(Note: Further information on individual heritage structures
is available at: www.township.northdumfries.on.ca/
community/lacac_tour.html)
Vegetation Related to Land Use
The watercourses remain the dominant landscape feature of
the village, providing a pastoral setting and a basis for local
recreational opportunities in place of the industries that once
shaped the village. The steeper sided, and wooded Nith
River valley contrasts with the quiet waters of the mill ponds
along Cedar Creek, the latter providing the backdrop for the
village green, and a trail to the upper dam.
Pavilion at Victoria Park
Mature trees and landscapes are present throughout the
residential areas of the village, while adventive vegetation
is overtaking former industrial areas located along the
creek valley.
Settlement Clusters
The village of Ayr was established through the
amalgamation of the historic tri-nodal grouping of
settlements comprised of Nithvale, Jedburgh and Mudge’s
Mills (see Patterns of Spatial Organization).
Archaeological Sites
There are a number of known archaeological sites (both
registered and non-registered)* within and just outside the
boundaries of the Ayr Candidate CHL. These sites include
pre-historic findspots and campsites located in association
with the watercourses, as well as historic settlement sites
within the village fabric. Details and locations of the known
sites can be found in the Region of Waterloo mapping and
database. (*Mapping of archaeological sites is confidential).
Continued Uses
The character of the village and community values are
demonstrated in continued historic uses such as the core
commercial area, and annual community festivals.
Park and recreational trail adjacent to mill pond
53
John Watson and Robert Wyllie arrived in this manner.
Though fiercely competitive, the three nascent hamlets,
Mudge’s Mill, Jedburgh and Nithvale, agreed to be called
Ayr for postal purposes, apparently because a number of the
settlers were of Ayrshire descent, including would-be
postmaster Robert Wyllie.
While any landscape upon which humankind has left their
imprint is a cultural landscape, only those cultural
landscapes that have a deep connection with the history of
the jurisdiction can be identified as cultural heritage
landscapes. The candidate CHL must meet one or more of
the following criteria and have the requisite degree of
heritage integrity.
A.
Is associated with events that made significant
contributions to the broad patterns of area history,
i.e., strong association with central themes.
B.
Is closely associated with the lives of individuals
history of the area.
th
Industry flourished throughout the last half of the 19 century
with expansion of the enterprises in the Jedburgh area but
particularly with the evolution of the John Watson foundry
into a major manufacturer of architectural implements and
machines rivaling the Harris’ and the Masseys. The fourstorey factory Watson had built in 1884 was supposedly the
largest agricultural works in Canada at that time.
derived from ethnic background, imposed by the
landscape, was the practice of a specific historic
period or a combination of the above.
domestic landscape.
E.
Has yielded or is likely to yield information important
to prehistory or history.
F.
Is strongly associated with the cultural and/or
spiritual traditions of First Nations or any other
ethnic and/or religious group.
A CHL must be able to be justified as distinct area of
contiguous heritage integrity. The key individual elements
which constitute the cultural heritage landscape and the way
in which their interweaving makes a ‘unique’ place must still
clearly reflect the historic period and/or organic evolution
from which the heritage significance derives.
The founding of Mudge’s Mills in 1824 followed by the
erection of Mills further east along Cedar Creek and west
along the Nith River prior to 1840, formed the basis for
settlement at these three, initially separate, locations. An
influx of Scottish settlers, mostly from the lowlands,
responding to the advertising campaign of William Dickson
the master developer of the area, immigrated to this locale.
Many of the key figures in local history including John Hall,
Ayr commercial district
The existing distinctive tri-nodal form of the Village can be
traced to the original three hamlets, themselves a reflection
of the milling opportunities provided by the winding Nith and
Cedar Creek. The mill ponds along Cedar Creek, still such
an important visual feature of the Village, were critical to
th
powering its industries throughout the 19 century and the
roads and built form of the village developed around them.
The internal road network, again reflecting the lasting (post
1850) ‘psychological’ separation of Jedburgh from the rest of
the community, has not changed significantly within the
Village proper but for the addition of several roads and the
augmentation of a few others. The imperative of the mills
established Northumberland Road and the need to reach
markets created the toll road to Paris. Finally the Credit
Valley Railway came through Ayr in 1879 and the track
alignment and station are still in the same position though
the latter is now only a freight siding.
54
The heritage built form of the Village is remarkably intact
including industrial, commercial, institutional as well as
residential structures spanning the period 1840 – WWII. The
homes associated with the key families, mill owners etc.
such as Hall, Wyllie and Watson are still extant. The
Jedburgh residential district and the Piper Street area are
each distinct in their layout and predominant architectural
character.
th
fire. The commercial district retains its 19 century
streetscapes (even a recent Bank of Commerce has
respected that scale) including some fine original shopfronts.
The Queen’s Hotel (formerly Hilborn House) still occupies its
corner lot on the road to Paris. Later institutional buildings
such as the Ayr School, Knox United Church and the original
Ayr Public Library which spread across the village suggest
the eventual true coalescence into one entity.
Village of Ayr, Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo
and Wellington Counties, 1881
Character Defining Elements of the Ayr CHL are:
•
The mill-ponds
•
The Northumberland/Stanley Commercial
Crossroads including the Memorial Cross (Traffic
Island)
•
The Watson Factory and Piper Street Bridge
•
The Watson family homes along Piper Street
(including 45, 74, 87, 128 and 166)
•
The Robert Wyllie (Postmaster’s House), 10 Water
Street
•
Victoria Park
•
The Hall Homes on Main Street (64, 142)
•
The Queen’s Hotel, Stanley and Swan Streets
•
Ayr Public School,
•
Knox United Church
•
Ayr Public Library
•
Stanley Street Cemetery
•
The Nithvale Bridge
•
Views on entry into the village core: from
Northumberland Street and Piper Street.
Conclusions
The preceding Inventory Report clearly demonstrates that
this Study Area fulfills Significance Criteria A, B and C. The
particular confluence of the Nith River and Cedar Creek led
to the relatively early development of an important regional
center and to the founding of a regionally (and for a period,
nationally) important industry, the John Watson
Manufacturing Company. The rivers along with the
ambitions of competing mill owners created the distinctive
tri-nodal village form still visible today. The influence of the
primarily Scottish settlers is evident in the village name and
its core institutions.
Ayr Public School
The Watson Factory, The highest profile building in the
Village for much of the 19th century, remains at the village
core, though in its reduced, rebuilt form following the 1920
55
It is thus recommended that the Ayr Village candidate
CHL be identified as a CHL with particular boundaries
as identified below.
Boundary Identification
The eastern boundary is considered to be the eastern edge
of the Jedburgh mill pond. The angling northern ‘edge’ is
created by the railway track (originally the Credit Valley
Railway) intimately connected to the industrial aspirations of
the village. The southern boundary is created by the ‘oxbow’
of the Nith River in association with the original road network
as depicted in the 1881 County Atlas. The western terminus
is suggested as the intersection of Gladstone and Piper,
which allows a sense of rural context and ‘gateway’ for the
CHL.
The described boundaries are illustrated on Figure 3,
attached.
General Guidelines for Conservation
The historic evolution of Ayr, including the original villages of
Nithvale, Mudge’s Mill, Jedburgh and Nithvale is still strongly
visible today. Important cultural features including the
millponds, bridges, dams still remain, and the heritage built
form of the Village is remarkably intact including industrial,
commercial, institutional as well as residential structures,
spanning the period 1840 – WWII. The CHL Inventory and
Evaluation process confirms the significance of the area,
within the boundaries indicated, as a cultural heritage
landscape.
There are a range of conservation measures for a cultural
heritage landscape provided for within provincial planning
and heritage policies, including listing on a register of
heritage resources, heritage easements for specific
properties, requirement for a heritage impact assessment,
site control by-laws, designation of heritage properties under
Section 29, Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, or
designation of a broader area under Part V as a Heritage
Conservation District.
The formal designation processes under the Ontario
Heritage Act require the approval of the local council, a more
stringent evaluation process and documentation of specific
heritage attributes, as well as direct consultation with the
community, and the development of specific guidelines to
direct land-use change, landscape and built form alterations.
Many of the built heritage features in Ayr have been, or are
proposed for, designation under the Ontario Heritage Act.
The village core as a whole is a significant heritage
resource, both regionally and locally, and consideration
should be given to pursuing its designation as a Heritage
Conservation District, to afford it the maximum protection
available under the Ontario Heritage Act.
However, in the absence of, or prior to this more detailed
undertaking, the following key considerations for the
conservation of the Ayr Cultural Heritage Landscape are
proposed for reference in the planning and decision making
process.
The recommendations are broad in nature, and not intended
to replace the need for more stringent guidelines as might
be established through an HCD study, or designation of
individual properties, a heritage impact assessment study,
as might be required in conjunction with a development
proposal or building permit application. Reference should
also be made to the Character Defining Elements identified
in the Statement of Significance, and to the Conservation
Guidelines outlined in Section 7.0 of the Region of Waterloo
Cultural Heritage Landscape Assessment Study.
Key considerations include, but are not limited to:
Protection of village form
Former industrial buildings
As such, the identification of measures to conserve both the
visible heritage features of the area, and its historic cultural
associations is key to its protection.
Establishment of a defined heritage district as
identified by the CHL boundaries, and/or (potentially)
confirmed through a Heritage Conservation District
Study, and designation under Part V of the Ontario
Heritage Act.
56
-
Preservation of scale and character of the urban and
semi-rural road network, and other evidence of the
historic settlement patterns, particularly the tri-nodal
village form.
Protection of heritage features: built and
landscape
-
Preservation of significant built heritage features
including residential, commercial, churches, schools,
library, and industrial buildings, bridges, dams
(including consideration for designation of individual
properties under section 29 of the Ontario Heritage
Act), through the development of architectural and
streetscape design guidelines.
-
Preservation of landscape character and features
including the millponds, dams, Nith River and Cedar
Creek and their associated open space, and the
designed landscape of Victoria Park.
-
Any proposed new development within the
settlement area should respect the existing street
and built-form patterns in both scale and character.
-
Consideration of architectural styling and
compatibility in scale and form of any new building
with heritage features.
Protection of views and viewsheds
-
-
-
Preservation of views, viewsheds, and the scenic
landscape context including the surrounding
farmlands to the east and west of the village, the
mill ponds and open space along Cedar Creetk,
the NIth River gorge, and views to it from Piper
Street through the wooded bank.
Maintenance of the existing village and river
views, on approach to Ayr from the north, west
and east.
Screening, buffering of new or intrusive land uses
to protect views.
The River Nith
Knox United Church
57
adjacent to regionally significant cultural heritage
landscapes;
9.0 SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS
Summary
Through this study, the Region of Waterloo has identified a
process for the identification of the cultural heritage
landscapes (CHLs). The study also recommends a number
of sites for ‘listing’ as Candidate CHLs, in that they appear to
have the potential to be CHLs but have not yet been
examined through the full Inventory and Evaluation criteria.
The listing of Candidate CHL areas, as delineated by the
associated mapping should indicate that they are of ‘special
interest’ to the Region and that future planning decisions,
both regional and local, must take into account the
conservation of their special heritage character, using
available tools under the Ontario Heritage Act and the
Planning Act.
The study further applied the criteria and inventory and
evaluation process to two Candidate CHLs: West Montrose
and Ayr (refer to Section 8.0); confirmed them as cultural
heritage landscapes; and provided recommendations for
conservation guidelines.
Next Steps
In developing a formal Regional process for addressing the
conservation of cultural heritage landscape resources, the
following Next Steps are proposed:
1.
2.
3.
Review/endorsement of the CHL inventory process and
Candidate CHLs contained within this report through
consultation with heritage advisory committees, local
municipal staff, and the public;
Recognition and ‘listing’ of the Candidate Regional
CHLs by the Region of Waterloo, through a report
approved by Regional Council;
Incorporation of supportive policies within the Regional
Official Plan (ROP) that recognize cultural heritage
landscapes as heritage resources to be conserved. It is
assumed that policies pertaining to cultural heritage
landscapes will be supported within a broader range of
policies that address heritage resources.
CHLs are already part of the broad heritage resources
definition in the ROPP, and as such, are part of the
Regional Inventory. In developing specific policies to
address the conservation of cultural heritage landscape
resources, the Region may wish to consider the
following:
•
establish a process and requirement for the
undertaking of a heritage impact assessment and
or conservation plan for development on, or
4.
5.
6.
•
encourage and support the local municipalities in
preparing, a municipal register of cultural heritage
landscape resources, and the provision of
guidelines for identification, evaluation, protection
tools, and impact mitigation activities;
•
cross-reference cultural heritage landscape
policies in other sections of the Regional Official
Plan that may have influences or impacts on
cultural heritage landscapes, e.g. natural
environment, agricultural, mineral resources.
Undertaking of a detailed Inventory for the listed
Candidate Cultural Heritage Landscapes, using the
recommended inventory and evaluation process, to
confirm their status. This may be a consolidated study
of all Candidate CHLs undertaken by the Region, or
individual studies undertaken on an as-needed basis,
or as a Heritage Conservation District Study or Section
29 designation under the OHA by a local municipality;
Potential adoption of the CHL through a Regional
Official Plan Amendment or Implementation Guideline
approval process.
Dialogue with local municipalities, and encouragement
of supportive policies in local official plans, and
processes for heritage conservation.
With the changes to the OHA, potential heritage
conservation tools for cultural heritage landscapes are
now integrated with those of other heritage resources
and include:
•
heritage policies as appropriate to the municipal
Official Plan, (i.e. based on policy directives and
statement included in the ROPP);
•
detailed heritage policies contained within a
secondary plan, that are specific to the heritage
area;
•
establishment of a register of properties of cultural
heritage value or interest (both designated and
non-designated);
•
designation of individual properties under section
29 of the Ontario Heritage Act, in accordance with
criteria identified in Ontario Regulation 9/06;
•
undertaking of a Heritage Conservation District
Study, and designation for confirmed CHLs, under
Part V of the OHA, including a Master Plan and
guidelines to address specific heritage
conservation measures, and development
59
controls;
•
heritage conservation agreements: voluntary legal
agreements with owners which set out
requirements for maintaining a property or specific
heritage features of a property, registered on title,
and binding for future owners. Can be used in
conjunction with the granting of planning
approvals.
60
LIST OF SOURCES
Books
Bloomfield, Elizabeth. ‘Waterloo Township through Two Centuries’. Waterloo Historical Society, October 1995
Eby, Ezra. ‘A Biographical History of Waterloo Township and Other Townships of the County’. Berlin (Kitchener), unknown, 1895.
English and McLaughlin. ‘Kitchener: An Illustrated History’. 1983
Epp, F.H. ‘Mennonites in Canada’. 1979
Hayes, Geoffrey. ‘Waterloo County 1852-1972: An Illustrated History’. Waterloo Historical Society. 1996.
Herrfort, A. K. ‘Mennonite Country’ [Waterloo County drawings by Peter Etril Snyder]. 1978.
Hunsberger, D.L. ‘People Apart: Portrait of a Mennonite World in Waterloo County, Ontario’. 1977
Kenna, K. ‘A People Apart’. Toronto. 1995
Libbrandt, Dr. G. ‘Little Paradise: German Canadians 1800-1975’
Martin, V.W. ‘Early History of Jakobstettel’
Moyers, Bill. ‘This Unique Heritage’. Kitchener, 1971.
Young, James. ‘Reminiscences of the Early History of Galt and the Settlement of Dumfries in the Province of Ontario’.
Toronto, Hunter and Rose Company, 1880.
Taylor, Andrew W., ‘Our Todays and Yesterdays: A History of the Township of North Dumfries and The Village of Ayr,
Ontario, Canada’. North Dumfries and Ayr Centennial Committee.1970.
Planning Documents
Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 2001. ‘A Cultural Framework for Canadian Heritage Rivers, 2nd
Edition, January 2000. First published in 1997.
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. ‘Provincial Policy Statement’. Government of Ontario. Toronto. 2005
Ontario Ministry of Culture. ‘Heritage Conservation Districts: A Guide to District Designation Under the Ontario Heritage Act
(DRAFT). Toronto, January 2006
Ontario Ministry of Culture. ‘Ontario Heritage Act’. Government of Ontario. Toronto, 2005
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. ‘Arts Heritage and Culture Master Plan’. Kitchener. 2002.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. ‘Regional Growth Management Strategy’. Kitchener. 2003.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. ‘Regional Growth Management Strategy: Greenlands Strategy Implementation, Conserving
61
Our Special Places: Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes in the Region of Waterloo. Kitchener. 2004.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. ‘Regional Official Policies Plan: Office Consolidation’.
Kitchener. 1998.
Region of Waterloo. Planning, Housing and Community Services Department. ‘Spanning the Generations: A Study of Old
Bridges in Waterloo Region’. May 2004. 2 vol.
Town of Caledon. ‘Caledon Official Plan’. 2005.
Articles, Reports and Unpublished Manuscripts
André Scheinman et al. ‘J. Steckle Heritage Homestead Study for the Steckle Homestead Trust’, June 20, 1994.
André Scheinman et al. ‘Criteria for the Identification of Cultural Heritage Landscapes: Town of Caledon’. 2003.
Cecelia Paine and Associates Inc., Landscape Architects. ‘Cultural Heritage Landscapes Assessment Template’ London
Advisory Committee on Heritage.
Commonwealth Historic Resource Management Limited (CHRM). ‘A Cultural Heritage Inventory for the Management Board
Secretariat, Phase 1: Cultural Heritage Process’. Toronto. 1994.
Flint McClelland, Linda. ‘National Register Bulletin #30 - Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic
Landscapes’. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1989. Revised 1999.
Grand River Conservation Authority. ‘The Grand Strategy for Managing the Grand River as a Canadian Heritage River’.
Cambridge. 2004.
Historica Research Limited. ‘Cultural Heritage Landscape Study of London’. November 1996.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. ‘A Topical Organization of Ontario History’. Toronto. 1972.
Parks Canada. ‘Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada’. ISBN 0-662-34897-4. Ottawa.
2003.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. ‘Scenic Roads Handbook’. Kitchener, 2004.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo and Heritage Resources Centre. ‘Cultural Heritage Landscape Resource Document’.
Kitchener, December, 2004.
Robertson, Iain Robertson, Richards, Penny. ‘Studying Cultural Heritage Landscapes’. Oxford University Press, New York: 2003.
Internet Sources
Epp, Marlene. ‘Montrose Mennonite Meetinghouse (West Montrose, ON)’. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online.
April 1986. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved 4 Jan 2006.
http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/M6587.html
Epp, Marlene. ‘Winterbourne Mennonite Meetinghouse (West Montrose, ON)’. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia
Online. April 1986. Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. Retrieved 4 Jan 2006
http://www.gameo.org/encyclopedia/contents/W576.html
62
Historic Ayr Walking Tour in the Township of North Dumfries. www.township.northdumfries.on.ca/community/lacac_tour.html
Ontario Heritage Properties Database. www.hpd.mcl.gov.on.ca
Region of Waterloo. Regional History. Historic Place Names. www.region.waterloo.on.ca
Waterloo Historical Society. www.ist.uwaterloo.ca
Maps
A map of the Township of Woolwich made by Joel Good for the Municipal Council of the Township of Woolwich A.D. 1852.
source: www.ebybook.region.waterloo.on.ca
GIS Datasource: Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services Dept.
Illustrated Historical Atlas of Waterloo and Wellington Counties, Ontario. H. Parsell & Co., Walker and Miles, Toronto, 1881 1887. Reprint Edition, Ross Cumming, Port Elgin, Ontario, 1972.
Tremaine Map for Waterloo County 1861.
63
CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDCAPES
IN WATERLOO REGION:
Appendix A:
Candidate CHLs Listed by Municipality
APPENDIX A: SUGGESTED CANDIDATE CHLS LISTED BY MUNICIPALITY *
Cambridge
Kitchener
Candidate Regionally Significant CHLs
Recommended in
Galt Core
Steckle House & Farm
Consultants Report
Preston Core
Pioneer Tower &
(italics) = requires
Hespeler Core
environs
further consideration as
Blair Village
Victoria Park
to regional significance
Cruickston Park
Warehouse District
Black Bridge
Civic Centre
Road/Holm’s Mills
Upper Doon
(Langdon Hall)
Lower Doon
(Chilligo Rd)
Other Suggested CHLs not found to be Regionally Significant**
Properties
Soper Park
Woolner Farmstead
Idlewyld Park
Cressmans Woods
Rockway Gardens
Sims Estate
Woodside
Glokenspiel
Hibner Park
Cenotaph Green
Kiwanis Park
Westmount Golf
Ferrie Mill Ruins
Districts/Areas
Pioneer Landing
Cedar Hill
Eagle Brand Factory
Swedenborgian
Dickson Hill
Royal Crossroads
St. Marys HCD
Scenic Routes
Riverbank Dr
Stauffer Road
Huron Rd
Settlements
Bridgeport
Freeport
Waterloo
North Dumfries
Wellesley
Elam Martin Farmstead
(University of Waterloo)
Ayr
Lockie Rd at Seaton /
Scheffield Rd (Scottish
farmsteads)
Wellesley
Old Order Mennonite
Country (includes
numerous cultural
pockets, incl. Linwood.
Wilmot
Woolwich
Philipsburg
New Dundee Core
New Hamburg Core
St. Agatha Core
(Pinehill Cemetery)
(Castle Kilbride)
Maryhilll
Old Order Mennonite
Country (includes
numerous cultural
pockets, incl. portions of
St. Jacobs and Elmira)
West Montrose
Huron Rd
Christner Rd
Mannheim
Baden
Petersburg
Conestoga Valley
Benjamin Rd
Conestogo Valley
Bloomingdale
Heidelberg
Tilman’s Bridge
Waterloo Park
Kaufman Flats
Old Waterloo Airport
Waterloo Core
Commercial
Clyde
Greenfield
Branchton
Roseville
Morrison
Reidsville
Bamberg
Crosshill
St. Clements
* Note: This is not an exhaustive list. Rather it is a compilation of the CHL suggestions offered during earlier municipal heritage committee consultations.
** Note: Either lacking in historic integrity, cultural landscape aspects, or no apparent significant regional thematic links identified based on the level of research undertaken. In some
instances there was insufficient information provided to pinpoint the exact site location.
A-1
CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDCAPES
IN WATERLOO REGION:
Appendix B:
Regional and Municipal Policy Review
APPENDIX B: REGIONAL AND MUNICIPAL POLICY REVIEW
1.0
REVIEW OF REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLANS
York Region Official Plan (updated 2005)
Does not specifically address cultural heritage landscapes. Preferred approach is for all polices to refer to cultural heritage
resources. ROP policies serve to promote and recognize importance of cultural heritage. It commits to:
Compilation of a list of significant cultural heritage resources in consultation with heritage experts; area municipalities
and their local heritage committees; Ministries of the Province and appropriate Federal agencies;
Conservation of cultural heritage resources under the Region’s ownership;
The York ROP directs municipalities as follows:
Requires municipalities to adopt official plan policies to conserve cultural heritage resources and to ensure that
secondary plans identify and conserve cultural heritage resources;
Ensures that an evaluation of cultural heritage resources is undertaken and that the proponent of a development
prepares a strategy;
Encourages municipalities to document significant heritage resources and promote awareness;
Encourages municipalities to undertake community improvement plans;
Encourages municipalities to consider designs that complement and preserve heritage qualities when approving
development/redevelopment plans in historic areas.
Ensure that identified cultural heritage resources are evaluated and preserved in capital works projects.
Region of Niagara Official Plan (updated 2004)
Does not specifically address cultural heritage landscapes. ROP policies serve to promote and recognize importance of cultural
heritage. The Niagara ROP commits the Region to:
Identify, inventory and evaluate sites and buildings of major historic and architectural significance, in co-operation with
other levels of government and concerned private groups;
Establish a sub-committee to assist in the identification and evaluation of sites and buildings of historic and
architectural significance.
Review development proposals that might impact sites and buildings evaluated as being of significant heritage interest.
The Niagara ROP directs municipalities as follows:
Encourages local municipalities to take advantage of the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act regarding the
designation and protection of historic and architecturally significant buildings and sites.
Each area municipality should provide policies in its official plan for the protection of sites and buildings which have
historical or architectural significance.
Region of Peel Official Plan (updated 2005)
The Region supports identification, preservation and interpretation of the cultural heritage features, structures, archaeological
resources, and cultural heritage landscapes in Peel (including properties owned by the Region), according to the criteria and
guidelines established by the Province. One of the main purposes of this section of the Plan is to implement provincial policies
related to cultural heritage.
Cultural Heritage Landscapes in Waterloo Region:
B-1
The ROP policies:
Direct the area municipalities to include in their official plans policies for the definition, identification and protection of
cultural heritage resources.
Support the designation of Heritage Conservation Districts in area municipal official plans.
Ensure that there is adequate assessment, preservation, interpretation and/or rescue excavation of cultural heritage
resources as prescribed by the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation’s in cooperation with the area
municipalities.
Require and support cultural heritage resource impact assessments, where appropriate, for infrastructure projects,
including Region of Peel projects.
Direct the area municipalities to require, in their official plans, that the proponents of development proposals affecting
heritage resources provide for sufficient documentation to meet Provincial requirements and address the Region's
objectives with respect to cultural heritage resources.
Encourage and support the area municipalities in preparing, as part of any area municipal official plan, an inventory of
cultural heritage resources and provision of guidelines for identification, evaluation and impact mitigation activities.
Supporting implementation policies for cultural heritage resources, identify that the Region will:
Prepare jointly, with the area municipalities and their local heritage committees, a Cultural Heritage Master Plan.
Durham Region Official Plan
Official Plan currently under review (March 2006). There are no specific policy updates on cultural heritage noted at this time.
2.0
REVIEW OF MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL PLANS AND STUDIES
CITY OF OTTAWA
Ottawa 20/20 – April 2003
Note: predates finalization of the Provincial Policy Statement, update to Ontario Heritage Act, and Planning Act, however it is
consistent
with
the
current
provincial
legislation
and
thinking
with
respect
to
CHLs.
City of Ottawa Official Plan
“The Official Plan defines cultural heritage landscapes as “discrete aggregations of features on the land, created and left by
people, that provide the contextual and spatial information necessary to preserve and interpret the understanding of important
historical settings and changes to past patterns of land use. Examples include a burial ground, historical garden or larger
landscape reflecting human intervention.” The protection of cultural heritage landscapes requires sustainable land-use that
maintains or enhances natural values in the landscape, supports biological diversity, and spiritual relationships to nature. The
Environmental Strategy complements the Heritage Plan and the Official Plan in its concern for the identification and preservation
of cultural landscapes.”
Heritage Policies
1. The City will provide for the conservation of cultural heritage resources for the benefit of the community and posterity.
Cultural heritage resources include:
a.
Buildings, structures, sites;
b.
Archaeological resources;
c.
Cultural heritage landscapes.
2.
3.
Individual buildings, structures, sites and cultural heritage landscapes will be designated as properties of cultural heritage
value under Part IV of the Heritage Act. Groups of buildings, cultural landscapes, and areas of the city will be designated
as Heritage Conservation Districts under Part V the Heritage Act. Any application to alter or demolish buildings which are
individually designated or within designated Heritage Conservation Districts will be supported by a cultural heritage
impact statement to ensure that the City's conservation objectives are achieved (see Section 4.6).
The City may recognize core areas of Villages, older residential neighbourhoods, cultural landscapes or other areas in
both the urban and rural areas as Cultural Heritage Character Areas, where designation under the Heritage Act may or
may not be appropriate. In these areas, the City will prepare design guidelines to help private and public landowners
construct new buildings, or additions or renovations to existing buildings, to reflect the identified cultural heritage features
of the community.
B-2
4.
5.
The City will undertake a study by 2005 to enhance its inventory of cultural heritage landscapes to be conserved through
the policies of this Plan.
In addition to requiring specific assessments as described above, the City will support its objective to conserve heritage
resources and to promote the stewardship of those resources by:
a.
Endeavouring to identify and protect building interiors of significant heritage merit;
b.
Commemorating cultural heritage resources with heritage plaques, awards and other forms of interpretation;
c.
Entering into heritage easement agreements with owners of designated heritage properties or properties eligible
for heritage designation, including entering into registered agreements with the owners of such properties if the
City deems that financial securities are required from an owner to ensure the retention and conservation of
heritage properties as part of a development approval, the amount of such financial securities to be determined by
a qualified heritage architect, and to be sufficient to ensure completion of the agreed-upon stabilization and
conservation work;
d.
Increasing its collaboration with the National Capital Commission and other federal departments and agencies, as
well as the provincial government, to promote the conservation and enhancement of Ottawa's cultural heritage
resources.
CITY OF LONDON
The City of London has prepared the following studies with respect to cultural heritage landscapes:
Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, November 1996, Historica Research
The study addresses:
Reasons for evaluating cultural heritage landscapes
Definitions of cultural heritage landscapes
Inventory Methods
2 Case Studies
The Inventory methodology includes the following components:
Location: Geographic / municipal addressing locations
Identification:
Historic Context
Physiographic Context
Survey – Land Uses, Response to Natural Environment, Spatial Organization, Cultural Traditions, Circulation Networks,
Boundary Demarcations, Vegetation Related to Land use, Buildings, Structures and Objects, Archaeological Sites, Small Scale
Elements, Perceptions
Evaluation:
Cultural Significance; Integrity; Boundaries;
Management:
Recommendations for areas/features for conservation
Cultural Heritage Landscapes Assessment Template, Cecilia Payne Outlines steps in assessment of cultural heritage
landscape resources, in accordance with the inventory methodology, and based on the scale of the landscape:
Cultural Landscape Area: e.g. rural agricultural area, industrial area, neighbourhood
Component Landscape: units of land with homogeneous land use and definable boundaries, e.g. parks
Landscape Features: discrete elements, e.g. gates, war memorial, trees, walls
Note: With the exception of noting the differences in scale by its identified category, the assessment template is identical for all 3
scales of landscapes.
City of London Official Plan (under review as of March 2006)
Section 13 of the City of London Official Plan (2001) provides a framework for the protection of heritage resources through the
policies that are contained in. Key objectives identified in the Official Plan are as follows:
1. Protect, where practical and feasible, those heritage resources, which contribute, in a significant way, to the identity
and character of the City.
2. Encourage the protection, enhancement, restoration, maintenance, and utilization of buildings, structures, areas, or
sites within London which are considered to be of significant architectural, historical, or archaeological value to the
community.
B-3
3.
4.
5.
Encourage new development, redevelopment, and public works to be sensitive to, and in harmony with, the City’s
heritage resources.
Increase public awareness and appreciation of the City’s heritage resources, and
Encourage participation by the public, corporations, and other levels of government in the protection, restoration, and
utilization of these resources.
The policies recognize that heritage preservation may consist of buildings and structures, historical and cultural assets,
landscape features and archaeological resources. Detailed policies in the Official Plan, in reference to the Ontario Heritage Act,
set out the criteria for the designation of both individual heritage resources as well as entire districts. Heritage districts can
consist of a block, streetscape or any contiguous area, with no minimum or maximum size standards.
The Official Plan Review – March 2006 Terms of Reference, notes that heritage resource policies including built and CHLs
will be reviewed as part of the Urban Design Background Review Study to ensure the implementation of City objectives within
the context of provincial legislation.
4. Subdivision Applications require:
“Development should conserve significant landscapes, vistas and ridge-lines, significant built heritage resources and cultural
heritage landscapes.”
CITY OF HAMILTON
Official Plan
Existing cultural heritage policies are being reviewed in order to develop a new set of policies that reflect a more proactive
approach to conservation and management of cultural heritage resources (as of March 2006)
Cultural Heritage Landscapes and policies for conservation are included within recent secondary plans.
Example: Secondary Plan - Ainslie Wood West
“The heritage character associated with the Ainslie Wood Westdale residential areas will be preserved and enhanced by a
number of means, as outlined in the Heritage and Urban Design policies, Section 6.4.11 of this Secondary Plan, including:
a)
retention of buildings and areas which have been designated or listed as
having historical or architectural significance; and,
b)
recognition of Cultural Heritage Landscapes. The three Cultural Heritage
Landscapes identified as illustrated on the Schedule N-2 are:
- The planned suburb of Westdale, commercial core and residential;
- The Veteran’s Housing Area, a post-war housing area south of Main;
- The Burke Survey, an early 20th century survey.
Policies
(i) Properties and areas which are designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, or listed in the City’s Inventory of Buildings of
Architectural and/ or Historical Interest, will be conserved and retained.
(ii) Additional properties or heritage conservation districts may be designated or listed under the Ontario Heritage Act, by City
Council, under the advice of the City Planning and Economic Development Department, and the Municipal Heritage
Committee, without the need for amendment to this Secondary Plan. This may include areas which are identified in this
Plan as Cultural Heritage Landscapes.
Cultural Heritage Landscapes3 will be conserved and protected with the intent of retaining major characteristics. This
will be implemented by the review of planning applications under the Planning Act. The City shall ensure that any
proposed change be consistent with the policies of the Secondary Plan. Cultural Heritage Landscapes have been identified for
the Ainslie Wood Westdale community, as indicated on Schedule N-2, namely:
(a) The planned suburb of Westdale;
(b) The Veteran’s Housing Area, on portions of Haddon Street, Gary Avenue, Dalewood Street and Stroud Road;
(c) The Burke Survey bounded by Main Street, Broadway Avenue, Emerson Street and the Escarpment; and,
(d) The McMaster University Historic Core.
(iv) A Heritage Impact Assessment, as defined by the City of Hamilton Official Plan, may be required, subject to Planning Act
approvals, for any private or public development or redevelopment in Ainslie Wood Westdale proposing to erect, demolish or
alter buildings or structures in, on, or adjacent to properties that meet one or more of the following criteria:
(a) Properties or districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act;
(b) Buildings or structures listed on the City’s Inventory of Buildings of Architectural and/or Historical Interest; and,
(c) Identified Cultural Heritage Landscapes.
B-4
The Heritage Impact Assessment(s) referred to in Policy 6.4.10 (iv) will be required as part of a complete application to the City,
and will be processed with development approvals and prior to the issuance of any building permit. The Municipal Heritage
Committee under the Planning Act will review the Heritage Impact Assessment and advise Council accordingly.
B-5

cultural heritage landscapes in waterloo region

Transcription

Similar documents

Caring for Those with Alzheimer`s and Dementia

June 2010 - Maritime Heritage Association

Criteria Identification Cultural Heritage Landscapes

Glitter and Gunge. Preserving the Future of JW

landscape archaeology - Open Research Exeter (ORE)

Cultural Heritage Assessment Report - Northland Power

catgirls forum home wayward wilde

The Safeguard of Cultural Heritage

14. Letter from Kirk Gable - Demolition of the Prince George Hotel

Lincoln National Park Management Plan

The MonTrose ACT - Montrose Chamber of Commerce

West Branch Section - Susquehanna Greenway Partnership

Batavia Stad - Rackcdn.com

PART I - Halton Region

- Scranton Times

to - The Rossford Record Journal

to - The Rossford Record Journal

No Schools To Close In Collinwood

April 27, 2015 - Brevard Business News

Westville Village – Resource Team Final Report

Photographic observation a tool for landscape policies

2008-05-17 Sat