Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PDS-011-26
Staff Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Council Date of Meeting: January 26, 2026 Report Number: PDS-011-26 Authored By: Sarah Allin, Principal Planner, Planning and Infrastructure Services Submitted By: Darryl Lyons, Deputy CAO, Planning and Infrastructure Services Reviewed By: Mary-Anne Dempster, CAO By-law Number: Resolution Number: File Number: PLN 34; HPA2025-008 Report Subject: Heritage Permit Application for Removal of Part of Building on a Designated Property; 2656 Concession Rd 4 (Future Site of the new Clarington Operations Depot, Emergency and Fire Services (CODEFS) building) Recommendations: 1.That Report PDS-011-26, and any related delegations or communication items, be received; 2.That the Heritage Permit Application (File No. HPA2025-008), to permit the demolition and removal of the one-storey brick rear wing and one-storey wooden outbuilding of the existing farmhouse dwelling at 2656 Concession Rd 4, be approved in accordance with Section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act and substantially in accordance with: a.The Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by Archaeological Resources Inc, Revised, dated December 10, 2025; b.The Heritage Demolition Advisory Report, prepared by MVW Construction & Engineering Inc., dated November 17, 2025; and 3.That the Ontario Heritage Trust, the Clarington Heritage Committee, and all interested parties listed in Report PDS-011-26, be advised of Council’s decision. C-029-26 Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report PDS-011-26 Report Overview 1. Background 1.1 The subject Heritage Permit application proposes to demolish and remove a portion of a structure on a property designated under Part IV (section 29) of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) by By-law 95-140. 1.2 The subject lands are municipally owned and are located at the northeast corner of Liberty Street N. and Concession Road 4, Darlington, as shown in Figures 1 and 2, below. The property measures approximately 26 hectares (65 acres). Municipality of Clarington Page 3 Report PDS-011-26 Figure 1: Aerial View of Property Located at 2656 Concession Rd. 4, Darlington (northeast corner of Liberty Street N. and Concession Rd. 4) Municipality of Clarington Page 4 Report PDS-011-26 2. Heritage Permit for 2656 Concession Road 4 Overview of Proposal 2.1 The Public Services Department, which oversees municipal asset management, submitted a Heritage Permit under Section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act to allow the partial demolition and removal of a structure on a designated heritage property. The property is designated under Section 29 of the Act by By-law 95-140. 2.2 Specifically, the permit is to permit the removal of the one-storey brick rear wing and one-storey wooden outbuilding, while retaining the main portion of the building, as identified in Figure 2, and shown in Figures 3, 4, and 5, below. Figure 2: Aerial View of Heritage House, Concession Rd. 4, identifying Sections to be Removed Municipality of Clarington Page 5 Report PDS-011-26 Figure 3: Perspective Photo of Southwest Corner of Heritage Dwelling, dated July 2024 (source: HIA prepared by ARA) Figure 4 Figure 5: 2.3 Per designation By-law 95-140 and the HIA submitted in support of the application, the subject property has physical or design value as a representative example of the Georgian architectural style. The structure is a one-and-a-half storey residential building Municipality of Clarington Page 6 Report PDS-011-26 that primarily exhibits characteristics typical of Georgian residential architecture with some Classical (specifically Greek Revival) influences. The building follows a rectangular plan with a one-storey rear additions, and a one storey outbuilding which is attached but not directly accessed by the main building. 2.4 The subject property has historical and associative value for its association with the Rutledge family, specifically John and Edward Rutledge, who were early settlers in the community and owned the property for over 70 years, until 1926. 2.5 The main building displays either a Common or Flemish brick bond on all elevations, while the one-storey rear wing follows a stretcher bond design. The variation in brick bond suggests a different construction date, likely when a summer kitchen was added to the building. The one-storey outbuilding is constructed with wood siding and has a gable roof with overhanging eaves. It is attached to the rear elevation; however, it does not appear to be connected through the interior. 2.6 A Heritage Permit for the removal of the two rear sections of the building is being pursued at this time to better secure the larger, main portion of the heritage structure. The rear sections of the building have been vulnerable to access by unauthorized persons, causing health and safety concerns for the Municipality. In addition, the removal of these sections will help to facilitate the construction of the CODEFS project, in order to mitigate negative impacts to the heritage house. 2.7 It is strongly recommended that the demolition work be performed during winter months when frost provides naturally hardened ground. 2.8 The heritage permit for the new municipal facility will be brought forward to Council for consideration at a later date, once the planning for the project has progressed. Supporting Documentation 2.9 The HIA submitted in support of the proposal indicates that while the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding contain historic fabric, they are not essential to understanding the cultural heritage value or interest of the building and property. The building’s design value is associated with its representativeness of Georgian Architecture which is displayed in the main portion of the building where the heritage attributes are directly and exclusively located. 2.10 Further, the HIA notes removal of the rear sections of the heritage building aligns with the preliminary design for the new municipal facility and will reduce impacts of excavation required near the structure. The removal of the proposed sections has been identified to reduce potential negative impacts of the new development on the main house. Municipality of Clarington Page 7 Report PDS-011-26 Consultation with Clarington Heritage Committee 2.11 The subject application was presented to the Clarington Heritage Committee at its June, November, and December 2025 meetings. The Committee requested additional information relating to the age and cultural heritage value or interest of the sections proposed to be removed. 2.12 In November, the Committee passed a motion that the heritage permit application be evaluated against By-law 95-140, which includes the original list of heritage attributes. The Committee did not support the list of attributes listed in the HIA, which recommends interior attributes be removed from the statement of significance. 2.13 The municipal project team, including staff from Community Services and the Infrastructure Division of Planning and Infrastructure Services, presented the requested additional information to the Heritage Committee at its December 16, 2025 meeting. The Committee subsequently passed a motion recommending that Council support the Heritage Permit Application to demolish a portion of the existing farmhouse, including the one-storey brick rear wing and the one-storey wooden outbuilding. Discussion 2.14 The HIA concluded that the removal of the identified portions of the building would not adversely impact the cultural value or interest of the property, as established by designation By-law 95-140. The proposal retains the main portion of the building, which includes the conservation of the heritage attributes identified by By-law 95-140. 2.15 The demolition and removal of the rear wing and outbuilding will address the immediate public safety concerns, allowing Community Services to better secure the heritage structure, and will also reduce potential impacts to the heritage dwelling, relating to vibration and excavation, when site works commence for the new municipal facility currently being planned. 2.16 Planning and Infrastructure Services and Public Services staff support the proposal, as presented, subject to implementation of the mitigation measures identified and demolition approach outlined in the supporting HIA and Heritage Demolition Advisory Report. This includes the salvage of bricks from the removed section for use in sealing openings and repairing sections on the main portion of the building. 2.17 A heritage permit for the new municipal facility will be brought forward to Council for consideration at a later date, once the planning for the project has progressed. Municipality of Clarington Page 8 Report PDS-011-26 3. Financial Considerations 3.1 The cost of the demolition of the one-storey brick rear wing and the one-storey wooden outbuilding will be funded through the project budget for the Clarington Operations Depot Emergency Fire Training Station. 4. Strategic Plan 4.1 The Heritage Permit will help to facilitate the development of a new municipal facility that will contribute to the Strategic Plan action to prioritize initiatives that improve community safety and well being. The retention of the main portion of the designated heritage structure for adaptive reuse contributes to achieving the ‘Connect’ priority to promote and support local arts, culture, and heritage sectors. 5. Climate Change 5.1 Support for the subject heritage permit aligns with Clarington’s Corporate Climate Action Plan goals to maintain public heath and safety, minimize risks to buildings and properties, and strengthen the resilience of municipal infrastructure. 6. Concurrence 6.1 This report has been reviewed by the Acting Deputy CAO Public Services, Mariano Perini, who concurs with the recommendations. 7. Conclusion 7.1 Staff and the Clarington Heritage Committee support the proposed Heritage Permit application to demolish and remove of the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding, as presented. 7.2 It is respectfully recommended that Council adopt the recommendations as presented. Staff Contact: Sarah Allin, Principal Planner, sallin@clarington.net or 905-623-3379 ext. 2419; Lisa Backus, Manager of Community Planning, lbackus@clarington.net or 905-623-3379 ext. 2413. Attachments: Attachment 1 – Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by Archaeological Resources Inc, Revised, dated December 10, 2025 Municipality of Clarington Page 9 Report PDS-011-26 Attachment 2 – Heritage Demolition Advisory Report, prepared by MVW Construction & Engineering Inc., dated November 17, 2025 Interested Parties: List of Interested Parties available from Department. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4 Municipality of Clarington Regional Municipality of Durham Lot 10, Concession 4 Geographic Township of Darlington Former Durham County, Ontario Prepared for: Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 www.clarington.net By: Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. 50 Nebo Road, Unit 1 Hamilton, ON L8W 2E3 Tel: (519) 804-2291 Fax: (519) 286-0493 araheritage.ca HR-527-2024 Project# 2024-0227 Original 27/05/2025 Revised 10/12/2025 Attachment 1 to Report PDS-011-26 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington i May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Under a contract awarded in May 2024 by the Municipality of Clarington, Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. (ARA) completed a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as part of a larger proposed development at 2656 Concession Road 4 in the Municipality of Clarington (subject property). The subject property is 66.53 acres and is currently zoned agricultural. The subject property includes a one-and-a-half storey brick building constructed in 1859. The subject property was designated in 1995 under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) through By-law 95-140. In consultation with Municipal staff a review of the existing By-law has been conducted and an Ontario Regulation 9/06 (O. Reg) evaluation completed as part of the HIA. Town staff have also confirmed that no adjacent resources need to be considered as part of this HIA. The purpose of this HIA is to help guide future planning and redevelopment exercises to provide an understanding of heritage considerations. To this end, the primary goal of the HIA is to refine the heritage evaluation of the property, evaluate impacts of the proposed development, and suggest mitigation measures. The O. Reg 9/06 evaluation conducted as part of this report confirms 2656 Concession Road 4 possesses CHVI. While the interior does contain historic fabric, as noted in the existing By-law, it is our opinion that they are not essential to understanding the CHVI of the building, which is best expressed in the exterior elements. The evaluation found that the subject property has physical or design value as a representative example of the Georgian architectural style. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style • Rectangular plan • Stone foundation • Balanced and symmetrical three-bay façade • Gable roof with return eaves, wide overhanging eaves, and adorned wood fascia, molded frieze and paired wood carved brackets • Enclosed portico which exhibits classical detailing, inspired by the Greek Revival period, including sidelights, molded decorative trim showcasing brackets, and mansard roofline. • Red brick construction showcasing Flemish bond, Common bond design, and English corners • Rectangular window openings which house six-over-six wood windows with buff brick voussoirs • Lunette window The evaluation found that the subject property has historical and associative value for its association with the Rutledge family, specifically John and Edward Rutledge. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style The proposed development includes the retention of the main portion of the heritage structures, the removal of the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding, as well as the creation of a new fire station and fire training center, with several outbuildings and storage structures to help serve the future needs of the Municipality of Clarington. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington ii May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The proposed development will have adverse impacts on the heritage attributes of 2656 Concession Road 4 as defined by MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006). The potential impacts include: • Impact 1 – While unlikely, there is the potential for impacts to 2656 Concession Road 4 as a result of accidental damage during the construction process. • Impact 2 – The one-storey brick wing is attached to a main portion of the house. Any potential destruction will be further mitigation as the demolition team will be performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition. Nonetheless, the removal has the potential to cause unintended destruction to the rear elevation of the building which is considered a heritage attribute. • Impact 3 – There is potential for unintended impacts from the building remaining vacant and unmaintained that may result in the loss of heritage attributes. • Impact 4 – The materials, scale, and massing of the proposed development, specifically the fire station and paved parking areas, has the potential to detract from the visual context relative to the heritage resource. • Impact 5 –There will be a change in land from agricultural to institutional. Given that potential impacts have been identified, mitigation measures must be recommended. The MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006:3) lists specific methods to minimize any potential negative impacts. The following mitigation measures are recommended: • To protect 2656 Concession Road 4 from accidental damage during the construction period, a Temporary Protection Plan (TPP), or at minimum temporary protective measures, should be developed and implemented; • To protect 2656 Concession Road 4 during the construction period the information provided in the Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (July 2025) should serve as a guidance tool for any future monitoring requirements throughout the construction phase. The approach noted by the demolition team will involve performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition should be carried out. If it is deemed necessary, the process by which it is undertaken/monitored can be determined in conjunction with Municipal Staff. • It is recommended that a Conservation Plan be carried out, or that demonstrated conservation approaches and conservation planning are established to the satisfaction of Municipality staff. This plan or approach should explain and outlines the strategies for safeguarding cultural heritage resources and attributes identified in a designation By- Law during the removal of the one-storey brick wing. This approach should also provide details on how the retained building will be safeguarded after the removal of the wing to ensure for further deterioration occurs. • While the property is currently boarded up and is offered some protection of further damage or disintegration by the elements, it is recommended that a mothball plan be established which ensures ongoing monitoring of the building and long term conservation • It is recommended that sympathetic architectural articulation be considered as detailed designs are generated. A comprehensive and detailed building design has not yet been finalized which provides an opportunity to incorporate materials and design elements that are sympathetic to the existing building and the character of the surrounding area. For example, future designs could seek to integrate brick and/or stone cladding. Furthermore, it is recommended that the subsequent designs be reviewed by the heritage committee or heritage planning staff. Should the proposed design change significantly, it is Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington iii May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 recommended that a revised HIA memo be prepared to ensure that the heritage attributes are not impacts by the new design. • It is recommended that the grading surrounding the existing building be implemented in a way that run-off does not impede on the 2656 Concession Road 4. Specifically, the drainage pattern should be directed away from the foundations of 2656 Concession Road 4. • The planting of landscape and vegetative features are encouraged as is the retention of plants and trees where possible. • While the one-storey brick wing and the one-storey wood outbuilding are not identified heritage resources, they do contain historic fabric that may be worthy of salvage and reuse. The salvaging of building materials is considered good practice and is encouraged as part of the proposed development. As part of the salvage consideration, exploration of the reuse of the brick in the main building could be explored (i.e. brick being used to close in openings as needed and/or be used to replace deteriorating/water damaged bricks) It is recommended that an updated designation by-law be completed. The By-law should include an updated statement of CHVI and list of heritage attributes Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington iv May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT 1 2.0 LEGISLATION AND POLICY REVIEW 3 2.1 Federal Guidelines 3 2.1.1 Standards and Guidelines of Historic Places in Canada 3 2.2 Provincial Policies and Guidelines 4 2.2.1 The Planning Act 4 2.2.2 The Provincial Planning Statement (2024) 4 2.2.3 Ontario Heritage Act 5 2.3 Municipal Policies 6 2.3.1 Envision Durham- Regional Official Plan (2024) 6 2.3.2 Municipality of Clarington- Official Plan (2018) 6 2.4 Policy Conclusion 8 3.0 KEY CONCEPTS 8 4.0 CONSULTATION 10 5.0 SITE HISTORY 11 5.1 Darlington Township 11 5.2 Subject Property – 2656 Concession Road 12 6.0 FIELD SURVEY 15 7.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION – 2656 CONCESSION ROAD 4 15 7.1 Contextual Surrounding 15 7.2 Building Exterior 15 7.2.1 Georgian Architecture 16 8.0 HERITAGE ASSESSMENT 18 8.1 Existing Heritage Recognition 18 8.2 Condition Review 18 8.3 Evaluation According to Ontario Regulation 9/06 19 8.3.1 Summary of Evaluation of 2656 Concession Road 4 21 8.3.1.1 Revised Statement of CHVI and Heritage Attributes 21 9.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 23 9.1 Site Design Constraints and Considerations 23 9.1.1 Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (July 2025) 24 9.1.2 Structural Impact of Nearby Construction on Heritage House (August 2025) 25 9.1.3 Construction Impact Assessment Report (October 2025) 26 10.0 ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS 32 11.0 ALTERNATIVES 34 11.1 Option 1: Do Nothing 34 11.2 Option 2: Remove Existing Building, Rear Wing, and Outbuilding 34 11.3 Option 3: Retain Existing Building, Rear Wing, and Outbuilding 34 11.4 Option 4: Retain Main Building and Remove Rear Wing and Outbuilding (Preferred Alternative/Proposed Development) 34 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington v May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 11.5 Summary of Alternative Design Considerations 35 12.0 MITIGATIVE MEASURES 35 12.1 Temporary Protection Plan (Impact 1) 35 12.2 Vibration Monitoring (Impact 1) 35 12.3 Conservation Plan (Impact 2) 36 12.4 Mothballing Plan (Impact 3) 36 12.5 Architectural Articulation (Impact 4) 36 12.6 Landscaping and Vegetative Planting (Impact 4) 37 12.7 Grading Precautions (Impact 5) 37 12.8 Reuse and Salvage (General) 37 12.9 Update Existing By-Law (General) 37 13.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING 38 14.0 SUMMARY 39 15.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES 41 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Maps and Figures 45 Appendix B: Subject Property Images 52 Appendix C: Key Team Member Biographies 68 Appendix D: Construction Impact Assessment Report 70 LIST OF IMAGES Image 1: Façade 52 Image 2: Detail of Portico 52 Image 3: Southwest Corner 53 Image 4: Detail of Foundation and Brickwork 53 Image 5: West Elevation 54 Image 6: Detail of Foundation 54 Image 7: Northwest Corner 55 Image 8: Southeast Corner 55 Image 9: East Elevation 56 Image 10: Detail of Roofline with Brackets and Decorative Frieze 56 Image 11: Detail of One-Storey Rear Addition and One-Storey Outbuilding 57 Image 12: Rear Elevation Where Main Building Meets Rear Addition 57 Image 13: Detail of One-Storey Rear Outbuilding 58 Image 14: Detail of One-Storey Rear Addition and Red Brick Chimney 58 Image 15: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Formal Entryway with Transom and Sidelights 59 Image 16: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Broken Left Sidelight 59 Image 17: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Wood Staircase with Oak Railing 60 Image 18: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Wood Staircase with Oak Railing 60 Image 19: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Parlour Fireplace Mantel 61 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington vi May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 20: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Parlour Room Six-Over-Six Sash Style Window with Casement 61 Image 21: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Casement, Baseboard and Window 62 Image 22: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Six- Over-Six Sash Window 62 Image 23: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Wood Paneling Underneath Window 63 Image 24: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained Wood Door 63 Image 25: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of “Hand Grained” and Painted Door Transition between Hallway and Rear Addition 64 Image 26: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Substructure 64 Image 27: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Pine Servants Staircase 65 Image 28: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Plaster Work in Servants Quarters 65 Image 29: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Plaster and Wood Lath 66 Image 30: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Arched Window Opening Overtop Front Entranceway 66 Image 31: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Rear One Storey Addition 67 Image 32: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Rear One Storey Addition 67 LIST OF MAPS Map 1: Subject Property – 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 2 Map 2: Subject Property in the Municipality of Clarington 45 Map 3: 2656 Concession Road 4 on an 1861 Map 46 Map 4: 2656 Concession Road 4 on an 1878 Map 47 Map 5: 2656 Concession Road 4 on a Topographic Map from 1930 48 Map 6: 2656 Concession Road 4 on Aerial Image from 1954 49 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: County and Township Settlement History 11 Table 2: Summary of Land Transactions for 2656 Concession Road 14 Table 3: Characteristics of Georgian Architecture 17 Table 4: Assessment of Current Condition of Heritage Attributes 18 Table 5: Evaluation of 2656 Concession Road 4 Using O. Reg. 9/06 19 Table 6: Impact Evaluation of Proposed Development 32 Table 7: Implementation Schedule 38 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Proposed Development – Site Plan 28 Figure 2: Proposed Development – Close up of Subject Property on Site Plan 29 Figure 3: Proposed Development – Elevation of Southwest Corner 30 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington vii May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 4: Proposed Development – Elevation of Southeast Corner 31 Figure 5: John Rutledge Grave Marker 50 Figure 6: View of 2656 Concession Road 4 – 2009 50 Figure 7: View of 2656 Concession Road 4 – 2009 51 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington i May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS ARA – Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. BHR – Built Heritage Resource CHVI – Cultural Heritage Value or Interest CHL – Cultural Heritage Landscape CHIA – Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment CHVI – Cultural Heritage Value or Interest MCM – Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism OHA – Ontario Heritage Act OHT – Ontario Heritage Trust O. Reg. – Ontario Regulation PPS – Provincial Policy Statement ROP – Regional Official Plan PERSONNEL Principal: P.J. Racher, MA, CAHP Director - Heritage Operations: K. Jonas Galvin, MA, RPP, MCIP, CAHP Project Manager: A. Barnes MA, CAHP Field Survey: A. Savov, BA, Dip. Heritage Conservation, A. Barnes Historical Research: R. Hendricks, MA Cartographer: A. Bailey (GIS), M. Johnson (GIS), K. Crotty (GIS) Technical Writer: A. Savov Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington ii May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT TERMS OF REFERENCE REQUIREMENTS CHART (ToR Provided to ARA June 2024) Minimum Requirements Relevant ARA Section 1. Executive Summary Executive Summary 2. Introduction to Property 1.0 Project Context 2.0 Legislation and Policy Review 3.0 Key Concepts 4.0 Consultation 6.0 Field Survey 3. Background Research and Analysis 5.0 Site History Appendix A 4. Statement of Significance 0 Heritage Assessment 5. Assessment of Existing Condition 0 Property Description Appendix B 6. Description of the Proposed Development or Alteration 9.0 Proposed Development 7. Impact of Development or Alteration on Heritage Attribute(s) 10.0 Analysis of Potential Impacts 8. Considered Alternatives and Mitigation Strategies 11.0 Alternatives 12.0 Mitigative Measures 9. Conservation Strategy 13.0 Implementation and Monitoring N/A 14 0 Summary Appendix C- CVs Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 1 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 1.0 PROJECT CONTEXT Under a contract awarded in May 2024 by the Municipality of Clarington, Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. (ARA) completed a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) as part of a larger proposed development at 2656 Concession Road 4 in the Municipality of Clarington (subject property). The subject property is 66.53 acres and is currently zoned agricultural. The subject property includes a one-and-a-half storey brick building constructed in 1859. The subject property was designated in 1995 under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA) through By-law 95-140. The proposed development includes the retention of the main section of the existing heritage structures, the removal of the rear one-storey wing and one-storey wooden outbuilding, as well as the creation of a new fire station and fire training center, with several outbuildings and storage structures to help serve the future needs of the Municipality of Clarington. The subject property is owned by: Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 Tel: 905-623-3379 ext. 2313 | 1-800-563-1195 In consultation with Municipal staff a review of the existing By-law has been conducted, and an Ontario Regulation 9/06 evaluation completed as part of the HIA. Town staff have also confirmed that no adjacent resources need to be considered as part of this HIA. The purpose of this HIA is to help guide future planning and redevelopment exercises to provide an understanding of heritage considerations. To this end, the primary goal of the HIA is to refine the heritage evaluation of the property, evaluate impacts of the proposed development, and suggest mitigation measures. This assessment was conducted in accordance with the aims of the Ontario Heritage Act (R.S.O. 1990); Provincial Planning Statement (2024); Parks Canada’s Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010); the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism’s (MCM) Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Series (2025), Municipality of Clarington HIA Terms of Reference and local Official Plans. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 2 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Map 1: Subject Property – 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington (Produced by ARA under license using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 3 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 2.0 LEGISLATION AND POLICY REVIEW The framework for this report is provided by provincial planning legislation and policies as well as municipal Official Plans and guidelines. 2.1 Federal Guidelines At the national level, The Standards and Guidelines for Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (Parks Canada 2010) provides guidance for the preservation, rehabilitation and restoration of historic places, including cultural landscapes and built heritage resources. Such guidance includes the planning and implementation of heritage conservation activities. 2.1.1 Standards and Guidelines of Historic Places in Canada The Standards and Guidelines list the following “General Standards for Preservation, Rehabilitation and Restoration”: 1. Conserve the heritage value of an historic place. Do not remove, replace, or substantially alter its intact or repairable character defining elements. Do not move a part of an historic place if its current location is a character-defining element. 2. Conserve changes to an historic place that, over time, have become character-defining elements in their own right. 3. Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention. 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Do not create a false sense of historical development by adding elements from other historic places or other properties, or by combining features of the same property that never coexisted. 5. Find a use for an historic place that requires minimal or no change to its character-defining elements. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize an historic place until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect and preserve archaeological resources in place. Where there is potential for disturbing archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information. 7. Evaluate the existing condition of character-defining elements to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention. 8. Maintain character-defining elements on an ongoing basis. Repair character-defining elements by reinforcing their materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character-defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes. 9. Make any intervention needed to preserve character-defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable on close inspection. Document any intervention for future reference (Parks Canada 2010:22) The Standards and Guidelines have been considered and help inform conservation approaches and mitigation measures. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 4 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 2.2 Provincial Policies and Guidelines 2.2.1 The Planning Act In Ontario, the Planning Act (Government of Ontario 2018b) is the primary document used by provincial and municipal governments in land use planning decisions. The purpose of the Planning Act is outlined in Section 1.1 of the Act, which states: 1.1 The purposes of this Act are, (a) to promote sustainable economic development in a healthy natural environment within the policy and by the means provided under this Act; (b) to provide for a land use planning system led by provincial policy; (c) to integrate matters of provincial interest in provincial and municipal planning decisions; (d) to provide for planning processes that are fair by making them open, accessible, timely and efficient; (e) to encourage co-operation and co-ordination among various interests; (f) to recognize the decision-making authority and accountability of municipal councils in planning (1994, c. 23, s. 4). Part I Provincial Administration, Section 2 states: The Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Municipal Board, in carrying out their responsibilities under the Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, (d) the conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historical, archaeological, or scientific interest(1990: Part I (2. d)) Part I Provincial Administration, Section 3, 5 Policy statements and provincial plans states: A decision of the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board, a minister of the Crown and a ministry, board, commission or agency of the government, including the Tribunal, in respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, (a) shall be consistent with the policy statements issued under subsection (1) that are in effect on the date of the decision; and (b) shall conform with the provincial plans that are in effect on that date, or shall not conflict with them, as the case may be ( 2006, c. 23, s. 5; 2017, c. 23, Sched. 5, s. 80). 2.2.2 The Provincial Planning Statement (2024) The Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024) contains a combined statement of the Province’s land use planning policies. It provides the provincial government’s policies on a range of land use planning issues including cultural heritage outlined in Chapter 1: “Cultural heritage and archaeology in Ontario will provide people with a sense of place… The Province’s rich cultural diversity is one of its distinctive and defining features” (MMAH 2024:1-2).The PPS, which is enforced as of October 20, 2024, promotes the conservation of cultural heritage resources through detailed polices in Section 4.6, such as 4.6.1 “Protected heritage property, which may contain built heritage resources or cultural heritage landscapes, shall be conserved,” and 4.6.3 “Planning authorities shall not permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage property unless the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserve” (MMAH 2024:28). Further, 4.6.5 b) notes “Planning authorities are encouraged to Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 5 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 develop and implement: b) proactive strategies for conserving significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes” (MMAH 2024:28). 2.2.3 Ontario Heritage Act The Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.018 (OHA) is the guiding piece of provincial legislation for the conservation of significant cultural heritage resources in Ontario. The OHA gives provincial and municipal governments the authority and power to conserve Ontario’s heritage. The Act has policies which address individual properties (Part IV), heritage districts (Part V), and allows municipalities to create a register of non-designated properties which may have cultural heritage value or interest (Section 27). In order to objectively identify cultural heritage resources, Ontario Regulation (O. Reg) 9/06 (as amended by O. Reg 569/22) made under the OHA sets out nine principal criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest (CHVI) (MCM 2025). The criteria set out in the regulation were developed to identify and evaluate properties for designation under the OHA. Best practices in evaluating properties that are not yet protected employ O. Reg. 9/06 to determine if they have CHVI. These nine criteria are: 1. The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method, 2. The property has design value or physical value because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit, or 3. The property has design value or physical value because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. 4. The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, 5. The property has historical value or associative value because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture, or 6. The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. 7. The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining, or supporting the character of an area, 8. The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings, or 9. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark. (O. Reg. 569/22, s. 1 (2).) A property must meet two of the criteria. An OHA designation provides the strongest heritage protection available for conserving cultural heritage resources. Recent changes to Ontario Regulation (O. Reg.) 9/06, as amended by O. Reg. 569/22, to determine if a property is worthy of designation under the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA), now requires two criteria be satisfied in order to be considered for designation. In addition, changes to the OHA brought on by Bill 23 imposes a deadline for all properties listed on the Municipal Heritage Register to be designated or removed from the Register by January 1, 2027. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 6 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 2.3 Municipal Policies 2.3.1 Envision Durham- Regional Official Plan (2024) Section 3.3. Complete Communities outlines policies related to cultural heritage with an objective to “Support the preservation of heritage and character within the region’s historic downtowns, streetscapes and neighbourhoods”, as well as “Promote the conservation, protection and enhancement of Durham’s built and cultural heritage resources and landscapes, including Indigenous cultural heritage” (2024:45). At the same time the objective recognizes the need to grow and provide through the communities through objective vii which reads “ Promote a balanced approach to intensification in downtowns where appropriate, while preserving built and cultural heritage value” which is echoed in when in objective viii which reads “Support the adaptive reuse of cultural heritage sites and properties”(2024:45). There are several policies which are recognized in the Built and Cultural Heritage subsection which work to support the OPs objectives. There are several policies specific to the downtown (3.3.32- 3.3.39). There are also policies which address adaptive reuse and capital works project which read: 3.3.43 Encourage built and cultural resource conservation through adaptive reuse. Where original uses cannot be maintained, promote opportunities for adaptive reuse of heritage structures and sites, including the recycling of building materials, wherever feasible. 3.3.44 Evaluate and conserve, where possible, cultural heritage resources in all capital works projects There are additional policies which encourage municipalities to protect, enhance, conserve, maintain etc. heritage resources using the tools provided in the Ontario Heritage Act and through the establishment of heritage committees. Lastly, there are several policies related to archaeology. 2.3.2 Municipality of Clarington- Official Plan (2018) The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan contains several policies that address cultural heritage resources. Section 2.2.2. Healthy Communities notes that “the arts, culture and heritage of the community are one of the foundations of a creative society. This Plan supports the provision of arts, culture and heritage programs, events and facilities in private and public developments” (2018: 2-3). Section 8 – Celebrating our Cultural Heritage outlines several polices related to the identification, evaluation, and protection of cultural heritage resources with the Municipality. The goal of these policies are “To promote a culture of conservation that supports cultural achievements, fosters civic pride and sense of place, strengthens the local economy, and enhances the quality of life for Clarington residents” (Section 8.1.1. 2018:8-1). Similarly the OP policies outline several overarching the objectives which state: 8.2.1 To encourage the conservation, protection, enhancement and adaptive reuse of cultural heritage resources including: • Structures, sites and streetscapes of cultural heritage value or interest; • Significant archaeological and historic resources; Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 7 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 • Significant landscapes, vistas and ridge-lines; and • Landmarks and focal points. 8.2.2 To incorporate cultural heritage resources into community design and development. 8.2.3 To support community efforts and events that celebrate the culture and heritage of the Municipality Section 8.3 notes that in order to achieve cultural heritage objectives the Municipality shall: d) Restore, rehabilitate, enhance and maintain Municipally-owned cultural heritage resources; e) Encourage the reuse of architectural features; f) Document the features of cultural heritage resources in the event that demolition is inevitable (2018:8-2) With regards to heritage resources designated under the OHA, Section 8.3.4. notes that the municipality shall: a) Allow alterations, renovations, additions or repairs provided the proposed changes are compatible and consistent with the building and the surrounding area in terms of building materials, colour, height, scale and design including windows, doors and roof lines; b) Require redevelopment and infill buildings in existing built up areas to be compatible and consistent with the surrounding buildings and streetscape in terms of building materials, height, width, scale, colour, setback and design including windows, doors and roof lines; c) Require new development in previously non built up areas to conserve and enhance the cultural heritage attributes of the resource by providing an appropriate transition with regard to the scale, massing and character; d) Discourage the demolition or the inappropriate alteration of a cultural heritage resource Section 8.3.5 of the OP provides guidance about ongoing use and adaptive reuse. It notes, Wherever possible, built heritage resources should be retained for the original use and in their original location. Where the original uses cannot be maintained, the adaptive reuse of built heritage resources will be supported. If no other alternative exists for maintaining structures in their original location, consideration may be given to the relocation of the structure (2018:8-3). In the event that a heritage resource has gone through the proper heritage consideration and “heritage resource be demolished, the dismantling, salvage and reuse of materials is encouraged” (2018:8-3). Lastly, Appendix A- General Description of Reports, Studies, and Plans notes the following description of Heritage Impact Assessment. It reads, Heritage Impact Assessment is a study to evaluate the impact a proposed development or site alteration will have on the cultural heritage resource(s) and to recommend an overall approach to the conservation of the resource(s). This Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 8 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 analysis, which must be prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional, will address properties identified in the Municipality of Clarington’s Inventory of Heritage Properties (which includes both listed and designated properties) as well as any yet unidentified cultural heritage resource(s) found as part of the site assessment. This study will be based on a thorough understanding of the significance and heritage attributes of the cultural heritage resource(s), identify any impact the proposed development or site alteration will have on the resource(s), consider mitigation options, and recommend a conservation strategy that best conserves the resource(s) within the context of the proposed development or site alteration. The conservation strategy will apply conservation principles, describe the conservation work, and recommend methods to avoid or mitigate negative impacts to the cultural heritage resource(s). Minimal intervention should be the guiding principle for all work. Further, the conservation strategy recommendations will be in sufficient detail to inform decisions and direct the conservation plan.(Appendix A 2018:12) 2.4 Policy Conclusion Provincial legislation and guidelines and municipal policies of the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan call for the consideration of identified cultural heritage resources, the retention and promotion of heritage resources and provide policies related to potential development impacts to cultural heritage resources. This HIA will address these cultural heritage policies as they relate to the proposed development. 3.0 KEY CONCEPTS The following concepts require clear definition in advance of the methodological overview and proper understanding is fundamental for any discussion pertaining to cultural heritage resources: • Adjacent lands, as defined in the PPS, means “for the purposes of policy 4.6.3, those lands contiguous to a protected heritage property or as otherwise defined in the municipal official plan” (MMAH 2024:38). • Built Heritage Resource (BHR) can be defined in the PPS as “a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured or constructed part or remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest as identified by a community, including an Indigenous community. Built heritage resources are located on property that has been designated under Parts IV or V of the Ontario Heritage Act, or that may be included on local, provincial, federal, and/or international registers” (MMAH 2024:40). • Conserved means “the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their cultural heritage value or interest is retained. This may be achieved by the implementation of recommendations set out in a conservation plan, archaeological assessment, and/or heritage impact assessment that has been approved, accepted or adopted by the relevant planning authority and/or decision-maker. Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches should be included in these plans and assessments” (MMAH 2024:41). • Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) is defined in the PPS as “a defined geographical area that may have been modified by human activity and is identified as having cultural heritage value or interest by a community, including an Indigenous community. The area Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 9 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 may include features such as buildings, structures, spaces, views, archaeological sites or natural elements that are valued together for their interrelationship, meaning or association. Cultural heritage landscapes may be properties that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest under the Ontario Heritage Act or have been included on federal and/or international registers, and/or protected through official plan, zoning by-law, or other land use planning mechanisms” (MMAH 2024:41). • Cultural Heritage Value or Interest (CHVI), also referred to as Heritage Value, is identified if a property meets two of the criteria outlined in O. Reg. 9/06, namely historic or associative value, design or physical value, and/or contextual value. Provincial significance is defined under the OHA’s O. Reg. 10/06. • Heritage Attributes are defined in the PPS as “the principal features or elements that contribute to a protected heritage property’s cultural heritage value or interest, and may include the property’s built, constructed, or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting (e.g., significant views or vistas to or from a protected heritage property” (MMAH 2024:44). • Protected Heritage Property is defined as “property designated under Parts IV, V, or VI of the Ontario Heritage Act, property identified by the Province and prescribed public bodies as provincial heritage property under the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties, property protected under federal legislation, and UNESCO World Heritage Sites” (MMAH 2024:50). • Significant in reference to cultural heritage and archaeology is defined as “resources that have been determined to have cultural heritage value or interest. Processes and criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest are established by the Province under the authority of the Ontario Heritage Act” (MMAH 2024:52). Key heritage definitions from the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan are as follows: • Built heritage resources are defined as “means a building, structure, monument, installation or any manufactured remnant that contributes to a property’s cultural heritage value or interest by a community, including Aboriginal community. These resources may be identified through designation or heritage conservation easement under the Ontario Heritage Act, or listed by local, provincial or federal jurisdictions.” (2018:24-7). • Cultural Heritage Resource: means man-made or natural features, including structures, objects, neighbourhoods, landscapes and archaeological sites that have been identified as significant by the local municipality or the province for being meaningful components of a community’s cultural heritage or identity (2018:24-7). • Conserved means the identification, protection, management and use of built heritage resources, cultural heritage landscapes and archaeological resources in a manner that ensures their cultural heritage value, or interest is retained. This may be addressed through a heritage impact assessment.” (2018:24-7). • Heritage Attributes: means the principal features or elements that contribute to a protected heritage property’s cultural heritage value or interest, and may include the property’s built or manufactured elements, as well as natural landforms, vegetation, water features, and its visual setting (including significant views or vistas to or from a protected heritage property) (24-13) • Heritage Resource: property of cultural or natural heritage importance, that being natural and cultural lands, areas and corridors and the features thereof, including buildings and other structures, archaeological and paleontological sites, cemeteries and other burial places (24-13). The Municipality of Clarington OP provides a number of definitions related to cultural heritage resources which echo definitions found in the PPS. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 10 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 4.0 CONSULTATION Built Heritage Resources (BHR) and Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHLs) are broadly referred to as cultural heritage resources. A variety of types of recognition exist to commemorate and/or protect cultural heritage resources in Ontario. As part of consultation ARA reviewed relevant online sources and databases to determine if the subject property has been recognized. The Minister of the Environment, on the advice of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (HSMBC), makes recommendations to declare a site, event or person of national significance. The National Historic Sites program commemorates important sites that had a nationally significant effect on, or illustrates a nationally important aspect of, the history of Canada. A National Historic Event is a recognized event that evokes a moment, episode, movement or experience in the history of Canada. National Historic People are people who are recognized as those who through their words or actions, have made a unique and enduring contribution to the history of Canada. The Parks Canada’s online Directory of Federal Heritage Designations captures these national commemorations as well as lists Heritage Railway Stations, Federal Heritage Buildings and Heritage Lighthouses. The subject property does not appear on these lists. Another form of recognition at the federal level is the Canadian Heritage Rivers System program. It is a federal program to recognize and conserve rivers with outstanding natural, cultural and recreational heritage. It is important to note that federal commemoration programs do not offer protection from alteration or destruction. Additionally, there is the Canadian Register of Historic Places which contains properties recognized by federal, provincial and territorial governments. As noted above, recognition in the Register does not offer protection from alteration/destruction but these properties may have other government designations/protections that do offer protections. The subject property does not appear to be in proximity to any rivers that appear on these lists. The Ontario Heritage Trust (OHT) operates the Provincial Plaque Program that has over 1,250 provincial plaques recognizing key people, places and events that shaped the province. Additionally, properties owned by the province may be recognized as a “provincial heritage property” (MCM 2010). The OHT plaque database and the Federal Canadian Heritage Database were searched. The subject property is not commemorated with an OHT plaque or recognized as National Historic Sites (OHT 2021; Parks Canada 2021). The subject property is not subject to an OHT or municipal easement. Protected properties are those protected by Part IV (individual properties) or Part V (Heritage Conservation District) designation under the OHA. Once designated, a property cannot be altered or demolished without the permission of the local council. Many heritage committees and historical societies provide plaques for local places of interest. Under Section 27 of the OHA, a municipality must keep a Municipal Heritage Register. A Municipal Heritage Register lists designated properties as well as other properties of cultural heritage value or interest in the municipality. Properties on this Register that are not formally designated are commonly referred to as “listed.” Listed properties are flagged for planning purposes and are afforded a 60-day delay in demolition if a demolition request is received. The subject property is designated under Part IV of the OHA through By-Law 95-140. In June 2024, Municipal Staff provided directions via email, the HIA Terms of Reference, and a virtual meeting regarding completion of the HIA. e. Staff determined that since heritage evaluation processes and policies have changed since the time of designation (1995), the HIA should review Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 11 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 the By-Law and provide an updated evaluation using O. Reg 9/06 and statement of significance if required. 5.0 SITE HISTORY In order to conduct an impact assessment, a more detailed review of the property history was requested. Background information was obtained from aerial photographs, historical maps (i.e., illustrated atlases), archival sources (i.e., historical publications and records), published secondary sources (online and print) and local historical organizations. The historical information included provides a contextual understanding of the subject property and surrounding area. The Township of Darlington has a long history of Indigenous land use and settlement including Pre-Contact and Post-Contact campsites and villages. It should be noted that the written historical record regarding Indigenous use of the landscape in southern Ontario draws on accounts by European explorers and settlers. As such, this record details only a small period of time in the overall human presence in Ontario. Oral histories and the archaeological record show that Indigenous communities were mobile across great distances, which transcend modern understandings of geographical boundaries and transportation routes. Based on current knowledge, the cultural heritage resources located within the subject are tied to the history of the initial settlement and growth of Euro-Canadian populations in the Township of Darlington. The arrival of European explorers and traders at the beginning of the 17th century triggered widespread shifts in Indigenous lifeways and set the stage for the ensuing Euro - Canadian settlement process. Documentation for this period is abundant, ranging from the first sketches of Upper Canada and the written accounts of early explorers to detailed township maps and lengthy histories. 5.1 Darlington Township The post-contact period can be effectively discussed in terms of major historical events, and the principal characteristics associated with these events are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: County and Township Settlement History (Coyne 1895; Lajeunesse 1960; Ellis and Ferris 1990; Surtees 1994; Mika 1972; Surtees 1994; AO 2023; Smith 1846; Sutherland 1865; E.E. Dodds & Bro. 1880) Historical Event Timeframe Characteristics Loyalist Influx Late 18th century United Empire Loyalist influx after the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783); British develop interior communication routes and acquire additional lands; Johnson-Butler Purchase completed in 1787/1788, but the extent was not documented; Constitutional Act of 1791 creates Upper and Lower Canada County Development Late 18th to early 19th century Durham County created in 1792; Johnson-Butler document declared invalid in 1794; Northern portion acquired as part of the Rice Lake Purchase (Treaty 20) in 1818; Townships of Mariposa, Ops, Emily, Cartwright, Manvers and Cavan added in 1821; Mariposa, Ops and Emily removed to Peterborough County in 1838; United Counties of Northumberland and Durham established after the abolition of the district system in 1849; Lands acquired as part of the Williams Treaties in 1923; Three large parcels were ceded, but compensation, land and harvesting issues remained; Settlement Agreement reached in 2018. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 12 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Historical Event Timeframe Characteristics Township Formation Late 18th to early 19th century Darlington surveyed ca. 1791 and in 1795; First settlers included J. Burk, J.W. Trull and R. Conant near Barber’s Creek (Port Darlington) in 1794; Other early pioneers included T. Soper and L. Soper, the latter of whom erected the first saw mill; Population reached 3,500 by 1842; 22,341 ha taken up by 1846, with 7,836 ha under cultivation; 6 grist mills, 9 saw mills and 1 distillery in operation at that time. Township Development Mid- to early 20th century Bowmanville was incorporated as a village in 1853 and as a town in 1858; Population of Darlington reached 6,912 by 1861, and it became the best settled township in Durham County; Traversed by the Grand Trunk Railway (1856), Ontario & Quebec Railway (1884), Lindsay, Bobcaygeon & Pontypool Railway (1904), Canadian Northern Railway (1911) and Campbellford, Lake Ontario & Western Railway (1914); Communities at Bowmanville, Charlesville, Enfield, Enniskillen, Hampton, Haydon, Kilmarnock, Podonk, Solina and Tyrone During pre-contact and early contact times, the vicinity of the area would have comprised a mixture of coniferous trees, deciduous trees and open areas. Indigenous communities would have managed the landscape to some degree. During the early 19th century, settlers from Tyrone County, Ireland arrived in the area and named the area Tyrone after their home. What attracted them to the area was the waterpower of Lynde Creek that was located to the west of the village where a small flour mill could be built. This flour mill has run from 1846 to present day (OG n.d.a). Salem was a small unincorporated hamlet located between Bowmanville and the village of Tyrone. Population figures are not available, but Squair estimates that there were likely 240 people comprising approximately 40 families in the area by 1875 who were mostly of British descent (Squair 1927). Surnames in the hamlet included Weldons, McFeeters, Rutledge, Noble, and Smith. Land parcels in the hamlet were generally small, under 500 acres, and the majority of the population were Bible Christians. A Bible Christian church was built there in the early to mid- 19th century and was replaced by a still-extant brick building in 1868 (Squair 1927). The hamlet appears to have been predominately rural, with most services located in either Bowmanville or Tyrone. 5.2 Subject Property – 2656 Concession Road In order to provide an understanding of the subject property and its historical use in context with the surrounding areas, ARA examined two historical maps documenting past residents, structures (e.g., homes, businesses and public buildings) and features during the 19th century, one topographic map from the early 20th century, and one aerial image from the mid-20th century. Specifically, the following resources were consulted: • G.C. and G.M. Tremaine’s Map of the County of Durham, Canada West (1861) (OHCMP 2021); • H. Parsell & Co.’s Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Durham, Ont. (1878) (McGill University 2001); • A topographic map from 1930 (OCUL 2021); and • Aerial imagery from 1954 (University of Toronto 2021) The boundaries of the subject property are shown on georeferenced versions of the historical maps and imagery (see Map 3 - Map 6). The subject property is located southwest of the town of Hampton and east of Bowmanville. While no structures are depicted on the subject property on the 1861 map, it is known that the subject building was constructed in 1859 for John Rutledge, his wife and his five children. The 1861 maps show the area surrounding the property is farmland Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 13 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 with roads (see Map 3; LAC 1861; MoC 1995). Along with the Rutledge’s, several early settler families are noted in surrounding lots including Samuel Pipe, Thomas Weldon, Zach Polland and J. Clemens. According to the 1861 census, John Rutledge is listed as living in a one-and-a-half storey brick house which was noted as being constructed in 1859 (LAC 1861). John Rutledge is noted as being born in Ireland circa 1805 (although his grave marker notes it as 1800) and employed as a yeoman; also listed are his wife Margaret J. (b. 1814 Ireland) and children Edward (b. 1836, Canton Northumberland County), Eliza Jane (b. 1839, Canada West), James (b. 1842, Canada Wes), John Jr (b.1844. Canada West) and Margaret Ann (b. 1847 Canada West) (LAC 1861). The 1861 Agricultural census notes John Rutledge is associated with the south 100 acres of Concession 4, Lot 10 (subject property). The agricultural census notes that he had 75 acres under cultivation, 52 ½ of which were used for crops, 20 under pasture, ½ acre under orchards or gardens, and 25 which were wooded or wild with the property having an overall cash value of $6500 (LAC 1861). Compared to other listing on the 1861 census, it appears that the Rutledge farming operations were among the most prosperous. The census notes that the Rutledge farming operation included fall wheat (5 acres producing 15 bushels), spring wheat (15 acres producing 200 bushels), 4 acres of peas (producing 40 bushels), 4 acres of Oats (producing 80 bushels). 1 acres of potatoes (producing 100 bushels), 1 acres of turnips (producing 500 bushels), carrots (producing 100 bushels), and hay (producing 12 tons of 2000 lbs or bundles of 16 lbs) (LAC 1861). John Rutledge died on November 17, 1878, in Salem, Durham Region and is buried in the Bowmanville Cemetery (FG 2022). When John died, he left the farm to his eldest son Edward (LAC 1861, AO 1878). Edward Rutledge was married to Elizabeth (nee McInnis, b. 1829 Scotland) and according to the 1881 census that lists him as a farmer, it appears he continued to farm the subject property. According to the 1901 census, Edward, now 70 years old, continues to be employed as a farmer and is living with his wife Elizabeth, her sister also named Elizabeth, and a lodger named Minnie Howson. Edward died on June 6, 1918, of cancer and is buried in the Bowmanville Cemetery (FG 2022). Edwards wife Elizabeth continued to reside on the property, and the 1921 census noted she was living with two lodgers, Ella and Winifred Staples (LAC 1921). The building on the subject property which Elizabeth and the lodgers lived in is listed in the 1921 census as being a seven-room brick building and located in Darlington (LAC 1921). The census does not specifically mention the one- storey brick rear wing. The 1878 map of Darlington Township indicates that the subject property was agricultural and distant from the village of Hampton and Bowmanville. A school is depicted on the south side of Concession Road 4, opposite the subject property (see Map 4). By 1930, modern road alignments were well established including Concession Road 4 and Liberty Street North. There are a few structures indicated on the surrounding lots and a house and barn located on the southwest corner in the subject property. The subject property was lined by deciduous trees on the west side of the lot (see Map 5). The property remained in the Rutledge family until 1926, when it was sold to Robert and George Collette, ending 71 years of Rutledge ownership. An aerial image from 1954 shows the development of the subject property. There are several deciduous trees on the west and north sides of the property and open areas visible. Due to unclear imaging the subject building is not visible on the aerial image although the outline of the barn can be seen in the same position as it was in 1930 (see Map 6). Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 14 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Based on the mapping analysis and background research, the building at 2656 Concession Road is believed to have been constructed in 1859 for John Rutledge with its first depiction shown on the 1878 historic map. Table 2: Summary of Land Transactions for 2656 Concession Road (LRO #40) Instrument # Instrument Date Grantor Grantee Comments Patent 2 Mar 1831 Crown Wait Lot 10, Concession 4, 200 acres Transactions between 1831 and 1855 unclear 2100 Deed 21 Nov 1855 James Hamilton, executor James Rutledge South half Lot 10, Concession 4; 100 acres 2103 Deed 21 Nov 1855 James Rutledge John Rutledge South half Lot 10, Concession 4; 100 acres 2288 Deed 31 Jan 1876 John Rutledge Edward Rutledge South half Lot 10, Concession 4; 100 acres Illegible Will Probate 24 Nov 1925 Edward Rutledge South half Lot 10, Concession 4; 100 acres 14083 Grant 7 Feb 1926 Edward Rutledge Robert and George Collette Part of Lot 10, Concession 4 16797 Grant July 1940 Robert and George Collette Lloyd Richards Part of Lot 10, Concession 4 18991 Grant 17 July 1968 Lloyd Richards wife Lloyd and Eve M. Richards his wife Part of Lot 10, Concession 4 155845 Transfer 10 Nov 1989 Lloyd Richards Donald George Richards Part of Lot 10, Concession 4 DR1996810 Transmission- land 29 Apr 2021 Donald George Richards Donna and Donald George Richards Estate Subject Property DR1996843 Trans. Personal Rep. 29 Apr 2021 Donna Richards The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Subject Property Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 15 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 6.0 FIELD SURVEY A field survey was conducted on July 24, 2024, to photograph and document the exterior and interior of the subject property and to record any local features that could enhance ARA’s understanding of their setting in the landscape and contribute to the cultural heritage evaluation process. Legal permission to enter to conduct all necessary fieldwork activities on the subject property at 2656 Concession Road 4 was granted by the property owner. Photographic documentation of the exterior of the subject property can be seen in Image 1–Image 14) and interior images can be seen in Image 15 - Image 30). The map and photos can be found in Appendix B. ARA did not undertake an additional field survey as part of the December revisions. 7.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION – 2656 CONCESSION ROAD 4 The subject property is a rectangular shaped lot positioned at the corner of Concession Road 4 and Liberty Street North. The subject property contains a one-and-a-half storey residential building surrounded by naturalized areas, woodlot and agricultural fields. Prior aerials show several outbuildings and barns however they are no longer extant. 7.1 Contextual Surrounding 2656 Concession Road 4 is surrounded to the north and east by agricultural lands, Concession Road 4 to the south and Liberty Street North to the west (see Map 1). The properties located in the surrounding area are primarily single-family residential properties which appear to predominantly include agricultural fields under use. Concession Road 4 is a secondary two-lane, paved roadway that runs in an east-west direction. A cross section of the road includes a soft shoulder and shallow ditches, typical of rural roads. The subject property is found on a small rise in the property’s topography. There are mature and dense tree canopies along the east and west boundaries of the subject property and mature trees and shrubbery along Concession Road 4 and Liberty Street North in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. Liberty Street is a two- lane, paved roadway that runs in a north-south direction. Cross section of the road includes wide gravel shoulders and naturalized with ditches on both sides of the roadway. The subject property fronts towards Concession Road and has a large set-back from the roadway. It is accessed via a gravel driveway, positioned along the east elevation of the subject building. The subject is not visible from the roadway and is blocked by vegetation. 7.2 Building Exterior The building at 2656 Concession Road 4 is a one-and-a-half storey residential building that primarily exhibits characteristics typical of Georgian residential architecture with some Classical (specifically Greek Revival) influences. The building follows a rectangular plan with a one-storey rear additions, and a one storey outbuilding which is attached but not directly accessed by the main building. There is no indication of when the outbuilding was constructed. The main building envelope is constructed overtop a tooled stone foundation with brick water table and consists of red brick coursed in alternating bonds across the four different elevations. The Georgian residence is topped by a side gable roof with overhanging eaves and includes return eaves on gable ends, wood fascia, and moulded frieze board finished with paired carved wood brackets. Additionally, the roofline includes two interior chimneys positioned along the east and west elevations respectively. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 16 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The three-bay façade (south elevation) contains the formal, centrally placed, primary entranceway enclosed within a one-storey closed portico, which is flanked by two large windows (currently sealed off) and topped with buff brick voussoirs. On the upper level, centrally placed above the portico is a semi-circular, rounded arch window, also known as a lunette window opening with elaborate wood mullions (the By-law describes this as an eye-brow window, however lunette window is more appropriate). Several windowpanes of this window have been broken. The red brick on the façade is coursed in a Flemish bond design. The east elevation is constructed with red brick coursed in a Common bond design. The elevation includes symmetrically positioned rectangular windows openings topped with flat arches with buff brick voussoirs and finished with wood sills. Window openings along the first storey are taller and wider are there are rectangular window openings along the foundation. The west and north elevations are red brick and coursed in a Flemish bond design. The west elevation similarly to the east elevation includes symmetrical rectangular windows openings topped with flat arches with brick buff voussoirs and finished with wood sills. Openings along first storey are taller and wider, and this elevation only includes one rectangular window opening along the foundation. The one-storey rear wing is constructed with red brick with a gable roof. The east elevation is recessed and the gable roof line overhang over an open porch. The west elevation appears to have a sunroom attached (inaccessible at time of site visit) and is clad in wood siding. There is a brick chimney located at the rear of the property. The rear wing is accessed by a single rectangular door opening located on the east elevation. Unlike the main building which displays either a Common or Flemish brick bond on all elevations, the one-storey rear wing follows a stretcher bond design. The variation in brick bond may suggest a different construction date, likely when a summer kitchen was added to the building. There is a one-storey outbuilding which is constructed with wood siding and has a gable roof with overhanging eaves. It is attached to the rear elevation however it does not appear to be connected through the interior. There are several window openings on the north and south elevation. There is no indication of when the outbuilding was constructed. 7.2.1 Georgian Architecture Georgian architecture “grew from the Italian Renaissance, which emphasized classical details and reached remote England only in the mid-16th century” (McAlester 1984:140). The style took root and flourished in Britian resulting in a “cumulative of architectural fashion in Britian during the reign of the first three King Georges of England (1750-1820)” (Kyles 2016). The term Georgian architecture in Britian refers to all the styles during the reigns of the three King Georges and includes “Palladian, Gothic, and Chinoiserie or Exotic”, however its application in Canada was a “strict interpretation of the Palladian Classical” (Kyles 2016). Georgian architecture arrived in Ontario (known then as Upper Canada) in the mid-to-late 1700s. It was brought through the United Empire Loyalist (UEL), a term given to those who remained loyal to the British crown during the war between United States and Britian in 1755-1778, and by way of upper-class British immigrants arriving between 1750-1830 (Kyles 2016, Ricketts et al. 2011). The style was also popularized through the distributions of builders’ manuals which were used by skilled craftsmen and individuals who were adept builders (Ricketts et al. 2011). Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 17 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Originally the Georgian style, also known as Loyalist architecture, was executed as simple and sturdy log houses which were not intended to make an architectural statement but rather provided dignified shelter in the harsh Canadian climate. As Kyles notes, Georgian architecture in Britan and in Canada was a modification of the Renaissance style adapted throughout Europe during the 18th century. It was a variation of the Palladian style which was known for balanced facades, muted ornament, and minimal detailing. Simplicity, symmetry, and solidity were the elements to be strived for (Kyles 2016). The style was highly adaptable in its simplicity to allow for the construction of vast sprawling Georgian mansions, or small and simple Georgian cottages or farmhouses. Fram notes several characteristics of Georgian style include, …general box-like, symmetrical elevations, with Classical (via Renaissance) proportions. Five bay front, with two windows on each side of a central doorway, were most characteristic. Structures were from one to three storeys, but usually two, with centre-hall plans. Large composition comprised a central block with symmetrical wing. The typically side-gabled roof was often pitched high enough to allow a half-floor in the attic….simple cornices with returns…simple classical moulding in modest pediments and central entry…At first plainly clad with clapboard, the style was adapted to stone and brick; corners were sometimes embellished as contrasting quoins (Fram 2003:24). Georgian architecture buildings are found throughout Ontario, and by extension North American with regional variations, as a result of their simplicity, adaptability, and their enduring solid construction. When examined against the typical characteristics of the Georgian architectural style as outlined by Blumenson in Ontario Architecture (1990), Fram in Well-Preserved (2003), Ricketts, Maitland and Hucker in A Guide to Canadian Architectural Styles (2011) and Kyles in Ontario Architecture Online (2016), 2656 Concession Road meets all of the characteristics of the style and therefore can be considered representative of the Georgian architectural style. Table 3: Characteristics of Georgian Architecture (adapted from Fram 2003, Kyles 2016) Characteristics 2656 Concession Road 4 Characteristics Box-like Yes Symmetrical façade Yes One to three -storeys Yes Center-hall plan Yes Five-bay façade, residences often three-bay Yes- three-bay Stone or brick cladding Yes-brick Side-gable roof Yes Simple cornices with return eaves Yes Small-paned double hung windows (typically 12-over- 12) Yes Paneled doors Yes Flat top or shallow arched fanlights, transom and side lights at central entry Yes Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 18 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 8.0 HERITAGE ASSESSMENT 8.1 Existing Heritage Recognition The subject property is recognized as a designated property under By-Law 95-140. As per the By-law, the statement of cultural heritage value or interest and heritage attributes include: Built for John Rutledge circa 1860 this structure was designed with Georgian Symmetry and shows evidence of the Greek Revival period in its returned eaves and distinctive lintels The eye-brow window set over the glazed porch is an architectural feature which is found in only two structures in Darlington Township The following exterior and interior features are recommended for designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act Exterior o 6 over 6 original glazed windows o Glazed porch o Paired brackets o Returned eaves o 4 over 4 double hung windows o Eye-brow window o Contrasting buff brick o Stone foundation o Liverpool bond, English bond and common bond brick work Interior o Dining room hand-grained doors and frames o Staircase with mahogany cage oak hand rails and spindles o Parlour fireplace mantel and surround built-in china cabinet o Coloured glass of front door sidelights and transom o Original pine floors o Pine servants staircase (By-Law 95-140) 8.2 Condition Review As requested by the Municipality as part of the scope of work, a condition assessment was undertaken of the heritage attributes listed in the By-law. The following condition assessment was based on visual observation only to confirm they are still extant and has been included for information purposes only. Table 4: Assessment of Current Condition of Heritage Attributes Observed Heritage Attributes Current Condition Six-over-six original glazed windows Existing-Good Condition Glazed porch with paired brackets Existing-Good Condition Returned eaves Existing-Good Condition Four-over-four double hung windows Not Observed Eye-brow window Existing-Poor Condition Contrasting buff brick Existing-Good Condition Stone foundation Existing-Good Condition Liverpool bond, English bond and common bond brick work Existing-Good Condition Dining room hand-grained doors and frames Existing-Good Condition Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 19 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Observed Heritage Attributes Current Condition Staircase with mahogany newel cage oak handrails and spindles Existing-Good Condition Parlour fireplace mantel and surround built-in china cabinet Existing-Good Condition Coloured glass of front door with sidelights and transom Existing-Poor Condition Original pine floors Existing-Good Condition Pine servants’ staircase Existing-Good Condition 8.3 Evaluation According to Ontario Regulation 9/06 The Municipality of Clarington staff have requested that this property undergoes a review according to O. Reg. 9/06 (as amended by O. Reg 569/22). Using the information provided by the existing By-Law, field survey and additional historical and contextual research, an evaluation of 2656 Concession Road 4 according to O. Reg. 9/06 (as amended by O. Reg 569/22), can be found below in Table 5. Table 5: Evaluation of 2656 Concession Road 4 Using O. Reg. 9/06 Description Criteria Met Yes/No Value Statement(s) The property has design value or physical value because it is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method Yes 2656 Concession Road 4 contains a representative example of building constructed in 1859 in the Georgian architectural. The one-and-a-half storey building follows a rectangular plan built atop a stone foundation and showcases a balanced and symmetrical three-bay composition, which is representative of the Georgian architectural style. The gable roof has return eaves and includes wide overhanging eaves adorned with wood fascia, molded frieze, and paired wood brackets. The roofline includes two interior chimneys positioned along the east and west elevations respectively. The enclosed centrally placed portico exhibits classical detailing including sidelights, molded decorative trim as well as showcasing a mansard roof with brackets which draws influence from the Greek Revival period. The subject property exhibits various brick designs as part of its construction including Flemish bond, Common bond design, and English corners. The red brick construction is contrasted by buff brick found along foundation line and most noticeably on the voussoirs which are found on the rectangular window openings which house six-over-six wood windows, all of which is in keeping with the Georgian style. The building includes a lunette window, which was noted as being only one of two found in Darlington Township. The property has design value or physical value because it displays a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic merit No 2656 Concession Road 4 does not display a high degree of craftsmanship or artistic value. It was built using common material and design for the construction period. The property has design value or physical value because it demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement. No 2656 Concession Road 4 does not display a high level of technical or scientific achievement. It was built using common methods and techniques of the construction period. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 20 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Description Criteria Met Yes/No Value Statement(s) The property has historical value or associative value because it has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community, Yes 2656 Concession Road 4 is historically associated with the Rutledge family who were early settlers in the community and owned the property for over 70 years. John Rutledge was born in Ireland circa 1805 and was noted as being a yeoman. He was married to Margaret J. Slack (b. 1814 Ireland) and together they had several children: Edward (b. 1836, Canton Northumberland County), Eliza Jane (b. 1839, Canada West), James (b. 1842, Canada Wes), John Jr (b.1844. Canada West) and Margaret Ann (b. 1847 Canada West). Historical documents note that John owned the south 100 acres of Concession 4, Lot 10 (subject property) and constructed the one-and-a-half brick building in 1859. In 1861, the agricultural census notes that he had 75 acres under cultivation, 52 ½ of which were used for crops, 20 under pasture, ½ acre under orchards or gardens, and 25 which were wooded or wild with the property having an overall cash value of $6500. Compared to other listings on the 1861 census, it appears that the Rutledge farming operations were among the most prosperous and would likely have been well known in the area. John Rutledge died on November 17, 1878, in Salem, Durham Region and is buried in the Bowmanville Cemetery and marked by a large monument. When John died, he left the farm to his eldest son Edward. Edward Rutledge was married to Elizabeth (nee McInnis, b. 1829 Scotland) and according to the 1881 census that lists him as a farmer, it appears he continued to farm the property until his death. The property remained in the Rutledge family until 1926 when it was sold, ending 71 years of Rutledge family ownership. The property has historical value or associative value because it yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture No 2656 Concession Road 4 does not yield or have the potential to yield information that contributes to the understanding of a community or culture. The property has historical value or associative value because it demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. No The builder is unknown. 2656 Concession Road 4 does not reflect the ideas or an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community. The property has contextual value because it is important in defining, maintaining, or supporting the character of an area No While 2656 Concession Road is consistent with the agricultural nature of the surrounding area, the subject property is not highly visible from the roadway. The subject property does not play an important role in defining, maintaining, or supporting the character of the area. The property has contextual value because it is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings No 2656 Concession Road 4 is not physically, functionally, or visually linked to its surroundings. The property has contextual value because it is a landmark No 2656 Concession Road 4 is not a landmark. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 21 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Based on the above O. Reg. 9/06 evaluation, a refined list of heritage attributes is suggested below. The subject property has physical or design value as a representative example of the Georgian architectural style. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style • Rectangular plan • Stone foundation • Balanced and symmetrical three-bay façade • Gable roof with return eaves, wide overhanging eaves, and adorned wood fascia, molded frieze and paired wood carved brackets • Enclosed portico which exhibits classical detailing, inspired by the Greek Revival period, including sidelights, molded decorative trim showcasing brackets, and mansard roofline • Red brick construction showcasing Flemish bond, Common bond design, and English corners • Rectangular window openings which house six-over-six wood windows with buff brick voussoirs • Lunette window The subject property has historical and associative value for its association with the Rutledge family, specifically John and Edward Rutledge. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style 8.3.1 Summary of Evaluation of 2656 Concession Road 4 The O. Reg 9/06 evaluation confirms 2656 Concession Road 4 possesses CHVI. While the interior does contain historic fabric, as noted in the existing By-law, it is our opinion that they are not essential to understanding the CHVI of the building, which is best expressed in the exterior elements. Similarity, while the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding contain historic fabric, it is our opinion that they are not essential to understanding the CHVI of the building. The building’s design value is associated with its representativeness of Georgian Architecture which is displayed in the main portion of the building where the heritage attributes are directly and exclusively located. As requested by the Municipality of Clarington Heritage Planning Staff, an updated Statement of CHVI and list of heritage attributes for 2656 Concession Road 4 are found below. 8.3.1.1 Revised Statement of CHVI and Heritage Attributes Description 2656 Concession Road 4 is located on the north side of Concession Road 4 in the Municipality of Clarington. The subject property contains a one-and-a-half storey brick building constructed in 1859 in the Georgian Architectural style. Statement of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest 2656 Concession Road 4 contains a representative example of building constructed in 1859 in the Georgian architectural. The one-and-a-half storey building follows a rectangular plan built Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 22 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 atop a stone foundation and showcases a balanced and symmetrical three-bay composition, which is representative of the Georgian architectural style. The gable roof has return eaves and includes wide overhanging eaves adorned with wood fascia, molded frieze, and paired wood brackets. The roofline includes two interior chimneys positioned along the east and west elevations respectively. The enclosed centrally placed portico exhibits classical detailing including sidelights, molded decorative trim as well as showcasing a mansard roof with brackets which draws influence from the Greek Revival period. The subject property exhibits various brick designs as part of its construction including Flemish bond, Common bond design, and English corners. The red brick construction is contrasted by buff brick found along foundation line and most noticeably on the voussoirs which are found on the rectangular window openings which house six-over-six wood windows, all of which is in keeping with the Georgian style. The building includes a lunette window, which was noted as being only one of two found in Darlington Township. 2656 Concession Road 4 is historically associated with the Rutledge family who were early settlers in the community and owned the property for over 70 years. John Rutledge was born in Ireland circa 1805 and was noted as being a yeoman. He was married to Margaret J. Slack (b. 1814 Ireland) and together they had several children: Edward (b. 1836, Canton Northumberland County), Eliza Jane (b. 1839, Canada West), James (b. 1842, Canada Wes), John Jr (b.1844. Canada West) and Margaret Ann (b. 1847 Canada West). Historical documents note that John owned the south 100 acres of Concession 4, Lot 10 (subject property) and constructed the one- and-a-half brick building in 1859. In 1861, the agricultural census notes that he had 75 acres under cultivation, 52 ½ of which were used for crops, 20 under pasture, ½ acre under orchards or gardens, and 25 which were wooded or wild with the property having an overall cash value of $6500. Compared to other listings on the 1861 census, it appears that the Rutledge farming operations were among the most prosperous and would likely have been well known in the area. John Rutledge died on November 17, 1878, in Salem, Durham Region and is buried in the Bowmanville Cemetery and marked by a large monument. When John died, he left the farm to his eldest son Edward. Edward Rutledge was married to Elizabeth (nee McInnis, b. 1829 Scotland) and according to the 1881 census that lists him as a farmer, it appears he continued to farm the property until his death. The property remained in the Rutledge family until 1926 when it was sold, ending 71 years of Rutledge family ownership. Heritage Attributes The subject property has physical or design value as a representative example of the Georgian architectural style. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style • Rectangular plan • Stone foundation • Balanced and symmetrical three-bay façade • Gable roof with return eaves, wide overhanging eaves, and adorned wood fascia, molded frieze and paired wood carved brackets • Enclosed portico which exhibits classical detailing, inspired by the Greek Revival period, including sidelights, molded decorative trim showcasing brackets, and mansard roofline. • Red brick construction showcasing Flemish bond, Common bond design, and English corners • Rectangular window openings which house six-over-six wood windows with buff brick voussoirs • Lunette window Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 23 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The subject property has historical and associative value for its association with the Rutledge family, specifically John and Edward Rutledge. The following heritage attributes reflect this value: • One-and-a-half storey building constructed in the Georgian architectural style 9.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development includes the retention of the main section of the building, the removal of the one-storey brick wing and one-storey outbuilding, and the construction of several new buildings, parking areas, and storage structures. The project is described as follows: The property required for the development of a new operations centre and fire station and Training Facility was acquired in February 2021… The [2019 Operations Depot Needs Assessment] report identified the need to construct a new consolidated Operations Depot will expand public works and fire services to the developing areas of north Bowmanville and Newcastle, ensuring sufficient response times to emergencies and providing comprehensive coverage across the municipality. The new facility main building is estimated to be 95,000 Sq Ft in addition to the associated exterior storage requirements, salt and sand dome, fire training yard, existing farmhouse, and future telecom tower amount to just under 150,000 Sq Ft of total floor area. …. The new fire hall will be designed to ultimately accommodate two (2) full-time 24-hour crews, with bay capacity for a minimum of six pieces of apparatus. Additionally, this space will provide for the classroom needs of the training facility. Based on existing Fire Hall requirements (Municipality of Clarington 2025) The site plan (see Figure 1-Figure 2) shows that surrounding the subject property there will be 17 parking spaces to the south which run parallel to Concession Road 4. To the west there is a proposed stormwater area. To the east there is a driveway which leads north to an additional 27 parking spaces, a control gate, and then 140 parking spaces. There are softscape areas, hardscape areas, courtyards are found throughout the area surrounding the subject property. The preliminary design elevations associated with the proposed firehall are found in Figure 3- Figure 4. At this time, there is no anticipated use for the subject property as part of the proposed development. 9.1 Site Design Constraints and Considerations The preliminary design to retain the entire structure (main portion and rear wings) as part of the proposed development underwent further analysis and study to understand the constraints of the subject property and the required needs of the development. This included analysis by several specialists in various areas of expertise. In relation to the heritage building, a “Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study” (July 04 2025) and the “Structural Impact of Nearby Construction on Heritage House” was conducted (August 15 2025). The Municipality of Clarington provided additional details of each study which are outlined below. These studies informed the “Construction Impact Assessment Report” (Oct 10 2025) (See Appendix D) which identified some concerns with the rear wings. A summary the findings note: Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 24 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The conservation authority, CLOCA requires the preservation of the existing forested areas on site as staked out along the tree dripline, a redesign encroaching within the boundaries is not an option. With the storm water discharge flowing southwardly the other constraint encountered is the Heritage House along with its additions. Reviewing the latest drawing set, the bioswales taper down near the Heritage House and diverts the flow of storm water further south-west to best optimize the limited space. This efficient use of space still poses a concern to the Heritage House and its additions regarding settlement and impacts of vibration from construction equipment within its zone of influence. The civil works especially, excavation work on the corner of the Heritage House can lead to deterioration of the entire structure and requires the removal of the two additions to mitigate potential damages to the Heritage House (Pers. Comm. Obaed Fizeeli, Dec 5 2025). It has been further noted that approach taken by the demolition team will be to perform a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the rear structure prior to engaging in any demolition. This will reduce any unintended consequence or further loss of the main portion of the heritage building during the removal stage. 9.1.1 Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (July 2025) The executive summary of the report states: GHD was retained by Municipality of Clarington to prepare a Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (Study) to assess the potential for construction- induced vibration impacts on the heritage-designated structure located at 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville Ontario. The Study evaluates vibration impacts against municipal and provincial heritage conservation policies and informs the development of mitigation strategies to preserve the structural and aesthetic integrity of the 1859 Georgian-style brick residence during the construction of a new municipal operations depot, fire station, and training centre. The vibratory construction work will include site preparation and building activities associated with the development of a new operations centre, fire station, and training facility at 2656 Concession Road 4. These activities may involve excavation, grading, and the use of heavy machinery for foundation work and utility installation. This Study evaluates the potential vibration impacts of the construction process on the existing heritage structure at the site and other sensitive land uses in the surrounding area. The Study was conducted in accordance with several key guidelines and standards, including: – City of Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 363 and By-Law No. 514-2008 – Federal Transit Authority (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (2018) – City of Toronto GN117SS Supplementary Specification for piling and shoring Using the FTA-recommended methodology, the Study modelled vibration impacts from anticipated construction equipment and established conservative zones of influence (ZOIs) for both the heritage structure and nearby utilities. The most significant ZOI was determined to be 20 metres, associated with the use of a compactor. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 25 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Key outcomes and recommendations include: – Establishment of a 3 mm/s PPV threshold for the heritage structure, aligning with the most conservative FTA criteria. – Identification of ZOIs for utilities, with distances ranging from 3 to 11 metres depending on the utility type and equipment used. – Implementation of a pre-construction consultation and inspection program to document existing conditions and utility locations. – Recommendation for deployment of a real-time vibration monitoring program using seismographs configured to trigger alerts at 1.5 mm/s to enable proactive mitigation. – Recommendation for monthly reporting during active construction of vibration levels and exceedance events, with corrective actions required if thresholds are surpassed. These measures are intended to ensure that construction activities proceed without compromising the integrity of the heritage structure or nearby infrastructure. The approach outlined in this Study provides a robust framework for managing vibration risks and maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. This Study is subject to, and must be read in conjunction with, the limitations set out in section 1.4 and the assumptions and qualifications contained throughout the Report. (GHD 2025c). 9.1.2 Structural Impact of Nearby Construction on Heritage House (August 2025) The executive summary of the report states: GHD was retained by Municipality of Clarington to study the potential construction impacts on Heritage structure located at 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville Ontario due to construction of the proposed Operations Depot nearby the Heritage structure. Recommendation for risk mitigation measure were also requested by the Municipality of Clarington. The Study states to lay out the current structural condition of the Heritage structure and the impact of vibration against municipal and provincial heritage conservation policies and recommends mitigation strategies to preserve the structural and aesthetic integrity of the 1859 Georgian-style brick residence during the construction of a new municipal operations depot, fire station, and training centre. The vibration on the structure is considered due to construction work including site preparation and building activities associated with the development of a new operations centre, fire station, and training facility at 2656 Concession Road 4. The Study was conducted in accordance with the following standards: – Ontario Heritage Act (OHA), R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18 – Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada – Ontario Building Code 2024 (OBC) – Part 9 Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 26 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 – Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual, 5th Edition, 2023. Key elements of the assessment includes: – The current structural condition of the building. – Evaluation of the potential impacts from settlement and construction- related vibrations (e.g., excavation, compaction) on the structural stability of the building and its components. – Coordination with the geotechnical team to determine a suitable buffer zone requirements that mitigate risks to the heritage structure. – Assessment of construction methodology and sequencing to identify structural risks and propose suitable mitigation Strategies These recommendations are intended to ensure that construction activities proceed without compromising the integrity of the heritage structure or nearby infrastructure. The approach outlined in this Study provides a robust framework for managing vibration risks and maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. This Study is subject to, and must be read in conjunction with, the limitations set out in section 1.4 and the assumptions and qualifications contained throughout the Report (GHD 2025a). 9.1.3 Construction Impact Assessment Report (October 2025) The executive summary of the report states: Municipality of Clarington (Municipality) retained GHD Limited (GHD) to provide geotechnical and hydrogeological engineering consulting services, as well as a construction impact assessment for an existing heritage building located at the southwestern corner of the Site, in support for the development of new facility. This report summarizes the findings of the construction impact assessment for the heritage building. In this study, freefield ground movements induced by various construction activities, including excavation for the stormwater bioswale and utility trenches, were estimated, and their potential impact on the heritage building was assessed. Where reliable empirical methods were unavailable, numerical analysis was conducted to estimate free-field ground movements. The results of the analysis were used to establish the Project Zone of Influence (PZOI) and to identify the risk of damage to the heritage building due to the proposed works, including the stormwater discharge pond excavation located west of the heritage building and the trench excavation for stormwater discharge pipe. The impacts of noise, vibrations, and other potential construction activities were not considered in this report. The PZOI is defined as the area surrounding the proposed works where the heritage building may potentially be affected by construction activities. In this study, the PZOI is defined as follows: Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 27 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 • It includes the footprint of the proposed works and the surrounding area where construction activities are expected to cause free-field ground movements greater than 5 mm. • It encompasses all parts of the heritage building for which the potential damage is assessed to be “slight” or worse, as defined in Section 7. Following the initial submission of this report, the Municipality of Clarington requested additional analyses to evaluate potential settlement within the footprint of the Heritage Building. These assessments considered varying setback distances, ranging from 1 metre to 10 metres, between the building’s western wall and the excavation for the stormwater discharge pond. The analyses were conducted using the same methodology outlined in this report for the CIAR studies, and the results are presented in Appendix B (GHD 2025b). Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 28 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 1: Proposed Development – Site Plan (Clarington 2025) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 29 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 2: Proposed Development – Close up of Subject Property on Site Plan (Clarington 2025) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 30 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 3: Proposed Development – Elevation of Southwest Corner (Clarington 2025) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 31 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 4: Proposed Development – Elevation of Southeast Corner (Clarington 2025) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 32 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 10.0 ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS The MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006:3) provides a list of potential negative impacts to consider when evaluating any proposed development. Impacts can be classified as either direct or indirect. Direct impacts (those that physically affect the heritage resources themselves) include, but are not limited to, initial project staging, excavation/levelling operations, construction of access roads and alterations or repairs over the life of the project. Indirect impacts include but are not limited to: alterations that are not compatible with the historic fabric and appearance of the area; alterations that detract from the cultural heritage values, attributes, character or visual context of a heritage resource. This could include the construction of new buildings and their building materials, scale, massing and orientation; the creation of shadows that alter the appearance of an identified heritage attribute; the isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment; the obstruction of significant views and vistas; and other less-tangible impacts. An assessment of impacts of the proposed development at 2656 Concession Road 4 can be evaluated using the negative impacts presented in InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (MCM 2006). The impacts evaluation found in Table 6 reflect the heritage attributes as described in the existing designation by-law. Table 6: Impact Evaluation of Proposed Development (Adapted from MCM 2006:3) Type of Negative Impact Applicable? (Y/N) Comments Destruction of any, or part of any, significant heritage attributes. Yes There is no proposed destruction of the heritage attributes, both exterior and interior, of 2656 Concession Road 4 as part of the proposed development. The rear wing and outbuilding are not listed as heritage attributes. The proposed removal of the rear wing does not result in the loss of heritage attributes, but it does constitute a loss of historic fabric. Furthermore, the one-storey rear wing is attached to a main portion of the house. While safeguarding measures (i.e. relief cuts) are proposed, its removal has the potential to cause unintended destruction to the rear elevation of the building which is considered a heritage attribute. While unlikely, there is the potential for impacts to 2656 Concession Road 4 as a result of accidental damage during the construction process. For instance, accidental impacts may happen as the result of movement of construction equipment and/or continued exposure to vibrations caused during the construction phase. Additionally, there is the potential for unintended impacts from the building remaining vacant and unmaintained that may result in the loss of heritage attributes. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 33 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Type of Negative Impact Applicable? (Y/N) Comments Alterations to a property that detract from the cultural heritage values, attributes, character or visual context of a heritage resource; such as the construction of new buildings that are incompatible in scale, massing, materials, height, building orientation or location relative to the heritage resource. Yes There are no direct proposed alterations to the noted cultural heritage value or attributes of the building located at 2656 Concession Road 4. While there is sufficient visual distance which provides a buffer between the existing building and proposed new buildings that allows for their individual legibility, the materials, scale and massing of the proposed development, specifically the fire station and paved parking areas, has the potential to detract from the visual context relative to the heritage resource. Shadows created that alter the appearance of a heritage attribute or change the viability of a natural feature or plantings, such as a garden. No There are no anitipcated shadows that would alter the appearance of 2656 Concession Road 4 or change the viability of any natural feature. Isolation of a heritage attribute from its surrounding environment, context or significant relationship. No While the proposed development includes the development of a large portion of the agricultural fields currently surrounding the house to the north and east, they are not listed as heritage attributes. Additionally, the property has not operated as a farmstead for several years. The proposed development will include naturalized areas to the west, and the parameter of the property on the north and east. Overall, 2656 Concession Road 4 will not result in the isolation of any heritage attributes from its surrounding context or significant relationship. Direct or indirect obstruction of significant views or vistas within, from, or of built and natural features. No No significant views or vistas were identified as heritage attributes. A change in land use such as rezoning a battlefield from open space to residential use, allowing new development or site alteration to fill in the formerly open spaces. Yes The heritage attributes and CHVI assigned in the by- law are exclusive to the built structure which is being retained. Nonetheless, there will be a change in land from agricultural to institutional. Land disturbances such as a change in grade that alters soils, and drainage patterns that adversely affect an archaeological resource. No An Archaeological Assessment has been undertaken through a separate process. As Table 6 summarizes, the proposed development will have adverse impacts on the heritage attributes of 2656 Concession Road 4 as defined by MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006). The potential impacts include: • Impact 1 – While unlikely, there is the potential for impacts to 2656 Concession Road 4 as a result of accidental damage during the construction process. • Impact 2 – The one-storey brick wing is attached to a main portion of the house. Any potential destruction will be further mitigation as the demolition team will be performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition. Nonetheless, the removal has the potential to cause unintended destruction to the rear elevation of the building which is considered a heritage attribute. • Impact 3 – There is potential for unintended impacts from the building remaining vacant and unmaintained that may result in the loss of heritage attributes. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 34 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 • Impact 4 – The materials, scale, and massing of the proposed development, specifically the fire station and paved parking areas, has the potential to detract from the visual context relative to the heritage resource. • Impact 5 –There will be a change in land from agricultural to institutional. 11.0 ALTERNATIVES The site plan and design of the proposed development outlined in Section 9.0, is the result of the exploration of several alternative options and designs considered. Throughout the planning process, the following alternative options were explored and have helped inform the preferred alternative. 11.1 Option 1: Do Nothing The “Do Nothing” approach is an alternative development approach whereby the proposed project to build a new firehall and training center on subject property does not proceed. The ‘Do Nothing’ approach would result in no indirect impacts on the CHVI of the subject property; however, it would result in the loss of an essential service and a much-needed community resource. 11.2 Option 2: Remove Existing Building, Rear Wing, and Outbuilding The original site design proposed the removal of the entire building in order to utilize the entire property for the fire station and training centre. This would have resulted in the loss of the heritage attributes and the CHVI identified in the By-Law. 11.3 Option 3: Retain Existing Building, Rear Wing, and Outbuilding This option includes the retention of the main portion of the existing building, the one-storey rear wing, and the one-storey wooden outbuilding. The heritage attributes and CHVI would be retained. Based on several studies undertaken, the rear additions and the built structures may be at risk of being damaged due to the proximity of necessary proposed works (storm water plan). These proposed works are proposed to be adjacent to the heritage building, because of the site constraints (i.e. wetlands, environmentally sensitive areas, watersheds etc.). In considering this option further, additional studies showed that there may be negative impacts from settlement and vibrations, that has the potential to result in the loss, or negative impacts, all part of the buildings. This option puts all part (main portion and rear wings) at an increased risk of destruction or alteration. 11.4 Option 4: Retain Main Building and Remove Rear Wing and Outbuilding (Preferred Alternative/Proposed Development) This option includes the retention of the main portion of the building (the Georgian style box-like portion identified in the heritage attributes) and the removal of rear-one storey wing and the one- storey outbuilding. Additional studies were conducted to further evaluate the heritage home and design option to help inform this design. As noted in Section 9.0, “The civil works especially, excavation work on the corner of the Heritage House can lead to deterioration of the entire structure and requires the removal of the two additions to mitigate potential damages to the Heritage House.” Put another way, the site constraints of storm water management might negatively impact the entire structure, including the main portion for the house and the heritage attributes identified in the by-law. The removal of the rear wing and rear outbuilding would reduce the potential negative impacts to the main house. Additionally, the demolition team will be performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition to Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 35 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 reduce any unintended harm to the main building. This option is the Municipality of Clarington’s preferred option as it retains the heritage attributes noted in the By-law, decreases the risk of loss of the structure while allowing the proposed development to be pursued. A more detailed description and rational for this option is outlined in detail in Section 9.0. 11.5 Summary of Alternative Design Considerations The preferred development includes the retention of the main portion of the building which includes all the noted heritage attributes in the By-Law and the removal of the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding. 12.0 MITIGATIVE MEASURES The MCM’s InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006:4) lists several specific methods of minimizing or avoiding a negative impact on a cultural heritage resource including, but not limited to: • Alternative Development approaches; • Limit height and density; • Design guidelines that harmonize mass, setback, setting, and materials; • Allowing only compatible infill and additions; • Reversable additions; and • Buffer zones, site plan control, and other planning mechanisms. Mitigation measures specific to the proposed development and general mitigation measures which align with conservation principles and best practices are outlined in the following sections. 12.1 Temporary Protection Plan (Impact 1) To protect 2565 Concession Road 4 during the construction period of the proposed new building, a Temporary Protection Plan (TPP) should be developed, or at minimum site-specific protective measure should be established. This could be undertaken by Town staff or a heritage consultant in consultation with the project contractor. This may include several considerations such as: 1) Marking the building on the construction plans. 2) Temporary construction fencing should be erected as a buffer between the house the development areas. The fencing should be erected at a sufficient distance to ensure that there will be no direct or indirect impacts to the house as a result of the construc tion activities or equipment. 3) Communication protocol that details who needs to be informed about the heritage attributes and who should be contacted if there is an issue with the building. 4) Plan for potential physical impact (i.e., a plan if there is any damage resulting from machinery). Currently there is the potential for accidental physical impacts. The TPP or protective measure should establish a protocol that would address the possibility of physical impacts and will outline who to contact if an impact occurs and that proper repairs would be required to return the building to its previous condition. 12.2 Vibration Monitoring (Impact 1) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 36 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The proposed development includes the construction of several new buildings and structures on the property. Construction activities associated with the proposed development have the potential to create vibrations that could impact the cultural heritage resource associated with 2656 Concession Road 4. With respect to identifying and monitoring vibrations, the Zone of Influence (ZOI) appears to have been explored within the Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (July 2025). The information in the study should serve as a guidance tool for any future monitoring. 12.3 Conservation Plan (Impact 2) The proposed development involves the removal of the one-storey rear wing which is attached to the main building and the part which contains the heritage attributes assigned to the property through By-Law 95-140. A Conservation Plan (CP), or conservation approach, explains and outlines the strategies for safeguarding cultural heritage resources and attributes identified in a designation By-Law. It often serves as a guiding document that can be used by planner and/or practitioners when changes or alterations to a heritage resource is proposed. A CP considers best practices and conservation principles suited to the specific type of heritage resource or attribute. A CP should consider current conditions and any deficiencies, and sets out recommended conservation actions. These measures are often organized across short-, medium-, and long-term approaches to ensure the ongoing protection and preservation of the property’s cultural heritage value or interest. It is recommended that a CP be carried out, or that demonstrated conservation approaches and conservation planning are established to the satisfaction of Municipal staff. This should at minimum be demonstrated in an understanding of how to safeguard the heritage attributes (main portion of the building) while the removal of the rear additions are being carried out, as well as, ensuring the ongoing protection of the rear elevation. The CP or conservation approach should be prepared by a professional member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). 12.4 Mothballing Plan (Impact 3) The proposed development does not include the immediate use of the existing building. The Municipality is strongly encouraged to find a use for the subject property and ensure its long term conservation. While the subject property is currently boarded up and is offered some protection of further damage or disintegration by the elements, it is recommended that a detailed Mothballing Plan be established which ensures ongoing monitoring of the building until the building is in active use. A Mothballing Plan is typically undertaken by a professional CAHP member who has relevant demonstrated experience. 12.5 Architectural Articulation (Impact 4) The current proposed development involves the construction of a firehall, which differs in material, massing and scale compared to the existing building. It is ARA’s understanding that a comprehensive and detailed building design has not yet been finalized which provides an opportunity to incorporate materials and design elements that are sympathetic to the existing building and the character of the surrounding area. For example, the integration of brick and/or stone cladding on portions of the main section would be sympathetic to the immediate context and would draw inspiration from the existing buildings. It is encouraged that as detailed building design process consider integration of sympathetic materials. Further design considerations should consider creating views to the existing façade. The proponent is encouraged to seek feedback on the design from the Municipality of Clarington Heritage Staff and/or the Heritage Committee. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 37 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 12.6 Landscaping and Vegetative Planting (Impact 4) The proposed development will result in the loss of some of the existing vegetation throughout the subject property. Although these features were not identified as significant heritage attributes, natural elements do contribute to the overall streetscape and can assist as a visual buffer between the new elements proposed on the property and the historic building. The planting of landscape and vegetative features are encouraged as is the retention of plants and trees where possible. This is typically done by a landscape architect as part of a landscape plan. 12.7 Grading Precautions (Impact 5) The proposed development will result in a change of land use from agricultural to industrial and will result in the removal of features and the construction of new features. As part of the proposed development, it is likely the need to regrade large portions of the property. It is recommended that the grading surrounding the proposed buildings or building features be implemented in a way that run-off does not impede on the 2656 Concession Road 4. Specifically, the site plan should ensure drainage pattern be directed away from the foundations of 2656 Concession Road 4. 12.8 Reuse and Salvage (General) While the one-storey brick wing and the one-storey wood outbuilding are not identified heritage resources, they do contain historic fabric that may be worthy of salvage and reuse. The salvaging of building materials is considered good practice and is encouraged as part of the proposed development. The materials listed below provide an example of materials that may be worthy of salvage or reuse: • Brick from one-storey rear wing • Interior baseboards or hardware • Wood from outbuilding The following suggestions for the salvage and reuse of materials are encouraged: • A reputable contractor(s) with proven expertise in cultural heritage resource and/or salvage removal should be obtained; • The ultimate destination of salvaged materials should be determined prior to the initiation of any salvage process. This may take the form of a local carpenter, a contractor, a salvage shop, etc.; • Materials should only be salvaged if they are suitable for re-use in other buildings or projects, i.e., the material must not be irreparably damaged or infested; • Consider the incorporation of salvaged materials (i.e. bricks, wood), into the proposed development o Exploration of the reuse of the brick in the main building could be explored (i.e. brick being used to close in openings as needed and/or be used to replace deteriorating/water damaged bricks) • The material must be extracted in a manner that ensures that it is not irreparably damaged; and • Any materials not deemed salvageable, but which are still recyclable should be recycled in an effort to reduce the amount of material sent to a landfill. 12.9 Update Existing By-Law (General) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 38 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 The existing designation By-law was written in 1995. Since that time, the OHA has undergone several changes which have influenced the way municipalities carry out heritage designation in their communities. In order to continue to ensure the long-term conservation of the 2656 Concession Road 4 it is recommended that an updated designation By-law be completed. The By-law should include an updated statement of CHVI and list of heritage attributes. A property designation By-law can be written using this report as a starting point and can be carried out by Municipal Staff accordingly. 13.0 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING Table 7 outlines the recommended conservation/mitigative/avoidance measures addressed to conserve the cultural heritage resource(s) as the development is undertaken. Table 7: Implementation Schedule Construction Phase Mitigation Measures Due Diligence Site Plan Construction Management Plan Pre-Construction Grading Precautions ✓ Design (Architectural Articulation) ✓ Mothballing Plan ✓ Landscape plans ✓ Temporary Protection Measures ✓ Establish Conservation Approaches ✓ Construction Temporary Protection Measures (i.e. protective fencing ✓ Vibration Monitoring ✓ Establish Conservation Approaches ✓ Post Construction Vegetation and Plantings Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 39 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 14.0 SUMMARY The subject property is 66.53 acres and is currently zoned agricultural. The subject property includes a one-and-a-half storey brick building constructed in 1859. The subject property was designated in 1995 under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act through By-law 95-140. The proposed development includes the retention of the main portion of the heritage structures, the removal of the one-storey rear wing and one-storey outbuilding, as well as the creation of a new fire station and fire training center, with several outbuildings and storage structures to help serve the future needs of the Municipality of Clarington. The proposed development will have adverse impacts on the heritage attributes of 2656 Concession Road 4 as defined by MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006). The potential impacts include: • Impact 1 – While unlikely, there is the potential for impacts to 2656 Concession Road 4 as a result of accidental damage during the construction process. • Impact 2 – The one-storey brick wing is attached to a main portion of the house. Any potential destruction will be further mitigation as the demolition team will be performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition. Nonetheless, the removal has the potential to cause unintended destruction to the rear elevation of the building which is considered a heritage attribute. • Impact 3 – There is potential for unintended impacts from the building remaining vacant and unmaintained that may result in the loss of heritage attributes. • Impact 4 – The materials, scale, and massing of the proposed development, specifically the fire station and paved parking areas, has the potential to detract from the visual context relative to the heritage resource. • Impact 5 –There will be a change in land from agricultural to institutional. Given that potential impacts have been identified, mitigation measures must be recommended. The MCM InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans (2006:3) lists specific methods to minimize any potential negative impacts. The following mitigation measures are recommended: • To protect 2656 Concession Road 4 from accidental damage during the construction period, a Temporary Protection Plan (TPP), or at minimum temporary protective measures, should be developed and implemented; • To protect 2656 Concession Road 4 during the construction period the information provided in the Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study (July 2025) should serve as a guidance tool for any future monitoring requirements throughout the construction phase. The approach noted by the demolition team will involve performing a relief cut 5 feet from the face of the structure prior to engaging in any demolition should be carried out. If it is deemed necessary, the process by which it is undertaken/monitored can be determined in conjunction with Municipal Staff. • It is recommended that a Conservation Plan be carried out, or that demonstrated conservation approaches and conservation planning are established to the satisfaction of Municipality staff. This plan or approach should explain and outlines the strategies for safeguarding cultural heritage resources and attributes identified in a designation By- Law during the removal of the one-storey brick wing. This approach should also provide Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 40 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 details on how the retained building will be safeguarded after the removal of the wing to ensure for further deterioration occurs. • While the property is currently boarded up and is offered some protection of further damage or disintegration by the elements, it is recommended that a mothball plan be established which ensures ongoing monitoring of the building and long term conservation • It is recommended that sympathetic architectural articulation be considered as detailed designs are generated. A comprehensive and detailed building design has not yet been finalized which provides an opportunity to incorporate materials and design elements that are sympathetic to the existing building and the character of the surrounding area. For example, future designs could seek to integrate brick and/or stone cladding. Furthermore, it is recommended that the subsequent designs be reviewed by the heritage committee or heritage planning staff. Should the proposed design change significantly, it is recommended that a revised HIA memo be prepared to ensure that the heritage attributes are not impacts by the new design. • It is recommended that the grading surrounding the existing building be implemented in a way that run-off does not impede on the 2656 Concession Road 4. Specifically, the drainage pattern should be directed away from the foundations of 2656 Concession Road 4. • The planting of landscape and vegetative features are encouraged as is the retention of plants and trees where possible. • While the one-storey brick wing and the one-storey wood outbuilding are not identified heritage resources, they do contain historic fabric that may be worthy of salvage and reuse. The salvaging of building materials is considered good practice and is encouraged as part of the proposed development. As part of the salvage consideration, exploration of the reuse of the brick in the main building could be explored (i.e. brick being used to close in openings as needed and/or be used to replace deteriorating/water damaged bricks) • It is recommended that an updated designation by-law be completed. The By-law should include an updated statement of CHVI and list of heritage attributes. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 41 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 15.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SOURCES Archives of Ontario (AO) 2023 Accessed online at: http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/access/our_collection.aspx. 2024 John Rutledge in Canada, Ontario Deaths, 1869-1937 and Overseas Deaths, 1939- 1947. Township of Darlington, Durham County, Ontario. Reference ID: yr 1878 cn 9711. Blumenson, J. 1990 Ontario Architecture. A Guide to Styles and Building Terms 1784 to the present. Toronto: Fitzhenry and Whiteside Coyne, J. H. 1895 The Country of the Neutrals (As Far as Comprised in the County of Elgin): From Champlain to Talbot. St. Thomas: Times Print. Durham Region 2024 Envision Durham- Regional Official Plan. Accessed online at: https://www.durham.ca/en/doing- business/resources/Documents/PlanningandDevelopment/Envision-Durham/Approved- Durham-ROP-2024.pdf E.E. Dodds & Bro. 1880 Directory and Book of Reference for the West Riding of the County of Northumberland and the County of Durham. Port Hope: E.E. Dodds & Bro. Ellis, C.J., and N. Ferris (editors) 1990 The Archaeology of Southern Ontario to A.D. 1650. Occasional Publication of the London Chapter, OAS Number 5. London: Ontario Archaeological Society Inc. Find a Grave (FG) 2022 Memorial Page for John Rutledge. Accessed online at: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/225595420/john_rutledge 2021 Memorial Page for Edward Rutledge. Accessed online at: https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/225595613/edward-rutledge. Fram, M. 2003 Well Preserved: The Ontario Heritage Foundation’s Manual of Principles and Practice for Architectural Conservation. Erin: Boston Mills Press GHD 2025a Structural Impact of Nearby Construction on Heritage House. August 15 2025. 2025b Construction Impact Assessment Report. October 10 2025 2025c Construction Vibration Zone of Influence Study. July 4 2025 Government of Ontario 2006 Ontario Regulation 9/06 made under the Ontario Heritage Act. Accessed online at: www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/060009. 2006 Ontario Regulation 10/06 made under the Ontario Heritage Act. Accessed online at: www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/060010. 2019 Ontario Heritage Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.18. Accessed online at: www.e- laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90o18_e.htm. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 42 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 2019 Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13. Accessed online at: www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90p13. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 43 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Kyles, S. 2016 Italianate (1850-1900) in Ontario Architecture. Accessed online at: http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/italianate.html Lajeunesse, E.J. 1960 The Windsor Border Region: Canada’s Southernmost Frontier. Toronto: The Champlain Society. Land Registry Office (LRO) #50 2024 Parcel Register for 2656 Concession Road 4. Municipality of Clarington. Accessed online at: http://www.onland.ca. 2024 Lot 10, Concession 4, Township of Darlington, Durham County in the Abstract Index to Deeds. Accessed online at: http://www.onland.ca. Library and Archives Canada (LAC) 1861 John Rutledge in the Census of 1861. Township of Darlington, Durham County. Roll C- C-1016-1017, Page 51 & 60, Line 13 & 21 . 1881 Edward Rutledge in the Census of Canada. Township of Darlington, Durham County, Ontario. Roll C-13242, page 47, family 33, lines 8-10. 1901 Edward Rutledge in the Census of Canada. Township of Darlington, Durham County, Ontario. Roll T-6464, page 1, family 7, lines 30-33. 1911 Edward Rutledge in the Census of Canada. Township of Darlington, Durham County, Ontario. Roll T-20369, page 3, family 29, lines 31-33. 1921 Elizabeth Rutledge in the Census of Canada. Township of Darlington, Durham County, Ontario. Roll T-25085, page 9, family 100, lines 22-24. McGill University 2001 The Canadian County Atlas Digital Project. Accessed online at: http://digital.library.mcgill.ca/countyatlas/default.htm. McAlester, Virginia & Lee 1984 A Field Guide to American Houses. New York: Alfred A Knopf Inc. Mika, N.H. 1972 Illustrated Historical Atlas of the Counties of Northumberland and Durham, Ont. Reprint of 1878 Edition (Toronto: H. Belden & Co.). Belleville: Mika Silk Screening Ltd. Municipality of Clarington (MoC) 1995 Designating By-law 95-140. Provided by the Municipality of Clarington. 2018 Municipality of Clarington Official Plan. Accessed online at https://www.clarington.net/en/business-and-development/resources/Official- Plan/Clarington-Official-Plan-AODA.pdf 2024 LACAC Files and Historic photographs. 2025 Personal Communications. Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism (MCM) 2006 InfoSheet #5: Heritage Impact Assessments and Conservation Plans. Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Series. Toronto: Ministry of Culture. 2021 List of Heritage Conservation Districts. Accessed online at https://www.heritagetrust.on.ca/pages/tools/conservation-districts/heritage-conservation- districts-in-ontario Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 44 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 2025 Ontario Heritage Tool Kit Series. Accessed online at: https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontario- heritage-tool-kit Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) 2024 Provincial Planning Statement, 2024. Toronto: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Ontario Council of University Libraries (OCUL) 2021 Historical Topographic Map Digitization Project. Access online at: https://ocul.on.ca/topomaps/. Ontario Historical County Maps Project (OHCMP) 2021 Ontario Historical County Maps Project. Accessed online at: http://maps.library.utoronto.ca/hgis/countymaps/maps.html. Ontario Heritage Trust (OHT) 2024 Ontario Heritage Plaque Guide. Accessed online at: www.heritagetrust.on.ca/en/ index.php /online-plaque-guide. Parks Canada 2024 Directory of Federal Heritage Designations. Accessed online at: https://www.pc.gc.ca/apps/dfhd/search-recherche_eng.aspx. Ricketts, S., L. Maitland, and J. Hucker 2011 A Guide to Canadian Architectural Styles- Second Edition. Peterborough: Broadview Press Exchange. Smith, W.H. 1846 Smith’s Canadian Gazetteer: Comprising Statistical and General Information Respecting all Parts of the Upper Province, or Canada West. Toronto: H. & W. Rowsell. Accessed online at: https://archive.org/details/smithscanadianga00smit. Squair, J. 1927 The Townships of Darlington and Clarke, Including Bowmanville and Newcastle. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Surtees, R.J. 1994 Land Cessions, 1763–1830. In Aboriginal Ontario: Historical Perspectives on the First Nations, edited by E.S. Rogers and D.B. Smith, pp. 92–121. Toronto: Dundurn Press. Sutherland, J.R. 1865 Gazetteer and General Business Directory for the United Counties of Northumberland and Durham. Woodstock: Sutherland & Co. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 45 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Appendix A: Maps and Figures Map 2: Subject Property in the Municipality of Clarington (Produced by ARA under licence using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 46 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Map 3: 2656 Concession Road 4 on an 1861 Map (Produced by ARA under licence using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri; OHCMP 2021) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 47 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Map 4: 2656 Concession Road 4 on an 1878 Map (Produced by ARA under licence using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri; McGill 2001) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 48 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Map 5: 2656 Concession Road 4 on a Topographic Map from 1930 (Produced by ARA under licence using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri; OCUL 2021) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 49 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Map 6: 2656 Concession Road 4 on Aerial Image from 1954 (Produced by ARA under licence using ArcGIS® software by Esri, © Esri; UoT) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 50 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Historic Figures Figure 5: John Rutledge Grave Marker (FG 2022) Figure 6: View of 2656 Concession Road 4 – 2009 (Municipality of Clarington 2024) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 51 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Figure 7: View of 2656 Concession Road 4 – 2009 (Municipality of Clarington 2024) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 52 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Appendix B: Subject Property Images Image 1: Façade (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing North) Image 2: Detail of Portico (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing North) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 53 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 3: Southwest Corner (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing Northeast) Image 4: Detail of Foundation and Brickwork (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing East) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 54 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 5: West Elevation (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing East) Image 6: Detail of Foundation (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing West) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 55 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 7: Northwest Corner (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing Southeast) Image 8: Southeast Corner (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing Northwest) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 56 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 9: East Elevation (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing West) Image 10: Detail of Roofline with Brackets and Decorative Frieze (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing West) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 57 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 11: Detail of One-Storey Rear Addition and One-Storey Outbuilding (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing North) Image 12: Rear Elevation Where Main Building Meets Rear Addition (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing South) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 58 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 13: Detail of One-Storey Rear Outbuilding (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing Southwest) Image 14: Detail of One-Storey Rear Addition and Red Brick Chimney (Photo taken July 24, 2024; Facing East) Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 59 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 INTERIOR Image 15: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Formal Entryway with Transom and Sidelights Image 16: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Broken Left Sidelight Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 60 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 17: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Wood Staircase with Oak Railing Image 18: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Wood Staircase with Oak Railing Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 61 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 19: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Parlour Fireplace Mantel Image 20: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Parlour Room Six-Over-Six Sash Style Window with Casement Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 62 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 21: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Casement, Baseboard and Window Image 22: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Six-Over-Six Sash Window Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 63 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 23: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained” Wood Paneling Underneath Window Image 24: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Dining Room “Hand Grained Wood Door Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 64 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 25: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of “Hand Grained” and Painted Door Transition between Hallway and Rear Addition Image 26: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Substructure Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 65 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 27: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Pine Servants Staircase Image 28: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Plaster Work in Servants Quarters Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 66 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 29: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Plaster and Wood Lath Image 30: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Arched Window Opening Overtop Front Entranceway Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 67 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Image 31: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Rear One Storey Addition Image 32: 2656 Concession Road 4 Interior – Detail of Rear One Storey Addition Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 68 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Appendix C: Key Team Member Biographies Kayla Jonas Galvin, MA, RPP, MCIP, CAHP – Director - Heritage Operations Kayla Jonas Galvin, ARA’s Director - Heritage Operations, has extensive experience evaluating cultural heritage resources and landscapes for private and public sector clients to fulfil the requirements of provincial and municipal legislation such as the Environmental Assessment Act, the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Provincial Heritage Properties and municipal Official Plans. She served as a Team Lead on the Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism (MCM) Historic Places Initiative, which drafted over 850 Statements of Significance and for Heritage Districts Work!, a study of 64 heritage districts. Kayla was an editor of Arch, Truss and Beam: The Grand River Watershed Heritage Bridge Inventory and has worked on Municipal Heritage Registers in several municipalities. Kayla has drafted over 192 designation reports and by-laws for the City of Kingston, the City of Burlington, the Town of Newmarket, Municipality of Chatham-Kent, City of Brampton and the Township of Whitchurch-Stouffville. Kayla manages all Vendor of Record assignments for the City of Hamilton, Town of Newmarket and Northumberland County. Kayla is the Heritage Team Lead for ARA’s roster assignments for Infrastructure Ontario and retainer services for the Ministry of Transportation, Central and West Region. As such, Kayla has in-depth experience in conducting, managing and directing heritage work following the Ontario Heritage Act and Ontario Heritage Toolkit series. Of direct relevance to this RFP is Kayla’s work conducting peer reviews for Heritage Impact Assessments for the Town of Collingwood, City of Burlington, Township of King, Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury and Municipality of Clarington as well as her work on two LPAT cases and a Conservation Review board hearing to achieve settlements. She has also directed the Peer Review of 58 St Paul Street (in the HCD), Designation Report for 362 Peel Street and the Built Heritage Assessment for the Collingwood Grain Terminals in the Town of Collingwood (also in the HCD). Kayla is a professional CAHP member, a Registered Professional Planner (RPP) and Member of the Canadian Institute of Planners (MCIP). Amy Barnes, M.A., CAHP - Heritage Project Manager Amy Barnes, a Project Manager with the Heritage Team, has over fifteen years of experience evaluating cultural heritage resources and leading community engagement. Amy has extensive experience working with provincial and municipal legislation and guidelines, including the Ontario Heritage Act, Official Plans, the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places, and the Ontario Heritage Toolkit. Ms. Barnes has completed over fifty heritage related projects including 150+ cultural assessments and has been qualified as an expert witness at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Amy has worked in the public and private sector where her duties included project management, public consultation, facilitator, research, database and records management, and report author. Amy has worked with the Town of Oakville, City of Cambridge, City of Kitchener, Niagara-on-the-Lake, City of London, and the City of Kingston on projects which range in size, scale and complexity. Amy Barnes holds an M.A. in Heritage Conservation from the School of Canadian Studies at Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario. Amy has successfully completed the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Foundations in Public Participation, the IAP2 Planning and Techniques for Effective Public Participation, and Indigenous Awareness Training through Indigenous Awareness Canada. Amy is a professional member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP) and formerly served as the Vice- Chair of the Cambridge Municipal Heritage Advisory Committee. Antiy-Demain Savov, BA, Dip. Heritage Conservation – Cultural Heritage Technician Antiy-Demian Savov joined the Heritage Team at ARA as a Heritage Technician in 2023. He has three years experience conducting archaeological assessments and two years experience directly conserving heritage resources in a variety of contexts. Antiy-Demian earned an hon. BA Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 69 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 degree in Near Eastern and Classical Archaeology from Wilfried Laurier University. He then joined the cultural resource management field in 2016. After several seasons as a Field Technician with ARA, Antiy-Demian went on to acquire a graduate Diploma in Heritage Conservation from the Willowbank School of Restoration Arts. He has hands on experience in traditional construction practices and has done conservation work as a heritage wood technician with Heritage Grade in Ottawa. The Willowbank program and his internship with the Heritage Team at ARA have given him experience in provincial and municipal legislation and guidelines, including the Ontario Heritage Act, Official Plans, the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places, the Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists and the Ontario Heritage Toolkit. Antiy-Demian has worked on a wide range of archaeological sites and heritage properties. Heritage Impact Assessment 2656 Concession Road 4, Municipality of Clarington 70 May 2025 Rev Dec 2025 Archaeological Research Associates Ltd. HR-517-2024 ARA File #2024-0227 Appendix D: Construction Impact Assessment Report HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVISORY REPORT Existing Structure at 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, Ontario Prepared for: Municipality of Clarington Prepared by: MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. Heritage Preservation & Construction Advisory Services Report Date: 17th November 2025 Project Reference: Heritage Advisory – Rutledge Property Attachment 2 to Report PDS-011-26 HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Pre-Construction Recommendations 2.1 Structural Engineering Assessment 2.2 Dilapidation Survey 2.3 Archaeological Considerations 2.4 Designated Substances Review 3. Observations of the Existing Heritage Structure 3.1. Brickwork Patterns 3.2. Addition Tie-In Details 4. Recommended Demolition Approach 4.1. Permitting and Site Protection 4.2. “Top-Down” Demolition Method 4.3. Shoring and Bracing 4.4. Controlled Separation (Relief Cut) 4.5. Heavy-Equipment Demolition (After Separation) 4.6. Salvaged Brick Removal 4.7. Selective Hand Demolition at the Tie-In 5. Ongoing Management and Clean-Up 5.1. Debris Management / Sustainability 5.2. Active Monitoring 5.3. Emergency Response Plan 6. Protection of the Heritage Building 7. Additional Considerations 7.1. Archaeological Protection 7.2. Demolition Method Cost Impact 8. Conclusion 9. Disclaimer / Statement of Limitations 10. Appendices 10.1. Site Photos HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 1. Introduction / Overview MVW Construction was engaged by the Municipality of Clarington to provide advice on how to preserve the heritage qualities of an existing historic building during the demolition of a later addition. The subject property, located at 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, was constructed circa 1860 and holds recognized heritage value. An archaeological evaluation determined that the property has historical and associative value through its connection to the Rutledge family, specifically John and Edward Rutledge. The heritage attributes reflecting this value include: • A one-and-a-half-storey structure constructed in the Georgian architectural style. • Distinct historic brickwork patterns on multiple elevations. • Overall integrity of original 19th-century construction materials. Two later additions exist at the rear of the structure: 1. Brick addition: double-skin brick construction, approx. 29 LF × 33 LF (≈ 1,000 sq. ft.). 2. Wood-frame addition: lumber construction, approx. 30 LF × 20 LF (≈ 600 sq. ft.). The Municipality seeks to remove these additions while preserving the structural integrity and heritage character of the original building. 2. Pre-Construction Recommendations Prior to any demolition activity, MVW Construction recommends the following: 2.1 Structural Engineering Assessment A licensed Ontario Professional Structural Engineer should conduct a full structural review to: • Identify/confirm shared walls and structural connection points. • Assess load paths, weak points, and potential hazards. • Determine temporary shoring/bracing requirements to prevent stress on the heritage structure during demolition. • Review roof, attic, and floor-level mechanical connections between the addition and original building. The demolition of ceiling finishes within the addition may be required to allow full investigation of attic tie -in points. MVW Construction recommends an estimated budget of $3,500 to $6,500, for Structural Engineer fees which would include up to 2 site visits and verification of the methodology stated in this report as well as any other precautions and tasks that must be adhered to for a successful outcome. 2.2 Dilapidation Survey A pre-demolition condition assessment should be completed to document: • Existing cracks or deficiencies in the heritage structure. • Notable settlement or deformation. • Any pre-existing conditions that could be mistaken for demolition -related damage. This will protect all parties from future dispute. HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 2.3 Archaeological Considerations Archaeological test pits surrounding the building have uncovered sensitive artifacts. These areas must be: • Protected from machine traffic. • Avoided during excavation or demolition staging. • Considered when planning access routes and equipment movements. 2.4 Designated Substances Review The designated substances survey provided to MVW Construction identifies: • Asbestos: present in only one area of the heritage structure (not scheduled for demolition). • Lead: elevated concentrations in painted trim throughout the property. Lead mitigation should be manageable through standard, economical abatement procedures. 3. Observations of the Existing Heritage Structure 3.1 Brickwork Patterns The original building features two distinct historic brick bonds: • South (front) and West elevations: Flemish Bond—alternating stretcher and header bricks. Header bricks tie the inner and outer wythe together, contributing to structural integrity. • North and East elevations: A modified English Bond, consisting of one header course followed by three courses of stretchers. While not a pure English Bond, it remains consistent with 19th-century construction practices. 3.2 Addition Tie-In Details • The brick addition was attached to the historic building by cutting a vertical chase into the original wall and building the new brick into it. • This creates a structurally sensitive connection that must not be subjected to vibration or lateral force during demolition. • The roof connection was not accessible, but is presumed to include mechanical fasteners (bolts through rafters, joists, and possibly floor structures). These details highlight the need for a controlled, low-impact demolition method. 4. Recommended Demolition Approach 4.1 Permitting and Site Protection • Obtain a demolition permit from the Municipality of Clarington. • Install secure site fencing and protective barriers to prevent unauthorized access. 4.2 “Top-Down” Demolition Method MVW Construction recommends a systematic top-down dismantling of the additions. HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 4.3 Shoring and Bracing • Install all shoring/bracing recommended by the structural engineer. • Shoring must be inspected and verified as adequate prior to demolition. 4.4 Controlled Separation (Relief Cut) Once shoring is in place: • Create a 1-ft-wide relief cut along the full width of the addition. • The cut should be 5–6 ft away from the heritage structure, isolating the sensitive connection and minimizing vibration transfer. 4.5 Heavy-Equipment Demolition (After Separation) • Once disconnected, heavy equipment may be used for the economical demolition of the majority of the addition. • Exception: The brick addition contains bricks that closely match the historic structure and should be manually salvaged for reuse. 4.6 Salvaged Brick Removal • Remove bricks manually from the top down using hand tools (e.g., <2 kg hammer drills). • Carefully clean mortar to allow future reuse in heritage repairs. 4.7 Selective Hand Demolition at the Tie-In • After heavy-equipment removal, use lifts/access equipment to manually dismantle the remaining portion at the tie -in. • Use hand tools only to avoid vibration and reduce risk to the original structure. 5. Ongoing Management and Clean-Up 5.1 Debris Management / Sustainability • Remove demolished materials promptly. • Sort for recycling and disposal. • Prevent debris from accumulating against heritage walls. 5.2 Active Monitoring • Continuous monitoring by the contractor for: o Movement o Stress cracking o Foundation instability o Brick displacement • Any concerns regarding the above shall be immediately reported to the Structural Engineer for review and direction on how to proceed 5.3 Emergency Response Plan A written emergency plan should be created to address unforeseen issues such as: • Sudden structural failure • Ground instability • Discovery of additional archaeological artifacts The outlined approach is anticipated to significantly reduce the likelihood of such events. HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 6. Protection of the Heritage Building There are three openings in the heritage structure that currently connect to the addition. These should be: • Hoarded for weather protection and building security. • Ideally sealed using salvaged brickwork for long-term continuity. • One opening may remain accessible for rear-entry access if required. Weatherproofing options should be reviewed and approved in collaboration with the Clarington Heritage Committee. 7. Additional Considerations 7.1 Archaeological Protection • Protect previously excavated areas around the building. • Consider performing demolition during winter months, when frost provides naturally hardened ground. • If accessing soft ground, use heavy-duty protection mats to prevent rutting and disturbance. 7.2 Demolition Method Cost Impact • Heavy equipment demolition is the most economical, provided separation is completed first. • A fully manual demolition would require: o Considerable additional labour time o Increased need for lifts and access equipment o Higher overall cost MVW Construction recommends an estimated budget of $50,000 to $75,000, subject to refinement once a final methodology has been approved. 8. Conclusion The proposed demolition approach offers a safe, controlled, and heritage-conscious process for removing the additions at 2656 Concession Road 4. By following the recommended engineering reviews, separation procedures, manual salvage techniques, and ongoing monitoring requirements, the Municipality of Clarington can ensure: • Preservation of the heritage building’s structural integrity • Protection of archaeological resources • Retention of historically appropriate materials for future restoration • Efficient and economical completion of the demolition work MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. remains available to support further planning, coordination with heritage authorities, and on - site oversight as required. HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 9. Disclaimer / Statement of Limitations This report has been prepared exclusively for the Municipality of Clarington for the purpose of providing advisory guidance o n the demolition of the existing additions at 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, Ontario, while preserving the structural integri ty and heritage attributes of the original building. The information, recommendations, and observations contained herein are based o n visual review, information provided to MVW Construction & Engineering Inc., and professional judgment at the time of assessment. MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. is not a licensed engineering consultant, and the contents of this report shall not be interpreted as a substitute for the review, analysis, or direction of a qualified Professional Engineer. All structural assum ptions, demolition methodologies, and stability considerations must be verified, app roved, and supervised by an Ontario-licensed Professional Engineer prior to the commencement of any work. MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. cannot be held responsible for structural conditions that were concealed, inaccessible, altered, or not reasonably observable at the time of review. The archaeological and heritage information referenced within this report is based on documentation provided to MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. Protection of archaeological resources and heritage attributes must be carried out in accordance with provincial legislation, the Municipality of Clarington’s requirements, and the direction of qualified professionals in t hese fields. This report does not include destructive testing, invasive investigation, detailed structural engineering analysis, environme ntal testing, or comprehensive hazardous materials assessment. Any designated substances, concealed conditions, or hazardous materials discovered during demolition must be addressed by qualified specialists and may require revision to the demolition methodology outlined in this document. The recommendations contained in this report apply only to the specific structures and conditions described. MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. makes no warranties, expressed or implied, regarding conditions that may arise after the date of this report, nor regarding the performance of any third-party contractors, engineers, or service providers engaged for this project. Use of or reliance upon this report by any parties other than the Municipality of Clarington is strictly prohibited without t he written consent of MVW Construction & Engineering Inc. HERITAGE DEMOLITION ADVICE REPORT Municipality of Clarington - 2656 Concession Road 4, Bowmanville, ON, L1C 7S5 November 17th, 2025 10. Appendices 10.1 Site Photo’s: South and West Elevations Addition Interior at Tie-In North and East Elevations West Elevation Addition Tie-In North Elevation of Addition North/East Elevation Addition East Elevation Addition Addition/Main Building Brick Tie-In Frost Damaged Brick