Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment: Windsor Solar …...STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: WINDSOR SOLAR PROJECT jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage

$Page 1: Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment: Windsor Solar …...STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: WINDSOR SOLAR PROJECT jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage$
Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment: Windsor Solar Project

Part of Lots 105 to 123, Concession 3 Petite Cote Geographic Township of Sandwich Now City of Windsor, Ontario

Prepared for: Windsor Solar LP 55 Standish Court, 9th Floor Mississauga, ON L5R 4B2 Tel: 1 (866) 236-5040

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 171 Queens Avenue, 6th Floor London, ON N6A 5J7 Tel: (519) 645-2007 Fax: (519) 645-6575

Licensee: Parker Dickson, MA License Number: P256 PIF Number : P256-0156-2014 Project Number: 160940284

FIT Number: N/A

ORIGINAL REPORT

July 3, 2014


STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: WINDSOR SOLAR PROJECT

jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage 1\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx i

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ III

PROJECT PERSONNEL ................................................................................................................ IV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. IV

1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT ....................................................................................................... 1.1 1.1 DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT ................................................................................................. 1.1

1.1.1 Objectives ....................................................................................................... 1.1 1.2 HISTORICAL CONTEXT ...................................................................................................... 1.2

1.2.1 Post-contact Aboriginal Resources ............................................................ 1.2 1.2.2 Euro-Canadian Resources ........................................................................... 1.4 1.2.3 Recent Reports ............................................................................................... 1.6

1.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT ........................................................................................ 1.6 1.3.1 The Natural Environment .............................................................................. 1.6 1.3.2 Pre-contact Aboriginal Resources .............................................................. 1.7 1.3.3 Previously Known Archaeological Sites and Surveys ............................... 1.8 1.3.4 Existing Conditions ......................................................................................... 1.9

2.0 FIELD METHODS ............................................................................................................. 2.1

3.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................... 3.1

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 4.1

5.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION........................................................... 5.1

6.0 BIBLOGRAPHY AND SOURCES ..................................................................................... 6.1

7.0 IMAGES .......................................................................................................................... 7.1 7.1 PHOTOS .............................................................................................................................. 7.1

8.0 MAPS ............................................................................................................................. 8.1

9.0 CLOSURE ........................................................................................................................ 9.1

LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Essex County ........................................................ 1.8

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location of Project Area .............................................................................. 8.2 Figure 2: Documented Aboriginal Activity in Essex County According to Lajeunesse 1960. 8.3 Figure 3: Treaties and Purchases (Adapted from Morris 1943) ............................... 8.4


jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage 1\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx ii

Figure 4: The 1800 Original Township Plan for a Portion of the Township of Sandwich 8.5 Figure 5: Portion of 1847 Historic Map of Western District of the Province of Canada 8.6 Figure 6: Portion of 1881 Historic Map of Sandwich Township ............................... 8.7 Figure 7: Portion of 1905 Historic Map of Sandwich Township ............................... 8.8 Figure 8: Soil Classification ............................................................................................ 8.9 Figure 9: Archaeological Potential ........................................................................... 8.10


jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage 1\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx iii

Executive Summary

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Dillon Consulting Limited on behalf of Windsor Solar LP to complete a Stage 1 archaeological assessment for the area to be impacted by the Windsor Solar Project. The Project Area comprises a 245.2 hectare parcel of land within an area generally bounded by Rhodes Drive to the north, Division Road to the south, Lauzon Parkway to the east, and Walker Road to the west, in the City of Windsor, Ontario. The entire Project Area is located on the Windsor International Airport property, which is owned by the City of Windsor and operated by Your Quick Gateway (Windsor) Inc. (YQG). The Project Area therefore spans part of Lots 105 to 123, Concession 3 Petite Cote, Geographic Township of Sandwich, now City of Windsor, Ontario. The Stage 1 assessment conducted by Stantec was undertaken in order to meet the requirements for an application for a Renewable Energy Approval (Government of Ontario 2011a), as outlined in Ontario Regulation 359/09 sections 21 and 22 under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (Government of Ontario 1990a).

The Stage 1 archaeological assessment, involving background research and a property inspection, resulted in the determination that the Project Area exhibits moderate to high potential for the identification and recovery of archaeological resources. The Stage 1 archaeological assessment has determined that the Project Area retains archaeological potential and any areas that will be subject to construction disturbance as a part of the Project Location will be subject to a Stage 2 archaeological assessment prior to construction. However, the existing roadways (Pillette Road and Jefferson Boulevard) and the municipal drains (Lappan, McGill, and Rivard Drains) do not retain archaeological potential and no further archaeological assessment is recommended for those elements.

The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport is asked to accept this report into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports. Additional archaeological assessment is still required and so the archaeological sites recommended for further archaeological fieldwork remain subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act and may not be altered, or have artifacts removed, except by a person holding an archaeological license.

The Executive Summary highlights key points from the report only; for complete information and findings, the reader should examine the complete report.


jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage 1\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx iv

Project Personnel

Licensed Archaeologist: Parker Dickson, MA (P256)

Project Manager: Tracie Carmichael, BA, B.Ed. (R140)

Report Writer: Arthur Figura (P083), Walter McCall, Ph.D. (P389), Paige Glenen (R386), Lena Zepf (R1033)

GIS Specialist: Kent Buchanan, H.B.Sc., OCGC

Technical Review: Jeffrey Muir, BA (R304)

Licensee Review: Parker Dickson, MA (P256)

Senior Review: Jim Wilson, MA (P001)

Acknowledgements

Proponent Contact: Mr. Bruce McAllister, Dillon Consulting Limited

Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport: Mr. Robert von Bitter

Ministry of Natural Resources: Ms. Lauren Workman

Windsor Public Library Archives: Mr. Michael Fish, Archivist


Project Context July 3, 2014

jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage 1\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx 1.1

1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT

1.1 DEVELOPMENT CONTEXT

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) on behalf of Windsor Solar LP to complete a Stage 1 archaeological assessment for the Windsor Solar Project located within an area generally bounded by Rhodes Drive to the north, Division Road to the south, Lauzon Parkway to the east, and Walker Road to the west, in the City of Windsor, Ontario (Figure 1). The Stage 1 assessment conducted by Stantec was undertaken in order to meet the requirements for an application for a Renewable Energy Approval (Government of Ontario 2011a), as outlined in Ontario Regulation 359/09 sections 21 and 22 under Part V.0.1 of the Environmental Protection Act (Government of Ontario 1990a).

Windsor Solar LP proposes to develop a solar facility with a maximum name plate capacity of 50 megawatts alternating current (MW AC), located on the Windsor International Airport property in the City of Windsor, Ontario. The Windsor International Airport is owned by the City of Windsor and operated by Your Quick Gateway (Windsor) Inc. (YQG). The renewable energy facility will be known as the Windsor Solar Project. Approximately 197,000 to 207,000 solar panels of between 290-305 watts (DC) each will be installed for the Windsor Solar Project. Solar panels create DC electricity, which is then converted to AC electricity through the inverter. The AC voltage created by the inverters will be “stepped-up” through multiple Medium Voltage (MV) Stations. The AC electrical energy output from the MV Stations will be collected via underground/overhead cables and connected to the main substation transformer. The collector system voltage will be stepped up to the IESO’s transmission grid voltage at one collector/interconnection substation. Approximately 245.2 hectares of agricultural lands, roadways, and municipal drains were evaluated as part of the Project Area. The Project Area spans parts of Lots 105 to 123, Concession 3 Petite Cote, former Geographic Township of Sandwich, now City of Windsor, Ontario. These lands are being considered for the Project Location which is still being defined.

1.1.1 Objectives

The objectives of the Stage 1 assessment are to compile available information about the known and potential archaeological resources within the Project Area and to provide specific direction for the protection, management and/or recovery of these resources. In compliance with the provincial standards and guidelines set out in the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport’s (MTCS) 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Government of Ontario 2011b), the objectives of the Stage 1 Archaeological Overview/Background Study are as follows:

To provide information about the Project Area’s geography, history, previous archaeological fieldwork, and current land conditions;




To evaluate in detail the Project Area’s archaeological potential which will support recommendations for Stage 2 survey for all or parts of the property; and

To recommend appropriate strategies for Stage 2 survey.

To meet these objectives Stantec archaeologists employed the following research strategies:

A review of relevant archaeological, historic, and environmental literature pertaining to the Project Area;

A review of the land use history, including pertinent historic maps such as the original township plans provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), historical atlases, and other archival mapping;

An overview of Project Area’s Quaternary geology and present-day drainage systems and wetlands;

An examination of the City of Windsor‘s Archaeological Master Plan Study Report for the City of Windsor (Cultural Resource Management (CRM) Group Limited et al. 2005);

An examination of the Ontario Archaeological Sites Database (ASDB) to determine the presence of known archaeological sites in and around the project area; and

A property inspection of the Project Area.

Permission to access the Project Area was provided by Bruce McAllister of Dillon Consulting Limited and Jose De Armas of Windsor Solar LP.

1.2 HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The Project Area comprises 245.2 hectares of primarily agricultural fields, plus municipal drains and roadways, within the Geographic Township of Sandwich, now City of Windsor (formerly part of Essex County), Ontario (Figure 1).

1.2.1 Post-contact Aboriginal Resources

The post-contact Aboriginal occupation of Southern Ontario was heavily influenced by the dispersal of various Iroquoian-speaking communities by the New York State Iroquois and the subsequent arrival of Algonkian-speaking groups from northern Ontario at the end of the 17th century and beginning of the 18th century (Konrad 1981; Schmalz 1991). By 1690, Algonkian speakers from the north appear to have begun to repopulate Bruce County (Roger 1978:761). This is the period in which the Mississaugas are known to have moved into southern Ontario and the lower Great Lakes watersheds (Konrad 1981). In southwestern Ontario, however, members of the Three Fires Confederacy (Chippewa, Odawa, and Potawatomi) were immigrating from Ohio and Michigan in the late 1700s (Feest and Feest 1978:778-779).




In Essex County, and specifically in the Windsor region, a splinter group of Odawa settled in the area (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:2-14 to 2-15). Also, the surviving remnants of the Huron and Petun were settling in the Windsor region as the Wyandot, exhibiting continuities with their 16th and 17th century predecessors from the Midland and Blue Mountain regions (Garrad 2014; Steckley 2014). Given the amalgamated nature of the Wyandot people, sometimes one of the contributing Aboriginal peoples was recognized over another, hence the Wyandot were known as Huron in the Windsor region (Garrad 2014:16-54). Therefore, the Wyandot settlement in the Windsor region is commonly referred to as the “Huron Village” and related place names survive in Windsor today, such as Huron Church Road (but also note Wyandotte Street).

Despite the dispersal and movement of Aboriginal groups throughout Southern Ontario during the 17th and 18th centuries, archaeologically they can be characterized by continuity with their pre-contact Aboriginal counterparts. These peoples still maintained a Terminal Woodland archaeological culture albeit with some features of European material culture. While there was cultural and social change occurring due to contact with European colonial powers, there was equally a definite persistence of Aboriginal socio-cultural practices since these groups were not so profoundly affected by European contact that they left their former lifeways behind (Ferris 2009).

Figure 2 reproduces a map from the History of the Windsor Border Region (Lajeunesse 1960) which depicts several First Nation sites and trails documented in the late 18th century. Two trails and three locations of interest possibly influence the Project Area. Trail A runs south of the Project Area. It extends from the Windsor region in a southeastern direction towards Leamington. This clearly shows that both modern Talbot Road and Highway 3 originated as routes travelled by Aboriginal peoples. A documented Wyandot burial mound is identified on Trail A as number 15, west of the Project Area. Another trail, Trail G, follows the shores of Lake St. Clair north of the Project Area (Lajeunesse 1960:xxxix). This was the route Lieutenant Governor John Graves Simcoe followed during his journey from Niagara-on-the-Lake to Detroit in 1793. Two First Nations villages are depicted on the map immediately north of the Site 15, one being the Wyandot village and the other the Odawa village and cemetery (designated as numbers 14 and 16 respectively). None of the trails or locations of interest illustrated in Figure 2 are located within the Project Area.

The Ojibwa and Wyandot groups present within the Essex County region surrendered the land to the Euro-Canadian inhabitants in 1790 through Treaty Number 2, within which the Project Area falls (Jacobs 1983: 61-68). Treaty Number 2:

... was made with the O[dawa], Chippew[a], Pottawatom[i] and Huro[n] May 19th, 1790, portions of which nations had established themselves on the Detroit River all of whom had been driven by the Iroquois from the northern and eastern parts of the Province, from the Detroit River easterly to Catfish Creek and south of the river La Tranche [Thames River] and Chenail Ecarte, and contains Essex County except Anderdon Township and Part of West Sandwich; Kent County except Zone Township, and Gores of Camden and Chatham; Elgin County except Bayham Township and parts




of South Dorchester and Malahide. In Middlesex County, Del[a]ware and Westminster Townships and part of North Dorchester [are included].

(Morris 1943:17)

While it is difficult to exactly delineate treaty boundaries today, Figure 3 provides an approximate outline of the area encompassed by Treaty Number 2 (identified by the letter “C”).

1.2.2 Euro-Canadian Resources

The first French settlers arrived in the Detroit-Windsor area in 1701 when the Sieur De Lamothe Cadillac and roughly 100 military and civilian personnel established Fort Pontchartrain on the Detroit side of the river (Fuller 1972:6-8). The French settlement remained on the Detroit side until 1748 when the Jesuit mission to the Huron (or Wyandot) was established on the south shore near the foot of the present-day Huron Church Road and the Ambassador Bridge. Fort Pontchartrain surrendered to the British in 1760 and remained under British control until 1796, although it was officially a part of the United States from 1783 onwards. During this period, the settlement continued to grow, but remained predominantly French. The area (now in present-day Windsor) across the river from Fort Pontchartrain (later to become Detroit) was called “Petite côte” and served the agricultural needs of the fort (Archives of Ontario 2014). The street pattern of the City of Windsor still reflects the French method of agricultural land division, for example, the long narrow parcels fronting the river where the “Petite côte” was located (Morrison 1954:3-4). In 1796, the original townsite of Sandwich was established to accommodate new immigrants of both French and British origin from the United States who wished to remain under British rule following American occupation of Detroit. This constituted the first urban settlement in what is now the City of Windsor, and also the first significant migration of English speaking people into the Windsor area (Neal 1909:86-87).

As the area began to attract more Euro-Canadian interest, Patrick McNiff was assigned to survey and organize the area into a township, also to be named Sandwich. His survey of the township was completed in 1793. The form of the concessions noted as “Petit cote” were dictated by the land divisions already used by the French farmers in the “Petit côte” area, in what was to become Concession 1 Petit Cote. In fact, on his original township map where he measured the Concession 1 lots, Patrick McNiff notes that “on my measuring the farms in front from No. 1 to No. 154 found their division Lines to run in the very Irregular manner they appear on the Plan” (McNiff 1793). Abraham Iredell then resurveyed the area and renumbered the lots from Lot 82 onwards in Concessions 1 to 3 Petit Cote (including the Project Area) in 1797 (Morris 1929). The most accurate map produced of the township survey was ultimately Abraham Iredell’s map (Iredell 1800) registered in 1800 and reproduced here as Figure 4. No structures are noted on this map but there are landowner names noted throughout the Project Area.

In the meantime, the community of Windsor was established and grew large enough to compete with the community of Sandwich for important development stimuli. For example, the Great Western Railway chose Windsor over Sandwich as its termination point in 1854. The arrival




of the railway also allowed for the foundation of Walkerville, the third oldest settlement that is now part of the City of Windsor. In 1857, Hiram Walker established his distillery in the downtown area of Windsor, where the Great Western Railway first met the waterfront (Morrison 1954:26).

In 1858, both Windsor and Sandwich were incorporated as towns (Morrison 1954:42). In 1861 the Township of Sandwich was subdivided into the Townships of Sandwich West, Sandwich East, and Sandwich South (Neal 1909:12).

The Historical Atlas of 1881 documents a total population of 36,258 for Essex County at that time. Of the total population, 25,303 settlers lived in rural settings, while 10,955 lived in urban settings (Belden 1881:8). By 1898, the Canadian Pacific Railway had been built north of the Project Area (Figure 7). By the early 1930s, the separate border cities of Windsor, East Windsor, Walkerville, and Sandwich amalgamated politically into a single community with a population of over 100,000. Following the amalgamation in 1935, the City of Windsor purchased the land that includes the Project Area from the Walker family in the Township of Sandwich East. The Walker Airport, named after Hiram Walker and his distillery business but eventually renamed Windsor Airport (Morrison 1954: 275), was built in 1928 prior to the land purchase.

The Project Area is illustrated in various 19th century and early 20th century maps during the development of the City of Windsor. No landowners are shown on either the 1847 Map of the Western District in the Province of Canada (Figure 5) or the 1881 H. Belden & Co. Essex County Supplement to the Illustrated Atlas of the Dominion of Canada’s map (Belden & Co. 1881) of Sandwich Township (Figure 6). The atlas shows no structures within the Project Area (Figure 6). Historical atlases were produced primarily to identify factories, offices, residences and landholdings of subscribers since these atlases were funded by subscription fees. As such, landowners who did not subscribe were not always listed on the maps. In addition, all structures were not necessarily depicted or placed accurately (Gentilcore and Head 1984). As a result, landowner information for the seemingly vacant lots is probably just missing from the Historical Atlas. The presence of Pillette Road within the west end of the Project Area and of Division Road to the south of the Project Area illustrates the persistence of the historic road grid until the present day. Mapping from 1905 shows landowner names, but again no structures are depicted within the Project Area (Figure 7). The map does show water sources related to the Project Area: the Little River to the east, a watercourse along the south side, and an intermittent watercourse to the north.

Landowner names are known from the late 19th century due to farmer’s directories that were published for all of Essex County, such as the Farmer’s Directory published biennially by the Union Publishing Company (e.g., Union Publishing Company 1884 or as included in a modern day printing of Belden & Co. 1881). Multiple landowners are listed for some lots but it is not differentiated what portion of the lot each landowner owned. However, such directories will be helpful in conjunction with land registry data and census returns if individual information on landowners is required for further archival research.




1.2.3 Recent Reports

There are no archaeological reports available within the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports that discuss the Project Area or land within 50 metres of it. However, the City of Windsor archaeological master plan (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005) can be used to evaluate the Project Area, as outlined in Section 1.3.3. below.

1.3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

1.3.1 The Natural Environment

The Stage 1 assessment area is situated in the St. Clair Clay Plains physiographic region (Chapman and Putnam 1984:146-147).

Adjoining Lake St. Clair in Essex and Kent County Counties and the St. Clair River in Lambton County are extensive clay plains covering 2,270 square miles. The region is one of little relief, lying between 575 and 700 feet a.s.l., except for the moraine at Ridgetown and Blenheim which rises 50 to 500 feet higher….Glacial Lake Whittlesey, which deeply covered all of these lands, and Lake Warren which subsequently covered nearly the whole area, failed to leave deep stratified beds of sediment on the underlying clay till except around Chatham, between Blenheim and the Rondeau marshes, and in a few other smaller areas. Most of Lambton and Essex Counties, therefore, are essentially till plains smoothed by shallow deposits of lacustrine clay which settled in the depressions while the knolls were being lowered by wave action.

(Chapman and Putnam 1984:147)

The two main soil types are Brookston Clay and Brookston Clay Loam (Figure 8). Brookston Clay is a dark clay over mottled clay then a blue-grey compact gritty clay, while Brookston Clay Loam is a dark clay loam over mottled and blue-grey gritty clay and clay loam. Both soils have few stones (Richards et al.1949). These soils would have been suitable for native agriculture and are still used for modern day agricultural practices including the cultivation of corn, beans, and wheat.

The closest sources of potable water are three drains running through the Project Area: the Lappan Drain, the McGill Drain, and Rivard Drain (Figure 9). While municipal drains today, the 1905 mapping of the area indicates that at least the McGill and Rivard Drains were small watercourses present at that time. Otherwise, the closest potable water would have been the Little River, approximately 700 metres to the east of the Project Area (Figure 1). Little River drains into Lake St. Clair very near the confluence of the lake and the Detroit River, approximately seven kilometres northeast of the Project Area.




1.3.2 Pre-contact Aboriginal Resources

This portion of southwestern Ontario has been occupied by First Nations peoples since the retreat of the Wisconsin glacier approximately 11,000 years ago. Local environmental conditions were significantly different from what they are today. Ontario’s first peoples would have crossed the landscape in small groups in search of food, particularly migratory game species. In this area, caribou may have been a Paleo-Indian diet staple, supplemented by wild plants, small game, birds, and fish. Given the low density of populations on the landscape at this time and their mobile nature, Paleo-Indian sites are small and ephemeral. They are sometimes identified by the presence of fluted points. Sites are frequently located adjacent to the shorelines of large glacial lakes.

Archaeological records indicate subsistence changes around 8000 B.C. at the start of the Archaic Period in southwestern Ontario. Since the large mammal species that formed the basis of the Paleo-Indian diet became extinct or moved north with the warming of the climate, Archaic populations had a more varied diet, exploiting a range of plants and bird, mammal, and fish species. Reliance on specific food resources like fish, deer, and several nut species became more noticeable through the Archaic Period and the presence of warmer, more hospitable environs led to expansion of group and family sizes. In the archaeological record, this is evident in the presence of larger sites. The coniferous forests of earlier times were replaced by stands of mixed coniferous and deciduous trees by about 4000 B.C. The transition to more productive environmental circumstances led to a rise in population density. As a result, Archaic sites become more abundant over time. Artifacts typical of these occupations include a variety of stemmed and notched projectile points; chipped stone scrapers; ground stone tools (e.g., celts, adzes) and ornaments (e.g., bannerstones, gorgets); bifaces or tool blanks; animal bone; and chert waste flakes, a byproduct of the tool making process.

Significant changes in cultural and environmental patterns occurred in the Early and Middle Woodland periods (circa 950 B.C. to 800 A.D.). Occupations became increasingly more permanent in this period, culminating in major semi-permanent villages by roughly 1,000 years ago. Archaeologically, the most significant changes by Woodland peoples were the appearance of artifacts manufactured from modeled clay and the emergence of more sedentary villages. The earliest pottery was crudely made by the coiling method and early house structures were simple oval enclosures. The Early and Middle Woodland periods are also characterized by extensive trade in raw materials, objects and finished tools, with sites in Ontario containing trade items with origins in the Mississippi and Ohio River valleys.

By the Late Woodland period there was a distinctive cultural occupation in Southwestern Ontario, including Essex, Kent, and Lambton counties. The primary Late Woodland occupants of the Windsor area were populations described by archaeologists as Western Basin Tradition. Murphy and Ferris (1990:189) indicate that these people had ties with populations in southeastern Michigan and northwestern Ohio, and represent an in situ cultural development from the earlier Middle Woodland groups. The Western Basin Tradition seems to have been centred in the territory comprising the eastern drainage basin of Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair, and the




southern end of Lake Huron. The Western Basin Tradition is divided up into four phases based on differences in settlement and subsistence strategies and pottery attributes. By the time of increased European interaction in the last half of the 16th century and early 17th century, there were no Western Basin Tradition sites in the Essex County area, having moved west into Michigan (Ferris 2007:32-33).

Table 1 provides a general outline of the cultural chronology of Essex County, based on Ellis and Ferris (1990).

Table 1: Cultural Chronology for Essex County

Period Characteristics Time Comments

Early Paleo-Indian Fluted Projectiles 9000-8400 B.C. spruce parkland/caribou hunters

Late Paleo-Indian Hi-Lo Projectiles 8400-8000 B.C. smaller but more numerous sites

Early Archaic Kirk and Bifurcate Base Points 8000-6000 B.C. slow population growth

Middle Archaic Brewerton-like Points 6000-2500 B.C. environment similar to present

Late Archaic

Narrow Point 2000-1800 B.C. increasing site size

Broad Point 1800-1500 B.C. large chipped lithic tools

Small Point 1500-1100 B.C. introduction of bow hunting

Terminal Archaic Hind Points 1100-950 B.C. emergence of true cemeteries

Early Woodland Meadowood Points 950-400 B.C. introduction of pottery

Middle Woodland Couture Corded Pottery 400 B.C.-A.D. 500 increased sedentism

Riviere au Vase Phase A.D. 500-800 seasonal hunting and gathering

Late Woodland

Younge Phase A.D. 800-1200 incipient agriculture

Springwells Phase A.D.1200-1400 agricultural villages

Wolf Phase A.D. 1400-1550 earthworked villages, warfare

Contact Aboriginal Various Algonkian and Iroquoian Groups A.D. 1600-1875 early written records and treaties

Historic French/Euro-Canadian A.D. 1749-present European settlement

1.3.3 Previously Known Archaeological Sites and Surveys

In order to compile an inventory of archaeological resources, the registered archaeological site records kept by the MTCS were consulted. In Ontario, information concerning archaeological sites stored in the ASDB is maintained by the MTCS. This database contains archaeological sites registered according to the Borden system. Under the Borden system, Canada is divided into grid blocks based on latitude and longitude. A Borden Block is approximately 13 kilometres east to west and approximately 18.5 kilometres north to south. Each Borden Block is referenced by a




four-letter designator and sites within a block are numbered sequentially as they are found. The Project Area under review is located within Borden Block AbHr.

Information concerning specific site locations is protected by provincial policy, and is not fully subject to the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The release of such information in the past has led to looting or various forms of illegally conducted site destruction. Confidentiality extends to all media capable of conveying location, including maps, drawings, or textual descriptions of a site location. The MTCS will provide information concerning site location to the party or an agent of the party holding title to a property, or to a licensed archaeologist with relevant cultural resource management interests.

The review of the ASDB determined that there are no registered archaeological sites within one kilometre of the Project Area (Government of Ontario n.d.). No other archaeological assessments have been conducted within 50 metres of the Project Area.

The City of Windsor’s Archaeological Master Plan Study Report (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005) discusses the City of Windsor’s archaeological context in general. As of 2005, archaeologists had registered only 23 archaeological sites within the city limits or within the immediate vicinity. However, the authors of the archaeological management plan recognized that a number of poorly documented sites exist and there are many sites still to be documented especially since the majority of the archaeological studies discussed in the archaeological management plan maps are concentrated along the Detroit River or in southwest Windsor (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:3-1 to 3-23).

In addition, the Project Area is depicted in the archaeological management plan’s archaeological potential mapping. Those portions identified as having archaeological potential are noted as such due to the present of existing water sources, presumably the municipal drains (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:Figure 1). Although the historical road grid is noted as having archaeological potential, that potential appears to be negated by the construction disturbance associated with the Windsor Airport (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:Figure 2). Ultimately, approximately half of the Project Area retains high archaeological potential according to the 2005 mapping (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:Figure 4). The archaeological management plan’s evaluation of archaeological potential is further discussed in Section 3.0.

1.3.4 Existing Conditions

The Project Area is predominantly composed of ploughed agricultural fields, along with municipal drains and roadways passing through the Project Area. The existing conditions are further discussed in Sections 2.0 and 3.0 below.


Field Methods July 3, 2014


2.0 FIELD METHODS

Prior to the property inspection and within a week of a PIF number being issued, initial background research compiled the available information concerning any known and/or potential archaeological heritage resources within the Project Area. A property inspection was conducted under archaeological consulting license P256 issued to Parker Dickson, MA, of Stantec by the MTCS. The property inspection was completed on May 21, 2014, in accordance with Section 1.2 of the MTCS’ 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Government of Ontario 2011b). The property inspection involved randomly spot checking within the Project Area to identify the presence or absence of any features of archaeological potential. During the property inspection the weather was sunny with some clouds, and visibility of land features was excellent. At no time were field, lighting, or weather conditions detrimental to the identification of features of archaeological potential.

The Project Area lies completely within the property of Windsor International Airport, located on the outskirts of the City of Windsor, Ontario. It is composed almost exclusively of existing agricultural fields. Pillette Road and Jefferson Boulevard are also included within the overall boundaries of the Project Area, as is a series of narrow, overgrown ditches, irrigation canals and tree lines that divide the larger territory into smaller fields. Three small woodlots are located to the south east of the Project Area while the airport itself and its associated buildings and runways are adjacent to the Project Area to the northwest.

The photography from the property inspection conducted on May 21, 2014 is presented in Section 7.1 and confirms that the requirements for a Stage 1 property inspection were met, as per Section 1.2 and Section 7.7.2 Standard 1 of the MTCS’ 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Government of Ontario 2011b).

Photos 1 to 9 illustrate a sample of the agricultural fields that make up the majority of the Project Area. Photo 8 shows the McGill Drain in the right of the photo, while Photos 10 to 12 illustrate the overgrown ditches that separate the agricultural fields. Photos 11 and 12 also depict a portion of Jefferson Boulevard. Photo 13 shows a roadside ditch running adjacent to one of the agricultural fields and to Pillette Road. Both Jefferson Boulevard and Pillette Road are modern paved roads therefore demonstrating modern construction disturbance in the Project Area. Finally, Photo 14 illustrates one of the drainage ditches that runs along the boundaries of the agricultural fields.


Analysis and Conclusions July 3, 2014


3.0 ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Archaeological potential is established by determining the likelihood that archaeological resources may be present on a subject property. Stantec applied archaeological potential criteria commonly used by the MTCS (Government of Ontario 2011b) to determine areas of archaeological potential within the region under study. These variables include proximity to previously identified archaeological sites; distance to various types of water sources; soil texture and drainage; glacial geomorphology; elevated topography; and the general topographic variability of the area. However, it is worth noting that extensive land disturbance can eradicate archaeological potential (Wilson and Horne 1995).

Potable water is the single most important resource for any extended human occupation or settlement and since water sources in southern Ontario have remained relatively stable over time, proximity to drinkable water is regarded as a useful index for the evaluation of archaeological site potential. In fact, distance to water is one of the most commonly used variables for predictive modeling of archaeological site location in Ontario. Distance to modern or ancient water sources is generally accepted as the most important determinant of past human settlement patterns and, considered alone, may result in a determination of archaeological potential. However, any combination of two or more other criteria, such as well-drained soils or topographic variability, may also indicate archaeological potential. As discussed above, distance to water is an essential factor in archaeological potential modeling. When evaluating distance to water it is important to distinguish between water and shoreline, as well as natural and artificial water sources, as these features affect sites locations and types to varying degrees. The MTCS categorizes water sources in the following manner:

Primary water sources: lakes, rivers, streams, creeks;

Secondary water sources: intermittent streams and creeks, springs, marshes and swamps;

Past water sources: glacial lake shorelines, relic river or stream channels, cobble beaches, shorelines of drained lakes or marshes; and

Accessible or inaccessible shorelines: high bluffs, swamp or marshy lake edges, sandbars stretching into marsh.

The closest sources of potable water are three drains within the study area that originate at the Little River, approximately 700 metres east of the Project Area. Moreover, additional ancient and/or relic tributaries of the various primary and secondary water sources may have existed but are not identifiable today and are not indicated on historic mapping. These watercourses are also reflected in the archaeological potential mapping produced for the City of Windsor’s archaeological management plan (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005).




Further examination of the natural environment within the Project Area identified soil conditions suitable for both Aboriginal and Euro-Canadian agriculture.

An examination of the ASDB has shown that no registered archaeological sites are located within one kilometre of the Project Area. While no archaeological sites have been registered within one kilometre of the study area, the writers of the archaeological management plan for the City of Windsor believe that the lack of sites within the City of Windsor is more a result of limited field work having been conducted to date rather than there being no archaeological potential (CRM Group Limited et al. 2005:3-9).

Written records document the presence of both Odawa and Wyandot groups about eight kilometres to the west of the Project Area. Given that there are also documented former Aboriginal trails within the vicinity of the Project Area, there is a possibility that either Aboriginal group may have left archaeological remains, however ephemeral, within the Project Area.

Based on these considerations, along with the background research presented in Sections 1.2.1 and 1.3.2, the pre-contact and post-contact Aboriginal archaeological potential of the Project Area is judged to be moderate to high.

For Euro-Canadian sites, archaeological potential can be extended to areas of early Euro-Canadian settlement, including places of military or pioneer settlements, early transportation routes, and properties listed on the municipal register or designated under the Ontario Heritage Act or property that local histories or informants have identified with possible historical events. The various historical records for Essex County, and Sandwich Township in particular, confirm that the Project Area and its environs were occupied by European settlers since the beginning of the 19th century. Moreover, the Project Area is in close proximity to early road and rail transportation routes, including Division Road and Pillette Road, as well as the late 19th century Canadian Pacific Railway. While the available historic mapping does not illustrate structures within the Project Area, that lack does not mean such structures did not exist. Evidence for landowners extending back into the late 18th century provides a possibility for Euro-Canadian archaeological resources to exist within the Project Area. Much of the established road and rail networks and agricultural settlement from that time is still visible today. Considering the above, the Euro-Canadian archaeological potential of the Project Area is judged to be moderate to high.

The archaeological management plan for the City of Windsor (CRM Group et al. 2005) differs slightly from the archaeological potential determination here in that some portions of the Project Area are determined to have low archaeological potential. Examining the plan’s mapping, it appears that the presence of watercourses is the factor that takes precedence in the weighting used to score archaeological potential in this area. However, the discussions in Section 1.2 and 1.3 above demonstrate the presence of First Nations groups in the area and a lack of documentation concerning possibly present Euro-Canadian structures in the historic mapping. The photographs in Section 2.0 exhibit the lack of evidence for visible modern disturbance. These additional factors lend reason to believe that the majority of the Project Area could retain




archaeological potential. Otherwise, some areas of low archaeological potential do exist within the Project Area. The two roadways that cross the Project Area, Pillette Road and Jefferson Boulevard, are both modern paved roads that exhibit disturbance from their construction. The drains are natural watercourses that have been modified within the last century and retain low archaeological either due to the low, wet nature of the area or due to modern ditching and culvert construction.

In summary, the archaeological potential for pre-contact Aboriginal, post-contact Aboriginal, and Euro-Canadian sites is deemed to be moderate to high within the Project Area, with the exception of the disturbed roadways (Pillette Road and Jefferson Boulevard) and the municipal drains (the Lappan, McGill, and Rivard Drains).


Recommendations July 3, 2014


4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

Stantec was retained by Dillon on behalf of Windsor Solar LP to complete a Stage 1 archaeological assessment for the area to be impacted by the proposed Windsor Solar Project. The Stage 1 assessment, involving background research and a property inspection, resulted in the determination that the Project Area retains archaeological potential and any areas that will be subject to construction disturbance as a part of the Project Location will be subject to a Stage 2 archaeological assessment prior to construction. However, the existing roadways (Pillette Road and Jefferson Boulevard) and the municipal drains (Lappan, McGill, and Rivard Drains) do not retain archaeological potential and no further archaeological assessment is recommended for those elements (Figure 9).

The objective of the Stage 2 archaeological assessment will be to document archaeological resources within the Project Location and to determine whether these archaeological resources require further assessment. The Stage 2 archaeological assessment of the Project Location will consist of pedestrian survey of the agricultural fields that make up the majority of the Project Area. Pedestrian survey will entail the systematic walking of open ploughed fields at five metre intervals as outlined in Section 2.1.1 of the 2011 Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists (Government of Ontario 2011b). If the archaeological field team judges any lands to be low and wet, steeply sloped, or disturbed during the course of the Stage 2 field work they will be photographically documented as such (as outlined in Section 2.1 Standards 2 and 6).

The Ontario Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport is asked to review the results presented and to accept this report into the Ontario Public Register of Archaeological Reports. Additional archaeological assessment is still required and so the archaeological sites recommended for further archaeological fieldwork remain subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act and may not be altered, or have artifacts removed, except by a person holding an archaeological license.


Advice on Compliance with Legislation July 3, 2014


5.0 ADVICE ON COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION

This report is submitted to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport as a condition of licensing in accordance with Part VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c 0.18. The report is reviewed to ensure that it complies with the standards and guidelines that are issued by the Minister, and that the archaeological fieldwork and report recommendations ensure the conservation, protection and preservation of the cultural heritage of Ontario. When all matters relating to archaeological sites within the project area of a development proposal have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, a letter will be issued by the ministry stating that there are no further concerns with regard to alterations to archaeological sites by the proposed development.

It is an offence under Sections 48 and 69 of the Ontario Heritage Act for any party other than a licensed archaeologist to make any alteration to a known archaeological site or to remove any artifact or other physical evidence of past human use or activity from the site, until such time as a licensed archaeologist has completed fieldwork on the site, submitted a report to the Minister stating that the site has no further cultural heritage value or interest, and the report has been filed in the Ontario Public Register of Archaeology Reports referred to in Section 65.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act.

Should previously undocumented archaeological resources be discovered, they may be a new archaeological site and therefore subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proponent or person discovering the archaeological resources must cease alteration of the site immediately and engage a licensed consultant archaeologist to carry out archaeological fieldwork, in compliance with Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act.

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

Archaeological sites recommended for further archaeological fieldwork or protection remain subject to Section 48(1) of the Ontario Heritage Act and may not be altered, or have artifacts removed from them, except by a person holding an archaeological license.


Biblography and Sources July 3, 2014


6.0 BIBLOGRAPHY AND SOURCES

Archives of Ontario. 2014. Detroit. In French Ontario in the 17th and 18th Centuries. Electronic document: http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/explore/online/franco_ontarian/detroit.aspx. Last accessed June 20, 2014.

Belden, H. and Co. 1881. Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Counties of Essex and Kent, 1881, including Union Publishing Company's Farmers' Directory for the County of Essex for 1883-4 and Farmers' Directory of the County of Kent for 1884-5. Reprint. Stratford: Cumming Atlas Reprints.

Chapman, L.J. and D.F. Putnam. 1984. The Physiography of Southern Ontario. Third Edition. Ontario Geological Survey. Special Volume 2.

Cultural Resource Management Group Limited, Fisher Archaeological Consulting, Historic Horizon Inc., and Dillon Consulting Limited. 2005. Archaeological Master Plan Study Report for the City of Windsor. Report submitted to the City of Windsor, Windsor.

Ellis, Chris J. and Neal Ferris (editors). 1990. The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650. Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, Ontario Archaeological Society, Number 5.

Ferris, Neal. 2009. The Archaeology of Native-Lived Colonialism: Challenging History in the Great Lakes. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Fuller, Robert M. 1972. Windsor Heritage. Windsor: Herald Press Limited.

Garrad, Charles. 2014. 2014. Petun to Wyandot: The Ontario Petun from the Sixteenth Century. Edited by Jean-Luc Pilon and William Fox. Mercury Series, Archaeology Paper 174. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press and Canadian Museum of History.

Gentilcore, R. Louis and C. Grant Head. 1984. Ontario’s History in Maps. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Government of Ontario. 1990a. Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER O.18. Last amendment: 2009, c. 33, Sched. 11, s. 6. Electronic document: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90e19_e.htm. Last accessed June 19, 2014.

Government of Ontario. 1990b. Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER O.18. Last amendment: 2009, c. 33, Sched. 11, s. 6. Electronic document: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90o18_e.htm. Last accessed June 19, 2014.




Government of Ontario. 2009. The Green Energy Act, S.O. 2009, Chapter 12, Schedule A. Last amendment: 2011, c.9, Sched. 27, s.27. Electronic document: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_09g12_e.htm. Last accessed June 19, 2014.

Government of Ontario. 2011a. Ontario Regulation 359/09: Renewable Energy Approval Under Part V.0.1 of the Act. Electronic document: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_090359_e.htm. Last accessed June 19, 2014.

Government of Ontario. 2011b. Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists. Toronto: Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

Government of Ontario. n.d. Archaeological Sites Database Files. Toronto: Archaeology Programs Unit, Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

Iredell, Abraham. 1800. Sandwich. Plan A34. Unpublished map, on file with the Ministry of Natural Resources Crown Land Survey Records Office, Peterborough, Ontario.

Jacobs, Dean. 1983. Indian Land Surrenders. In The Western District. Papers from the Western District Conference, eds. Kenneth G. Pryke and Larry L. Kulisek. Windsor: Essex County Historical Society and the Western District Council.

Lajeunesse, Ernest J. (editor).1960. The Windsor Border Region: Canada’s Southernmost Frontier. The Champlain Society. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Morris, J.L. 1929. Memorandum for Surveyor-General. Re Sandwish Township Noes. Lots 1 to 156, Front Concession. File Number FNB 612. Unpublished memorandum on file with the Ministry of Natural Resources Crown Land Survey Records Office, Peterborough, Ontario.

Morris, J.L. 1943. Indians of Ontario. 1964 reprint. Toronto: Department of Lands and Forests, Government of Ontario.

Morrison, Neil F. 1954. Garden Gateway to Canada: One Hundred Years of Windsor and Essex County. Toronto: Ryerson Press.

Neal, Frederick. 1909. The Township of Sandwich, Past and Present. Windsor: The Record Printing Co.

Richards, N.R., A. G. Caldwell, and F.F. Morwick. 1949. Soil Survey of Essex County. Report No.11 of the Ontario Soils Survey. Guelph: Experimental Farms Service, Dominion Department of Agriculture and the Ontario Agricultural College.

Steckley, John. 2014. The Eighteenth Century Wyandot: A Clan-Based Study. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.




Union Publishing Company. 1884. The Union Publishing Co.’s Farmers’ and Classified Business Directory, for the Counties of Essex, Kent and Lambton, 1884-85, Vol. 1. Ingersoll: Union Publishing Company.

Wilson, J.A. and M. Horne. 1995. City of London Archaeological Master Plan. London: City of London, Department of Planning and Development.


Images July 3, 2014


7.0 IMAGES

7.1 PHOTOS

Photo 1: Agricultural Field within the Project Area, looking southeast


Images July 3, 2014


Photo 2: Agricultural Field within the Project Area, looking northwest



Images July 3, 2014


Photo 4: Agricultural Field within the Project Area, looking northwest



Images July 3, 2014


Photo 6: Agricultural Field within the Project Area, looking northeast

Photo 7: Agricultural Field within the Project Area, looking south


Images July 3, 2014


Photo 8: Agricultural Field and the McGill Drain within the Project Area, looking northeast



Images July 3, 2014


Photo 10: Narrow Ditch and Tree Line Separating Agricultural fields within the Project Area, looking southwest

Photo 11: Jefferson Boulevard and Grassy Right of Way Separating Agricultural fields within the Project Area, looking southeast


Images July 3, 2014


Photo 12: Jefferson Boulevard and Grassy Right of Way Separating Agricultural Fields within the Project Area, looking southeast

Photo 13: Pillette Road and Grassy Right of Way Separating Agricultural Fields within the Project Area, looking southeast


Images July 3, 2014


Photo 14: Drainage Ditch at the Corner of an Agricultural Field, looking northwest


Maps July 3, 2014


8.0 MAPS

All mapping with will follow on succeeding pages.


Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

LakeHuron

LakeErie

PennsylvaniaOhio

Michigan

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!

!

TUTU TU

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !

!

!

!!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!!

! ! !! !

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!

!!

!!

!!

!!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!

!!

!

!

L I T T L E R

I VE

R

HA

NS

EN

CR

ES

CE

NT

HAWTHORNE DRIVE

GE

OR

GE

AV

EN

UE

TOU

RA

NG

EA

U R

OA

D

MEMORIALDRIVE

ME

AD

OW

BR

OO

KLA

NE

SO

UT

HF

IEL D

DR

IVE

SOUTH SERVICE ROAD EAST

SC

OT

IAD

RIV

E

GRANDBOULEVARD

TUR

NE

R R

OA

D

LYNNSTREET

LEIS

UR

E

CR

ES

CE

NT

NO

RM

AN

RO

AD

RO

SS

INI B

OU

LEVA

RD

FOSTER AVENUE

DEZIEL DRIVE

WO

OD

WA

RD

BO

ULE

VAR

D

HOLBURN STREET

ROCKPORTSTREET

QUEEN ELIZABETH DRIVE

LOON

STREET

SYDNEY AVENUE

HAIG

AVENUE

SEYMOUR BOULEVARD

ALE

XIS

RO

AD

CH

AN

DLE

R R

OA

D

AIRPORT ROAD

CA

DILLA

C S

TR

EE

T

AR

TH

UR

RO

AD

MU

LB

ERRY

CO

U

R T

PARK D ALE

PL A CE

FIESTA

COURT

ACORN

COURT

CALDERWOOD AVENUE

RU

TH R

OA

D

7T

HC

ON

CE

SS

I ON

RO

AD

ROSECOURT

IDEL

COURT

SU

NR

ISE

CO

UR

T

LEO

NA

RD

RO

AD

NORTH SERVICE

ROAD

MA

YR

AN

D

CR

ES

CE

NT

RO

BE

RT

RO

AD

ROSE STREET

ER

IND

ALE

CR

ES

CE

NT

BE

RN

AR

D R

OA

D

LAR

KIN

RO

AD

BEACHDALE ROAD

VIMY AVENUE

MONS

AVENUE

SOMME AVENUE

YPRES AVENUE

ST JULIEN

AVENUE

GE

MA

VE

NU

E

ADSTOLL AVENUE

RIB

ER

DY

RO

AD

ALLY

SO

N A

VE

NU

E

AP

PL

ELAN

E

MOXLAY AVENUE

LEDYARD AVENUE

MELINDA STREET

MC

MA

HO

N

AVE

NU

E

SO

UILL

IER

E D

RIV

E

ROS

EB

RIA

R

RO

AD

KE

RB

Y

ROAD

LOC

KE

ST

RE

ET

STILLMEA

DO

W

RO

AD

BO

NIT

AA

VE

NU

E

SU

SS

EX

DR

IVE

WE

ST

CO

TT R

OA

D

NOVA DRIVE

TEMPLE DRIVE

TWIN OAKS DRIVE

PR

INC

ES

S AV

EN

UE

DOLPHINCOURT

TA

MARACK

STREET

AN

TH

ON

Y

COU

RT

CANTELON DRIVE

WE

ST

MIN

ST

ER

BO

ULE

VA

RD

LAB

AD

IE R

OA

D

LYNDON

COURT

ROBWOOD

COURT

KEWDRIVE

AU

ST

EN

DR

IVE

FRA

NC

OIS

RO

AD

MA

RLI

NA

VE

NU

E

AR

PIN

O A

VE

NU

E

VA

LTE

CC

OU

RT

BLIS

S R

OA

D

HAYE S

RO

AD

SHINGLECREEK C OU

RT

WALLACE AVENUE

SCOFIELD AVENUE

LLOY

D G

EO

RG

E B

OU

LEVA

RD

CLE

ME

NC

EA

U B

OU

LEVA

RD

OLIV

E R

OA

D

WH

EE

LTO

N

DR

IVE

BY

NG

RO

AD

ALTEN

DRIVE

NORTH SERVICE

RO AD EAST

INN

ER

K IP

CR

ES

CE

N T

AR

MS

TR ONG

AVE

NU

E

ELEC

TR

ICIT

Y

DR

IVE

CO

RA

M

CR

ES

CE

NT

ST ETIENNE BOULEVARD

KLO

ND

IKE

AVE

NU

E

CO

LET

TA

CO

UR

T

ELMWO

OD

CO

URT

CANCUNSTREET

AU

BIN

RO

AD

ARISTOTLE

CRESCENT

SHIELDS DRIVE

RYERSON

ROAD

KA

UT

EX

DR

IVE

BLAIRWOO

D

CRESC

EN

T

PILLE

TT

E R

OA

D

MU

NI CH COURT

INTERSECTION ROAD

LAU

ZO

N R

OA

D

SERVICE RO

AD

B

LEG

ACYPARK

DRI V E

RAY ROAD

JOY ROAD

BASELINE ROAD

E C ROW AVENUE EAST

TR

OU

P

CR

ES

CE

NT

SU

FF

OL

K

ST

RE

ET

SE

VIL

LE A

VE

NU

E

GR

AN

DM

AR

AIS

ROAD

EAS

T

HA

R

MONYDR

IV E

WILDWOOD DRIVE

BU

CK

ING

HA

M D

RIV

E

DUCHARME STREET

DEERBROOKDRIV

E

SOCRATESCRESCENT

CLARENCE

DRIVE HEMLOCK ROAD

CO

LB

O URNEDR

IV E

RO

BIN

ET

RO

AD

WA

C

HNA DRIVE

RE

GIS

AVE

NU

E

BR

IAR

BA

NK

DR

IVE

CHESTNUT

DRIVE

ES

PLA

NA

DE

DR

IVE

DO

WN

ING

ST

RE

ET

MAPLELEAF

CRESCENT

FULLER CRESCENT

DONLON WAY

HA

LPIN

ROA

D

AVERY

LANE

VIC

K

Y

CIR

CL

E

CA

RIB

OU

CR

ES

CE

NT

BR

IMLEY

DR

IVEA

S PEN

LANE L

O NSDAL ECR

E S CENT

BALDWIN

AVENUE

9TH

CO

NC

ES

SIO

N R

OA

D

ANCHOR DRIVE

QUALITY WAY

FOREST

GLADE DRIVE

JEF

FE

RS

ON

BO

ULE

VAR

D

ROOSEVELT

AVENUE

6TH

CO

NC

ES

SIO

NR

OA

D

CABANA ROAD EAST

E C ROW COLLECTOR NORTH

RIVA

RD

AVE

NU

E

WA

LKE

RR

OA

D

PILLE

TTE

RO

AD

GRAND MARAIS

ROAD EAST

TECUMSEH

ROAD EAST

DIVISION ROAD

8T

HC

ON

CE

SS

ION

RO

AD

COUNTY

ROAD22

PROVINCIAL ROAD

CE

NT

RA

L

AVE

NU

E

JEFF

ER

SO

NB

OU

LEVA

RD

SE

RV

ICE

RO

AD

PLYMOUTH

DRIVE

BA

NW

EL

LR

OA

DNORTH SERVICE ROAD EAST

LAU

ZO

N

PAR

KW

AY

CH

RY

SLE

RC

EN

TRE

LAU

ZO

NR

OA

D

CO

NC

ES

SIO

N R

OA

D 1

1

CO

UN

TY

RO

AD

17

BASELINE ROAD

COUNTY ROAD 42

RHODES DRIVE

E C ROW EXPRESSWAYTurkey Creek

Turkey Creek

338000

338000

340000

340000

342000

342000

344000

344000

4680

000

4680

000

4682

000

4682

000

4684

000

4684

000

Client/Project

Figure No.

Title

Location of Project Area1

Dillon Consulting LimitedWindsor Solar ProjectStage 1 Archaeological Assessment

June 201416040284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N

Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013.

0 500 1,000m

1:25,000

Project Area

Highway

Major Road

Local Road

Railway

! ! Transmission Line

TU Unknown Pipeline

Watercourse

Waterbody

Wooded Area

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

1_Si

teLo

catio

n.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

7 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP


Ontario

LakeHuron

LakeErie

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

Client/Project

Figure No.

TitleDocumented Aboriginal Activityin Essex County According toLaJeunesse 1960

2

Dillon Consulting Ltd.Windsor Solar ProjectStage 1 Archaeological Assessment

June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.

Scale is approximate.

Map from The Windsor Border Region: Canada'sSouthernmost Frontier. Ed. by Ernest J. Lajeunesse.University of Toronto Press, 1960.

Approximate Location of Project Area

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

2_Tr

ails

.mxd

Revi

sed

: 201

4-06

-20

By: k

buc

hana

n

±

KEY MAP 25km

5km


AE

Y

Z

AF

S

T

C

O

D

W

AG

D

V

E

R

P

L

NAA

I

M

J

A

FA2

KX

HN

G

U

AB

B2

B1Q

B

^

Q u é b e c

L a k eH u r o n

L a k eE r i e

L a k eO n t a r i o

G e o r g i a nB a y

74°W

76°W

76°W

78°W

78°W

80°W

80°W

82°W

82°W

84°W

84°W

86°W

48°N

46°N

46°N

44°N

44°N

42°N

42°N

Client/Project

Figure No.

Title

Treaties and Purchases(Adapted from Morris 1943)

3


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.

3.

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 Statistics Canada Lambert

Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministryof Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2012.

Treaty boundaries adapted from Morris 1943 (1964 reprint).For cartographic representation only.

0 75 150km

1:3,000,000

^Project Area

Municipal Boundary - Upper Tier

Municipal Boundary - Lower or Single Tier

Watercourse

Waterbody

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0283

_St1

_Fig

3_Tr

ea

ties.

mxd

Revi

sed

: 201

4-06

-20

By: k

buc

hana

n

±

Treaty No. 381, May 9th, 1781 (Mississauga and Chippewa)Crawford's Purchase, October 9th, 1783 (Algonquin and Iroquois)Crawford's Purchase, October 9th, 1783 (Mississauga)Crawford's Purchases, 1784, 1787 And 1788 (Mississauga)John Collins' Purchase, 1785 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 2, May 19th, 1790 (Odawa, Chippewa, Pottawatomi, and Huron)Treaty No. 3, December 2nd, 1792 (Mississauga)Haldimand Tract:from the Crown to the Mohawk, 1793Tyendinaga:from the Crown to the Mohawk, 1793Treaty No. 3 3/4:from the Crown to Joseph Brant, October 24th, 1795Treaty No. 5, May 22nd, 1798 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 6, September 7th, 1796 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 7, September 7th, 1796 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 13, August 1st, 1805 (Mississauga)Treaty No. 13A, August 2nd, 1805 (Mississauga)Treaty No.16, November 18th, 1815 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 18, October 17th, 1818 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 19, October 28th 1818 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 20, November 5th, 1818 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 21, March 9th, 1819 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 27, May 31st, 1819 (Mississauga)Treaty No. 27½, April 25th, 1825 (Ojibwa and Chippewa)Treaty No. 35, August 13th, 1833 (Wyandot or Huron)Treaty No. 45, August 9th, 1836 (Chippewa and Odawa, "For All Indians To Reside Thereon")Treaty No. 45½, August 9th, 1836 (Saugeen)Treaty No. 57, June 1st, 1847 (Iroquois of St. Regis)Treaty No. 61, September 9th, 1850 (Robinson Treaty:Ojibwa)Treaty No. 72, October 30th, 1854 (Chippewa)Treaty No. 82, February 9th, 1857 (Chippewa)Williams Treaty, October 31st and November 15th, 1923 (Chippewa and Mississauga)Williams Treaty, October 31st, 1923 (Chippewa)

ABB1B2A2CDEFG

HIJLMNOPQRSTUVWXZAAABAF

AG


Ontario

LakeHuron

LakeErie

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

Client/Project

Figure No.

TitleAn 1800 Original Township Plan fora Portion of Sandwich Township

4


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.

Historic information not to scale.

Iredell, Abraham. 1800. Sandwich. Unpublished map,on file with the Ministry of Natural Resources CrownLand Survey Records Office, Peterborough, Ontario.

Approximate Extent of Project Area

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

4_H

isto

ric.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

3 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP 25km


Ontario

LakeHuron

LakeErie

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

Client/Project

Figure No.

TitlePortion of 1847 HistoricMap of Western District

5


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.


Billyard, William and Richard Parr. 1847. Map of theWestern Districtin the Province of Canada.Toronto: Scobie and Balfour.


V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

4_H

isto

ric.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

3 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP 25km


Ontario

LakeHuron

LakeErie

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

Client/Project

Figure No.

TitlePortion of 1881 HistoricMap of Sandwich Township

6


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.


Sandwich Township map from Essex supplement inIllustrated atlas of the Dominion of Canada.Toronto: H. Belden and Co., 1881.


V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

6_H

isto

ric.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

3 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP 25km


Ontario

LakeHuron

LakeErie

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

Client/Project

Figure No.

TitlePortion of 1905 HistoricMap of Sandwich Townships

7


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.


McPhillips, G. 1905. Plan of the Townships ofSandwich - West, East and South. Map on file withthe Municipal Archives of the City of Windsor.


V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

7_H

isto

ric.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

3 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP 25km


9TH

CONC

ESSIO

NRO

AD

LAUZON PARKWAY

PILLETTE ROAD

SOUTH SERVICE RO

AD EAST

NORTH SERVICE ROAD EAST

E C ROW EXPRESSWAY

COUNTY ROAD 42

RHODES DRIVE

B-s

BcBcl

Client/Project

Figure No.

Title

Soil Classification8


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.2.

3.

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17NBase features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013.Richards, N.R., A. G. Caldwell, and F.F. Morwick. 1949. SoilSurvey of Essex County. Report No.11 of the Ontario Soils Survey.Guelph: Experimental Farms Service, Dominion Department ofAgriculture and the Ontario Agricultural College.

0 250 500m

1:10,000

Project Area

Road

Watercourse

Waterbody

Soil NameBrookston Clay

Brookston Clay Loam

Brookston Clay - Sand Spot Phase

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

8_So

ils.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

3 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±

KEY MAP

Kitchener

LondonSarnia

Windsor Chatham

LakeHuron

LakeErie

PennsylvaniaOhio

Michigan


;!!

;!!

;!!

;!!

;!!

;!!

;!!

;!! ;!!

; !!

;!!

;!!

;!!

;!!

L A P P A N D R A I N

M C G I L L D R A I N

R I V A R D D R A I N

MC G I L

L D R A I N

COUNTY ROAD 42

LAUZO

N PA

RKWAY

NORTH SERVICE ROAD EAST

TWIN OAKS

DRIVE

RHODES DRIVE

SOUTH SERV ICE ROAD

EAST

PILLETTE ROAD

JEFFERSON

BOULEVARD

E C ROW EXPRESSWAY

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 9

10

11

12

13

14

Client/Project

Figure No.

Title

Archaeological Potential9


June 2014160940284

Notes

Legend

1.

2.

3.

Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N

Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013.

2010 orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2014.

0 250 500m

1:10,000

;!! Photos

Project Area

Further Work RecommendationsArea of archaeological potential,Stage 2 recommended

Previously disturbed by roadconstruction, no assessmentrecommended

Low and wet, no assessmentrecommended

V:\

0160

9\a

ctiv

e\16

0940

284

- Sa

msu

ng P

hase

III O

nta

rio S

ola

r - W

ind

sor\

wo

rk_p

rog

ram

\dra

win

g\M

XD\1

6094

0284

_St1

_Fig

9_Po

tent

ial.m

xdRe

vise

d: 2

014-

06-2

7 By

: kb

ucha

nan

±



Closure July 3, 2014

jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\p256-0156-2014_3jul2014_re.docx 9.1

9.0 CLOSURE

This report has been prepared for the sole benefit the Dillon Consulting Limited and Windsor Solar LP and may not be used by any third party without the express written consent of Stantec Consulting Ltd., Dillon Consulting Limited, and Windsor Solar LP. Any use which a third party makes of this report is the responsibility of such third party.

We trust this report meets your current requirements. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you require further information or have additional questions about any facet of this report.

Project Manager Review (signature)

Tracie Carmichael, BA, B.Ed. (R140)

Licensee Review (signature)

Parker Dickson, MA (P256)

Senior Review (signature)

Jim Wilson, MA (P001)

jmuir

tlc

jmuir

pd

jmuir

jaw

Documents

Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment: Windsor Solar …...STAGE 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT: WINDSOR SOLAR PROJECT jm l:\01609\active\160940284 - samsung phase iii ontario solar - windsor\work_program\report\final\stage