environmental impact study - oakville planning/da-su11003-eis.pdf · environmental impact study 3...

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY WINSTON PARK WEST EMPLOYMENT LANDS Prepared For

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO 14.11208.001

October, 2011

WINSTON PARK WEST EMPLOYMENT LANDS October 2011

Environmental Impact Study

MMM Group Limited i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1

2 Methods ................................................................................................................................... 1

2.1 Vegetation and Vegetation Communities ........................................................................ 1

2.2 Wildlife Survey Approach ................................................................................................ 1

3 Existing Conditions .................................................................................................................. 3

3.1 Vegetation ........................................................................................................................ 3

3.2 Wildlife ............................................................................................................................. 6

3.3 Aquatic ............................................................................................................................. 8

4 Development Constraints ........................................................................................................ 9

4.1 Wetlands .......................................................................................................................... 9

4.2 Forests ........................................................................................................................... 10

4.3 Sensitive Species .......................................................................................................... 10

5 Proposed Development ......................................................................................................... 14

6 Impact Assessment ............................................................................................................... 16

6.1 Development Adjacent to the Easterly Wetland ............................................................ 16

6.2 Alteration of Hydrological Conditions that Support the Wetlands .................................. 17

6.3 Impact to Woodland Habitat and Species ..................................................................... 18

6.4 Impact to Species at Risk .............................................................................................. 18

7 Mitigation ............................................................................................................................... 19

8 Summary and Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 19

9 References ............................................................................................................................ 22

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Existing Natural Environmental Conditions ....................................................................... 4

Figure 2 Development Constraints ................................................................................................ 11

Figure 3 Draft Plan of Subdivision ................................................................................................. 15

Figure 4 Wetland Enhancement .................................................................................................... 21



MMM Group Limited ii

APPENDICES Appendix A. Checklist of Vascular Plants

Appendix B. Avifaunal Observations



1

1 Introduction

Infrastructure Ontario (IO) has retained MMM Group Limited to submit a draft plan of subdivision

application and supporting studies for lands located west of Highway 403, north of Upper Middle Road in

the area referred to as Winston Park West located within the Town of Oakville, Region of Halton (Figure

1), henceforth the Study Area. The land holdings are comprised of three (3) separate landowners, IO,

Tomulka and Sheridan Lanes. The three property owners are working together to facilitate development

of the subject lands. Winston Park West (WPW) has long been recognized as a prime employment land

area that can provide additional employment land to meet the Town of Oakville’s needs.

MMM Group Limited conducted an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) in the Study Area to investigate the

environmental impacts by the proposed development application. This study documents the natural

heritage features within the subject property, highlights any identified sensitive species and areas, and

assesses the potential impact of the proposed works on these natural features.

2 Methods

The EIS builds upon previous work including a detailed inventory of the Hydro corridor and a natural

heritage overview as documented in the draft EIS report (Beacon, 2008). Additional background

information was derived from the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database, Town of Oakville

Official Plan, The Regional Municipality of Halton Official Plan and aerial imagery. Field investigations

included a site visits on April 18th, June 1, 14th, and 29th, 2011 to inventory plant species and map the

existing vegetation communities, conduct breeding bird surveys and anuran surveys. The detailed

methodology for vegetation and wildlife has been described in the following sections.

2.1 Vegetation and Vegetation Communities

Aerial imagery, draft EIS report (Beacon, 2008), and the NHIC database results were referred prior to site

visit. The vegetation communities were classified according to the Ecological Land Classification for

Southern Ontario: First Approximation and its Application (Lee et.al. 1998). Plant species status was

reviewed for provincial S rank based on the NHIC database (NHIC, 2011) of the Ministry of Natural

Resources (MNR); and for the Halton Region (Varga et.al. 2000).

2.2 Wildlife Survey Approach

Observations of wildlife species or habitat usage (such as tracks, scats, trails, dens or other wildlife sign)

were recorded during all field surveys, with specific surveys conducted for breeding birds, and calling

amphibians.



2

2.2.1 Avifauna

An avifaunal inventory and habitat assessment was completed for the study area, including a breeding

bird survey. Avian surveys were completed on June 14 and 29, 2011.

The purpose of the avian surveys was to gather breeding bird data, evaluate natural areas for avian

habitat potential. For breeding bird surveys, random transects were completed throughout vegetation

blocks in the study area by qualified, experienced staff, under appropriate conditions (per Ontario

Breeding Bird Atlas [OBBA] protocols) and the level of breeding bird evidence observed was recorded

following standard criteria established by the OBBA. Results are listed in Appendix B.

2.2.2 Anuran

Anuran surveys were conducted on the subject property on April 18th and June 1st, 2011, and

supplemented by incidental observations recorded during all field visits. This survey was undertaken

during suitable field season timing and under appropriate weather conditions for amphibians.

The methodology for the survey is described below:

Amphibian Calling: Nine (9) stations were established in potential amphibian breeding habitat on the

subject property; locations are shown on Figure 1. Amphibian calling surveys were completed once as

the property contains a limited amount of suitable amphibian habitat and it was determined that additional

surveys were not necessary.

Amphibian calling activity was assessed using a passive three (3) minute auditory survey at each calling

station as specified by the Marsh Monitoring Program (MMP) amphibian monitoring protocol (Bird Studies

Canada, 2008). Observations of species present, call levels and a count of individuals present, where

applicable, were recorded on MMM Amphibian Calling data sheets. MMP protocol uses the following

assessment approach:

Level 1 - individual calls can be counted, with no overlap;

Level 2 - some calls can be counted, some overlap;

Level 3 - calls continuous and overlapping, individuals not distinguishable.

With this protocol surveys typically begin one half hour after sunset on nights with suitable weather

conditions. The survey cycle concludes near midnight. The appropriate timing for the amphibian calling

surveys was confirmed by referencing other local sites with known amphibian populations, liaison with

other researchers and tracking weather information for the site. In accordance with MMP guidelines,

night time air temperatures are ideally greater than 5°C for the first survey, 10°C for the second survey,

and 17°C for the third survey. All amphibian callings surveys met the above motioned conditions.

Station placement protocols recommended in the MMP amphibian survey protocols are designed to

assess areas of potential amphibian breeding habitat within the subject property.



3

2.2.3 General Wildlife Observations

Supplemental wildlife observations were recorded during all field visits. All observations made during the

field surveys were recorded, including sightings of species, as well as evidence of use (e.g. browse,

tracks / trails, scat, burrows, and vocalizations). Wildlife habitat potential was also evaluated during field

surveys.

3 Existing Conditions

The subject property is predominantly active agricultural lands, with a rural residential property fronting

Upper Middle Road East and some natural / semi-natural areas in the south / southeast portions. . There

are two main natural features: a significant woodlot in the northwest corner, and wetland abutting the

southwest property boundary. The features are shown in Figure 2.

3.1 Vegetation

The list of plant species identified at the site is presented in Appendix A.

Community #1 and #5 (CUW1/CUM1-1): Mineral Cultural Thicket Ecosite / Dry-Moist Old Field Meadow

Type

This community is located between an agricultural field and the west edge of the residential area, at the

south edge of the property adjacent to the driveway. This typical early successional community is located

at the southeast edge of the subject property, near Upper Middle Road East. It is bounded by an active

agricultural field to the northeast, rural residential lands to the west and a hydroelectric power corridor.

Tree cover is predominantly limited to a hedgerow dominated by Silver maple (Acer saccharinum), with

associates of Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Red oak (Quercus rubra) and White elm (Ulmus

americana). The understory is dominated by Common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) and Red

raspberry (Rubus idaeus), and also includes occasional Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica),

American Mountain-Ash (Sorbus americana), Staghorn Sumac (Rhus typhina), Low Rose (Rosa

virginiana) and scattered willows (Salix sp.). The ground cover is largely occupied by disturbance tolerant

and early successional species such as Oxeye daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum), Common

burdock (Arctium minus), Teasel (Dipsacus fullonum), Garlic mustard (Alliaria pertiolata), Cow vetch

(Vicia cracca), Dame’s rocket (Hesperis matronalis), Common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), Queen

Ann’s lace (Daucus carota), Mullein (Verbascum thapsus), Sweet white clover (Melilotus alba), Canada

thistle (Cirsium arvense), Bindweed (Convolvus arvensis) and Tall goldenrod (Solidago altissima). Yellow

avens (Geum aleppicum) occasionally present in the ground cover is the only uncommon plant species in

the Halton Region.

Community #2 (MAM2): Mineral Meadow Marsh Ecosite

This community is located along a drainage feature that runs along the eastern boundary of the residence

into the roadside ditch at Upper Middle Road.

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

CUT1/CUM1-1

CUW1/CUT1

FOD2-4

Residential

MAS2-1/MAM2/MAS2-2

CUW1

CUW1

CUT1

MAS2-1/MAS2-2/MAM2

CUM1-1CUW1

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

21

9TH LINE

HIGHWAY 403

BRISTOL CIRCLE

UP

PE

R M

IDD

LE R

OA

D E

AS

T

QU

EE

N E

LIZA

BE

TH

WAY

PLY

MO

UT

H D

RIV

E

Winston Park West Employment LandsExisting Natural Environment Conditions

Title:

Prepared by:

Review: PPScale as Shown

Date: September 2011© 2011 Microsoft Corporation © 2010 NAVTEQ

Figure: 114-11208-001-EC1

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIOClient:

M:\

Job

s\2

011

\14

.11

20

8.0

01

.P0

1 -

OR

C W

inst

on

Pa

rk W

est

, O

akv

ille

\Ma

pp

ing

\mx

d\2

011

09

\Fig

ure

1 -

Exi

stin

g N

atu

ral E

nv

iron

me

nt

Co

nd

itio

ns.

mxd

0 140 28070Meters

Oakville

MississaugaHIGHW

AY 403

8TH LINE

9TH LINE

QU

EE

N E

LIZ

AB

ET

H W

AY

LAIRD ROAD

TRUSCOTT DRIV

E

DU

ND

AS S

TREE

T EA

ST

HIGHWAY 403 WEST

TRAFALGAR RO

AD

RO

YAL

WIN

DS

OR

DR

IVE

CO

RN

WA

LL R

OA

D

BRIS

TOL

CIR

CLE

GROSVENOR STREET

BRO

MSG

RO

VE R

OAD

AR

RO

WH

EA

D R

OA

DB

AYS

HIR

E D

RIV

E

DU

NED

IN R

OAD

BUCKINGHAM

ROAD

BERYL RO

AD

HADWEN ROAD

QU

EE

N E

LIZ

AB

ET

H W

AY

8TH LINE

Key MapNTS

Ü

SUBJECTPROPERTY

Ü

LegendProperty Boundary

!( Anuran Survey Station

Drainage Feature

ELC Units

CUM1-1CUT1CUW1FOD2-4

MAM2MAS2-1MAS2-2

Dry - Moist Old Field Meadow TypeMineral Cultural Thicket EcositeMineral Cultural Woodland EcositeDry - Fresh Oak - Hardwood Deciduous Forest TypeMineral Meadow Marsh EcositeCattail Mineral Shallow Marsh TypeBulrush Mineral Shallow Marsh Type



5

It is dominated by Narrow-leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) and Common Reed (Phragmites australis), and

includes occasional Broad-leaf cattail (Typha latifolia), Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea),

Canada thistle, and Cow vetch (Vicia cracca).

Community #3 (CUT1): Mineral Cultural Thicket Ecosite

This community is located along the east boundary of the residential area, adjacent to the MAM

(community #2). It is dominated be a dense canopy of Common Buckthorn, with an abundance of

Tartarian honeysuckle, hawthorn sp. (Crataegus sp.) and Low Rose. The groundcover includes Spotted

jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), Field Horsetail (Equisetum arvense), Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus

quinquefolia), Yellow avens, Poison ivy (Toxicodendron rydbergii), and Tall goldenrod (Solidago

altissima).

Community #4 (Residential area)

The residential area includes a variety of tree species that form a canopy up to 15 m in height north of the

residential buildings. Species in this area include Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris), White willow (Salix alba),

and Green ash.

Community #6 (FOD2-4): Dry-Fresh Oak-Hardwood Deciduous Forest Type

This community is located at the north end of the property and is the predominant natural feature on the

property. The tree canopy is approximately 20 m in height and is dominated by Red oak with an

abundance of Sugar maple (Acer saccharum var. saccharum), Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), Red

maple (Acer rubrum), American Beech (Fagus grandifolia), and scattered Eastern White Pine (Pinus

strobus) and Ironwood (Ostrya virginiana). The shrub layer is less than 2 m in height and is dominated by

patches of Common buckthorn with Green ash, Swamp Fly-honeysuckle (Lonicera oblongifolia), Choke

cherry (Prunus virginiana), Canada honeysuckle (Lonicera canadensis), Prickly gooseberry (Ribes

cynosbati), Skunk currant (Ribes glandulosum), Red raspberry, and Virginia creeper. Groundcover is

sparse and includes Yellow avens, Garlic mustard, Enchanter’s nightshade (Circaea lutetiana), Common

speedwell (Veronica officinalis), Poison ivy, Trout-lily (Erythronium sp.), May Apple (Podophyllum

peltatum), Tall goldenrod, Herb-robert (Geranium robertianum), Cinquefoil (Potentilla sp.) and Virginia

strawberry (Fragaria virginiana). Ephemeral pools of water are surrounded by Spotted jewelweed, Jack-

in-the-pulpit (Arisaema triphyllum), and rose (Rosa sp.)

To the north of the community is agricultural woodland separated by a powerline corridor (see Community

#1). The cultural woodland is similar to the FOD2-4 community but has a greater density of shrubs

dominated by Common buckthorn, and the canopy includes additional species such as Basswood (Tilia

americana), White elm and oak (Quercus sp.).



6

Community #7 (MAS2-1/MAS2-2/MAM2): Cattail Mineral Shallow Marsh Type/Bulrush Mineral Shallow

Marsh Type/ Mineral Meadow Marsh Ecosite

This community is located along the west boundary of the property, and is surrounded by agricultural

field. The community is dominated by cattail (both broad and narrow leaf), and also includes reed-canary

grass, which dominates the raised ground in the western portion of the unit. The community also includes

bulrush, great burdock, cow vetch, Canada thistle, garlic mustard, jewelweed, teasel, red-osier dogwood,

and scattered willows.

3.2 Wildlife

Wildlife resources were evaluated using a review of background material and multi-season field surveys.

Specific survey methods are described in Section 2.1.1 above and summary results are discussed below.

In general, the subject property provides habitat for tolerant, urban-adapted and open-country species

(e.g. open-country / generalist birds and mammals), with some habitat for forest- and wetland-associated

species. The avifaunal species observed and exhibiting breeding evidence in the study area are

expected for site conditions. Refer to Appendix B for the list of species observed.

3.2.1 Avifauna

In total, 35 bird species were recorded for the subject property (both breeding and non-breeding). The

avifauna observed and exhibiting breeding evidence on the subject property are expected for site

conditions (Appendix B).

There are 4 habitat areas identified that support birds. These are the open agricultural fields, meadow

marsh (wetlands), deciduous forest and residential property. The majority of the species recorded are

common for these habitat types and are abundant in the landscape.

Agricultural Fields

This is the predominant habitat type at the site. Species recorded from this habitat included song

sparrow (Melospiza melodia), killdeer (Charadrius vociferous), red-winged blackbird (Agelaius

phoeniceus), savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura),

European starling (Sturnella vulgaris), American goldfinch (Carduelis tristis) and barn swallow (Hirundo

rustica).

Meadow Marsh

Meadow marsh is the dominant wetland vegetation and forms the wetland features at the site. There

were no wetland specialist birds identified for these habitats. The birds found in these habitats were

similar to those documented for the agricultural fields. Species recorded included red-winged blackbird,

song sparrow, mourning dove and spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia).



7

Forest

Forest habitat is provided by the dry oak-hickory forest located at the northwest corner of the site. The

bird community consisted of mostly edge woodland species such as black-capped chickadee (Poecile

atricapillus), northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), gray catbird (Dumetella carolinensis), Baltimore

oriole (Icterus galbula), cedar waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum) and indigo bunting (Passerina cyanea).

The dense, tall cover was sufficient to support great horned owl (Bubo virginiana).

Residential Property

This habitat consisted of shrub thickets, trees, and lawn and building structures. Species included

warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus), American goldfinch, American robin (Turdus migratorius), song sparrow

and roosting turkey vulture (Cathartes aura).

Of the total of 35 bird species observed:

Thirty-four are considered to be breeding (i.e. ‘possible’, ‘probable’ or ‘confirmed’ level of evidence

as per OBBA protocols) within the entire study area

One (1) species, Ring-billed Gull (Larus delawarensis) displayed no evidence of breeding per

OBBA protocols (e.g. fledged young)

One (1) federally designated (COSEWIC) Threatened species was recorded: Barn Swallow

(Hirundo rustica) in the agricultural fields

No provincially designated (COSSARO/MNR) species or provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3

ranked by NHIC) were recorded

Two (2) species considered “Area Sensitive” by MNR (2000)1 were recorded: Least Flycatcher

(Empidonax minimus) and Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis)

No natural habitat types with potential to support rare / sensitive bird species with specific habitat

requirements are present on the subject property.

3.2.2 Anurans

In total, 2 amphibian species were recorded during site surveys for the current study: Green Frog (Rana

clamitans) and Western Chorus Frog (Pseudacris triseriata). Both were recorded during the calling

survey.

1 Area Sensitive bird species require “a substantial area of suitable habitat for successful breeding and their populations decline when habitat

becomes fragmented”. This includes birds of various habitats, such as grassland or forest birds. In the case of forest birds, the minimum forest habitat for area sensitive species is at least 100 metres from any edge habitat” (MNR 2000; pp 43).



8

Amphibian calling was heard from one single location (Station 7) located at the north end of the wet

pocket (Wetland B) on the west side of the subject property. At this station, low numbers of Green

Frog and Chorus frog were recorded. No species were recorded at any other station or elsewhere

on the property.

Notwithstanding the above, other common species such as American Toad, Leopard Frog and

Gray Treefrog could potentially use portions of the site.

Western Chorus Frog, is considered a federally (COSEWIC) and provincially (COSSARO)

designated Threatened species at risk and is listed on Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act.

No provincially rare (S1-S3) species were recorded, either in NHIC records or during field surveys.

The forest located on the northwest corner of the subject property contains scattered ephemeral

ponded areas which contained water in the early spring months. However, these ponded areas are

small, leaf littered, void of egg attachment material, and were dry by June 14, 2011. No amphibian

species were recorded during the calling surveys at the stations located in and adjacent to this unit.

These ponded areas are likely not suitable for amphibian breeding habitat although some species

may use them for forage and shelter in the early spring months.

3.2.3 Mammals

In total, 3 common mammal species were recorded during site surveys:White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus

virginianus), Raccoon (Procyon lotor), and Eastern Cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus). All are tolerant,

urban-adapted species expected in the general area. This area likely supports a range of common

mammals that were not observed during the field surveys but are often found in similar habitats

throughout the province. These species include Eastern Chipmunk (Tamias striatus), Grey Squirrel

(Sciurus carolinensis), Groundhog (Marmota monax), Red Fox (Vulpes fulva), Striped Skunk (Mephitis

mephitis), Coyote (Canis latrans), and, in addition to a number of small mammals that often go

undetected (for example shrews, voles, mice, bats).

3.3 Aquatic

The site generally drains in a southerly direction. A drainage feature is identified at the west side of the

study area. It travels through the westerly wetland to the property boundary where it travels south to join

with the roadside ditch at Upper Middle Road. The southerly portion of the drainage feature is a formed

channel. The channel exhibits both downcutting and some lateral erosion. The majority of the length of

channel along the property is a severely eroded channel (downcutting). Toward Upper Middle Road the

channel flattens out to meet the existing grade. The channel drops by 1.5 m to 2 m to the roadside ditch.

A second drainage feature is associated with the easterly wetland. This drainage feature captures

surface runoff from the agricultural lands to the north and east. It forms a drainage path for at least half of

the property. It passes under an agricultural access (with culvert) and then enters into the wetland area.

The channel flows south through the wetland and emerges from the wetland to travel beneath a second



9

agricultural access a short distance north of Upper Middle Road. The channel then changes to diffuse

flow as it reaches the ditch at Upper Middle Road.

3.3.1 Fish Habitat

Both drainage features provide indirect fish habitat as they provide flow and organic material inputs

Joshua’s Creek. On site the channels flow only for the early spring period and during storm events. Both

channels contain barriers at Upper Middle Road that would prevent the passage of fish upstream from

Joshua’s Creek. It is recognized that there are other barriers between Joshua’s Creek and the site.

3.4 Groundwater

The following description of groundwater conditions at the site is taken from the report, Hydrogeological

Investigation Winston Park West, Oakville Ontario Proposed Development (Norbert Woerns, February

2008). Subsequent to this report and in conjunction with the current study, a terms of reference has

been developed to undertake groundwater level monitoring to confirm the results of the above named

preliminary assessment.

The site occurs within the South Slope physiographic region and within an area of shale plain with a thin

soil layer over shale bedrock. The site is underlain by a thin layer of surficial deposits consisting of

sandy silt and clayey silt between 0.5 m and 4.0 m thick.

The mostly silty clay surficial soil has a low permeability with a limited groundwater recharge potential.

Due to the relatively poor aquifer characteristics of the underlying shale bedrock the amount of

discharge is expected to be restricted and localized. Groundwater flow is interpreted to flow toward the

southeast with local flow toward Joshua’s Creek. Groundwater levels are within the range of 1 to 9 m

below surface.

Based on the review of the drainage features and wetlands at the site, groundwater would appear to

supplement the flow regime in the wetlands and drainage features through an elevated water table in the

late winter/early spring season. Field investigations of the drainage features and wetlands from April to

July in 2011 identified that water was present only in the early season. It is also recognized that the

summer of 2011 was dry.

4 Development Constraints

Development constraints were identified based on the identification of natural heritage features,

requirements for a vegetation protection zone adjacent to respective significant natural heritage features,

and an analysis of the land use designations according to the Town of Oakville Official Plan, the Regional

Municipality of Halton Official Plan. The following section addresses the constraints imposed by sensitive

natural areas and sensitive species. The development constraints are shown in Figure 2.

4.1 Wetlands



10

There are two wetlands within the study area. One is located along the west boundary of the property is

0.90 ha in size, and is dominated by cattail (T. angustifolia and T. latifolia), bulrush and reed-canary

grass. The other wetland, located along the eastern boundary of the residence is 0.23 ha in size, and is

also dominated by cattail, bulrush and reed-canary grass.

These wetlands are regulated by Conservation Halton under the Development; Interference with

Wetlands and Alteration to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. On July 5th, 2011, wetland staking

was conducted with Conservation Halton staff in order to delineate the exact boundaries of the two

wetlands. Based on the wetland size, Conservation Halton has identified a setback of 15 m from the

wetland boundaries. Development is prohibited in the wetland and in the adjacent 15 m buffer. It is

identified that the buffer is established as a natural vegetated area.

4.2 Forests

The FOD2-4 forest, located at the north end of the property, is considered as a Significant Woodland in

the Regional Municipality of Halton. This is a Dry-Fresh Oak-Hardwood Deciduous Forest dominated by

red oak (Quercus rubra), and includes associates of Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum ssp. saccharum),

Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), Red maple (Acer rubrum), beech (Fagus grandifolia), and Ironwood

(Ostrya virginiana).

The Oakville Liveable Plan (May 2011) identifies that “Development or site alteration shall not be

permitted within regionally significant woodlands or within the required buffer width, which shall generally

be a minimum of 10 metres measured from the drip line of the woodland.”

The Regional Municipality of Halton regulates Significant Woodland, and on July 5th, 2011 a staking

exercise was conducted with the Region staff, in order to mark the boundaries of the woodland. In order

to maintain the integrity of the woodland functions, the Regional Municipality of Halton suggested a

setback of 10 m from the Significant Woodland. In accordance with the requirements in the Oakville

Liveable Plan, as discussed above, development is prohibited in the Significant Woodland or in the

adjacent 10 m buffer comprising natural vegetation cover.

4.3 Sensitive Species

The NHIC database and the MNR Aurora District office were consulted for information on species of

conservation concern, defined here as federally and provincially designated species at risk (including any

that may be legally listed and protected), provincially rare (S-rank) species and locally rare / uncommon

species.

The following results are based on: a review of background studies, NHIC database; field surveys

conducted by MMM and Ecoplans for the current study.

4.3.1 Vegetation

Exploration of the Natural Heritage Information Centre database has indicated the potential presence of

12 provincially rare species, including 4 Species at Risk, in the surrounding area. However, a review of

SignificantWoodland

Wetland

Wetland

9TH LINE

HIGHWAY 403

BRISTOL CIRCLE

UP

PE

R M

IDD

LE R

OA

D E

AS

T

QU

EE

N E

LIZA

BE

TH

WAY

PLY

MO

UT

H D

RIV

E

Winston Park West Employment LandsDevelopment Constraints

Title:

Prepared by:

Review: PPScale as Shown

Date: September 2011© 2011 Microsoft Corporation © 2010 NAVTEQ

Figure: 214-11208-001-EC1

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIOClient:

M:\

Job

s\2

011

\14

.11

20

8.0

01

.P0

1 -

OR

C W

inst

on

Pa

rk W

est

, O

akv

ille

\Ma

pp

ing

\mx

d\2

011

09

\Fig

ure

2 -

De

velo

pm

en

t C

on

stra

ints

.mx

d

0 125 25062.5Meters

Oakville

MississaugaHIGHW

AY 403

8TH LINE

9TH LINE

QU

EE

N E

LIZ

AB

ET

H W

AY

LAIRD ROAD

TRUSCOTT DRIV

E

DU

ND

AS S

TREE

T EA

ST

HIGHWAY 403 WEST

TRAFALGAR RO

AD

RO

YAL

WIN

DS

OR

DR

IVE

CO

RN

WA

LL R

OA

D

BRIS

TOL

CIR

CLE

GROSVENOR STREET

BRO

MSG

RO

VE R

OAD

AR

RO

WH

EA

D R

OA

DB

AYS

HIR

E D

RIV

E

DU

NED

IN R

OAD

BUCKINGHAM

ROAD

BERYL RO

AD

HADWEN ROAD

QU

EE

N E

LIZ

AB

ET

H W

AY

8TH LINE

Key MapNTS

Ü

SUBJECTPROPERTY

LegendProperty Boundary

Staked Natural Feature Boundary

Drainage Feature

SetbacksWetland - 15m

Significant Woodland - 10m

Ü



12

background material suggests that only 3 of the provincially rare species could be present within the

study area.

Northern hawthorn (Crataegus dissona) – This species prefers sandy open upland forests as well as

richer forested banks, stream borders, forested hills, river bluffs; roadsides, fencerows, fields, meadows,

pastures. This species was not present on the subject property.

Schreber’s Wood Aster (Euybia schreberi) - This species grows in woods, and is similar to large leaf

aster. This species was not present on the subject property.

Virginia Lungwort (Mertensia virginica). – This species prefers habitat with rich forests and floodplain

forests. This species was not present on the subject property.

None of the above species were found on the subject property during the field surveys.

4.3.2 Wildlife

Avifauna

One (1) federally (COSEWIC) designated Threatened species, Barn Swallow, was observed within the

subject property. This species is not considered a provincially (MNR/COSSARO) designated species of

risk (i.e. Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened), or provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3 ranked by

NHIC). This species is not listed on the Species at Risk Act (SARA).

No other federally (COSEWIC) or provincially (MNR/COSSARO) designated species of risk (i.e.

Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened), or provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3 ranked by NHIC) were

observed on the subject property.

Two (2) bird species considered “Uncommon” in Halton Region (Dwyer 2006), Least Flycatcher

(Empidonax minimus) and Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii), were observed within the subject

property. Both of these species are considered to be ‘breeding’2 within the subject property.

Barn Swallow: This species nests almost exclusively on man-made structures including barns, bridges,

outbuildings, houses as well as natural structures including cliff ledges. Habitat for this species is present

in the outbuildings located on the residential portion of the subject property and adjacent lands and it is a

“Probable” breeder on site. No nests were observed.

2 Breeding evidence is based on the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas Guide (2006), where species are identified as

Possible, Probable or Confirmed breeding species. Additional species were observed during the fall migration and

as such these breeding designations do not apply.



13

Herpetofauna

Sensitive species were identified through the NHIC database and are discussed in the

paragraphs below

One (1) federally (COSEWIC) designated Threatened species, Western Chorus Frog

(Pseudacris triseriata), was observed within the subject property. This species is not considered

a provincially (MNR/COSSARO) designated species of risk (i.e. Extirpated, Endangered or

Threatened), or provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3 ranked by NHIC). This species is listed

Schedule 1 of SARA.

No other federally (COSEWIC) or provincially (MNR/COSSARO) designated species of risk (i.e.

Extirpated, Endangered or Threatened), or provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3 ranked by

NHIC) were observed on the subject property.

Western Chorus Frog: This species was recorded in low numbers at one amphibian calling station

(Station 7) during field surveys. Suitable breeding habitat is not present in this area.

COSEWIC recently published a report (COSEWIC 2008) stating that they recognize the Western Chorus

Frog as two population units: The Great Lakes / St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield Population, which is

designated as Threatened by COSEWIC, and the Carolinian Population, which remains Not at Risk. The

subject property is located in the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence zone and hence Chorus Frog found on site

would be considered Threatened by COSEWIC. Notwithstanding the Threatened designation, SARA only

applies if the project is on federal lands or is receiving federal funding. At the provincial level,

MNR/COSSARO does not recognize two populations of Western Chorus Frog and as such this species is

not afforded legal protection under the Endangered Species Act 2007.

Jefferson Salamander (Ambystoma jeffersonianum): A review of the NHIC indicated that Jefferson

Salamander is known from the general vicinity of the subject property. This species is an Endangered

species both federally (COSEWIC) and provincially (MNR/COSSARO). It is considered a provincially rare

S2 species and is listed on Schedule 1 of SARA. It is also considered an ‘Uncommon’ species in Halton

Region (Dwyer 2006).

The Jefferson Salamander is found in a variety of woodland habitats including deciduous, coniferous or

mixed forests as well as swamps. Breeding ponds are usually vernal pools found within these woodland

areas, but will breed in acceptable marshes, swamps or even roadside ditches. This species requires

intact deciduous forest with undisturbed forest floor, and breeding ponds that are permanent and

unpolluted with abundant egg attachment sites (these types of ponds often contain other breeding

species of amphibians).

Within the subject property there is no dense deciduous habitat. There is a small forest stand located on

the northwest corner of the property with ephemeral pooling evident in the spring. Forest habitat in this

area is disturbed by urban encroachment and invasive species. The ephemeral pools present in the wet

spring weather are small, leaf littered with no egg attachment sites. During the June field visits, it was



14

noted that these pools were completely dry. These pools do not appear to provide a sufficiently lengthy

hydroperiod in which larval development could be completed successfully.

Due to the lack of undisturbed areas, insufficient hydroperiod, and lack of egg attachment sites it is

unlikely that Jefferson Salamander habitat would be present in the study area.

Lepidoptera

Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus): The Monarch Butterfly is designated a species of Special Concern

both federally (COSEWIC) and provincially (MNR/COSSARO) and is listed on Schedule 1 of SARA. It is

not considered a provincially rare species (i.e. S1 to S3 ranked by NHIC).

This species was observed feeding in small patch of milkweed in the southwest corner of the residential

property. Monarchs inhabit any areas where milkweed and wildflowers such as Goldenrod, asters, and

Purple Loosestrife are found, including roadsides, abandoned farmland or open, meadow areas. The

Monarch’s Special Concern status is based on ongoing threats to wintering habitat outside of Canada

rather than the rarity of its summer habitat and key host plant, Common Milkweed, which are still

generally common throughout the province. Potential Monarch is present throughout much of the cultural

meadow habitat within the subject property. This meadow habitat is generally common and abundant

within the subject property and adjacent lands and throughout much of the southern rural-agricultural

Ontario. We anticipate that suitable habitat will be retained within the Hydro Electric Power Corridor

(HEPC) and road / highway right-of-ways in the vicinity of the subject property.

5 Proposed Development

The Draft Plan of Subdivision is comprised of a series of medium sized employment blocks, which may be

further subdivided at a later stage, once the specific needs and land use requirements of the employment

users have been identified. This may occur through part-lot control or severance, which may be

undertaken concurrently with the preparation and submission of detailed Site Plan applications for these

blocks. As a result of the limitations and buffer requirements posed by the easements and pipelines, the

proposed draft plan of subdivision represents the best use for the Subject Property. The draft plan of

subdivision is shown in Figure 3.

The Draft Plan of Subdivision outlines the proposed natural heritage and woodlot which has been refined

based upon the EIS. The layout and road pattern through the Subject Property encourages accessibility

and addresses the traffic needs for the area. The primary road access is accommodated from Upper

Middle Road north through the property then east-west along the hydro easement to Ninth Line. The

industrial collector road is 26.0m wide, which is consistent with the Official Plan.

The primary road access to the Subject Property is accommodated from Upper Middle Road with a new

collector road through the lands adjacent to the west side of the Hydro corridor, connecting to an east-

west collector road, accessed from Ninth Line, at the north end of the Subject Site. Both intersections at

Ninth Line and Upper Middle Road are proposed to be full movement intersections. A Highway 403

widening of 30 metres is provided abutting development blocks (Block 11). This does not extend into the



16

Future Development blocks as these will continue to be owned by the Province subsequent to

development approvals.

Easements within the Plan of Subdivision will generally continue to apply to the subject lands post

development approval. A 5.0 metre buffer is proposed south of Street B to facilitate the request of Hydro

One to provide for a minimum of 5.0 metres easement in their favour for future hydro facilities if necessary

(Blocks 15, 9 and portion of 14). Providing this easement on the south side allows for the lands north of

Street B to be potentially available for development in the future. Block 9 is a Utilities Block located

between the Union Gas Compressor Station and Street “B”. Access over this Block will be provided to

the Union Gas Compressor Station either through an easement in favour of Union Gas or other

appropriate means. Lands north of Street B will continued to be owned by the Province.

Access across the Enbridge Pipeline easement (easement number 4) to the adjacent development blocks

will be determined at the site plan approval stage of each development block. Driveway access can be

accommodated across the pipeline but no development or parking will occur on the pipeline. No

development is proposed on the easement blocks and limited crossings are proposed through those

blocks. The development limit largely is compliant with the outside limit of the buffers required for the

wetlands. A 15 m buffer has been provided for all areas of the easterly wetland but for the west side.

On this site there is no buffer proposed and the development encroaches into a small area of wetland at

its southwest end.

6 Impact Assessment

Based on the nature of the proposed development and the natural environment features and functions at

the site the following potential impacts have been identified:

i. Development Effects to Easterly Wetland

ii. Effect of Development on Alteration of Hydrology

iii.Effect to Woodland Habitat and Species

iv. Effect to Species at Risk

6.1 Development Adjacent to the Easterly Wetland

At the present time the easterly wetland occurs between the residential property to the west and the

agricultural land to the east and north and Upper Middle Road to the south. On the west side the

wetland transitions into a partial landscaped lawn in its southern portion and a small area of tree and

shrub cover at its north portion, associated with the residential property. The wetland is a linear feature

and has become established likely as a direct result of the drainage that flows southerly from the north

agricultural fields to the roadside ditch at Upper Middle Road. Under this landscape setting the wetland



17

is considered to be isolated and maintained only by the agricultural field runoff. It is proposed that the

limit of development extend to the wetland boundary at its west side. Providing a 15 m buffer on this

side is not feasible due to the short distance between the main access road and the wetland boundary.

A 15m buffer adjacent to the wetland is required in accordance with the CH policy. A buffer of 20 m is

provided on the east side of the wetland.

This wetland feature is small, isolated and provides habitat for a small number of common wildlife

species that include song sparrow, red-winged blackbird and mourning dove. These are edge species

that will continue to use this habitat once the site is developed. Amphibians were not recorded from the

wetland and based on the evidence of seasonal spring flow only there is no breeding habitat for

amphibians in the wetland. The opportunity for amphibians to access the wetland now is only slightly

better than the proposed development would offer. Any amphibian attempting to arrive to the wetland

would pass through the fully exposed agricultural lands where they would be at risk from potential

dessication and vulnerable to predators due to the lack of cover.

At present the agricultural field occurs directly adjacent to the wetland feature on the east and north

sides. This encroaches to within a few metres of the wetland boundary. With implementing the buffer

zone and promoting natural vegetation enhancement of the buffer, this natural area that includes the

wetland and buffer will be larger in size. It will still remain isolated but with the increased size will also

assist in maintaining the opportunity for wildlife edge species to use it. Not providing a buffer on the

west side will not affect the wetland to provide habitat for wildlife edge species similar to what it does

now.

6.2 Alteration of Hydrological Conditions that Support the Wetlands

The two wetland habitats are supported by a combination of surface water runoff and seasonal

groundwater as described in section 3.4. The ensuing discussion of groundwater contribution is based

on the physical site conditions but does not have the benefit of groundwater levels through the seasons.

However, based on site evidence the role of groundwater related to support of wetland conditions can be

interpreted with some confidence.

There are no significant species or habitats associated with the two wetlands at the site for which a

specific moisture regime is required. Western chorus frog was identified in the westerly wetland but no

breeding habitat was identified. Therefore, the approach is to maintain the hydrological character of the

wetlands in the post development similar to what occurs at the present time. This includes providing

runoff to the wetlands via surface water flow and also allowing a high water table to develop in the early

spring. This will be achieved by designing a discharge to the upstream point of the wetlands that mimics

the amount of seasonal flow. The high water table will be established by collecting and directing roof

leaders toward infiltration swales that occur adjacent to and upgradient of these features.

The management of surface water flow and infiltration to support the wetlands is identified as feasible.

However for this study it has not been designed. This will occur in the next stage of development

design. At that time consideration may be made to manage surface flows in the westerly wetland to



18

reduce the erosion that is occurring in the drainage feature that runs along the westerly boundary toward

Upper Middle Road.

6.3 Impact to Woodland Habitat and Species

The woodland located at the northwest corner of the site is identified as edge habitat in terms of its size

and shape and the species that were observed during the field investigations. A 10 m buffer will be

applied to the perimeter of the woodland. It is assumed that at the time of final design a planting plan will

be developed to vegetate the buffer which is largely agricultural land at the present time. The focus of the

discussion of effects to wildlife relates to the avifauna community. As described in section 3.2.1 the

avifauna community consists mostly of edge species that are anticipated to access and use the habitat

post development. However, there are some species that require further assessment to address their

potential to continue to use the woodland. This includes great horned owl and the three flycatcher

species (least, alder and willow).

Great horned owl can be found in these types of woodlands that are smaller in size and isolated. The key

habitat features of the woodland that supports this species would be the relatively tall canopy cover that

provides the density of cover for the owl to roost, possibly nest and hunt. The adjacent agricultural fields

and proximity to the Joshua’s Creek valleyland provide hunting opportunity. It is anticipated that with

development in the adjacent agricultural lands hunting habitat will be removed and may force the owl to

move to another site where hunting opportunities are improved. It may still include the woodland as part

of its territory and use it for roosting. A single individual will be affected if this species no longer uses the

site.

Least and willow flycatchers are identified as regionally rare. The least flycatcher nests in semi-open and

closed immature to mature deciduous and mixed forests, rarely in coniferous forests; usually nests near

the edge or at forest openings, less common in interior; appears to be associated with forests 30 ha or

larger, although it often nests in small copses of woods or even orchards near forest. The willow

flycatcher nests in open areas that have shrub cover as the dominant vegetation structure. Shrub

species can include willow, hawthorn and rose. Least flycatcher was recorded in the deciduous woodland

and the willow flycatcher was recorded in the vicinity of the woodland. The least flycatcher may continue

to use the forest habitat and shrub edge however, the development may remove a potential immediate

area for foraging as insect production may be reduced. Habitat for willow flycatcher is limiting in the study

are and the development will reduce this further. It is likely that the willow flycatcher will no longer use the

site once it is developed.

6.4 Impact to Species at Risk

Barn swallow is the species at risk present in the study area. It is principally associated with man-made

structures for nest sites and forages in the area adjacent to the nest site. The site with farm buildings and

other stuctures does provide nesting opportunities although none were observed during the field

investigations. The species is an aerial forager. The development will not prevent the species from

foraging above the proposed building structures but as mentioned earlier the amount of local aerial insect



19

production may be reduced by the development. It is anticipated that this species will continue to be

present in the area of the site.

Western chorus frog was present in the area of the westerly wetland calling in low numbers. At the time

there was no suitable breeding habitat available for this species. The western chorus frog inhabits forest

openings around woodland ponds but can also be found in or near damp meadows, marshes, bottomland

swamps and temporary ponds in open country, or even urban areas. It breeds in ponded areas with at

least 10 centimetres of water, including quiet, shallow, usually temporary waterbodies with vegetation that

is submerged or protrudes from the water, and especially in rain-flooded meadows and ditches, and in

temporary ponds on floodplains. Although the spring 2011 was wet there was no suitable breeding

habitat for this species at the site. This area has undergone change in the last decade with the removal

of shrubby vegetation. It may be that this species was prevalent during that time but with the removal of

vegetation breeding habitat is no longer available at the site. Maintaining the drainage regime to this

wetland and providing the 15 m buffer may provide opportunity for this species.

7 Mitigation

It is proposed that to offset the lack of a 15 m buffer on the west side of the easterly wetland and the

removal of a small area of the southwest corner of the wetland, that in addition to the benefits of a 20 m

wide buffer on the east side of the wetland, the area between the southerly wetland boundary and the

ditch at Upper Middle Road be naturalized to increase the size of the wetland. The proposal is to remove

the farm access culvert and regrade the access cover to match the gradient of the adjacent wetland. This

will promote sheet flow to disperse through this relatively flat area and allow the expansion of emergent

marsh vegetation and thus the increase in the wetland size. It is possible that a small amount of

contouring may be required to hold back some water to allow the area to become wetter. It is proposed

that this will mitigate the removal of a small area of wetland and the lack of a buffer on the west side of

the wetland. This is shown in Figure 4.

To maintain the hydrologic regime roof leaders will be designed to discharge to infiltration areas adjacent

to the wetlands. This will match the function of the wetland hydrology by allowing water to enter into the

shallow upper soil layer where it will be held under the relatively impermeable soils and thus create the

excess surface moisture necessary to support the wetlands.

8 Summary and Conclusion

The natural environment features at the proposed development site include two regulated non-provincially

significant wetlands, drainage features associated with the wetlands and a deciduous woodland at the

northwest corner. The boundaries of these features were staked and the requisite buffer applied: 15 m

for the wetlands and 10 m for the woodland. To overcome some of the constraints associated with

Blocks 1 and 2, a buffer would not be provided to the west side of the easterly wetland and the

development would encroach into a very small area. To mitigate this effect the buffer on the east side of

the wetland eas widened to 20 m and the area to the south of the wetland was identified for enhancement

that would increase the size of the wetland.



20

Surface water and groundwater management in the post development condition will ensure that the

hydrologic regime of the wetlands and drainage features will be maintained. This will be developed in

the next stage of design.

The majority of species found at the site are common to the type of habitat present. Barn swallow, a

Species at Risk, is found on the site. It is anticipated that the species will continue to use the site

although nesting habitat will be less available due to the removal of buildings and structures found on

the residential property.

It is concluded that the development should proceed with some minor residual impact to the natural

habitats and species found at the site.

UP

PE

R M

IDD

LE R

OA

D E

AS

T

LegendDevelopment Block Boundaries

Additional Buffer Area

Wetland to be Removed

Wetland Enhancement Area

Staked Wetland Boundary

Wetland Setback - 15m

.M

:\Jo

bs\

20

11\1

4.1

12

08

.00

1.P

01

- O

RC

Win

sto

n P

ark

We

st,

Oa

kvill

e\M

ap

pin

g\m

xd\

20

11 0

9\F

igu

re 4

- W

etl

an

d E

nh

an

cem

en

t.m

xd

Winston Park West Employment LandsWetland Enhancement

Client:

Title:

Prepared by:

Review: JWScale as Shown

Date: September 2011

14-11208-001-EC1

INFRASTRUCTURE ONTARIO

© 2011 Microsoft Corporation © 2010 NAVTEQFigure: 4

0 50 10025Meters



22

9 References

Beacon Environmental 2008. Draft Winston Park West Environmental Impact Study.

Bird Studies Canada. 2001. Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas - Guide for Participants. Bird Studies Canada.

Bird Studies Canada. 2008. The Marsh Monitoring Program – Training Kit and Instructions for Surveying

Marsh Birds, Amphibians and Their Habitats 2008 Edition. Birds Studies Canada, Environment

Canada and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Cadman, M.D., D.A. Sutherland, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage, and A.R. Couturier (eds.). 2007. Atlas of the

Breeding Birds of Ontario, 2001-2005. Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field

Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto, xxii + 706 pp.

Canadian Wildlife Service. 2007. Area Sensitive Forest Birds in Urban Areas. Environment Canada.

COSEWIC. 2011. Canadian Species at Risk. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada.

[http://www.cosewic.gc.ca/eng/sct5/index_e.cfm.]

COSEWIC. 2008. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on the Western Chorus Frog

Pseudacris triseriata Carolinian population and Great Lakes/St. Lawrence – Canadian Shield

population in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa.vii + 47

pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm).

Dunn, E., J. Bart, B. Collins, B. Craig, B. Dale, C. Downes, C., Francis, S. Woodley, and P. Zorn. 2006.

Monitoring Bird Populations in Small Geographic Areas. Canadian Wildlife Service.

Dwyer, J.K. 2006. Halton Natural Areas Inventory.

Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. Igl, C. M. Goldade, A. L. Zimmerman, and B. R.

Euliss. 1999 (revised 2001). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Bobolink.

Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center, Jamestown, ND. 24 pages.

Harding, J.H. 1997. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Great Lakes Region. University of Michigan Press,

Ann Arbor.

Herkert, J. R. 1991. Prairie birds of Illinois: population response to two centuries of habitat change. Illinois

Natural History Survey Bulletin 34:393-399.

Konze, Karl and McLaren, Margaret. 1997. Wildlife Monitoring Programs and Inventory Techniques for

Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Northeast Science and Technology. Technical

Manual TM-009. 139 pp.

Lee, Harold, Wasyl Bakowsky, John Riley, Jane Bowles, Michael Puddister, Peter Uhlig and Sean

McMurray, 1998. Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario. Ministry of Natural

Resources: North Bay, ON.



23

Livable Oakville 2011. Town of Oakville Official Plan, Planning Services Department

Natural Heritage Information Centre. 2011. Natural Areas Summary Report for Ontario Ministry of Natural

Resources, Peterborough, Ontario. Available

http://www.biodiversityexplorer.mnr.gov.on.ca/nhicWEB/nhicIndex.jsp

Ministry of Natural Resources. 2011. Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List. Ontario Ministry of Natural

Resources. (http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/Species/2ColumnSubPage/276722.html)

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2000. Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide. Fish and

Wildlife Branch, Wildlife Section. Science Development and Transfer Branch, Southcentral Sciences

Section.

The Municipality of Halton. 2006. This Regional Official Plan as adopted by the Council of the Regional

Municipality of Halton.

Town of Oakville. 2006. Town of Oakville Official Plan as adopted by the Council of the Corporation of the

Town of Oakville.

Varga, S., D. Leadbeater, J. Webber, J. Kaiser, B. Crins, J. Kamstra, D. Banville, E. Ashley, G. Miller, C.

Kingsley, C. Jacobsen, K. Mewa, L. Tebby, E. Mosely, and E. Zajc. 2000. Distribution and status

of the Vascular Plants of the Greater Toronto Area. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources,

AuroraDistrict. 103 pp.

Woerns, N.M. Hydrogeological Investigation Winston Park West, Oakville Ontario, Proposed

Development. Prepared for Beacon Environmental. February 2008.

APPENDIX A:

Checklist of Vascular Plants

APPENDIX A. CHECKLIST OF VASCULAR PLANTS

Common Name Scientific Name Grank Srank Halton Status

ELC Communities

CUM1-1 CUW1 CUT1 FOD2-4 MAS2-1/2/MAM2

Trees Silver maple Acer saccharinum G5 S5 x x Shagbark hickory Carya ovata G5 S5 XU x Sugar maple Acer saccharum var. saccharum G5T? S5 x x

Ironwood Ostrya virginiana G5 S5 x x Red maple Acer rubrum G5 S5 x x Green ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica G5 S5 x x x American Beech Fagus grandifolia x Red oak Quercus rubra G5 S5 x x x White elm Ulmus americana G5? S5 x x x Large Tooth Aspen Populus grandidentata G5 S5 x x basswood Tilia americana G5 S5 x x x Bur oak Quercus macrocarpa G5 S5 x x Eastern White Pine Pinus strobus G5 S5 x Scotch pine Pinus sylvestris G? SE5 x

Shrubs Red raspberry Rubus idaeus G5T S5 x x x Serviceberry Amelanchier sp. x Bush honeysuckle Diervilla lonicera G5 S5 x x Choke Cherry Prunus virginiana G5T? S5 x x gray dogwood Cornus racemosa G5 S5 x x


ELC Communities


Canada honeysuckle Lonicera canadensis G5 S5 x

Swamp Fly-honeysuckle

Lonicera oblongifolia G4 S5 R2 x

Tatarian honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica G? SE5 x x

Prickly Gooseberry Ribes cynosbati G5 S5 x x Skunk Currant Ribes glandulosum G5 S5 RR1 x American Mountain-ash

Sorbus americana G5 S5 x

White Willow Salix alba G5 SE4 x Willow Salix sp. x x x Staghorn Sumac Rhus typhina G5 S5 x x Low Rose Rosa virginiana G5 SU x Buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica G? SE5 x x x Hawthorn Crataegus sp. x x Virginia creeper Parthenocissus quinquefolia G5 S4? XU x x

Ground cover Redtop Agrostis gigantea G4G5 SE5 x x Garlic mustard Alliaria petiolata G? SE5 x x x Common burdock Arctium minus G?T? SE5 x x Common milkweed Asclepias syriaca G5 S5 x x Yellow rocket Barbarea vulgaris G? SE5 x x Star-of-bethlehem Ornithogalum umbellatum G2? SE3 x x Trout-lily Erythronium sp. x Oxeye daisy Chrysanthemum leucanthemum G? SE5 x x


ELC Communities


Enchanter's Nightshade

Circaea lutetiana G5T5 S5 x x

Common Speedwell Veronica officinalis G5 SE5 x x Canada thistle Cirsium arvense G? SE5 x x x Bindweed Convolvulus arvensis G? SE5 x x Queen Ann's Lace Daucus carota G? SE5 x x Teasel Dipsacus fullonum G?T? SE5 x x Field Horsetail Equisetum arvense G5 S5 x x Yellow avens Geum aleppicum G5 S5 XU x x x Dame's Rocket Hesperis matronalis G4G5 SE5 x x Herb-robert Geranium robertianum G5 SE5 x x Virginia Strawberry Fragaria virginiana G5T? SU x x Jack-in-the-pulpit Arisaema triphyllum G5T5 S5 x x Cinquefoil Potentilla sp. x Spotted jewelweed Impatiens capensis G5 S5 x x x May Apple Podophyllum peltatum G5 S5 x x Elecampane Inula helenium G? SE5 x x Field pepper-grass Lepidium campestre G? SE5 x x False Solomon's Seal Maianthemum stellatum G5 S5 x x

Common mallow Malva neglecta G? SE5 x x Pineapple weed Matricaria matricarioides G5 SE5 x x Black medic Medicago lupulina G? SE5 x x Sweet white clover Melilotus alba G5 SE5 x x Reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea G5 S5 x x x Common Reed Phragmites australis G5 SE5 x x Common plantain Plantago major G5 SE5 x x


ELC Communities


Curly dock Rumex crispus G? SE5 x x Tall Goldenrod Solidago altissima G? S5 x x x Dandelion Taraxacum officinale G5 SE5 x x Poison ivy Toxicocendron rydbergii G5T S5 x x Red clover Trifolium pratense G? SE5 x x Narrow-leaf cattail Typha angustifolia G5 S5 x x Broad-leaf cattail Typha latifolia G5 S5 x x Mullein Verbascum thapsus G? SE5 x x Cow vetch Vicia cracca G? SE5 x x x

APPENDIX B:

Avifaunal Observations

APPENDIX B. Avifaunal Observations

Species G

RA

NK

1

SR

AN

K2

CO

SE

WIC

3

MN

R4

SA

RA

Sta

tus

5

Sch

edu

le 5

Hal

ton

Re

gio

n (

1993

) 6

MN

R A

rea

Se

ns

itiv

e7

Hab

ita

t U

se 8

Residential Forest Fallow Land (Corn) Agricultural

(Wheat) Wetland A Wetland B Hedgerow (West) Hedgerow (Center)

Hig

he

st B

ree

din

g E

vid

en

ce

Bre

edin

g S

tatu

s

Hig

he

st A

bu

nd

an

ce 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Red-tailed Hawk (Buteo jamaicensis)

G5 S5B,SZN NAR NAR E H 1 H POSS 1

Killdeer (Charadrius vociferus)

G5 S5B,SZN S 1 S 1 T PROB 1

Spotted Sandpiper (Actitis macularia)

G5 S5B,SZN S 1 S POSS 1

Ring-billed Gull (Larus delawarensis)

G5 S5B,SZN X 1 X OBS 1

Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 4 H 2 H 3 S 1 H 2 T PROB 4

Great Horned Owl (Bubo virginianus)

G5 S5 H 1 H POSS 1

Woodpecker Species (Picoides sp.)

NU 1 NU CONF 1

Downy Woodpecker (Picoides pubescens)

G5 S5 I/E S 1 S POSS 1

Northern Flicker (Colaptes auratus)

G5 S5B,SZN I/E H 1 H POSS 1

Great Crested Flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus)

G5 S5B,SZN I/E S 1 S POSS 1

Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii)

G5 S5B,SZN U S 1 S POSS 1

Alder Flycatcher (Empidonax alnorum)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S POSS 1

Least Flycatcher (Empidonax minimus)

G5 S5B,SZN U X E S 1 S POSS 1

Warbling Vireo (Vireo gilvus)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S 1 S 1 T PROB 1

Blue Jay (Cyanocitta cristata)

G5 S5 I/E S 1 S 1 S POSS 1

American Crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos)

G5 S5B,SZN E H 2 H 2 H POSS 2

Species

GR

AN

K1

SR

AN

K2

CO

SE

WIC

3

MN

R4

SA

RA

Sta

tus

5

Sch

edu

le 5

Hal

ton

Re

gio

n (

1993

) 6

MN

R A

rea

Se

ns

itiv

e7

Hab

ita

t U

se 8



Hig

he

st B

ree

din

g E

vid

en

ce

Bre

edin

g S

tatu

s

Hig

he

st A

bu

nd

an

ce 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica)

G5 S4B,SZN THR H 2 H 6 H 4 H 1 H 2 T PROB 6

Tree Swallow (Tachycineta bicolor)

G5 S5B,SZN E H 4 H POSS 4

Black-capped Chickadee (Poecile atricapillus)

G5 S5 I/E S 1 S 5 S POSS 5

American Robin (Turdus migratorius)

G5 S5B,SZN E CF 3 CF 1 A 2 S 1 CF 5 FY 6 S 2 CF 4 S 4 P 3 FY CONF 6

Gray Catbird (Dumetella carolinensis)

G5 S5B,SZN I/E S 1 S 2 S POSS 2

European Starling (Sturnus vulgaris)

G5 SE I E CF 1 FY 8 FY 8 FY 5 S 4 FY CONF 8

Cedar Waxwing (Bombycilla cedrorum)

G5 S5B,SZN E P 3 S 4 S 6 S 1 T PROB 6

Yellow Warbler (Dendroica petechia)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S POSS 1

Common Yellowthroat (Geothlypis trichas)

G5 S5B,SZN I/E S 1 S POSS 1

Savannah Sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis)

G5 S5B,SZN X S 1 S 5 S 12 FY 12 S 3 S 2 FY CONF 12

Song Sparrow (Melospiza melodia)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S 1 S 1 S 4 S 10 AE 1 S 2 S 6 S 3 S 8 S 3 S 3 AE CONF 10

Northern Cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis)

G5 S5 I/E S 1 A 2 S 1 A PROB 2

Indigo Bunting (Passerina cyanea)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 2 S 2 T PROB 2

Brown-headed Cowbird (Molothrus ater)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S 1 S POSS 1

Red-winged Blackbird (Agelaius phoeniceus)

G5 S5B,SZN E A 5 FY 12 FY 6 S 2 S 3 AE 8 A 6 A 12 S 17 S 2 FY 14 FY CONF 17

Baltimore Oriole (Icterus galbula)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 1 S 1 P 2 T PROB 2

Common Grackle

G5 S5B,SZN E FY 6 A 1 S 2 FY 2 S 2 FY CONF 6

Species

GR

AN

K1

SR

AN

K2

CO

SE

WIC

3

MN

R4

SA

RA

Sta

tus

5

Sch

edu

le 5

Hal

ton

Re

gio

n (

1993

) 6

MN

R A

rea

Se

ns

itiv

e7

Hab

ita

t U

se 8



Hig

he

st B

ree

din

g E

vid

en

ce

Bre

edin

g S

tatu

s

Hig

he

st A

bu

nd

an

ce 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11 14-Jun-

11 29-Jun-

11

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

Bre

edin

g E

vid

en

ce

Ab

un

da

nce

(Quiscalus quiscula) American Goldfinch (Spinus tristis)

G5 S5B,SZN E S 2 P 6 P 2 P 4 P PROB 4

House Sparrow (Passer domesticus)

G5 SE I E S 1 S POSS 1

Total No. of Species

35

Halton Region

Uncommon 2

Invasive 2

Breeding Birds

Observed 1

Possible 18

Probable 9

Confirmed 7

Area Sensitive 2

Legend

1G-Rank (global) Global ranks are assigned by a consensus of the network of Conservation Data Centres (CDCs), scientific experts, and the Nature Conservancy to designate a rarity rank based on the range-wide status of a species, subspecies, or variety. (Global Status from MNR Biodiversity Explorer May 2011) G1 Extremely rare - usually 5 or fewer occurrences in the overall range or very few remaining individuals; or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extinction. G2 Very rare - usually between 5 and 20 occurrences in the overall range or with many individuals in fewer occurrences; or because of some factor(s) making it vulnerable to extinction. G3 Rare to uncommon - usually between 20 and 100 occurrences; may have fewer occurrences, but with a large number of individuals in some populations; may be susceptible to large-scale disturbances. G4 Common - usually more than 100 occurrences; usually not susceptible to immediate threats. G5 Very common - demonstrably secure under present conditions. 2S-Ranks (provincial) Provincial (or Subnational) ranks are used by the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) to set protection priorities for rare species and natural communities. These ranks are not legal designations. Provincial ranks are assigned in a manner similar to that described for global ranks, but consider only those factors within the political boundaries of Ontario. (Provinical Status from MNR Biodiversity Explorer May 2011) S1 Critically Imperiled - Critically imperiled in the nation or state/province because of extreme rarity (often 5 or fewer occurrences) or because of some factor(s) such as very steep declines making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state/province. S2 Imperiled - Imperiled in the nation or state/province because of rarity due to very restricted range, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), steep declines, or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the nation or state/province. S3 Vulnerable - Vulnerable in the nation or state/province due to a restricted range, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer), recent and widespread declines, or other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation. S4 Apparently Secure - Uncommon but not rare; some cause for long-term concern due to declines or other factors. S5 Secure - Common, widespread, and abundant in the nation or state/province. S#S# Range Rank - A numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate any range of uncertainty about the status of the species or community. Ranges cannot skip more than one rank (e.g., SU is used rather than S1S4). SAN Non-breeding accidental. SE Exotic - not believed to be a native component of Ontario's fauna. SZN Non-breeding migrants/vagrants. SZB Breeding migrants/vagrants. 3COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada) (federal status from COSEWIC May 2011) EXT Extinct - A species that no longer exists. EXP Extirpated - A species no longer existing in the wild in Canada, but occurring elsewhere. END Endangered - A species facing imminent extirpation or extinction. THR Threatened - A species likely to become endangered if limiting factors are not reversed. SC Special Concern (formerly vulnerable) - A species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. NAR Not At Risk - A species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk of extinction given the current circumstances. DD Data Deficient (formerly Indeterminate) - Available information is insufficient to resolve a species' eligibility for assessment or to permit an assessment of the species' risk of extinction. 4OMNR (Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources) (provincial status from MNR June 8 2011) The provincial review process is implemented by the MNR's Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). EXT Extinct - A species that no longer exists anywhere. EXP Extirpated - A species that no longer exists in the wild in Ontario but still occurs elsewhere. END Endangered - A species facing imminent extinction or extirpation in Ontario which is a candidate for regulation under Ontario's Endangered Species Act (ESA) (END-R designations are no longer relevant as species are covered under new ESA April 2009) THR Threatened - A species that is at risk of becoming endangered in Ontario if limiting factors are not reversed. SC Special Concern (formerly Vulnerable) - A species with characteristics that make it sensitive to human activities or natural events. NAR Not at Risk - A species that has been evaluated and found to be not at risk. DD Data Deficient (formerly Indeterminate) - A species for which there is insufficient information for a provincial status recommendation.

5SARA (Species at Risk Act) Status and Schedule The Act establishes Schedule 1, as the official list of wildlife species at risk. It classifies those species as being either Extirpated, Endangered, Threatened, or a Special Concern. Once listed, the measures to protect and recover a listed wildlife species are implemented. http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/sar/listing/listing_e.cfm EXT Extinct - A wildlife species that no longer exists. EXP Extirpated - A wildlife species that no longer exists in the wild in Canada, but exists elsewhere in the wild. END Endangered - A wildlife species that is facing imminent extirpation or extinction. THR Threatened - A wildlife species that is likely to become endangered if nothing is done to reverse the factors leading to its extirpation or extinction. SC Special Concern - A wildlife species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. Schedule 1: is the official list of species that are classified as extirpated, endangered, threatened, and of special concern. Schedule 2: species listed in Schedule 2 are species that had been designated as endangered or threatened, and have yet to be re-assessed by COSEWIC using revised criteria. Once these species have been re-assessed, they may be considered for inclusion in Schedule 1. Schedule 3: species listed in Schedule 3 are species that had been designated as special concern, and have yet to be re-assessed by COSEWIC using revised criteria. Once these species have been re-assessed, they may be considered for inclusion in Schedule 1. The Act establishes Schedule 1 as the official list of wildlife species at risk. However, please note that while Schedule 1 lists species that are extirpated, endangered, threatened and of special concern, the prohibitions do not apply to species of special concern. Species that were designated at risk by COSEWIC prior to October 1999 (Schedule 2 & 3) must be reassessed using revised criteria before they can be considered for addition to Schedule 1 of SARA. After they have been assessed, the Governor in Council may on the recommendation of the Minister, decide on whether or not they should be added to the List of Wildlife Species at Risk. Government of Canada. Species at Risk Public Registry. Website: [http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm May 24, 2011] Glossary: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/about/glossary/default_e.cfm#e Species Index A-Z: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/sar/index/default_e.cfm Species Listing by Schedule: http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/sar/listing/default_e.cfm 6 Regional Status Halton Region From : Halton Natural Areas Inventory (Dwyer 2006) A = Abundant >125 Stations C = Common 36-125 Stations U = Uncommon 15-35 Stations R= Rare < 15 Stations E = Extirpated no longer present in Halton Region I = Introduced an introduced species not native to Ontario Uncertain = Uncertain if species is present in Halton Region LS = Locally Significant M = Migration 7 MNR Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide Area Sensitive Species Area Sensitivity is defined as species requiring large areas of suitable habitat in order to sustain population numbers From: Ministry of Natural Resources. 2000. Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide. Fish and Wildlife Branch, Wildlife Section. Science Development and Transfer Branch, Southcentral Science Section. 151pp. + appendices. 8 Habitat Use I=interior species, I/E=interior edge species, E=edge species (Freemark and Collins, 1989); M/F=Marsh/Fen, S/B=Treed Swamp/Bog. Interior bird species require habitat which is often found 100m from the forest edge while Interior/Edge species are found within both interior and edge habitat. Often Interior and Interior/Edge are more sensitive to urban encroachment as they require these large, relatively undisturbed forest habitats to support viable populations. The increasing urbanization of rural areas often results in increased parasitism and predation as well as disturbance from human recreational activities (e.g. illegal bike trails, dumping and pets.) (Freemark, K. and Collins, B. 1989. Landscape ecology of birds breeding in temperate forest fragments. – In: Hagan III, J. M. and Johnston, D. W. (eds), Ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant landbirds. Smithsonian Inst. Press, pp. 443–454)

Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas - Breeding Evidence Codes OBSERVED X Species observed in its breeding season (no breeding evidence). POSSIBLE H Species observed in its breeding season in suitable nesting habitat. S Singing male(s) present, or breeding calls heard, in suitable nesting habitat in breeding season. PROBABLE P Pair observed in suitable nesting habitat in nesting season. T Permanent territory presumed through registration of territorial behaviour (song, etc.) on at least two days, a week or more appart, at the same place. D Courtship or display, including interaction between a male and a female or two males, including courtship feeding or copulation. V Visiting probable nest site A Agitated behaviour or anxiety calls of an adult. B Brood Patch on adult female or cloacal protuberance on adult male. N Nest-building or excavation of nest hole. CONFIRMED DD Distraction display or injury feigning. NU Used nest or egg shells found (occupied or laid within the period of the survey). FY Recently fledged young (nidicolous species) or downy young (nidifugous species), including incapable of sustained flight. AE Adult leaving or entering nest sites in circumstances indicating occupied nest. FS Adult carrying fecal sac.

environmental impact study - oakville planning/da-su11003-eis.pdf · environmental impact study 3...

Documents