I 1-1. by Paul Dilse, Heritage Planning Consultant with photography by Paul Till. for VanMar Developments Ontario Inc. and the City of Brampton

Transcription

1 I HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE ALEXANDER TRIMBLE FARMHOUSE 1225A QUEEN STREET WEST, BRAMPTON PART OF THE EAST HALF OF LOT 5, CONCESSION 3, WEST OF HURONTARIO STREET CHINGUACOUSY TOWNSHIP by Paul Dilse, Heritage Planning Consultant with photography by Paul Till for VanMar Developments Ontario Inc. and the City of Brampton February 3, 2012 Fig. 1 Front facade of farmhouse

2 I HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF THE ALEXANDER TRIMBLE FARMHOUSE Executive Summary A late nineteenth century brick farmhouse with the municipal address of 1225A Queen Street West and a small mid-twentieth century bungalow at 1225B Queen Street West occupy a 6.86-acre lot. A mid-twentieth century ranch-style bungalow at 1235 Queen Street West stands on its own lot adjacent to the 6.86-acre lot, and both lots combined are proposed for single-detached housing. After detailed historical research and as-found recording, the 6.86-acre lot and its farmhouse were evaluated with reference to Ontario Regulation 9/06. The farmhouse built for Alexander Trimble does not meet provincial criteria for determining cultural heritage value, and the property does not merit the protection that designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act would give to it. Although the farmhouse is not a significant built heritage resource, the property has a history that could be commemorated in the new subdivision. The father and mother of Alexander Trimble the Irish-born James and Sarah Trimble settled here in A conservation strategy is recommended: erection of a cairn incorporating stone from the farmhouse s foundation walls to commemorate James and Sarah Trimble s settlement on the Trimble homestead farm; salvaging and reuse of any other materials or features from the farmhouse as can be accomplished and documented in a report; and, naming a street in the plan of subdivision that commemorates the Trimble name or the cairn and that is acceptable to the Region of Peel. Background In mid-november 2011, Mike Van Hemert of VanMar Developments Ontario Inc. asked heritage planner and historian Paul Dilse to make a preliminary heritage assessment of the property known municipally as 1225A, 1225B and 1235 Queen Street West. The farmhouse at 1225A (Fig. 1) and the small bungalow at 1225B belong to the same 6.86 acre lot while the ranch-style bungalow at 1235 is on a separate lot. Both lots are owned by Joao (John) and Isabel Tavares, who have entered into an agreement with

3 I VanMar Developments to construct single-detached houses on the lands. John and Isabel Tavares live at 1235 Queen Street West, In addition to visiting the site, Paul Dilse conducted initial historical research and reviewed previous heritage evaluations of the property. He and Mike Van Hemert also met Antonietta Minichillo and Bettina Takacs from the City of Brampton at the site to discuss opportunities that may exist for integrating the farmhouse into new development. In mid-december, Mike Van Hemert retained Paul Dilse to make a full assessment. In late December and early in the new year, Paul Dilse searched the land title, transcribed data in the 1891 Census of Canada, viewed historic maps, copied selected pages from the William Perkins Bull collection, and transcribed entries in Chinguacousy Township collector s rolls. The assistance of Diane Allengame and Brian Gilchrist in accessing the Perkins Bull collection and property tax assessment rolls at the Peel Region Archives is acknowledged. On January 18, 2012, Paul Dilse and photographer Paul Till recorded the farmhouse in photographs. In making the assessment, Paul Dilse has followed draft terms of reference for heritage impact assessments in the City of Brampton. Location, Surroundings and Setting Located on the south side of Queen Street West and about midway between Chinguacousy and Creditview Roads, the combined property at 1225 and 1235 Queen Street West has a relatively short street frontage and considerable depth (Fig. 2 and 3 in Appendix A). Two mid-twentieth century houses at 1203 and 1221 Queen Street West stand on their own lots. They completely hide the farmhouse behind them from public view. Between 1221 Queen Street West and 1235 Queen Street West is a gravel lane with broad grassy shoulders. The lane leads southward from Queen Street West to the small bungalow at 1225B Queen Street West and, after turning eastward, to the farmhouse at 1225A Queen Street West. Figures 4 through 7 show the Queen Street West frontage, from the two midtwentieth century houses at 1203 and 1221, across the farm lane s entrance, and to The ranch-style bungalow at 1235, the shed directly behind it, the small bungalow at 1225B, the greenhouse opposite the small bungalow and the shed behind the farmhouse lack any historic interest and are not the subject of further investigation (Fig. 7 to 11).

4 I The farmhouse lane forks near the spot where a magnificent red oak tree has grown (Fig. 12 and 13). One branch of the lane heads to the small bungalow, while the other branch heads to the farmhouse. Near the farmhouse and close to the site s eastern boundary, the lane loops around the farmhouse (Fig. 14). At the northeastern curve of the loop, there are two mature sugar maple trees, one to either side of the lane. As the oak tree marks the fork in the lane, the maples mark the lane s destination in front of the farmhouse. Heritage Status, Current Use and Physical Condition The 6.86-acre farmhouse lot is included in the municipal register of cultural heritage resources. The farmhouse contains two occupied apartments, each with their own ground-floor entrance (the lower apartment is reached through the back wing s door, and the upper apartment is accessed through the front door). The farmhouse appears well-constructed and structurally sound. The basement is dry. The brick walls are in good repair although there is a small amount of spalling under an upper-floor window, some bore holes and a few mortar joints in need of repointing. History According to genealogical information collected by William Perkins Bull in the 1930s, James Trimble ( ) and his wife, Sarah Alexander ( ), came from Northern Ireland in 1821 to the east half of Lot 5, Concession 3, west of Hurontario Street, in Chinguacousy Township. Here, they pioneered and established the homestead farm. In 1852, after James had died, Sarah Trimble was issued the Crown patent for the 100 acre farm. On Tremaine s Map of the County of Peel, Canada West, published in 1859, the farm is labelled as hers (Fig. 15). The map marked a significant building, likely a permanent dwelling and certainly not the original log shanty or house, near the northwest corner of the farm. When she died a decade later without a will, her eleven children living in Chinguacousy Township and other locations in Central Ontario sold the 100-acre farm in Chinguacousy as well as another 100-acre farm in Caledon Township to a relative of the family, Edward Fletcher, in Fletcher, a Chinguacousy Township farmer, immediately sold 50 acres in the west half of the 100-acre farm in Chinguacousy to Alexander Trimble and the 50

5 I acres in the east half to William Trimble (both Alexander and William were Sarah s sons). In 1868, William Trimble, who had moved to Amaranth Township in Dufferin County, sold his 50 acres to his brother, Joseph, a Chinguacousy Township mason. When Joseph Trimble sold the 50 acres to Alexander in 1873, Alexander Trimble had reunited the two halves of the farm. Alexander Trimble sold an acre off the northeast corner of his 100-acre farm to Joseph Pearen, a blacksmith, in The following year, J.H. Pope marked on his map of the southern part of Chinguacousy Township the corner lot s blacksmith shop, dwelling and orchard (Fig. 16). The map also showed Alex Trimble s farm with farmhouse and orchard as well as land he additionally owned in Lot 6. In 1889, Alexander Trimble bought back the one-acre lot from Joseph Pearen, who had left blacksmithing for a new career as an accountant. Very little property tax assessment information exists for the area in Chinguacousy Township where Alexander Trimble s farm was located to make definitive comparisons of data. However, two collector s rolls survive. In 1882, Alexander Trimble s 99-acre farm was valued at $3,800. Eighty-five acres had been cleared. In 1893, the assessed value was nominally higher at $3,900. Although this small difference would not account for the construction of a new permanent house, Census of Canada data for 1891 record Alexander Trimble inhabiting a brick, two-storey house with nine rooms in it. He was 52 years old, born in Ontario to a father and mother who were both born in Ireland. A farmer, he employed one part-time hand. His religious affiliation was Methodist, and he was able to read and write. He lived with his wife, Margaret, who was 43 years of age, and three adult children George, Ann and Benjamin. It may be that the farmhouse that stands today at 1225A Queen Street West was built for Alexander Trimble and his family by 1891 the second permanent house on the homestead farm. The reason for replacement of his mother s permanent house is unknown. Perhaps, a fire destroyed the first permanent house; or maybe, prosperous circumstances permitted demolition of the old house and the erection of a new one. A reproduction of an undated historic photograph showing the farmhouse s front facade was given to the current owner, John Tavares, by a Trimble descendant (whose name Mr. Tavares does not recall). Figure 17 may have been taken when the farmhouse was newly built. The rough shape of the front lawn planks and a stone in the foreground of the picture, a tree stump and lack of shrubbery and herbaceous plants could indicate the photo was shot to document the completion of the house. The man and woman seated on the front porch might have been Alexander and Margaret Trimble, the young people on the balcony and the young man in the buggy may have

6 I been their unmarried adult children, and the young family beside the porch post could have been their married daughter Mary Black s family. Alexander Trimble died in Margaret Trimble died in In 1908, her son, Benjamin Trimble, inherited the farm except for the one acre of land with house on the northeast corner of the farm. It was bequeathed to Mary Alice Black. Benjamin was also given the 50 acres in Lot 6. Son George Trimble received another farm in the fourth concession of Chinguacousy Township. Benjamin Trimble moved to Brampton; and Mary Black s son, Alexander Black, worked the farm. Hannah Trimble, the unmarried sister, also lived at the homestead. Between 1944 and 1948, Benjamin Trimble sold six small lots off the farm, ranging in size from a half-acre to two-and-a-quarter acres. He sold the remaining 90 acres to Douglas Swackhamer, a local farmer, in At the same time, Douglas Swackhamer sold ten of the 90 acres to Homer Swackhamer, a millwright; making the ten-acre lot a rural residence rather than a viable farm. In 1955, Homer Swackhamer severed acres from the ten-acre lot to create a deep house lot along the west boundary. A Brampton storekeeper, Eric Tompkins, and his wife, Helen, bought the acre lot. In 1958, Swackhamer severed two lots along the Queen Street West frontage, in front of the farmhouse, and sold them to Voldemar Tellman, a Brampton builder. When the two houses had been built, the farmhouse was hidden behind them and its front lawn greatly reduced. Fig. 18, a plan of survey registered in 1966 for the eventual widening of Queen Street West, shows the two house lots sold to Voldemar Tellman and the strip of land Homer Swackhamer retained between the Tellman lots and the Tompkins lot. Kathleen Swackhamer, Homer s widow, sold the remaining 6.86 acres to Norma Cowton in She sold the 6.86-acre lot to Daily Contracting Ltd. in 1978, and the year after Daily Contracting Ltd. sold to Risorgi and Zulma Bernardini. In 1986, they sold the 6.86-acre lot to Joao (John) and Isabel Tavares, the current owners. John Tavares later purchased the Tompkins lot that had been severed to consolidate it with the farmhouse lot. By 1998 when Unterman McPhail Cuming Associates photographed the farmhouse for their built heritage and cultural landscape analysis of the Credit Valley Secondary Plan area, the farmhouse had lost its original windows (Fig. 19).

7 I As-found Appearance Fig. 20 to 81 illustrate the existing appearance of the farmhouse. Traces of its late nineteenth century Queen Anne inspiration remain in the asymmetrical composition, complex roofline and variety of decorative wood. The two-storey farmhouse has a rubblestone foundation, with hewn stone exterior facing, and red brick walls, maybe of double brick construction. A front gable, projecting from the hip roof behind it, surmounts the house s front facade. It is oriented northward to the road, and the gable s face is clad in patterned wood shingle. The single-leaf front door under the front porch includes wood panels in a Regency motif and glass panes (replacements). The side porch door and balcony door are of similar design. All windows are synthetic replacements of the original banded sash; and they rest on concrete sills, which were probably installed along with the new windows. Radiating brick voussoirs head windows and doors. The balcony above the front porch and the porch on the east side of the front facade are decorated with some of the surviving turned or carved wood trim (scroll brackets on porch posts, spindle friezes along the cornices and a scrolling edge to the balcony). Boxed-in eaves of synthetic material, an asphalt shingle roof and a tall brick chimney remaining on the west side of the roof characterize the roofline. The walls of a one-storey back wing attached to the main part of the farmhouse are covered in synthetic siding. The main part measures 31 feet across the front facade and 39 feet along the west elevation. The farmhouse s interior has been reconfigured into two apartments. The narrow ground-floor central hall running north to south through the interior plan and the narrow upstairs central hall similarly running north to south still exist although the ground-floor hall is blocked at the front. The farmhouse s front hall is now the entrance to the upstairs apartment while the downstairs apartment is entered through the back wing. The mahogany-coloured woodwork in the upstairs apartment gives it more of a late nineteenth century character than the white-painted woodwork downstairs. Reflecting the same Regency-influenced motif as found on the external doors, fivepanelled doors surrounded by narrow Regency casing lead from the halls. Window surrounds carry the same Regency motif. Baseboard less than a foot high is beaded and moulded. A typically Victorian staircase with turned newel post and balusters climbs from the front hall with winders half way up to the upstairs hall. A pendant lamp in the upstairs hall near the balcony door may date from the Edwardian era. A single painted plaster ceiling medallion survives in a ground-floor room. The attic, reached by a steep straight staircase between the upstairs northwest corner room and the upstairs kitchen, is finished and used as a room in the upstairs apartment. The basement under the main

8 I part of the farmhouse consists of a number of rooms enclosed by parged rubblestone walls while the basement in the back wing is finished as a bedroom. Cultural Heritage Value The farmhouse lot has been evaluated a number of times. The farmhouse was included in the City of Brampton Heritage Resource Inventory after it received a numerical grade of 40. In the hierarchical grading system, a Class A resource would score 70 or more points, Class B would score 40 to 69 points, and Class C would score below 40 points. The borderline score of 40 put the farmhouse in the second class of heritage resource Class B. In 1998, Unterman McPhail Cuming Associates, heritage conservation and planning consultants, identified and evaluated built heritage features and cultural landscapes in the Credit Valley Secondary Plan area on behalf of the City of Brampton. They identified the farmhouse as Built Heritage Feature 27. Following the same evaluative criteria applied for the Heritage Resource Inventory, they downgraded the farmhouse to Class C. In addition to evaluating the relative significance of the built heritage features they had identified, Unterman McPhail Cuming Associates offered a conservation objective for each of three groups of built heritage features. In the first group of top features, they listed those that should be designated under the Ontario Heritage Act and retained and incorporated into development. These top features were either in Class A or Class B. In the second group of less important features, they listed those that may be considered for retention and incorporation into development where circumstances permit. Built Heritage Feature 27 fell into the second group. All these features in the second group were in Class B except for Built Heritage Feature 27 in Class C. In the lowest group were Class C features of insufficient merit for retention but requiring asfound recording and historical documentation prior to demolition. In 2005, Unterman McPhail Associates carried out another evaluation of the farmhouse as part of a comprehensive grading of properties in the Heritage Resource Inventory. This time, the farmhouse scored 48 points, which put it back in Class B. At the bottom of their evaluation worksheet, they defined the general conservation strategy for each of the three classes. For Class A properties, designation under the Ontario Heritage Act would be pursued. Class B properties, which are worthy of preservation, would be considered for designation. Class C properties are simply noteworthy. Recently, staff rated the farmhouse a low priority among the built heritage resources that remain in the City s greenfield area.

9 I For the purpose of the heritage impact assessment, the farmhouse lot is again evaluated but with reference to Ontario Regulation 9/06. The provincial regulation sets out qualitative criteria for determining cultural heritage value. As summarized in the table below, the property does not merit the protection that designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act would give to it. APPLICATION OF CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE Criteria Binary Explanation Determination (Yes/No) 1. Design or physical value i) Is a rare, unique, representative or early example of a style, type, expression, material or construction method No Brampton has a number of very good examples of houses designed in the Queen Anne style. When built, the farmhouse at 1225A Queen Street West was a vernacular expression of the style. The removal of external features that had contributed to the farmhouse s character and interior alterations that have changed the ground floor plan have reduced the farmhouse s original visual appeal. On the exterior, the original banded sash, louvered window shutters, some decorative wood trim and the east elevation chimney have been lost. Inside, the front hall, central groundfloor hall and northwest room layout no longer function as they did in the original layout and decoration.

10 I ii) Displays a high degree of No Several external features that had craftsmanship or artistic merit given the farmhouse a vernacular charm are missing. Internal elements surviving from the late nineteenth century indicate that the interior layout and decoration were unexceptional for the time period. iii) Demonstrates a high degree of technical or scientific achievement 2. Historical or associative value i) Has direct associations with a theme, event, belief, person, activity, organization or institution that is significant to a community No No Not applicable. This is a commonly constructed brick farmhouse from the late nineteenth century. The property is the location of the pioneer farmstead of James and Sarah Trimble who settled here in The farmhouse built for their son, Alexander, in the late nineteenth century is the second permanent farmhouse at the farmstead. What happened to James and Sarah s permanent house is unknown. Alexander and Margaret Trimble s son, Benjamin, lived away from the farm and began severing small lots off the farm. After the Swackhamer family purchased the remaining farmland from Benjamin Trimble in 1948, they continued to sever lots, including directly in front of the farmhouse. In its current state, the farmhouse does not pay tribute to the Trimble family. The farmhouse never was directly associated with pioneers James and Sarah Trimble.

11 I ii) Yields, or has the potential to yield, information that contributes to an understanding of a community or culture iii) Demonstrates or reflects the work or ideas of an architect, artist, builder, designer or theorist who is significant to a community 3. Contextual value i) Is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of an area ii) Is physically, functionally, visually or historically linked to its surroundings No No No No For several decades, the farmhouse has not been seen by the public travelling along Queen Street West as mid-twentieth century houses in front of it block the view. Even if it could be appreciated, the farmhouse has lost several of its features that describe architectural tastes in Chinguacousy Township during the late nineteenth century. The house s builder is unknown. Lot severance off the frontage of the property has compromised the property s rural character. The farmhouse is alone without a barn and array of farm outbuildings. The original visual relationship between its principal facade and the road is gone. iii) Is a landmark No To the public travelling along Queen Street West, the farmhouse hidden behind midtwentieth century ribbon development does not have any visual presence.

12 I Impact of Proposed Plan of Subdivision The proposed draft plan of subdivision for the property, which is a refinement of the plan for Block 5 in the Credit Valley Secondary Plan, is laid out so that new house lots are oriented east or west. The farmhouse, oriented northward, occupies all of Lot 45 and parts of Lots 44 and 46 (Fig. 82). In this scheme, the farmhouse s front facade abuts the side yard, and looks toward the side elevation, of the new house on Lot 44. Even if a large lot were set aside for the farmhouse, its front facade would be turned away from the new street (Street B ), in the opposite direction to the new houses in the subdivision. Alternative Approaches Retention of the farmhouse in situ would be indicated if the farmhouse were significant. If integration into the plan of subdivision were warranted, retaining the farmhouse in its existing location would result in an awkward architectural relationship between the farmhouse facing north and the new houses facing east. A better option would be to relocate the farmhouse on new concrete foundations so that its front facade faced the new street in the plan of subdivision. This approach would also be difficult to justify for the farmhouse in its current state. Although the farmhouse is not a significant built heritage resource under the meaning of the Provincial Policy Statement, the property has a history that could be made known and commemorated in the new subdivision. The Irish-born James and Sarah Trimble, pioneers to Chinguacousy Township, could be remembered in a cairn erected in the boulevard of a subdivision street. A cairn, a Celtic-derived word to describe a monument of piled stones, would be appropriate to the Trimble family s Irish origin. Cairns used to be a popular form of historical interpretation in rural Ontario. One example is the stone cairn constructed in 1945 to commemorate the centennial of St. Luke s Anglican Church in Palermo and honour the memory of the Trafalgar Township pioneers who founded it (Fig. 83). Stone from the farmhouse s foundation walls could be salvaged and incorporated into the cairn. As well, good brick units, doors, door hardware and the lamp in the upstairs hall may have value for salvaging and reuse. Naming a street in the subdivision after the Trimble family would also be appropriate. However, the name, Trimble, is already in use for a Peel Region street. It might be acceptable to name the street on which the cairn is located Trimble Cairn Road, or Cairn Road, for instance. A street name referring to the Trimble family, the cairn or both would complement the physical commemoration.

13 I Recommended Conservation Strategy It is recommended that the City of Brampton: 1) permit the demolition of the farmhouse subject to the developer of the lands at 1225A, 1225B and 1235 Queen Street West agreeing to provide a design for a cairn that commemorates James and Sarah Trimble s settlement on the Trimble homestead farm and a plan showing the cairn s location in the plan of subdivision; 2) request a report on the salvage and reuse of materials and features from the farmhouse; and, 3) consider naming one of the streets in the plan of subdivision after the Trimble family or the commemorative cairn.

14 Fig. 2 Combined property s location in Brampton as marked in red outline on aerial photograph I Appendix A: Illustrations

15 Fig. 3 Aerial photograph, showing site and adjacent lands I

16 I 1-16 Fig. 4 Mid-twentieth century house at 1203 Fig. 5 Mid-twentieth century house at Fig. 6 Entrance to farm lane, leading to 1225A Fig. 7 Ranch-style bungalow at 1235 Queen Queen Street West 1221 Queen Street West and 1225B Queen Street West Street West 16

17 I Fig. 8 Shed behind ranch-style bungalow at 1235 Queen Street West Fig. 9 Small bungalow at 1225B Queen Street West

18 I Fig. 10 Greenhouse opposite small bungalow at 1225B Queen Street West Fig. 11 Shed behind farmhouse at 1225A Queen Street West

19 I Fig. 12 Fork in lane, one branch heading southward to the small bungalow and the other branch heading eastward to the farmhouse (seen on the left) Fig. 13 Double-trunked oak tree near fork in lane, looking eastward to farmhouse

20 I Fig. 14 Sugar maple trees at northeastern curve in lane s loop around farmhouse Fig. 15 Detail from George R. Tremaine, Tremaine s Map of the County of Peel, Canada West (Toronto: G.R. & G.M. Tremaine, 1859).

21 I Fig. 16 Detail from J.H. Pope, Southern Part of Chinguacousy, Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel, Ont. (Toronto: Walker & Miles, 1877), p. 16.

22 I Fig. 17 Undated photograph of farmhouse s front facade, in possession of John Tavares

23 I Fig. 18 Detail from Arthur De ath, Land Plan being Part of Lot 6, Concession 2, W.H.S., Town of Brampton and Lots 1-7 (incl.), Registered Plan No. 428 and Part of Lot 5, Concession 2, W.H.S., Parts of Lots 5 and 6, Concessions 3 and 4, W.H.S., Township of Chinguacousy, County of Peel, registered as Instrument # VS, 20 Oct. 1966, Peel Land Registry Office.

24 I Fig. 19 Unterman McPhail Cuming Associates, Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape Analysis of Credit Valley Secondary Plan Area, Dec. 1998, n.p. Fig. 20 Front facade

25 I Fig. 21 Front porch and balcony

26 I Fig. 22 Front door with screen door over Fig 23 Front door without screen door

27 I Fig. 24 Regency-influenced wood panel on front door Fig. 25 Window beside front door

28 I Fig. 26 Side porch Fig. 27 Detail of scroll bracket on porch post and spindle frieze along porch cornice

29 I Fig. 28 Side door with screen door over Fig. 29 Side door without screen door Fig. 30 Door hardware on side door

30 I Fig. 31 Corner view, showing east elevation and front facade Fig. 32 East elevation of main part of farmhouse

31 I Fig. 33 Projecting front gable as seen from east Fig. 34 East elevation detail of hewn stone foundation wall, brick water table, brick courses above and concrete window sill

32 I Fig. 35 Ground-floor window on east elevation

33 I Fig. 36 Corner view, showing back wing and rear and east elevations of farmhouse s main part Fig. 37 Corner view, showing front facade and west elevation

34 I Fig. 38 West elevation Fig. 39 Wide ground-floor window on west elevation

35 I Fig. 40 Basement window below wide ground-floor window Fig. 41 Narrow ground-floor window on west elevation

36 I Fig. 42 Foreshortened upstairs window on west elevation Fig. 43 Remaining brick chimney on west elevation

37 I Fig. 44 Corner view, showing east and rear elevations of main part and back wing Fig. 45 One of the basement s rooms under main part

38 I Fig. 46 Bedroom in back wing s basement Fig. 47 Inside front door

39 I Fig. 48 Window beside front door; note Regency-influenced surrounds Fig. 49 Staircase balustrade as seen from front hall

40 I Fig. 50 Staircase, looking up; note winders at turn Fig. 51 Ground-floor hall, looking south

41 I Fig. 52 Detail of baseboard in ground-floor hall Fig. 53 Typical doorway off ground-floor hall; note Regency-influenced casing

42 I Fig. 54 Door hardware on typical ground-floor hall door Fig. 55 Ground-floor living room east of the hall, looking north

43 I Fig. 56 Doorway in ground-floor living room Fig. 57 Regency-influenced window surrounds in ground-floor living room, matching door casing

44 I Fig. 58 Room used as gym in northwest corner of ground floor; note partition added to divide original space into this room and a bedroom Fig. 59 Detail of baseboard in gym

45 I Fig. 60 Ground-floor bedroom, once part of a larger space Fig. 61 Painted wood floor in ground-floor bedroom

46 I Fig. 62 Painted plaster ceiling medallion in ground-floor bedroom Fig. 63 Bathroom in southwest corner of ground floor Fig. 64 Ground-floor kitchen in back wing

47 I Fig. 65 Upstairs hall, looking north toward balcony door Fig. 66 Staircase balustrade in upstairs hall

48 I Fig. 67 Inside face of balcony door Fig. 68 Outside face of balcony door Fig. 69 View from balcony, looking north through treetop

49 I Fig. 70 Pendant lamp in upstairs hall near balcony door Fig. 71 Upstairs hall, looking south; note Regency-influenced door casing

50 I Fig. 72 Hardware on upstairs hall door Fig. 73 Meeting of staircase string and upstairs hall baseboard

51 I Fig. 74 One of two bedrooms east of the upstairs hall Fig. 75 The other bedroom east of the upstairs hall

52 I Fig. 76 Living room in northwest corner of upstairs floor Fig. 77 Baseboard in upstairs living room

53 I Fig. 78 Window in upstairs living room; note Regency-influenced window surrounds Fig. 79 Kitchen in southwest corner of upstairs floor

54 I Fig. 80 Steep straight staircase, leading to the attic Fig. 81 Attic, looking north

55 I Fig. 82 Glen Schnarr & Associates Inc., Draft Plan of Subdivision, VanMar Developments Ontario Inc., Part of Lot 5, Concession 3, W.H.S. (1225 & 1235 Queen Street West), City of Brampton, Regional Municipality of Peel, Jan

56 I Fig. 83 Cairn at St. Luke s Anglican Church in Palermo: front view (with tablet) and back view

57 I Appendix B: All Photographs Taken Thumbnail photographs of all the saved digital images taken for the heritage impact assessment more than those selected for illustration of the text are presented below.

58 I

59 I

60 I

61 I

62 I

63 I

64 I

65 I

66 I

67 I

68 I \

69 I

70 I

71 I

72 I

73 I

74 I

75 I Appendix C: Bibliography Anonymous. Undated historic photograph of the farmhouse s front facade. In possession of John Tavares. Bull, William Perkins. Trimble file. William Perkins Bull Collection, Reel 74, Peel Region Archives. Canada. Census of Canada, Province of Ontario, District No. 106 Peel, S. District b4 Chinguacousy, Schedule No. 1 Nominal Return of the Living. pp , # 116. Chinguacousy, Township of. Collector s Roll for the Township of Chinguacousy for 1882 [South West Quarter]. p. 5. Peel Region Archives Collector s Roll for the Municipality of Chinguacousy for 1893 [South West 1/4]. p. 6. Peel Region Archives. Death, Arthur. Land Plan being Part of Lot 6, Concession 2, W.H.S., Town of Brampton and Lots 1-7 (incl.), Registered Plan No. 428 and Part of Lot 5, Concession 2, W.H.S., Parts of Lots 5 and 6, Concessions 3 and 4, W.H.S., Township of Chinguacousy, County of Peel. Registered as Instrument # VS, 20 Oct. 1966, Peel Land Registry Office. Dilse, Paul. Title Search of 1225A Queen Street West, Brampton, Part of the East Half of Lot 5, Concession 3, W.H.S., Chinguacousy Township, as in Instrument # RO Dec Pope, J.H. Illustrated Historical Atlas of the County of Peel, Ont. Toronto: Walker & Miles, Tremaine, George R. Tremaine s Map of the County of Peel, Canada West. Toronto: G.R. & G.M. Tremaine, Unterman McPhail Cuming Associates. Built Heritage and Cultural Landscape Analysis of Credit Valley Secondary Plan Area. Dec

76 I Appendix D: Author s Qualifications Paul Dilse has specialized in heritage planning and historical study since his graduation from the professional planning school at the University of Waterloo in He has written official plan policies on heritage conservation for the former Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto and for the City of Cambridge (his related official plan background study, in which he delineated the boundaries of prospective heritage conservation districts across the municipality, remained a reference document there for two decades). He has surveyed the entire rural and exurban municipality of the Town of Caledon to compile a comprehensive inventory of built heritage resources located on 1,643 properties. He has assessed the cultural heritage value of two French Canadian Roman Catholic churches in rural Essex County as well as the 190-acre cultural heritage landscape of the David Dunlap Observatory and Park in Richmond Hill, and successfully defended their designation under the Ontario Heritage Act at Conservation Review Board hearings. He has also provided expert witness testimony at the Ontario Municipal Board, successfully defending the designation of the first heritage conservation district in the Town of Markham; and contributing to the positive outcome in favour of retaining a complex of rare garden apartments in the Leaside neighbourhood of Toronto. In addition to the Thornhill-Markham heritage conservation district, he has written heritage conservation district plans for Old Port Credit Village in Mississauga, the MacGregor/Albert neighbourhood in Waterloo and Lower Main Street South in Newmarket. He has also conducted a heritage conservation district study of the George Street and Area neighbourhood in Cobourg. He is, as well, the author of a report on the feasibility of establishing heritage conservation districts in Downtown Brampton. Additionally, he has prepared conservation-based design guidelines for the historic commercial centres of Alliston, Beeton, Tottenham and Picton. Since 2004 when municipalities in Central and Southwestern Ontario started requesting heritage impact assessments from him, he has written 44 such reports, including eight for properties in the City of Brampton. He has written text for commemorative plaques, including several for the Ontario Heritage Trust, and has planned an extensive program to interpret the history of the Freeport Sanatorium at the Grand River Hospital in Kitchener. His major work in 2011, a history of the Legislative Building in Queen s Park and a statement on its cultural heritage value, forms part of an historic structure report commissioned by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. Paul Dilse is qualified as a planner and historian by the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals, of which he is a founding member.