Grey County Committee of the Whole Meeting Transcript — July 24, 2025

00:24:17 Speaker 17: five. I'll call to order this

00:24:19 Speaker 17: business and ask if there are

00:24:21 Speaker 17: any declarations of interest. See no

00:24:23 Speaker 03: hands go up. We can proceed.

00:24:36 Speaker 03: We do not have any business

00:24:38 Speaker 03: arising for minutes, and with that,

00:24:39 Speaker 03: we have one delegation. So this.

00:24:42 Speaker 03: morning, I'm going to first invite

00:24:45 Speaker 03: Ms. Buckton, as our senior policy

00:24:47 Speaker 03: planner, to come up and make

00:24:49 Speaker 18: introductions before we get into the

00:24:51 Speaker 18: archaeological management plan deputation. Wonderful, thank

00:24:53 Speaker 18: you very much. I'm really excited

00:24:56 Speaker 18: to be here today and to

00:24:58 Speaker 18: have some staff from Team HC

00:25:01 Speaker 18: Consulting joining us for presentation. so

00:25:03 Speaker 18: I'll just do a very brief

00:25:05 Speaker 18: introduction before we turn that

00:25:07 Speaker 18: over. This morning we will have

00:25:09 Speaker 18: two representatives from TMC Inc. joining

00:25:11 Speaker 18: us to present regarding the archaeological

00:25:12 Speaker 18: potential model that they've prepared for

00:25:15 Speaker 18: us in relation to the archaeological

00:25:17 Speaker 18: management plan. Joining us today is

00:25:21 Speaker 18: Dr. Holly Martell. Holly is a

00:25:24 Speaker 18: principal with TMC, a skilled archaeologist,

00:25:26 Speaker 18: project manager, and relationship builder, and

00:25:28 Speaker 18: we've been so very fortunate to

00:25:31 Speaker 18: have her as project. lead for

00:25:34 Speaker 18: the model preparation component of the

00:25:36 Speaker 18: app project. Holly is joined today

00:25:39 Speaker 18: by Dr. John Moody, Team HC's

00:25:41 Speaker 18: digital applications manager and the GIS

00:25:44 Speaker 18: lead for the project. John has

00:25:46 Speaker 18: over fifteen years of experience working

00:25:48 Speaker 18: on various facets of archaeology projects

00:25:49 Speaker 18: and is an innovator in his

00:25:50 Speaker 18: field relating to data collection, management,

00:25:53 Speaker 18: and presentation through technology. And certainly,

00:25:55 Speaker 18: we benefited from John's expertise. as

00:25:57 Speaker 18: well in preparation of the JS-based

00:25:59 Speaker 18: model as they'll present to you

00:26:00 Speaker 18: today. So I think the intention

00:26:01 Speaker 18: is this one being related to

00:26:03 Speaker 18: the project will be a little

00:26:06 Speaker 18: bit longer than our usual delegation.

00:26:06 Speaker 18: So they've got lots of information

00:26:08 Speaker 18: to share with us today. We'll

00:26:11 Speaker 18: have an opportunity for some questions,

00:26:14 Speaker 19: and then we'll also be presenting

00:26:16 Speaker 19: the staff report just a little

00:26:18 Speaker 19: bit later. So there'll be some

00:26:20 Speaker 19: further discussion opportunity then. But I

00:26:22 Speaker 19: won't take up any more time.

00:26:23 Speaker 19: I'll just pass that along to

00:26:24 Speaker 19: NHC. To Team HC, thank you

00:26:26 Speaker 19: so much. Okay, thank you. So,

00:26:28 Speaker 19: welcome, Ms. Martell and Mr. Moody,

00:26:37 Speaker 19: for for your presentation this morning.

00:26:39 Speaker 19: And Council will listen, and then

00:26:41 Speaker 19: we'll ask questions of clarification to

00:26:44 Speaker 19: you while you're here. And then,

00:26:46 Speaker 19: of course, we'll have a

00:26:48 Speaker 19: further discussion when the actual report

00:26:53 Speaker 19: comes forward later in the agenda.

00:26:54 Speaker 19: So, with that, welcome, and the

00:26:55 Speaker 19: floor is yours. Thank you. so

00:26:57 Speaker 19: much, Warden and Council, and Liz

00:26:58 Speaker 19: for inviting us to come and

00:27:00 Speaker 19: present to you today on the

00:27:02 Speaker 19: progress and findings of the preparation

00:27:04 Speaker 19: of the archaeological management plan for

00:27:07 Speaker 20: Gray County. Just to give you

00:27:10 Speaker 20: a little bit of an overview

00:27:11 Speaker 20: of what we're going to talk

00:27:13 Speaker 20: about today, we wanted to give

00:27:16 Speaker 20: sort of a high level summary

00:27:17 Speaker 20: of archaeology in Gray County. Talk

00:27:19 Speaker 20: a little bit about the goals

00:27:21 Speaker 20: of the archaeological management plan. discuss

00:27:27 Speaker 20: how we've developed the archaeological potential

00:27:31 Speaker 20: model or that planning layer that's

00:27:33 Speaker 20: used in a planning context. What

00:27:35 Speaker 20: the methodology was for data collection,

00:27:36 Speaker 20: how we've compiled that layer, how

00:27:39 Speaker 20: it will be used in the

00:27:41 Speaker 20: planning context going forward, and current

00:27:43 Speaker 20: status of the project, and

00:27:46 Speaker 20: discuss some next steps. Yeah, archaeology

00:27:48 Speaker 20: in Gray County is something that

00:27:50 Speaker 20: is a lot of community

00:27:53 Speaker 20: members are very passionate about. There

00:27:56 Speaker 20: is a high level of archaeological

00:27:58 Speaker 20: significance throughout various areas in Grey

00:28:01 Speaker 20: County, and the county actually contains

00:28:03 Speaker 20: some of the oldest and most

00:28:07 Speaker 20: significant known archaeological sites in Ontario,

00:28:10 Speaker 20: dating back over ten thousand years

00:28:11 Speaker 20: old. To date, one hundred ninety-nine

00:28:13 Speaker 20: registered archaeological exists in the archaeological

00:28:17 Speaker 20: sites exist in the county, and

00:28:20 Speaker 20: those include both Indigenous and historic

00:28:23 Speaker 20: settler sites. Ninety-one of those

00:28:26 Speaker 20: are Indigenous. villages, camps, and burial

00:28:28 Speaker 20: sites, which all together offer evidence

00:28:31 Speaker 20: of continuous indigenous presence in the

00:28:37 Speaker 20: county from at least the end

00:28:40 Speaker 20: of the last ice age

00:28:43 Speaker 20: to the present day. Early efforts

00:28:46 Speaker 20: at archaeological conservation in Gregg County

00:28:50 Speaker 20: really came at the hands of

00:28:51 Speaker 20: really passionate individuals, researchers like Peter

00:28:54 Speaker 20: Stork, for example, and Dr. William

00:28:57 Speaker 20: Fitzgerald, who are very interested. in

00:28:59 Speaker 20: understanding past Indigenous life in the

00:29:01 Speaker 20: county, and we're undertaking research

00:29:04 Speaker 20: alongside avocationalists and concerned citizens

00:29:06 Speaker 20: who were watching out for very

00:29:09 Speaker 20: precious archaeological resources and trying to

00:29:10 Speaker 20: take efforts to make sure they

00:29:13 Speaker 20: were documented and protected in threat

00:29:16 Speaker 20: of ensuing development. A lot of

00:29:18 Speaker 20: early efforts were concentrated in the

00:29:20 Speaker 20: nineteen. were concentrated in the 1980s

00:29:22 Speaker 20: under the umbrella of a provincial

00:29:24 Speaker 20: ministry responsible for archaeology. There was

00:29:28 Speaker 20: an archaeological conservation programme, and folks

00:29:31 Speaker 20: like Charlie and Ella Garrard, you

00:29:33 Speaker 20: might be familiar with, with their

00:29:36 Speaker 20: names, and Mike and Christine Kirby,

00:29:38 Speaker 20: worked tirelessly on on weekends and

00:29:41 Speaker 20: and evenings to go out and

00:29:43 Speaker 20: document sites and make sure they're

00:29:45 Speaker 20: identified and protected. And at that

00:29:47 Speaker 20: time, there was no municipal or

00:29:49 Speaker 20: planning framework to to really address.

00:29:52 Speaker 20: the conservation of archaeological resources, and

00:29:53 Speaker 20: no legislation to support that, or

00:29:55 Speaker 20: a requirement for archaeological assessments to

00:29:57 Speaker 20: be undertaken at that time, so

00:30:00 Speaker 20: their efforts were really important. Today,

00:30:02 Speaker 20: what we know about archaeology in

00:30:04 Speaker 20: Gray County really stems back to

00:30:09 Speaker 20: their work. A lot of those

00:30:11 Speaker 20: register sites we know about are

00:30:13 Speaker 20: comprised of the bulk of registered

00:30:14 Speaker 20: sites still unknown about in Gray

00:30:17 Speaker 20: County. But when we look at

00:30:19 Speaker 20: the number of sites in the

00:30:21 Speaker 20: county in relation to the land

00:30:24 Speaker 20: mass. Gray counties, you know, got

00:30:25 Speaker 20: this Van Lats land mass of

00:30:27 Speaker 20: 4,500 square kilometres. The 199 sites

00:30:30 Speaker 20: is really, really a very small

00:30:32 Speaker 20: number, and is not representative in

00:30:34 Speaker 20: any way of the number of

00:30:37 Speaker 20: sites that are actually out there.

00:30:41 Speaker 20: When we look in comparison

00:30:43 Speaker 20: to, say, a smaller municipality like

00:30:48 Speaker 20: the city of London, for example,

00:30:49 Speaker 20: which is a tenth of the

00:30:51 Speaker 20: size. of Gray County. There are

00:30:54 Speaker 20: over 500 registered sites known there

00:30:55 Speaker 20: now, and a lot of that

00:30:57 Speaker 20: dates back to the early development

00:30:59 Speaker 20: of an archaeological management plan in

00:31:01 Speaker 20: the mid 90s and sort of

00:31:04 Speaker 20: rigorous implementation of archaeological conservation within

00:31:06 Speaker 20: the planning context. When we look

00:31:08 Speaker 20: also at the registered sites, here's

00:31:11 Speaker 20: a map on the right that

00:31:12 Speaker 20: shows where they're distributed across. the

00:31:15 Speaker 20: county, you can see that there's

00:31:18 Speaker 20: quite a bit of difference. Many

00:31:20 Speaker 20: of the sites we know about

00:31:23 Speaker 20: are concentrated in the areas where

00:31:26 Speaker 20: those researchers have looked in

00:31:29 Speaker 20: the historic territories of the Payton,

00:31:32 Speaker 20: for example, in the Beaver Valley,

00:31:34 Speaker 20: or they're concentrated in municipalities and

00:31:36 Speaker 20: those areas that have witnessed a

00:31:39 Speaker 20: lot of land development. For example,

00:31:43 Speaker 20: along Highway 26 and those lakeside

00:31:45 Speaker 20: areas where the county has witnessed

00:31:47 Speaker 20: a lot of residential. and commercial

00:31:50 Speaker 20: development, a lot of roadworks to

00:31:53 Speaker 20: improve transportation and infrastructure networks. We

00:31:55 Speaker 20: also have sites documented in areas

00:31:57 Speaker 20: that have been subject to survey

00:32:00 Speaker 20: for some of those aggregate pits

00:32:02 Speaker 20: that, you know, delving into the

00:32:05 Speaker 20: the rich aggregate resources in the

00:32:07 Speaker 20: county. But for the most part,

00:32:09 Speaker 20: the the sites are are being

00:32:12 Speaker 20: found where we've been looking, but

00:32:14 Speaker 20: we're not necessarily. identifying potential in

00:32:16 Speaker 20: all areas of the county. If

00:32:17 Speaker 20: you can see on the map

00:32:20 Speaker 20: too that many of the lower

00:32:23 Speaker 20: tier municipalities, some of the historic

00:32:24 Speaker 20: township, have no or very few

00:32:27 Speaker 20: archaeological sites recorded so far, and

00:32:33 Speaker 20: that is often a reflection of

00:32:34 Speaker 20: a lack of survey and assessment

00:32:39 Speaker 20: that's been done. Some related to

00:32:42 Speaker 20: the fact that those areas

00:32:46 Speaker 20: just don't see much in the

00:32:50 Speaker 20: way of land development, but

00:32:51 Speaker 20: in other cases. it's a product

00:32:53 Speaker 20: of the planning context and some

00:32:56 Speaker 20: uncertainty around how and when

00:32:59 Speaker 20: an archaeological assessment should be undertaken.

00:33:03 Speaker 20: Today, there is legislation, and since

00:33:05 Speaker 20: the 1990s, there is a

00:33:08 Speaker 20: legislation and policy and regulatory framework

00:33:11 Speaker 20: that makes municipalities in Ontario

00:33:16 Speaker 20: responsible for archaeological conservation. The provincial

00:33:19 Speaker 20: planning statement, in particular. requires that

00:33:21 Speaker 20: planning authorities shall not permit development

00:33:24 Speaker 20: and site alteration on lands

00:33:26 Speaker 20: containing archaeological resources or areas of

00:33:28 Speaker 20: archaeological potential unless the significant archaeological

00:33:31 Speaker 20: resources have been conserved. The Planning

00:33:33 Speaker 20: Act calls for recognition of archaeological

00:33:36 Speaker 20: resources, and the Ontario Heritage Act

00:33:38 Speaker 20: offers protection for registered archaeological sites

00:33:41 Speaker 20: in the province. Municipalities across Ontario,

00:33:43 Speaker 20: Grey County being one of them,

00:33:45 Speaker 20: have often been challenged to manage

00:33:48 Speaker 20: archaeology and these archaeological interests and

00:33:51 Speaker 20: meet those provincial requirements. And there's

00:33:54 Speaker 20: a number of reasons for that.

00:33:55 Speaker 20: Identifying those areas of concern or

00:33:57 Speaker 20: interest where archaeological sites might be,

00:34:00 Speaker 20: where there is archaeological potential, is

00:34:02 Speaker 20: not an easy thing to do.

00:34:05 Speaker 20: The information to make those evaluations

00:34:09 Speaker 20: is very hard to access. It's

00:34:12 Speaker 20: not consistently updated or not consolidated

00:34:16 Speaker 20: in one place. There's often uncertainty

00:34:18 Speaker 20: about when and where to require

00:34:21 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment, and it can

00:34:24 Speaker 20: be approached differently by different planners

00:34:27 Speaker 20: at various tiers, lower and upper,

00:34:29 Speaker 20: and it can vary based on

00:34:31 Speaker 20: the type of application being put

00:34:36 Speaker 20: forth in a planning context or

00:34:39 Speaker 20: the legislative requirements. But noting that

00:34:41 Speaker 20: the consequences for not identifying archaeological

00:34:44 Speaker 20: interests, as we all know, with

00:34:46 Speaker 20: recent press findings across Ontario can

00:34:48 Speaker 20: be very difficult to navigate. Particularly

00:34:51 Speaker 20: as Indigenous communities are expecting more

00:34:53 Speaker 20: and asserting their treaty and

00:34:56 Speaker 20: territorial rights and interests with respect

00:34:58 Speaker 20: to their archaeological heritage. So the

00:35:01 Speaker 20: goals of the archaeological management plan,

00:35:02 Speaker 20: or AMP, for short, is

00:35:05 Speaker 20: to help. a municipality, or in

00:35:08 Speaker 20: this case, help Grey County, meet

00:35:12 Speaker 20: their responsibilities under the Planning Act

00:35:14 Speaker 20: and provincial policy statement. And it

00:35:17 Speaker 20: can an AMP can help develop

00:35:19 Speaker 20: a good understanding of where archaeological

00:35:21 Speaker 20: resources are, or are currently known

00:35:24 Speaker 20: within the county, or might be

00:35:26 Speaker 20: located. Can create a clear process

00:35:31 Speaker 20: for addressing archaeological interests in the

00:35:33 Speaker 20: planning context. Can help establish a

00:35:36 Speaker 20: consistent and transparent. Distant and transparent

00:35:38 Speaker 20: process for requiring archaeological assessments as

00:35:41 Speaker 20: part of the Planning Act and

00:35:44 Speaker 20: other municipal projects and approvals, and

00:35:47 Speaker 20: define a better process for

00:35:49 Speaker 20: engaging Indigenous communities when and

00:35:53 Speaker 20: where their heritage is affected by

00:35:59 Speaker 20: land use changes approved by the

00:36:01 Speaker 20: county. It's also acknowledged that an

00:36:04 Speaker 20: AMP can help address Indigenous interests

00:36:07 Speaker 20: in archaeology, and and again going

00:36:09 Speaker 20: back to the provincial planning

00:36:13 Speaker 20: statement. it suggests or or requires

00:36:16 Speaker 20: planning authorities shall engage early with

00:36:19 Speaker 20: indigenous communities and ensure their interests

00:36:22 Speaker 20: are considered when identifying, protecting and

00:36:28 Speaker 20: managing archaeological resources, built heritage resources

00:36:31 Speaker 20: and cultural heritage landscapes. So what

00:36:32 Speaker 20: is an archaeological management plan? It's

00:36:34 Speaker 20: essentially a planning tool for municipalities

00:36:38 Speaker 20: to use to manage, in other.

00:36:41 Speaker 20: words, to identify, to conserve, and

00:36:45 Speaker 20: protect archaeological resources within their jurisdiction.

00:36:48 Speaker 20: It really helps establish a

00:36:50 Speaker 20: clear planning framework to plan for

00:36:53 Speaker 20: the the better conservation of archaeological

00:36:57 Speaker 20: resources. An AMP is essentially a

00:36:59 Speaker 20: very collabourative process. We don't do

00:37:01 Speaker 20: this on our own. We take

00:37:04 Speaker 20: into account the information, the expertise,

00:37:08 Speaker 20: the. experience, that a variety of

00:37:11 Speaker 20: planners, both at the county level

00:37:13 Speaker 20: and private private planners, developers, individuals

00:37:15 Speaker 20: who interact with archaeology and archaeological

00:37:18 Speaker 20: assessment requirements on a daily basis,

00:37:20 Speaker 20: the city is or the

00:37:24 Speaker 20: county has developed a technical advisory

00:37:27 Speaker 20: committee, which has helped us along

00:37:29 Speaker 20: the way within this process.

00:37:31 Speaker 20: We've engaged with indigenous and descendant

00:37:34 Speaker 20: communities. including Saugeen Ojibway Nation, who

00:37:37 Speaker 20: have had a leading role, historic

00:37:40 Speaker 20: Saugeen Métis Six Nations, many of

00:37:44 Speaker 20: those communities that were identified in

00:37:47 Speaker 20: your land acknowledgement today. We've been

00:37:50 Speaker 20: working with the local Black heritage

00:37:53 Speaker 20: communities as well, stakeholders, museums throughout

00:37:55 Speaker 20: the county or beyond the county

00:37:57 Speaker 20: that may have information about archaeological

00:37:59 Speaker 20: resources and collections from Grey County.

00:38:02 Speaker 20: Gray County, local historical and archaeological

00:38:03 Speaker 20: organisations, community groups, and of course

00:38:06 Speaker 20: local archaeologists with expertise in this

00:38:09 Speaker 20: area. There are two components

00:38:12 Speaker 20: essentially of the archaeological management plan.

00:38:15 Speaker 20: One is the archaeological potential model,

00:38:18 Speaker 20: which is essentially a GIS-based map

00:38:20 Speaker 20: or planning layer or planning layers

00:38:23 Speaker 20: and data that informs those layers.

00:38:28 Speaker 20: In the compilation of that, has

00:38:29 Speaker 20: been the responsibility of T. Responsibility

00:38:32 Speaker 20: of TMHC, and that's what we're

00:38:34 Speaker 20: going to talk most about today.

00:38:38 Speaker 20: Alongside that, the Gray County Planning

00:38:41 Speaker 20: Department is preparing policy, planning, and

00:38:42 Speaker 20: implementation framework, which will develop the

00:38:44 Speaker 20: procedures and approach for utilising that

00:38:46 Speaker 20: GIS map or planning layer, that

00:38:47 Speaker 20: archaeological potential model, addressing how that

00:38:50 Speaker 20: will be used within making planning

00:38:52 Speaker 20: decisions. So today, as I said,

00:38:55 Speaker 20: we're going to speak to the

00:38:57 Speaker 20: archaeological potential model and our methodology

00:39:00 Speaker 20: for establishing that model and planning

00:39:02 Speaker 20: tool. Building the model, we have

00:39:04 Speaker 20: used a series of steps. They're

00:39:06 Speaker 20: kind of a logical set of

00:39:10 Speaker 20: steps that we've taken to create

00:39:12 Speaker 20: a number of layers that we

00:39:15 Speaker 20: can then compile into an overall

00:39:18 Speaker 20: planning tool or a composite layer

00:39:20 Speaker 20: to be used by planning staff.

00:39:22 Speaker 20: The first step is to map

00:39:24 Speaker 20: the archaeological sets. sites in the

00:39:27 Speaker 20: county, so we wanted to

00:39:29 Speaker 20: gather all that data on the

00:39:31 Speaker 20: registered archaeological sites that are known

00:39:33 Speaker 20: within the county. Registered sites

00:39:37 Speaker 20: are kept in an inventory that

00:39:40 Speaker 20: is maintained by the Ministry of

00:39:43 Speaker 20: Citizenship and Multiculturalism within a provincial

00:39:45 Speaker 20: registry or database. So we've collected

00:39:48 Speaker 20: that information, but we also wanted

00:39:50 Speaker 20: to supplement that, knowing that there

00:39:52 Speaker 20: has been sort of, you know,

00:39:56 Speaker 20: relatively. little archaeological assessment done, particularly

00:39:57 Speaker 20: in certain parts of Gray County.

00:40:00 Speaker 20: So we wanted to supplement those

00:40:02 Speaker 20: registered sites' information with information that

00:40:05 Speaker 20: suggests that archaeological sites have been

00:40:08 Speaker 20: found, potentially not registered, or may

00:40:10 Speaker 20: exist in other areas but have

00:40:12 Speaker 20: not been confirmed by an archaeologist.

00:40:16 Speaker 20: So the map of archaeological sites,

00:40:18 Speaker 20: then our whole data set of

00:40:20 Speaker 20: of known archaeological findings, comes from.

00:40:23 Speaker 20: sites that have been confirmed and

00:40:24 Speaker 20: identified by archaeologists, but others that

00:40:27 Speaker 20: have just been reported with in

00:40:30 Speaker 20: historical documents, whether those be maps,

00:40:32 Speaker 20: newspapers, accounts, some oral histories, or

00:40:34 Speaker 20: other information, museum collections that suggest

00:40:37 Speaker 20: that sites could be present on

00:40:41 Speaker 20: lands within the county. To give

00:40:43 Speaker 20: you a summary, the map on

00:40:46 Speaker 20: the right shows the locations of

00:40:48 Speaker 20: the archaeological sites that we've included

00:40:51 Speaker 20: in our model that. we are

00:40:52 Speaker 20: aware of, as I said, 199

00:40:55 Speaker 20: of those are registered. We've we've

00:40:58 Speaker 20: got sites that came directly from

00:41:01 Speaker 20: the database and the ministry source

00:41:03 Speaker 20: directly. We've done through further investigation

00:41:05 Speaker 20: found an additional 40 registered sites

00:41:06 Speaker 20: there, bringing the total to 199.

00:41:08 Speaker 20: As I said earlier, about half,

00:41:14 Speaker 20: almost half of those have an

00:41:16 Speaker 20: indigenous component to them, and the

00:41:19 Speaker 20: other half relating to sort of

00:41:20 Speaker 20: historic settler sites, the sites that

00:41:24 Speaker 20: we've supplemented, those sites that are

00:41:27 Speaker 20: unregistered in the present provincial database,

00:41:29 Speaker 20: and those may be fine spots

00:41:31 Speaker 20: of single artifacts that archaeologists have

00:41:33 Speaker 20: found over the years, but might

00:41:37 Speaker 20: have not have met the threshold

00:41:40 Speaker 20: for provincial registration. Fine spots, including

00:41:42 Speaker 20: historical references or site leads, areas

00:41:45 Speaker 20: where sites may be known to

00:41:46 Speaker 20: have existed but have not yet

00:41:48 Speaker 20: been confirmed. by an archaeologist. We

00:41:52 Speaker 20: also, as part of this compilation

00:41:55 Speaker 20: of this map, verified the site

00:41:57 Speaker 20: locations through comparison with reports and

00:42:00 Speaker 20: make sure that the data was

00:42:04 Speaker 20: highly accurate. The second step

00:42:07 Speaker 20: of building the archaeological model

00:42:10 Speaker 20: was then to map areas of

00:42:13 Speaker 20: archaeological potential. So, where are those

00:42:15 Speaker 20: areas where sites that maybe have

00:42:18 Speaker 20: not yet been found,

00:42:21 Speaker 20: but there is potential for sites

00:42:24 Speaker 20: to exist? that process is

00:42:27 Speaker 20: very much guided by standards and

00:42:31 Speaker 20: guidelines that are established by the

00:42:34 Speaker 20: Ministry of Citizenship and Multiculturalism, who

00:42:36 Speaker 20: provide some baseline criteria for predicting

00:42:38 Speaker 20: where archaeological sites might exist and

00:42:40 Speaker 20: evaluating, evaluating or identifying archaeological potential.

00:42:42 Speaker 20: Some of the example criteria that

00:42:44 Speaker 20: are used to signal archaeological potential

00:42:47 Speaker 20: include the presence of watercourses, wetlands,

00:42:50 Speaker 20: glacial shorelines, historic settlement features like

00:42:53 Speaker 20: churches or mapped buildings, transportation routes

00:42:54 Speaker 20: like early roadways or trails, portages,

00:42:56 Speaker 20: and resource areas. And we know

00:43:00 Speaker 20: for we know that Grey County

00:43:02 Speaker 20: has one of the primary sources

00:43:03 Speaker 20: for Indigenous toolstone in all of

00:43:06 Speaker 20: the province, used throughout the Great

00:43:08 Speaker 20: Lakes, and it's a very important

00:43:10 Speaker 20: part of that Indigenous. history in

00:43:16 Speaker 20: Gray County. So to prepare a

00:43:18 Speaker 20: map of archaeological potential, basically we

00:43:21 Speaker 20: and John have spent a lot

00:43:23 Speaker 20: of time doing this, identifying the

00:43:25 Speaker 20: various physical features, historic features from

00:43:27 Speaker 20: historic maps and so on, put

00:43:30 Speaker 20: those in a into a GIS

00:43:33 Speaker 20: map and a database, and from

00:43:35 Speaker 20: those features we establish a distance

00:43:39 Speaker 20: buffer around those features

00:43:43 Speaker 20: and create an area of archaeological

00:43:46 Speaker 20: potential. Within the model, we've created

00:43:49 Speaker 20: two key layers of archaeological potential.

00:43:52 Speaker 20: One of those is an indigenous

00:43:56 Speaker 20: archaeological potential layer. The other is

00:43:59 Speaker 20: a historic or a municipal settlement

00:44:02 Speaker 20: period or settlement area map of

00:44:06 Speaker 20: potential. We map these separately because

00:44:09 Speaker 20: they are very much tied to

00:44:11 Speaker 20: traditional land uses, different systems of

00:44:13 Speaker 20: land management, resource resource utilization, where

00:44:16 Speaker 20: indigenous. archaeological potential is very much

00:44:18 Speaker 20: tied to traditional knowledge and land

00:44:20 Speaker 20: use, oriented around seasonal cycles, hunting,

00:44:24 Speaker 20: fishing, the gathering of traditional resources

00:44:26 Speaker 20: like medicines and edible plants, very

00:44:28 Speaker 20: much heavily heavily centreed on water.

00:44:31 Speaker 20: Water is life, of course, to

00:44:37 Speaker 20: indigenous communities. The historic or municipal

00:44:41 Speaker 20: settlement era potential is really much

00:44:44 Speaker 20: geared to or or based on

00:44:47 Speaker 20: a colonial land-based management system, so

00:44:48 Speaker 20: we look at settlement lots and

00:44:51 Speaker 20: early buildings and industries. It's heavily

00:44:53 Speaker 20: centreed on transportation routes because those

00:44:55 Speaker 20: are are what encouraged settlement to

00:44:58 Speaker 20: occur in the first place. And

00:45:00 Speaker 20: of course, we look at the

00:45:03 Speaker 20: registered sites relating to both indigenous

00:45:05 Speaker 20: and historic settlement when we develop

00:45:07 Speaker 20: those mapping layers. The third step

00:45:10 Speaker 20: of building the archaeological potential map

00:45:12 Speaker 20: is to also map all of

00:45:15 Speaker 20: those areas that's been previously studied.

00:45:17 Speaker 20: One of the challenges to know

00:45:20 Speaker 20: where and when an archaeological assessment

00:45:21 Speaker 20: has been taken place has taken

00:45:24 Speaker 20: place in the past, and also

00:45:27 Speaker 20: what its status is. So, archaeological

00:45:29 Speaker 20: assessments are done in various stages,

00:45:32 Speaker 20: and sometimes there's only a background

00:45:36 Speaker 20: study that's done. Sometimes there's an

00:45:39 Speaker 20: intensive survey. Sometimes lands are cleared

00:45:41 Speaker 20: of archaeological concern, and sometimes there's

00:45:43 Speaker 20: still some lingering interest. Maybe some

00:45:47 Speaker 20: sites have been registered and not

00:45:48 Speaker 20: yet fully mitigated. So, for a

00:45:51 Speaker 20: planner to evaluate and know the

00:45:52 Speaker 20: status of archaeological interests on a

00:45:56 Speaker 20: particular property is critical, and that

00:46:00 Speaker 20: information is hard to collect in

00:46:04 Speaker 20: the current system without sort of

00:46:07 Speaker 20: comprehensive mapping of these areas of

00:46:08 Speaker 20: previous assessment. and backup data that

00:46:10 Speaker 20: indicate what the particular status of

00:46:13 Speaker 20: archaeological interests on a specific land

00:46:14 Speaker 20: parcel are. So, in terms of

00:46:17 Speaker 20: that, we've created a map of

00:46:20 Speaker 20: all the archaeological assessments and studies

00:46:21 Speaker 20: that we were able to identify.

00:46:24 Speaker 20: We did identify 567 in Gray

00:46:26 Speaker 20: County. We were able to obtain

00:46:29 Speaker 20: 551 of those reports. We could

00:46:33 Speaker 20: not. obtain sixteen. Most of those

00:46:35 Speaker 20: are very old, and nobody seems

00:46:38 Speaker 20: to be able to find

00:46:41 Speaker 20: them anymore. The reports, many of

00:46:44 Speaker 20: them, are stored in a provincial

00:46:46 Speaker 20: database managed by that ministry. Again,

00:46:49 Speaker 20: but they can often get lost.

00:46:52 Speaker 20: Some of the old records are

00:46:54 Speaker 20: particularly hard to find. Tracking the

00:46:57 Speaker 20: status can also be challenging with

00:47:00 Speaker 20: changes in the ministry administration as

00:47:02 Speaker 20: well. We note that close to

00:47:04 Speaker 20: half of those. Almost a half

00:47:06 Speaker 20: of those reports were completed prior

00:47:09 Speaker 20: to the contemporary standards and guidelines

00:47:12 Speaker 20: for consultant archaeologists, which were passed

00:47:13 Speaker 20: in 2011. And those are both

00:47:19 Speaker 20: the best practice and regulatory standards

00:47:22 Speaker 20: that that are required to be

00:47:25 Speaker 20: met for archaeological interests to be

00:47:26 Speaker 20: considered in the province. So

00:47:28 Speaker 20: we have tagged all of those

00:47:30 Speaker 20: reports, noting that some of those

00:47:32 Speaker 20: older reports done prior to the

00:47:34 Speaker 20: contemporary Courts done prior to the

00:47:39 Speaker 20: contemporary standards may need a second

00:47:41 Speaker 20: look. May need some engagement with

00:47:42 Speaker 20: indigenous communities. May need some further

00:47:46 Speaker 20: clarification before it can be determined

00:47:50 Speaker 20: that lands are clear of archaeological

00:47:55 Speaker 20: concern. Finally, the last step, kind

00:47:57 Speaker 20: of in in, are building the

00:47:58 Speaker 20: archaeological map, is to map and

00:48:00 Speaker 20: remove areas where there is no

00:48:03 Speaker 20: further archaeological interest, either because they've

00:48:06 Speaker 20: been cleared by previous studies or

00:48:07 Speaker 20: where. there's deep land impacts that

00:48:09 Speaker 20: have removed the possibility of archaeological

00:48:12 Speaker 20: resources to be present, and the

00:48:15 Speaker 20: map on the right again shows

00:48:18 Speaker 20: areas that we have mapped that

00:48:22 Speaker 20: no longer have integrity or no

00:48:24 Speaker 20: longer have archaeological interest because they

00:48:27 Speaker 20: have been falsely studied. So when

00:48:30 Speaker 20: we developed this layer, again

00:48:32 Speaker 20: we looked at those all of

00:48:35 Speaker 20: those previous studies. All of those

00:48:37 Speaker 20: previous assessments, and we've been able

00:48:41 Speaker 20: to tag where archaeological concerns have

00:48:43 Speaker 20: been fully addressed. That would mean

00:48:46 Speaker 20: that those areas could then be

00:48:48 Speaker 20: removed from the archaeological potential layer

00:48:50 Speaker 20: and that planning tool to not

00:48:53 Speaker 20: require an archaeological assessment again. We've

00:48:55 Speaker 20: also done an evaluation, a high-level

00:48:56 Speaker 20: evaluation of integrity that's been focused

00:48:59 Speaker 20: on some key areas in the

00:49:00 Speaker 20: county to evaluate or identify. areas

00:49:03 Speaker 20: where there is no longer potential

00:49:07 Speaker 20: for finding archaeological resources intact. So

00:49:09 Speaker 20: those areas that have been very

00:49:12 Speaker 20: deeply and very extensively disturbed. Providing

00:49:15 Speaker 20: a bit of an example here

00:49:17 Speaker 20: and more discussion about how we've

00:49:23 Speaker 20: evaluated integrity. It's not an easy

00:49:26 Speaker 20: process to do based on a

00:49:30 Speaker 20: desk a desktop review only,

00:49:33 Speaker 20: without going out to a site

00:49:35 Speaker 20: and spending a lot of time

00:49:38 Speaker 20: researching the prior land. use on

00:49:39 Speaker 20: a property, but we are still

00:49:42 Speaker 20: able to do, I think, a

00:49:43 Speaker 20: good high-level evaluation in various areas

00:49:47 Speaker 20: through careful analysis of aerial imagery.

00:49:49 Speaker 20: We look at contemporary conditions. We

00:49:53 Speaker 20: look at historical aerial imagery that

00:49:56 Speaker 20: demonstrates and can demonstrate the degree

00:49:57 Speaker 20: of prior extensive disturbance. We targeted

00:49:59 Speaker 20: in this case some obvious areas.

00:50:01 Speaker 20: where, for example, aggregate extraction has

00:50:04 Speaker 20: happened, some major subdivision developments that

00:50:06 Speaker 20: have involved, you know, extents of

00:50:09 Speaker 20: land clearing and disturbance. We've looked

00:50:10 Speaker 20: at a lot of the urban

00:50:12 Speaker 20: lands outside of the historic settlement

00:50:15 Speaker 20: areas where there there might be

00:50:16 Speaker 20: some interest in historic archaeological resources.

00:50:18 Speaker 20: So we were able to remove

00:50:20 Speaker 20: a significant number of of land

00:50:26 Speaker 20: parcels from the archaeological potential model

00:50:28 Speaker 20: in that way. The map on

00:50:30 Speaker 20: the left there is just an

00:50:32 Speaker 20: example of areas that have been

00:50:34 Speaker 20: removed of archaeological potential. Those areas

00:50:37 Speaker 20: in orange there have been removed

00:50:38 Speaker 20: because they were previously assessed and

00:50:40 Speaker 20: all the archaeological concerns have been

00:50:42 Speaker 20: addressed in those parcels. The area

00:50:44 Speaker 20: that's in the green has been

00:50:46 Speaker 20: removed because we were able to

00:50:49 Speaker 20: determine through the aerial imagery that

00:50:52 Speaker 20: those areas have been very

00:50:55 Speaker 20: extensively disturbed and there's no further

00:50:58 Speaker 20: archaeological. concern there. So, with all

00:51:00 Speaker 20: those steps taken and those mapping

00:51:02 Speaker 20: layers developed, we are then able

00:51:05 Speaker 20: to kind of compile them

00:51:07 Speaker 20: together to create that composite

00:51:09 Speaker 20: archaeological potential model or map that

00:51:12 Speaker 20: can be used in a planning

00:51:13 Speaker 20: context. So, this slide is just

00:51:16 Speaker 20: giving a general summary of what

00:51:18 Speaker 20: those layers are and how we've

00:51:21 Speaker 20: combined them. So, we create a

00:51:23 Speaker 20: map of indigenous archaeological potential, as

00:51:26 Speaker 20: I said. combine that with

00:51:29 Speaker 20: a layer denoting the historic archaeological

00:51:31 Speaker 20: potential. Both of those layers add

00:51:32 Speaker 20: potential to the mapping layer, and

00:51:34 Speaker 20: then we remove from those the

00:51:36 Speaker 20: integrity—the places where there's no longer

00:51:38 Speaker 20: integrity, where archaeological assessments have

00:51:40 Speaker 20: been undertaken and removed archaeological concern—and

00:51:46 Speaker 20: then we've also then removed areas

00:51:47 Speaker 20: that are outside of the county

00:51:49 Speaker 20: jurisdiction. So that would be all

00:51:50 Speaker 20: of those federal lands and provincial

00:51:52 Speaker 20: lands. for which the county does

00:51:53 Speaker 20: not make any planning decisions for.

00:51:56 Speaker 20: The final outcome would be that

00:52:00 Speaker 20: composite archaeological potential layer, and that's

00:52:03 Speaker 20: the layer that would be used

00:52:06 Speaker 20: by planning staff when determining

00:52:08 Speaker 20: whether or not an archaeological assessment

00:52:11 Speaker 20: will be required as part of

00:52:14 Speaker 20: the approval of a planning application

00:52:18 Speaker 20: or doing during municipal infrastructure and

00:52:21 Speaker 20: development projects. So, I want to

00:52:23 Speaker 20: talk a little bit more. to

00:52:26 Speaker 20: about that planning tool, give you

00:52:29 Speaker 20: an idea of what it looks

00:52:31 Speaker 20: like a little bit more close

00:52:32 Speaker 20: up, and kind of give some

00:52:38 Speaker 20: kind of analysis and explanation about

00:52:41 Speaker 20: its effectiveness and what we've arrived

00:52:43 Speaker 20: at. So the composite map, as

00:52:47 Speaker 20: you see here in high level,

00:52:49 Speaker 20: indicates where archaeological assessment should happen

00:52:52 Speaker 20: to fulfil provincial those provincial requirements

00:52:56 Speaker 20: to manage, identify, conserve archaeological resources.

00:52:59 Speaker 20: Serve archaeological resources. We have tested

00:53:01 Speaker 20: the effectiveness of that model, and

00:53:02 Speaker 20: we've done that by comparison comparing

00:53:05 Speaker 20: the areas of archaeological potential mapped

00:53:08 Speaker 20: in this model to the registered

00:53:11 Speaker 20: and known archaeological sites that sample

00:53:14 Speaker 20: we talked about earlier in the

00:53:17 Speaker 20: presentation. When we do that, this

00:53:20 Speaker 20: particular model that we've developed it

00:53:25 Speaker 20: captures ninety two of the ninety

00:53:26 Speaker 20: six indigenous. archaeological sites and find

00:53:30 Speaker 20: spots that we've identified. So it

00:53:32 Speaker 20: captures ninety-six percent of those. That's

00:53:33 Speaker 20: an excellent capture for this type

00:53:35 Speaker 20: of modelling. For the historic era

00:53:37 Speaker 20: sites, it captures ninety percent of

00:53:40 Speaker 20: those sites, which again is a

00:53:41 Speaker 20: very high capture. And when combined,

00:53:43 Speaker 20: the model captures ninety-three percent of

00:53:46 Speaker 20: the total archaeological sites in our

00:53:47 Speaker 20: sample that is available to. us.

00:53:50 Speaker 20: In total, the composite archaeological map

00:53:52 Speaker 20: captures seventy-two percent of the county

00:53:54 Speaker 20: landmass, which, again, in comparison to

00:53:57 Speaker 20: other AMPs, is a is a

00:53:58 Speaker 20: pretty reasonable target. Wanting to also

00:54:01 Speaker 20: qualify, I mean, it can often

00:54:04 Speaker 20: seem like this is a very

00:54:05 Speaker 20: dense map, and there's a lot,

00:54:07 Speaker 20: high percentage of of area of

00:54:10 Speaker 20: archaeological potential in the county. But

00:54:12 Speaker 20: wanted to speak to how it

00:54:15 Speaker 20: actually. kind of gets triggered

00:54:18 Speaker 20: and used in a planning

00:54:21 Speaker 20: context. So, a large percentage of

00:54:23 Speaker 20: lands with archaeological potential, as shown

00:54:25 Speaker 20: on this map, will likely never

00:54:28 Speaker 20: see development. That that is, they

00:54:29 Speaker 20: are rural farmlands and natural or

00:54:31 Speaker 20: conservation lands that are well away

00:54:33 Speaker 20: from settlement areas. You know, there

00:54:35 Speaker 20: there's very limited likelihood that they

00:54:37 Speaker 20: would ever be developed in a

00:54:40 Speaker 20: way that would require the county

00:54:42 Speaker 20: to trigger an archaeological assessment or

00:54:45 Speaker 20: that a planning. application

00:54:47 Speaker 20: would be submitted. The map is

00:54:50 Speaker 20: really specifically applicable to those circumstances

00:54:51 Speaker 20: and applications where, within a planning

00:54:53 Speaker 20: context, archaeological assessments are triggered. So,

00:54:56 Speaker 20: to give some example on that,

00:55:00 Speaker 20: it would never. These areas of

00:55:02 Speaker 20: archaeological potential would never, for example,

00:55:05 Speaker 20: be zoned on to private lands

00:55:08 Speaker 20: or be applicable to, say, a

00:55:13 Speaker 20: farmer who wants to do some

00:55:14 Speaker 20: landscaping. It would never apply there.

00:55:16 Speaker 20: If that farmer wanted to. build

00:55:18 Speaker 20: a barn and a building

00:55:20 Speaker 20: permit was required, for example, unless

00:55:21 Speaker 20: the Gray County planning context requires

00:55:25 Speaker 20: archaeological assessments for building permits, it

00:55:27 Speaker 20: would it would not trigger an

00:55:29 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment. But in on that

00:55:31 Speaker 20: same land parcel, if a farmer

00:55:34 Speaker 20: wanted to several multiple lots build

00:55:36 Speaker 20: houses or redevelop their property entirely

00:55:38 Speaker 20: as a residential subdivision, then an

00:55:40 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment would be triggered. through

00:55:42 Speaker 20: the use of this planning tool.

00:55:44 Speaker 20: Some more detail just about what

00:55:46 Speaker 20: the planning tool might look like,

00:55:48 Speaker 20: and I—it's hard to show kind

00:55:50 Speaker 20: of the different representations of information

00:55:51 Speaker 20: here. But this is kind of

00:55:54 Speaker 20: a two-dimensional representation of what the

00:55:56 Speaker 20: planning layer would look like. Noting

00:55:58 Speaker 20: that behind this, for any planner,

00:55:59 Speaker 20: would be more details about what

00:56:03 Speaker 20: the features of archaeological potential are.

00:56:05 Speaker 20: If there's, say, a registered site,

00:56:07 Speaker 20: what that site is. There's a

00:56:10 Speaker 20: lot of information that would be

00:56:14 Speaker 20: in the in the data layer

00:56:17 Speaker 20: that would allow a planner to

00:56:20 Speaker 20: have much more information than just

00:56:24 Speaker 20: see this map. So the model

00:56:26 Speaker 20: itself is not just a map;

00:56:29 Speaker 20: it is also the data that

00:56:32 Speaker 20: goes with it that informs it.

00:56:34 Speaker 20: So the planning tool itself is

00:56:35 Speaker 20: both the map and data layers

00:56:38 Speaker 20: that are consulted when a planning

00:56:40 Speaker 20: application is received or municipal project

00:56:43 Speaker 20: is planned. If the proposal includes

00:56:46 Speaker 20: an area of archaeological potential, an

00:56:48 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment should be planned or

00:56:50 Speaker 20: triggered. The underlying data also alerts

00:56:53 Speaker 20: planners to the presence of archaeological

00:56:55 Speaker 20: sites immediately, to pass along to

00:56:59 Speaker 20: the proponent or to whoever is

00:57:01 Speaker 20: is coordinating a project to assist

00:57:03 Speaker 20: in planning. So it really allows

00:57:05 Speaker 20: very early planning in terms of

00:57:08 Speaker 20: you know. what is going to

00:57:10 Speaker 20: happen on a property and

00:57:12 Speaker 20: gives a little bit additional planning

00:57:18 Speaker 20: guidance even at a pre consultation

00:57:20 Speaker 20: stage to a proponent or planning

00:57:23 Speaker 20: for a municipal project for example.

00:57:25 Speaker 20: So the layer, as you can

00:57:31 Speaker 20: see in the image on the

00:57:33 Speaker 20: right, shows some features of archaeological

00:57:34 Speaker 20: potential. There, there's some historic buildings

00:57:36 Speaker 20: and roadways, water courses, a registered

00:57:39 Speaker 20: archaeological site. All of that green

00:57:43 Speaker 20: is buffering a. Green is buffering

00:57:46 Speaker 20: around those features of archaeological potential.

00:57:51 Speaker 20: Any project that would or planning

00:57:52 Speaker 20: application that would occur within or

00:57:55 Speaker 20: or just you know clip any

00:57:57 Speaker 20: portion of archaeological potential would require

00:58:00 Speaker 20: an archaeological assessment, as also informed

00:58:02 Speaker 20: by the planning and implementation process.

00:58:04 Speaker 20: And any area that fell outside

00:58:06 Speaker 20: of that green space would not

00:58:08 Speaker 20: require an archaeological assessment. So, in

00:58:11 Speaker 20: terms of our next steps from

00:58:12 Speaker 20: the potential model, so where we

00:58:14 Speaker 20: are at, we have developed this.

00:58:17 Speaker 20: We are pretty close to finalizing

00:58:20 Speaker 20: it. The model and its data

00:58:22 Speaker 20: layers are currently being reviewed by

00:58:26 Speaker 20: indigenous communities and stakeholders, and we

00:58:27 Speaker 20: are just kind of wrapping up,

00:58:30 Speaker 20: receiving feedback on that, and we'll

00:58:33 Speaker 20: be kind of completing that phase

00:58:35 Speaker 20: of. the project very shortly. We

00:58:38 Speaker 20: will also TMHC will be making

00:58:43 Speaker 20: recommendations for a process and a

00:58:47 Speaker 20: time period for updating the data

00:58:49 Speaker 20: that's within the model and for

00:58:51 Speaker 20: keeping the information current. And it's

00:58:53 Speaker 20: really important that the model and

00:58:56 Speaker 20: the mapping layer is considered to

00:58:58 Speaker 20: be a dynamic tool. There are

00:59:00 Speaker 20: archaeological sites registered every day. There

00:59:02 Speaker 20: are archaeological assessments and new planning

00:59:04 Speaker 20: applications coming in constantly, and the

00:59:06 Speaker 20: data is the. really critical piece

00:59:09 Speaker 20: here in in managing the

00:59:13 Speaker 20: county's risk. So it's really

00:59:15 Speaker 20: important that that we kind of

00:59:19 Speaker 20: position the model and the

00:59:21 Speaker 20: AMP in that very dynamic way.

00:59:24 Speaker 20: Aligned with the completion of the

00:59:26 Speaker 20: archaeological potential layer, that planning layer,

00:59:27 Speaker 20: the potential model is the development

00:59:29 Speaker 20: of the policy planning and implementation

00:59:31 Speaker 20: framework that is currently under the

00:59:33 Speaker 20: county's. Under the county scope, that

00:59:36 Speaker 20: framework will establish a process for

00:59:38 Speaker 20: how that map is going to

00:59:40 Speaker 20: be used within the planning context.

00:59:43 Speaker 20: What types of projects and planning

00:59:45 Speaker 20: application it is used for? For

00:59:48 Speaker 20: example, just for plans of subdivision,

00:59:49 Speaker 20: rezoning, severances, other applications. When indigenous

00:59:52 Speaker 20: and descendant community engagement is required,

00:59:56 Speaker 20: what and how requirements for archaeological

00:59:58 Speaker 20: assessment are communicated back to proponents.

01:00:01 Speaker 20: It will also set out

01:00:04 Speaker 20: a plan for training

01:00:06 Speaker 20: staff on the use of

01:00:09 Speaker 20: the model and understanding the data

01:00:11 Speaker 20: layers and what's behind that. It

01:00:13 Speaker 20: will also help establish a process

01:00:15 Speaker 20: for addressing inadvertent discoveries. We we

01:00:19 Speaker 20: hear about these in the news

01:00:21 Speaker 20: all the time, and and helping

01:00:22 Speaker 20: the county manage those and and

01:00:27 Speaker 20: helping components manage those as well.

01:00:29 Speaker 20: We'll also establish a process for

01:00:32 Speaker 20: maintaining the database of sites and

01:00:34 Speaker 20: reports, as I mentioned, for incorporating

01:00:35 Speaker 20: new finds. and new information, some

01:00:37 Speaker 20: of the benefits to having an

01:00:41 Speaker 20: A.m.P. really is to increase the

01:00:42 Speaker 20: efficiency, consistency, and predictability of the

01:00:44 Speaker 20: archaeological process, or identifying archaeological concerns

01:00:48 Speaker 20: within the planning process. The current

01:00:50 Speaker 20: process right now can be

01:00:52 Speaker 20: very subjective. It's very

01:00:55 Speaker 20: ad hoc. There's a lot of

01:00:57 Speaker 20: uncertainty in the in the in

01:01:01 Speaker 20: the process about decision making. when,

01:01:04 Speaker 20: why, and how. Who should we

01:01:05 Speaker 20: contact? The process will be established

01:01:08 Speaker 20: to keep information current and inaccurate,

01:01:10 Speaker 20: which I said is very important.

01:01:11 Speaker 20: Ultimately, though, the biggest benefit is

01:01:13 Speaker 20: that it will help reduce risks

01:01:15 Speaker 20: to the county. It will ensure

01:01:18 Speaker 20: the requirements and responsibilities are met,

01:01:19 Speaker 20: as they may not have been

01:01:22 Speaker 20: met in the most

01:01:24 Speaker 20: fulsome way in the past. It

01:01:26 Speaker 20: will. It's important to acknowledge. that

01:01:28 Speaker 20: these requirements for addressing archaeological interests

01:01:30 Speaker 20: and conserving archaeological resources exist, whether

01:01:32 Speaker 20: or not an AMP is in

01:01:34 Speaker 20: place. The AMP can certainly help

01:01:36 Speaker 20: reduce delays and uncertainty to, on

01:01:38 Speaker 20: behalf of the proponents, but also

01:01:41 Speaker 20: for municipal projects. If, if the

01:01:44 Speaker 20: expectations are set out and they

01:01:48 Speaker 20: are very clear from the beginning,

01:01:49 Speaker 20: I think it will help all

01:01:51 Speaker 20: parties move forward in a good

01:01:55 Speaker 20: way. An AMP can also reduce

01:01:59 Speaker 20: the number and likelihood of unanticipated

01:02:00 Speaker 20: finds and work stoppages where archaeological

01:02:03 Speaker 20: assessment or Indigenous engagement was not

01:02:09 Speaker 20: done in advance. And there are

01:02:10 Speaker 20: several examples within Gray County where

01:02:12 Speaker 20: we're witnessing both on the archaeological

01:02:13 Speaker 20: side and county side where there

01:02:15 Speaker 20: have been situations where not everyone

01:02:16 Speaker 20: was on the same page, and

01:02:20 Speaker 20: it's resulted in significant sites being

01:02:22 Speaker 21: found and a lot of additional

01:02:25 Speaker 21: costs and delay in that respect.

01:02:27 Speaker 21: So that's the end of kind

01:02:30 Speaker 21: of our formal presentation today, and

01:02:31 Speaker 21: we would gladly take questions with

01:02:34 Speaker 21: respect to our piece of the

01:02:35 Speaker 21: archaeological management plan. And I know

01:02:36 Speaker 21: Liz is also present there; can

01:02:38 Speaker 21: can address anything directed to the

01:02:40 Speaker 21: county side as well. Okay, thank

01:02:42 Speaker 21: you very much for those details.

01:02:44 Speaker 21: So with that, then we'll put

01:02:47 Speaker 21: it out to council members if

01:02:48 Speaker 21: they committee. Council members, if the

01:02:50 Speaker 21: committee, the whole members, if they

01:02:53 Speaker 21: have questions, we'll begin with Councillor

01:02:54 Speaker 21: Nielsen. Thank you very much, Gordon.

01:02:56 Speaker 21: Just a quick question regarding you.

01:02:59 Speaker 21: You've mentioned that the mapping itself

01:03:03 Speaker 21: is dynamic, and as information is

01:03:05 Speaker 21: gathered, the map is going to

01:03:06 Speaker 21: be updated, and you'd be clearing

01:03:08 Speaker 20: more lands. I guess would be

01:03:11 Speaker 20: the best way to put it.

01:03:13 Speaker 20: When it comes to the our

01:03:15 Speaker 20: archaeological studies need to be

01:03:18 Speaker 20: done, the scope of those is

01:03:21 Speaker 20: it on like a like very.

01:03:22 Speaker 20: minute and specific to the work

01:03:25 Speaker 20: that's being done within the land,

01:03:27 Speaker 20: or is it more broad to

01:03:30 Speaker 20: the size of the project of

01:03:35 Speaker 20: the lot itself? So I'm just

01:03:37 Speaker 20: wondering, in terms of when archaeological

01:03:40 Speaker 20: studies are done, how much potential

01:03:41 Speaker 20: I'll I'll use the word clearing

01:03:43 Speaker 20: of the um compositor archaeological potential

01:03:46 Speaker 20: mapping gets done. Just wondering, like

01:03:48 Speaker 20: the size of the scope of

01:03:51 Speaker 20: each study. Sure, it's dependent on

01:03:55 Speaker 20: the particular application. So if a

01:03:56 Speaker 20: planning application comes in and it's

01:03:59 Speaker 20: for a you know a twenty-acre

01:04:02 Speaker 20: residential development, it would typically cover

01:04:03 Speaker 20: and that all of that land

01:04:06 Speaker 20: is going to be impacted by

01:04:08 Speaker 20: the development. Then the standard is

01:04:10 Speaker 20: usually that that entire parcel is

01:04:12 Speaker 20: subject to archaeological excavation or investigation.

01:04:14 Speaker 20: Now, I would qualify that in

01:04:16 Speaker 20: saying you have other types of

01:04:19 Speaker 20: projects, like say municipal parks. projects

01:04:21 Speaker 20: where you might just be doing

01:04:23 Speaker 20: a trail, and in that case,

01:04:26 Speaker 20: the archaeological assessment is often scoped

01:04:29 Speaker 20: or focused specifically on the impacts

01:04:31 Speaker 20: from that project, as opposed to

01:04:35 Speaker 20: the complete legal land parcel. And

01:04:37 Speaker 20: I would also note that there

01:04:42 Speaker 20: are instances where the county can

01:04:45 Speaker 20: make those decisions to scope down

01:04:48 Speaker 20: assessments. So there are a lot

01:04:49 Speaker 20: of examples of, say, cottage developments

01:04:53 Speaker 20: where you might have, you know,

01:04:56 Speaker 20: a. small impact from a footprint

01:05:01 Speaker 20: of a new cottage and the

01:05:03 Speaker 20: driveway and any infrastructure going there,

01:05:05 Speaker 20: but you might have another, you

01:05:07 Speaker 20: know, twenty acres of woodland or

01:05:11 Speaker 20: natural areas in behind that are

01:05:12 Speaker 20: not being touched. But the planning,

01:05:14 Speaker 20: you know, application permits certain land

01:05:16 Speaker 22: uses to take place. So there's

01:05:19 Speaker 22: ways that that can be scoped

01:05:20 Speaker 22: down by the municipality, and but

01:05:22 Speaker 22: just ensuring that there's other kinds

01:05:24 Speaker 22: of covenants or language and review

01:05:26 Speaker 22: of any additional impacts on those

01:05:28 Speaker 22: areas that are not examined archaeologically.

01:05:29 Speaker 22: So there's there's a lot of

01:05:32 Speaker 22: power within the the county to

01:05:33 Speaker 22: establish those rules and scope of

01:05:37 Speaker 22: those assessments for sure. Okay, thank

01:05:38 Speaker 22: you. I'll look around the room

01:05:41 Speaker 22: and we'll go to Councillor McQueen.

01:05:43 Speaker 22: Thank you. Mr. Ward or Madam

01:05:45 Speaker 22: Warden, and to the presenter. I'm

01:05:47 Speaker 22: not sure where this is going

01:05:48 Speaker 22: to end up because I look

01:05:49 Speaker 22: at the one map that's a

01:05:54 Speaker 22: lot of blue and gray county.

01:05:55 Speaker 22: I know with other layers that

01:05:58 Speaker 22: we have seen in the past,

01:05:59 Speaker 22: we a lot of times we

01:06:00 Speaker 22: have checklists that sometimes identify if

01:06:01 Speaker 22: an area needs further scope or

01:06:03 Speaker 22: not. Concerns me if every zoning

01:06:04 Speaker 22: or every severance or every building

01:06:08 Speaker 22: a permit or every barn built

01:06:10 Speaker 22: has to have an arc. Built

01:06:12 Speaker 22: has to have an archaeological study.

01:06:16 Speaker 22: I think we're going to hear

01:06:17 Speaker 22: from that as a county counselor

01:06:18 Speaker 22: as well. Certainly, the potential I

01:06:19 Speaker 22: can see the mapping, and if

01:06:21 Speaker 22: there's areas that show a potential,

01:06:23 Speaker 22: you know, my father when he

01:06:24 Speaker 22: was a kid found an arrowhead.

01:06:26 Speaker 22: You could have arrowheads anywhere across

01:06:28 Speaker 22: this county. I couldn't find one,

01:06:30 Speaker 22: so I had to buy one.

01:06:32 Speaker 22: They're they're there. There's lots of

01:06:34 Speaker 22: them around. So my point is,

01:06:35 Speaker 22: is to what scope are we

01:06:37 Speaker 22: going to zero this down to

01:06:40 Speaker 22: in the sense of, and I

01:06:43 Speaker 22: think on the more on the

01:06:44 Speaker 22: proactive side, is if people find

01:06:48 Speaker 22: stuff, then you know they they

01:06:50 Speaker 22: may not identify it because they're

01:06:51 Speaker 22: they're worried about the overlayering what

01:06:52 Speaker 22: that could do to their property

01:06:53 Speaker 22: as well. So I think there

01:06:55 Speaker 22: has to be some kind of

01:06:56 Speaker 22: a a balance approach to where

01:06:58 Speaker 22: you move forward on you know

01:06:59 Speaker 22: I know for an example, scenic

01:07:01 Speaker 22: caves and Blue Mountains is a

01:07:02 Speaker 22: very historical site of knowledge knowing

01:07:03 Speaker 22: that said that was a a

01:07:09 Speaker 22: village certain. A village, certainly those

01:07:11 Speaker 22: areas, but it does concern me

01:07:13 Speaker 22: that you know to what level,

01:07:14 Speaker 22: to how far down you're you're

01:07:16 Speaker 22: going to drive this. I understand

01:07:17 Speaker 22: aggregate operators or whole development subdivisions,

01:07:19 Speaker 22: but if Mr. Smith is going

01:07:21 Speaker 22: to build a barn, you know

01:07:22 Speaker 22: I think that has a different

01:07:24 Speaker 22: potential on where this ends up

01:07:30 Speaker 22: going. And then I, you know,

01:07:33 Speaker 22: I always look at a checklist.

01:07:38 Speaker 22: Is something that you know is

01:07:40 Speaker 22: it does it could be

01:07:43 Speaker 22: scoped? Could it be you know

01:07:45 Speaker 22: doesn't meet that requirement? Or if

01:07:48 Speaker 20: it's in an area. Environment, or

01:07:51 Speaker 20: in an area where it has

01:07:52 Speaker 20: been highly identified, I just think

01:07:54 Speaker 20: we have to find there has

01:07:57 Speaker 20: to be a balance as well.

01:08:00 Speaker 20: Understood. Okay. Sorry, I'm. I'm just

01:08:03 Speaker 20: gonna just ask if you just

01:08:06 Speaker 20: want to respond to anything that

01:08:08 Speaker 20: that you can offer as a

01:08:12 Speaker 20: consultant. However, the discussion for this

01:08:14 Speaker 20: item will come when the report

01:08:17 Speaker 20: comes forward. So, just if if

01:08:18 Speaker 20: there's anything that you'd like to

01:08:20 Speaker 20: respond to that will assist in

01:08:22 Speaker 20: the information that Councillor McQueen was

01:08:24 Speaker 20: asking. Sure, I can just say

01:08:26 Speaker 20: that that those those questions are

01:08:28 Speaker 20: are are going to be addressed

01:08:30 Speaker 20: within the the the county's planning

01:08:33 Speaker 20: and implement implementation framework about which

01:08:35 Speaker 20: of those applications actually require an

01:08:38 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment and which do not,

01:08:40 Speaker 20: and those are important decisions because

01:08:42 Speaker 20: again, yes, we do not want

01:08:45 Speaker 20: to impinge on you know private

01:08:48 Speaker 20: landowners. you know, use of their

01:08:51 Speaker 20: land, and so yeah, we do

01:08:53 Speaker 20: identify that. There are lots of

01:08:55 Speaker 20: opportunities to work with identifying, you

01:08:58 Speaker 20: know, where there are also very

01:09:00 Speaker 20: high areas of archaeological sensitivity, where

01:09:01 Speaker 20: there might be an op opportunity

01:09:03 Speaker 20: to, you know, look more closely

01:09:04 Speaker 20: at some of those areas for

01:09:06 Speaker 20: some of those smaller applications, but

01:09:10 Speaker 20: not then require that to be

01:09:14 Speaker 20: the case throughout the entire county.

01:09:17 Speaker 20: So there's lots. of opportunities within

01:09:20 Speaker 20: that planning context. I would also

01:09:22 Speaker 20: note that there is an existing

01:09:24 Speaker 20: checklist that is developed by the

01:09:26 Speaker 20: ministry that many county staff have

01:09:29 Speaker 20: been using already, which is problematic

01:09:31 Speaker 20: for a number of reasons. It

01:09:33 Speaker 20: requires, in order to complete that

01:09:38 Speaker 20: checklist, it does it require evaluation

01:09:40 Speaker 20: of disturbance. The Ministry of Citizenship

01:09:42 Speaker 12: and Multiculturalism is very clear that

01:09:47 Speaker 12: only an archaeological someone with an

01:09:49 Speaker 12: archaeological licence can make that evaluation

01:09:50 Speaker 23: of disturbance. So that's often a

01:09:53 Speaker 23: place where a planner can make

01:09:56 Speaker 23: that decision, and then you find

01:09:58 Speaker 23: something in the field, and then

01:10:02 Speaker 23: it causes a work stoppage and

01:10:05 Speaker 23: has created a situation in the

01:10:07 Speaker 23: past. That checklist also requires engagement

01:10:10 Speaker 23: with Aboriginal—the language in the checklist

01:10:13 Speaker 20: is Aboriginal or Indigenous peoples—and to

01:10:16 Speaker 20: verify that and speak to

01:10:18 Speaker 20: their traditional land use as well.

01:10:20 Speaker 20: So. how does a planner use

01:10:23 Speaker 20: that or make that determination can

01:10:28 Speaker 20: be very challenging from the county

01:10:31 Speaker 20: perspective. So, the AMP is a

01:10:32 Speaker 20: way to help have those conversations

01:10:34 Speaker 20: and make that determination together. Okay,

01:10:36 Speaker 20: thank you very much. And

01:10:39 Speaker 20: I'll look around the room, and

01:10:41 Speaker 20: we'll go to Councillor Greg. Thank

01:10:43 Speaker 20: you, Orden, and through you, a

01:10:46 Speaker 20: question. Your second last slide, Holly,

01:10:47 Speaker 20: and. thanks for the presentation today.

01:10:53 Speaker 20: States reduce risk to the county.

01:10:56 Speaker 20: It's very easy just to always

01:10:58 Speaker 20: insert risk into into the the

01:10:59 Speaker 20: document. Can you please expand and

01:11:00 Speaker 20: define exactly what you are referring

01:11:02 Speaker 20: to in using the word risk?

01:11:05 Speaker 20: Sure. There's a number of of

01:11:06 Speaker 20: case studies where you know planners,

01:11:09 Speaker 20: for example, and other municipalities have

01:11:11 Speaker 20: made determinations based on that checklist

01:11:15 Speaker 20: we talked about, and and made

01:11:16 Speaker 20: those decisions, and then archaeological resources

01:11:19 Speaker 20: or burial sites in particular have

01:11:22 Speaker 20: been identified. A proponent is then

01:11:25 Speaker 20: saying, "Well, why?" And they've

01:11:27 Speaker 20: been identified in areas that have

01:11:30 Speaker 20: been deemed of no archaeological interest,

01:11:34 Speaker 20: and archaeological assessment has not

01:11:37 Speaker 20: been required within that municipal planning

01:11:39 Speaker 20: context. And then the proponent is

01:11:43 Speaker 20: left with you know work stoppage

01:11:45 Speaker 20: in millions of dollars. Work stoppage

01:11:48 Speaker 20: and millions of dollars of costs

01:11:50 Speaker 20: in reparation work in not able

01:11:53 Speaker 20: to necessarily proceed with their development.

01:11:55 Speaker 20: Their schedule is off, and they're

01:11:58 Speaker 20: looking back to the county for

01:12:00 Speaker 20: why? Why didn't you trigger an

01:12:01 Speaker 20: archaeological assessment when it clearly, very

01:12:06 Speaker 24: clearly needed one? So the decision

01:12:10 Speaker 24: making is not easy from a

01:12:11 Speaker 24: planning context. Archaeological interests are very

01:12:13 Speaker 25: hard to identify within a planning

01:12:18 Speaker 25: context, especially with new planners who

01:12:21 Speaker 25: are unfamiliar. with the process, we've

01:12:25 Speaker 25: seen cases where municipalities have been

01:12:28 Speaker 25: required to pay the costs of

01:12:32 Speaker 25: reparation work and archaeological assessment midway

01:12:34 Speaker 25: through construction projects. It causes a

01:12:38 Speaker 25: lot of shutdowns and expense and

01:12:41 Speaker 25: hardship and damages relationships with indigenous

01:12:45 Speaker 25: communities and with proponents as well.

01:12:48 Speaker 25: So that's happening and has happened

01:12:52 Speaker 25: throughout a lot of municipalities. so

01:12:54 Speaker 25: AMPS can can help define that

01:12:55 Speaker 25: process more clearly. Make sure that

01:12:56 Speaker 25: archaeological concerns are addressed early on.

01:12:58 Speaker 25: People aren't finding out about these

01:13:02 Speaker 25: partway through developments. There's not work

01:13:04 Speaker 25: stoppages, and making things these things

01:13:07 Speaker 25: move forward in a in a

01:13:10 Speaker 25: very transparent way. Okay, thank you,

01:13:11 Speaker 25: and we'll go to Councillor Dobrin.

01:13:13 Speaker 25: Thank you, and through you, Warden.

01:13:16 Speaker 25: Good morning, everyone, and thank you

01:13:20 Speaker 25: for. your presentation. The from a

01:13:23 Speaker 25: planning perspective, we already circulate to

01:13:24 Speaker 25: Indigenous agencies with regard to their

01:13:26 Speaker 25: interest. Recently, we have experienced a

01:13:27 Speaker 25: requirement for Phase One archaeological studies

01:13:29 Speaker 25: when an existing development and an

01:13:30 Speaker 25: existing farm is looking to sever

01:13:32 Speaker 25: or surplus farm severance, where development

01:13:33 Speaker 25: and farming. has occurred for decades,

01:13:34 Speaker 25: years, for however long. That phase

01:13:37 Speaker 25: one study will produce a certain

01:13:39 Speaker 25: level. Either decide whether or not

01:13:41 Speaker 25: it has to go to a

01:13:44 Speaker 25: phase two or phase three, or

01:13:46 Speaker 26: it can stop right there. At

01:13:50 Speaker 26: what point will our local planners

01:13:52 Speaker 26: then receive those phase one studies?

01:13:53 Speaker 26: Should they be forwarding them to

01:13:55 Speaker 26: be incorporated into this plan, and

01:13:56 Speaker 26: maybe? it's a question for when

01:13:58 Speaker 26: we get to the staff report.

01:13:59 Speaker 26: I see a nod over there,

01:14:00 Speaker 26: so I wasn't sure the involvement

01:14:02 Speaker 26: and at what level. So thank

01:14:07 Speaker 26: you. Okay, so Ms. Martell, if

01:14:09 Speaker 26: there's anything that you'd like to

01:14:10 Speaker 26: add, just because you won't be

01:14:11 Speaker 26: part of that discussion when we

01:14:12 Speaker 26: get to the county report, but

01:14:15 Speaker 26: the staff will will hold on

01:14:17 Speaker 26: to that discussion when we get

01:14:18 Speaker 26: to the report. Is there anything

01:14:19 Speaker 26: that you wanted to add to

01:14:20 Speaker 26: that? Okay, all right. Thank you.

01:14:22 Speaker 26: So, Councillor Dobrin, hold that thought,

01:14:23 Speaker 26: and we'll we'll bring up County

01:14:25 Speaker 26: Staff later. Okay, and looking around

01:14:28 Speaker 26: the room for any other hands.

01:14:29 Speaker 26: Okay, all right. See no further

01:14:32 Speaker 26: hands. Thank you very much, Ms.

01:14:35 Speaker 26: Martell and Mr. Moody, for attending

01:14:36 Speaker 26: today, and thank you for the

01:14:38 Speaker 26: details that you provided and presented

01:14:41 Speaker 26: to us. And we will go

01:14:43 Speaker 26: into a full some discussion when

01:14:45 Speaker 26: we come to the the staff

01:14:47 Speaker 26: report that comes later in the

01:14:48 Speaker 26: agenda. Thank you. Okay. so with

01:14:51 Speaker 26: that, then, what I'd like to

01:14:53 Speaker 26: do at this point in time,

01:14:55 Speaker 26: looking at the time, is I'd

01:14:56 Speaker 26: like to call out for determination

01:14:58 Speaker 26: of any items requiring separate discussion

01:15:02 Speaker 26: from the consent agenda, and then

01:15:05 Speaker 26: when we get to that point,

01:15:08 Speaker 26: we'll do a break before we

01:15:09 Speaker 26: go into the items that are

01:15:11 Speaker 26: for discussion. So with that, I'll

01:15:13 Speaker 26: put out a call for anything

01:15:15 Speaker 03: that's listed in six. We have

01:16:00 Speaker 01: seven different items that committee, the

01:25:40 Speaker 01: whole member, would like to have

01:25:42 Speaker 01: a separate discussion on. Anything there?

01:25:43 Speaker 03: Not seeing hands to my left.

01:26:02 Speaker 03: or my right or on the

01:26:03 Speaker 27: screen. So with that, then I'll

01:26:07 Speaker 27: just ask that it's recommended that

01:26:09 Speaker 27: the following consent agenda items be

01:26:10 Speaker 27: received, and that staff be authorised

01:26:13 Speaker 27: to take actions necessary to give

01:26:15 Speaker 27: effect to the recommendations in the

01:26:17 Speaker 27: staff reports, and that the

01:26:20 Speaker 27: correspondence be supported or received for

01:26:22 Speaker 27: information as recommended in the consent

01:26:24 Speaker 27: agenda. May I ask for a

01:26:26 Speaker 27: mover? Moved by Councillor Dobrin, seconded

01:26:28 Speaker 27: by Councillor Nielsen. Any discussion? All

01:26:30 Speaker 27: those in favour? and that motion

01:26:31 Speaker 27: is carried. Thank you. So at

01:26:34 Speaker 27: this point in time, we'll call

01:26:36 Speaker 03: a break. If we can come

01:26:49 Speaker 03: back by eleven twenty, we will

01:26:51 Speaker 03: continue with the items on the

01:26:52 Speaker 03: agenda. Thank you. Okay. If I

01:27:12 Speaker 03: could please invite all of our

01:27:13 Speaker 03: committee, the whole members, back to

01:27:15 Speaker 03: the table. Okay, so we are

01:27:17 Speaker 03: going to move on with Section

01:27:19 Speaker 03: Seven of our. See, yep, Section

01:27:20 Speaker 18: Seven of our agenda. These are

01:27:23 Speaker 18: the items that we have flagged

01:27:25 Speaker 18: for discussion. The first one is

01:27:27 Speaker 18: Item Seven A. It's recommended that

01:27:28 Speaker 18: Report PDR CW Forty Eight Twenty

01:27:32 Speaker 18: Five regarding the Archaeological Management Plan

01:27:35 Speaker 18: Status Update be received for information.

01:27:36 Speaker 18: May I ask for a mover

01:27:37 Speaker 18: and a seconder? Moved by Councillor

01:27:38 Speaker 18: Kentner, and seconded by. Councillor Carleton.

01:27:40 Speaker 18: So it's now on the floor

01:27:41 Speaker 18: for discussion. So I will invite

01:27:44 Speaker 18: Ms. Buckton to come up and

01:27:45 Speaker 18: begin the conversation regarding the report.

01:27:47 Speaker 18: Thank you. We just got a

01:27:51 Speaker 18: very brief slide deck. We're just

01:27:53 Speaker 18: getting that that loaded up. Thank

01:27:56 Speaker 18: you very much. Okay, so I

01:27:58 Speaker 18: think I thank you very much.

01:28:00 Speaker 18: I'm really excited to talk to

01:28:02 Speaker 18: County Council today about this project.

01:28:04 Speaker 18: It has been what I've been

01:28:07 Speaker 18: living and breathing for the last

01:28:09 Speaker 18: year, climbing an incredibly steep learning

01:28:11 Speaker 18: curve, and I feel. so much

01:28:14 Speaker 18: better for having done so. Hoping

01:28:17 Speaker 18: to share some of that today,

01:28:18 Speaker 18: we've certainly had an informative presentation

01:28:19 Speaker 18: by Team HCT staff. I think

01:28:23 Speaker 18: they're going to be hanging around

01:28:28 Speaker 18: on the line in case we

01:28:29 Speaker 18: do run into some questions at

01:28:32 Speaker 18: this phase as well, and that

01:28:34 Speaker 18: they might be better suited to

01:28:35 Speaker 18: answer. But I think we'll try

01:28:37 Speaker 18: to kind of parlay from the

01:28:39 Speaker 18: model into where we're headed with

01:28:41 Speaker 18: this project. So, in the report

01:28:43 Speaker 18: that's been provided for you. We've

01:28:44 Speaker 18: we've broken down or articulated this

01:28:47 Speaker 18: project as being comprised of three

01:28:48 Speaker 18: phases. So the first is the

01:28:50 Speaker 18: preparation of the archaeological potential model,

01:28:51 Speaker 18: as teammate she has presented on

01:28:53 Speaker 18: today. The next component of that

01:28:55 Speaker 18: is the archaeological management plan, and

01:28:57 Speaker 18: so that's a report format document

01:28:59 Speaker 18: that will outline the processes and

01:29:01 Speaker 18: procedures. And Holly did speak to

01:29:03 Speaker 18: this a little bit in her

01:29:06 Speaker 18: presentation as well, just outlining the

01:29:09 Speaker 18: types of I guess, triggers that

01:29:11 Speaker 18: would be articulated through the planning

01:29:13 Speaker 18: process, right? So, knowing that we

01:29:17 Speaker 18: have that model, we're identifying those

01:29:18 Speaker 18: areas of potential. What do we

01:29:20 Speaker 18: want to do with that information?

01:29:22 Speaker 18: So, obviously, there's some assessment requirements,

01:29:24 Speaker 18: but what type of applications? To

01:29:26 Speaker 18: what scope? To what scale? And

01:29:27 Speaker 18: what other tools do we want

01:29:28 Speaker 18: to establish to kind of support

01:29:31 Speaker 18: that framework and and the way

01:29:34 Speaker 18: that we deal with that framework