Appendix C: Subject Lands Status Report July 2017

Transcription

1 Appendix C: Subject Lands Status Report July 2017

2 LONDON RT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT City of London Project No Distribution: 1 c Client 1 c File Canada Inc. 126 Don Hillock Drive, Unit 2 Aurora, Ontario L4G 0G9 Phone: Fax:

3 June 2, 2017 City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue, PO Box 5035 London, Ontario N6A 4L9 Attention: Mr. Doug MacRae, Division Manager, Transportation and Planning Dear Mr. MacRae: Subject: London Rapid Transit Project Environmental Impact Study Canada Inc. () has been retained to complete an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the proposed Rapid Transit (RT) Project for the City of London. To inform planning, design and routing for the proposed RT system, prepared a Subject Lands Status Report (SLSR) which summarized available data from past studies and current field investigations to help understand the existing environmental conditions and potential constraints within the Study Area. This report, dated February 10, 2017, focused on natural heritage features adjacent to the preliminary transit corridors and was used in the determination of the preferred option. The RT corridors, as detailed in the Rapid Transit Master Plan and approved by London City Council on May 16, 2017, incorporate changes to the routes examined in the SLSR. Additional ecological field investigations will be completed as part of the EIS during the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP) to address the areas that have changed. Particular focus will be given to areas where the proposed infrastructure is likely to extend beyond the existing road allowance into Natural Heritage Features as identified on Schedule B-1 of the City of London Official Plan, or as identified through this process. The existing environmental conditions and potential for negative impacts associated with the approved RT corridors, will be described and assessed in the EIS report. Measures to avoid, minimize and/or mitigate identified impacts will be provided as part of the EIS. Yours sincerely, Erin Fitzpatrick, M.Sc. Ecologist, Environment EAF/nah ref.: H:\Proj\MARKHAM\14\ \220 - Natural - GTA Environment\Wp\EAF-L LondonRT SLSR Letter for TMP_2Jun2017.docx Unit Don Hillock Drive Aurora, ON, Canada L4G 0G9 Tel.: Fax: wsp.com Canada Inc.

4 LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT Project Team: STAFF ROLE Dan Reeves Senior Biologist and Project Advisor Erin Fitzpatrick Project Manager and Lead Biologist Erika Spencer Former Senior Biologist and Project Advisor (to August 2016) Austin Adams Former Project Manager and Lead Biologist (to October 2016) Sophie Gibbs Terrestrial Biologist Victoria Pyett Aquatics Biologist Joshua Vandermeulen Wildlife Biologist Eric Peissel Project Director Record of SLSR Revisions DATE EDITOR PURPOSE November 29, 2016 November 30, 2016 Erin Fitzpatrick Dan Reeves January 24, 2017 Erin Fitzpatrick January 26, 2017 Dan Reeves February 8, 2017 Erin Fitzpatrick To address Environmental Parks and Planning Comments issued on July 9, 2016 To review updated report To address Environmental Parks and Planning Comments issued on January 4, 2017 Reviewed alterations to the report Alternations to remove sensitive data for public release H:\Proj\MARKHAM\14\ \220 - Natural - GTA Environment\Wp\EAF-DJR - London_RT_Subject Lands Status Report_2017_public.docx

5 February 10, 2017 Mr. MacRae Division Manager, Transportation Planning & Design City of London 300 Dufferin Avenue, PO Box 5035 London, Ontario N6A 4L9 Subject: Subject Lands Status Report London Rapid Transit (RT) Project City of London, Middlesex County Project No Dear Mr. MacRae, We are pleased to provide you with a Subject Lands Status Report (SLSR) of the preferred routes for the City of London Rapid Transit (RT) Project. Please note that recent modifications to the alignment are not reflected in this report, but will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Study for the project. The intent of this report is to summarize the available data within the Study Area from past studies and current field investigations to help understand the existing conditions of the natural features and potential constraints along the RT preferred routes. This summary is presented as the initial phase of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the City of London RT Project. The City of London has indicated that in general, should a preferred infrastructure routing option go beyond the existing road allowance and then into a Natural Heritage Feature as identified on Schedule B-1 of the City of London Official Plan (OP) or identified through the process, then an EIS would be required which identifies potential impacts, mitigation and compensation for those areas beyond the road allowance. This SLSR has been prepared in advance of an EIS scoping meeting to be held with the City of London Technical Review Team, to determine if the existing conditions data presented in this SLSR are sufficient to proceed to the impact assessment phase of the EIS. Thank you for the opportunity to complete this assignment. Please contact the undersigned with any questions or comments. Yours truly, Canada Inc. Dan Reeves, M.Sc. Project Biologist H:\Proj\MARKHAM\14\ \220 - Natural - GTA Environment\Wp\EAF-DJR - London_RT_Subject Lands Status Report_2017_public.docx Canada Inc. 126 Don Hillock Drive. Unit 2 Aurora, Ontario L4G 4G9

6 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY CONTEXT PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT CITY OF LONDON OFFICIAL PLAN UPPER THAMES CONSERVATION AUTHORITY REGULATION 157/ ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SPECIES AT RISK ACT FISHERIES ACT AND NAVIGATION PROTECTION ACT THAMES VALLEY CORRIDOR PLAN STUDY APPROACH BACKGROUND REVIEW AGENCY CONSULTATION METHODS FIELD PROGRAM VEGETATION SURVEYS WILDLIFE SURVEYS BIRD SURVEYS HERPTOFAUNA SURVEYS GENERAL WILDLIFE SURVEYS AQUATIC HABITAT ASSESSMENT HABITAT CHARACTERIZATION WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS TEMPERATURE PH DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONDUCTIVITY BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY City of London No

7 iv 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS VEGETATION ECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION SPECIES AT RISK TREE SCREENING FLORA ASSESSMENT SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD WILDLIFE BIRDS SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD HERPTOFAUNA SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD MAMMALS AND GENERAL WILDLIFE SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD AQUATIC HABITAT SITE 1: TRIBUTARY OF THE THAMES RIVER AT OXFORD STREET WEST BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES SITE 2: NORTH THAMES RIVER AT RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND QUEEN S AVENUE BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES SITE 3A: MEDWAY CREEK AT WESTERN ROAD BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES SITE 4: NORTH THAMES RIVER AT UNIVERSITY DRIVE BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES SITE 5: SOUTH THAMES RIVER AT WELLINGTON ROAD No City of London

8 v BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES SIGNIFICANCE AND SENSITIVITY DESIGNATED AREAS SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS SIGNIFICANT VALLEYLANDS SIGNIFICANT WOODLANDS SPECIES AT RISK AND SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN FLORA SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL TERRESTRIAL FAUNA AND INSECT SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL PREVIOUS STUDIES AQUATIC SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE HABITAT SEASONAL CONCENTRATION AREAS RARE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES OR SPECIALIZED WILDLIFE HABITATS SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN HABITAT ANIMAL MOVEMENT CORRIDORS CLOSURE REFERENCES City of London No

9 vi TABLES TABLE 1 TABLE 2 TABLE 3 TABLE 4 TABLE 5 FIELD SURVEY SUMMARY HABITAT CHARACTERIZATION PARAMETERS ACCEPTABLE PWQO FOR DISSOLVED OXYGEN VEGETATION COMMUNITIES IN THE STUDY AREA AQUATIC SPECIES AT RISK DOCUMENTED WITHIN THE STUDY AREA TABLE 6 UTRCA FISH SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 1 TABLE 7 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR SITE 1 TABLE 8 UTRCA BENTHIC SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 1 TABLE 9 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR SITE 2 TABLE 10 UTRCA BENTHIC SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 2 TABLE 11 UTRCA FISH SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 3A TABLE 12 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR SITE 3A TABLE 13 UTRCA BENTHIC SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 3A TABLE 14 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR SITE 4 TABLE 15 WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS FOR SITE 5 TABLE 16 UTRCA BENTHIC SAMPLING DATA FOR SITE 5 TABLE 17 HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES OF SPECIES AT RISK AND SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN TABLE 18 SEASONAL CONCENTRATION AREAS WITHIN 120 M OF THE STUDY AREA TABLE 19 RARE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES WITHIN 120 M OF THE STUDY AREA TABLE 20 SPECIALIZED WILDLIFE HABITATS WITHIN 120 M OF THE STUDY AREA TABLE 21 HABITATS OF SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN WITHIN 120 M OF THE STUDY AREA TABLE 22 ANIMAL MOVEMENT CORRIDORS FIGURES FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4 FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 FIGURE 7 MAP INDEX NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES WEST AREA NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES EAST AREA NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES NORTH AREA NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES SOUTH CENTRE NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES SOUTH AREA EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 1 WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET No City of London

10 vii FIGURE 8 FIGURE 9 FIGURE 10 FIGURE 11 FIGURE 12 FIGURE FIGURE 26 EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 2 NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 3A CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD, SITE 3B WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 4 NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 5 THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 6 WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD ECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION SPECIES AT RISK, SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN AND SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE HABITAT APPENDICES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE FIELD PROGRAM SPECIES LISTS SITE PHOTOGRAPHS FIELD NOTES SAR AND SCC SCREENING LIST CURRICULUM VITAE OF AUTHORS City of London No

11 1 1 INTRODUCTION The City of London, Ontario has retained the IBI Group (IBI) in collaboration with Canada Inc. () to provide engineering consulting and environmental assessment services for the development of a Rapid Transit (RT) network corridor in London. This RT network comprises two lines, a Red or L Line and Blue or 7 Line (Figure 1). The Red line runs south on Richmond Street and Clarence Street to the City centre, then runs east along King and Dundas Streets, then north on Highbury Avenue to Oxford Street. The Blue Line runs along Oxford Street from Wonderland Road to the City Centre, then turns south along Wellington Road to Bradley Avenue. As a part of the RT design process, a preliminary evaluation was conducted of the Natural Heritage Features and constraints to help determine the preferred RT routes. Potential impacts to Natural Heritage Features within 300 m were considered when evaluating preferred routing options in order to minimize potential environmental impacts. These Natural Heritage Features have been considered in the development of the project and those features which could be avoided by routing alternatives have been incorporated into the development of the Preferred Routes, which are presented in Figures 1 to 6. The City of London has indicated that in general, should a preferred infrastructure routing option go beyond the existing road allowance and then into a Natural Heritage Feature as identified on Schedule B-1 of the City of London Official Plan (OP) or identified through the process, then an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) would be required which identifies potential impacts, mitigation and compensation for those areas beyond the road allowance, consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (OMMAH, 2014), City of London Official Plan (London, 2006) and the London Environmental Management Guidelines (London, 2007). It is noted that it is the preference of the Municipal Council that the preferred location of infrastructure not be within the Natural Heritage System (Section of the Official Plan). As part of the Environmental Assessment (EA) process and to facilitate approvals upon final design, the route will require a detailed EIS. This Subject Lands Status Report (SLSR) has been prepared in advance of an EIS scoping meeting to be held with the Technical Review Team, comprised of members of the City of London staff, with invitations to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, MNRF, DFO and the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC). The review and comments provided by the Technical Review Team will determine if the existing conditions data presented in this SLSR is sufficient to proceed to the impact assessment phase of the EIS. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY CONTEXT 2.1 PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (OMMAH), 2014) is a planning document that provides a framework for, and governs development within, the Province of Ontario. In order to preserve various ecological resources deemed significant in the Province, development lands must be assessed for the presence of natural heritage features and sensitive hydrological features prior to construction. Natural heritage features (listed below) are both defined and afforded protections under the PPS. Linkages between natural heritage features, surface water and groundwater features are also recognized and afforded similar protections under the policy. Section of the PPS also requires that the diversity and connectivity of natural heritage features and the long-term ecological function of natural heritage systems be maintained, restored or improved where possible. City of London No

12 2 Natural heritage features as defined by the PPS (OMMAH, 2014) include: Natural Heritage Systems; Fish Habitat; Habitats of Endangered and Threatened Species; Significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI); Significant Wetlands; Significant Coastal Wetlands; Significant Wildlife Habitat; Significant Woodlands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E (excluding islands in Lake Huron and the St. Mary s River); and, Significant Valleylands in Ecoregions 6E and 7E (excluding islands in Lake Huron and the St. Mary s River). Natural Heritage Features within the 120 m area of influence (except 50 m for ANSIs) of development lands must be assessed. Planning policies as they relate to surface water features and groundwater features are outlined within Section 2.3 of the PPS (OMMAH, 2014). Specifically, development and site alteration in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive groundwater features should be restricted to ensure the protection, improvement, and/or restoration of these features and their hydrologic functions, as well as the quality and quantity of water within the watershed and adjacent watersheds. Although this project is not considered to be development or site alteration, the RT network corridor project would include, or be considered, infrastructure in this case. To be consistent with the City s proposed process for amalgamating Environmental Assessments (EA) and Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) the City completed an SLSR in advance of the EIS for this project. 2.2 CITY OF LONDON OFFICIAL PLAN The City of London Official Plan (2006) provides for the recognition and protection of natural features and ecological processes that are important to the sustainability of healthy urban and rural environments. The components of the City of London Natural Heritage System are identified in Chapter 15 of the Official Plan, and include Natural Heritage Features that are mapped on Schedule B-1: Provincially Significant Wetlands; Locally Significant Wetlands; Unevaluated Wetlands; Environmentally Significant Areas (ESAs); Potential Environmentally Significant Areas; Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors; Unevaluated Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors (which are considered equivalent to Significant Valleylands in the PPS); Earth Science and Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI); Significant Woodlands; No City of London

13 3 Woodlands; and, Unevaluated Vegetation Patches. Other elements of the City of London Natural Heritage System are defined in the Official Plan, but are unmapped on Schedule B-1 as they are also based on criteria established by agencies such as the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) or the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), and often require specific surveys and evaluation such as that provided through an environmental assessment process, in consultation with the applicable agencies. These Natural Heritage Features include: Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species; Significant Wildlife Habitat; and Fish Habitat. Section of the Official Plan (2006) states that The Natural Heritage policies establish the requirements for the refinement and protection of the Natural Heritage System through public ownership/acquisition, stewardship, management and rehabilitation, ecological buffers and the preparation of area planning studies, environmental impact studies, environmental assessments or conservation master plans. The City of London has prepared Environmental Management Guidelines (2007) setting out in more detail the requirements of environmental studies for Environmental Impact Studies and/or Subject Lands Status Reports. These guidelines provided the basis for the preparation of this SLSR. This SLSR is has been prepared to determine the Natural Heritage Features within the Study Area in advance of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the Project. As this Project will enhance the infrastructure of the City of London, the EIS policies of Section Infrastructure must be satisfied, which include: i) It is the preference of the Municipal Council that the preferred location of infrastructure not be within the Natural Heritage System. New or expanded infrastructure shall only be permitted within the Natural Heritage System where it is clearly demonstrated through an environmental assessment process under the Environmental Assessment Act that it is the preferred location for the infrastructure, and that the alternatives are all evaluated in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan, including the completion of an environmental impact study accepted by the City. For any alternative location identified within the Natural Heritage System, an environmental impact study, accepted by the City, shall be completed to further assess potential impacts, identify mitigation measures, and determine appropriate compensatory mitigation. Any alternative where the impacts of the proposed works as identified in the environmental impact study would result in the loss of the ecological features or functions of the component of the Natural Heritage System affected by the proposed works, such that the natural heritage feature would no longer be determined to be significant, shall be reconsidered. The City and other relevant public authorities shall include methods for minimizing impacts when reviewing proposals to construct transportation, communication, sewerage or other infrastructure in the Natural Heritage System. ii) Where there is more than one type of infrastructure, the rights-of-way shall be combined, wherever feasible, to reduce the extent of the intrusion into the area. iii) As a condition of approving infrastructure projects within the Natural Heritage System, the City shall require specific mitigation and compensatory mitigation measures that area identified in the accepted environmental impact study to address impacts to natural features and functions caused by the construction or maintenance of the infrastructure. City of London No

14 4 For the purposes of this Plan, mitigation shall mean the replacement of the natural heritage feature removed or disturbed on a one-for-one land area basis. Compensatory mitigation shall mean additional measures required to address impacts on the functions of the natural heritage system affected by the proposed works. The extent of the compensation required shall be identified in the environmental impact study, and shall be relative to both the degree of the proposed disturbance, and the component(s) of the natural heritage system removed and/or disturbed. Compensatory mitigation may be provided in forms such as, but not limited to: a) additional rehabilitation and/or remediation beyond the area directly affected by the proposed works; b) off-site works to restore, replace or enhance the ecological functions affected by the proposed works; and, c) replacement ratios greater than the one-for-one land area required to mitigate the impacts of the proposed works. 2.3 UPPER THAMES CONSERVATION AUTHORITY REGULATION 157/06 The Conservation Authorities Act gives individual conservation authorities the power to regulate development and activities in or adjacent to river or stream valleys, Great Lakes and large inland lakes and shorelines, watercourses, hazardous lands and wetlands. Regulations made under the Conservation Authorities Act specify the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulations managed by individual Conservation Authorities. These regulations apply to lands within river or stream valleys, flood plains, wetlands, watercourses, lakes, hazardous lands or lands within 120 m of a Provincially Significant Wetland or wetlands greater than two hectares (ha), or lands within 30 m of non-provincially significant wetlands. Development or site alteration within these regulated areas may be permitted provided development is conducted in accordance with existing policies. The RT Route is located within the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) jurisdiction, and crossings of the Thames River, North Thames River and Medway Creek are within the UTRCA Regulated Area. Work must be conducted in accordance with Ontario Regulation 157/06 (Government of Ontario, 2006) made under the Conservation Authorities Act and must meet the requirements of the UTRCA. 2.4 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT The Endangered Species Act, 2007 (Government of Ontario) outlines the methods for the classification of Species at Risk in Ontario, and provides for their protection and recovery. Species at Risk in Ontario are listed under Regulation 230/08. The MNRF is mandated to ensure accurate database information for the identification, listing and conduct of ongoing assessments for significant Endangered species and their related habitats. The Endangered Species Act, 2007 defines the significant habitat of Endangered or Threatened species as the habitat, as approved by the MNRF, that is necessary for the maintenance, survival and/or the recovery of a naturally occurring or reintroduced population of Endangered or Threatened species, and where those areas of occurrences are occupied or habitually occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of their life cycle. Regulation 242/08 of the Endangered Species Act, 2007 outlines the limitations and requirements regarding impacts to Species at Risk and their habitats. No City of London

15 5 2.5 SPECIES AT RISK ACT The Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA; Government of Canada, 2002) affords legal protection to flora and fauna Species at Risk listed on Schedule 1 of the Act on Federal lands, listed aquatic species, and migratory bird species protected by the Migratory Birds Convention Act (Government of Canada,1994). Mandatory recovery planning is required for species listed on Schedule 1. Species on Schedules 2 and 3 of the Act are species designated as at risk by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) prior to October 1999 and needed to be reassessed using revised criteria before they could be considered for addition to Schedule 1. Schedule 2 includes species that are listed as Endangered or Threatened, and Schedule 3 lists Special Concern species; however, neither Schedule 2 nor 3 species are protected by the Act. 2.6 FISHERIES ACT AND NAVIGATION PROTECTION ACT The Fisheries Act, c. F-14 (Government of Canada, 1985a) provides for the conservation and protection of fish habitat essential to sustaining freshwater and marine fish species. There are two main provisions outlined by the Act. The first provision directs the management of threats to fish and fish habitat, by managing threats to fish that are part of or support commercial, recreational or Aboriginal fisheries with the goal of ensuring their productivity and ongoing sustainability. The second provision relates to pollution prevention, by prohibiting the deposit of deleterious substances into waters frequented by fish, unless authorized by regulations under the Fisheries Act or other federal legislation. Fish habitat, as defined by the Fisheries Act, c. F-14, includes the spawning grounds and nursery, rearing, food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life processes. The Act also includes a broader definition of fish as shellfish, crustaceans, and marine mammals at all stages of their life cycles. Where the project is expected to result in serious harm to fish, the DFO is likely to require the proponent to complete and submit a standardized form with project information. DFO will identify authorization requirements, such as an offsetting plan (e.g. compensation). In addition, should a proposed crossing occur within the habitat of protected Endangered mussel species, mussel relocation may need to be undertaken. This would trigger a DFO Fisheries Act Authorization and MNRF permitting under the Endangered Species Act. Transport Canada administers the Navigation Protection Act N-22 (Government of Canada, 1985b) which regulates work over, under or in a navigable waterway. It will be necessary for the proponent to undertake a screening to determine if the waterway is listed as navigable on the Act s schedule and if so, to complete and submit the standardized application form. 2.7 THAMES VALLEY CORRIDOR PLAN The Thames Valley Corridor Plan (TVCP; City of London, 2011) supports the City of London Official Plan (2006) by recommending measures to protect and enhance the natural features within the Thames River Valley. Section 3.3 of the Thames Valley Corridor Plan describes various strategies for land use management and planning. City of London No

16 6 3 STUDY APPROACH IBI in collaboration with was retained to complete an EIS for the design of the London RT Route (Figures 1 to 6). As an initial step toward the EIS, this SLSR has been prepared in advance of an EIS scoping meeting to be held with the Technical Review Team, comprised of members of the City of London staff, with invitations to the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority, MNRF, DFO, and the Environmental and Ecological Planning Advisory Committee (EEPAC). The review and comments provided by the Technical Review Team will determine if the existing conditions data presented in this SLSR is sufficient to proceed to the impact assessment phase of the EIS. As a part of the RT design process, a preliminary evaluation was conducted of the Natural Heritage Features and constraints to help determine the preferred RT routes. Potential impacts to these Natural Heritage Features were considered when evaluating preferred routing options in order to minimize required EIS effort, mitigation and compensation. The preferred routes have been selected based on the aforementioned information and are presented in Figures 1 to 6. This SLSR incorporates natural heritage information from a variety of sources including a background/secondary source data evaluation, a summation of previously conducted studies in the Study Area, and the results of the supplemental field surveys completed. The field surveys conducted for the Project were designed to supplement the existing knowledge, available data, and reports; filling gaps in the existing data for specific locations or natural heritage features along the London RT Preferred Routes. A Study Area including the preferred routes and lands within 300 m was considered to capture identified Natural Heritage Features with the potential for impact. The majority of the routes fall within developed urban areas, and the potential interactions with Natural Heritage Features is limited. However, seven locations along the preferred routes have been identified that overlap with Natural Heritage Features identified in the City of London Official Plan (2006). These Sites are the primary focus of the SLSR, and include: Site 1: Woodlands Along Oxford Street; Site 2: North Thames Crossing on Riverside Drive; Site 3A: Crossing of Medway Creek on Western Road; Site 3B: Woodlands Along Western Road; Site 4: North Thames Crossing on University Drive; Site 5: Thames Crossing on Wellington Road; and, Site 6: Westminster Ponds East of Wellington Road. These sites and features have been identified based on recommended distances for defining adjacent lands. The existing conditions of Natural Features along the preferred London RT routes are described using these sites as reference to their locations within the Study Area (Figures 7 to 12). While Site 3B does not contain Natural Heritage Features defined in the City of London Official Plan, the woodlands hold the potential for Natural Heritage interactions and were therefore included in the assessment. No City of London

17 7 3.1 BACKGROUND REVIEW Relevant information resources were consulted prior to designing the field program, and over the course of the report preparation, as documented below. The City of London was consulted to provide or identify past studies within or near the Study Area that would have applicability to the Project. The field program was designed to supplement and complete this secondary source information, providing a full data set for the Study Area. Full references are provided in the Literature Cited section of this report. Aerial Photographs and Satellite Images; Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario internet site (Bird Studies Canada, 2006); Conservation Authorities Act, Ontario Regulation 157/06 Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (Government of Ontario, 2006); City of London Official Plan, 1989 (2006); City of London Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) Guidelines and Checklist (2015): Distribution maps for the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority Aquatic Species at Risk (Conservation Ontario, 2014); Dingman Creek Subwatershed Study Update. Volume 1: Main Report (Delcan, 2005); Endangered Species Act, 2007 (Government of Ontario, 2007); Environmental Management Guidelines (City of London, 2007); Existing Ecological Conditions Report Mudcreek Subwatershed (Delcan, 2013); Master Plan Update 2005 Westminster Ponds / Pond Mills Environmentally Significant Area (UTRCA, 2005); Middlesex Natural Heritage Study (URTCA, 2003); Middlesex Natural Heritage Systems Study: A study to identify the natural heritage systems in Middlesex County (Middlesex County, 2014); Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Natural Heritage Areas Mapping, including Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) Make-a-Map Online Tool and Species List data (MNRF, 2015a); MNRF NHIC Species Lists (2015b); Natural Heritage Evaluation and Inventory, Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA (Dillon, 2015); Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (OMNR, 2010); Provincial Policy Statement (OMMAH, 2014); Regionally Rare Plants of Middlesex County (UTRCA, 2002); Significant Wildlife Habitat: Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000); Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List (Government of Ontario (Ontario), 2016); Species at Risk Public Registry (Government of Canada, 2016); Subject Lands Status Report Harris Park (NRSI, 2013a); SoHo Redevelopment Environmental Impact Study (NRSI, 2013b); Thames Valley Corridor Plan (City of London, 2011); City of London No

18 8 UTRCA 2012 London Watershed Report Cards (UTRCA, 2012); and, Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA: Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report Volume 1 (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015). 3.2 AGENCY CONSULTATION The MNRF was contacted to obtain information pertaining to Natural Heritage Features, Species at Risk (SAR), Species of Conservation Concern (SCC) and other environmental constraints along the RT route to ensure that available information was reviewed prior to initiating the field program. A copy of correspondence from Aylmer District MNRF staff outlining potential concerns in the vicinity of the RT route is provided in Appendix A. The MNRF administers the Endangered Species Act and Public Lands Act (Government of Ontario, 1990). Where the alignment has potential to affect a Species at Risk, or their habitat, approval may be required under the Endangered Species Act. Where the bed of a watercourse is disturbed or altered, authorization under the Public Lands Act may be necessary. The Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) was also contacted to obtain information pertaining to Natural Heritage Features, Species at Risk (SAR), Species of Conservation Concern (SCC), and other environmental constraints along the RT route to ensure that available information was reviewed prior to initiating the field program. The UTRCA was able to provide fish, mussel, and benthic invertebrate study records for locations near each of the crossings in the Study Area. The fish records sent were from Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) sampling runs. A copy of correspondence from UTRCA staff outlining potential concerns in the vicinity of the RT route is provided in Appendix A. 4 METHODS 4.1 FIELD PROGRAM Field survey visits were conducted on 14 occasions between August, 2015 and October, Details of each site visit are provided in Table 1. Field surveys were conducted as per the City of London Environmental Management Guidelines (2007) to assess terrestrial, aquatic, wetland and wildlife resources within the Study Area and to confirm the presence of Natural Heritage Features and general site characteristics. Focus was given to rounding out information on portions of the Study Area or potential taxa where data may be deficient. While each field survey had a primary purpose, incidental wildlife observations were collected during all surveys. Lists of vegetation, birds, amphibians, aquatic and incidental wildlife species observed by during the field surveys are provided in Appendix B. Photographs were taken during all field survey visits, and representative photos are presented in Appendix C. Copies of field notes are provided in Appendix D. Prior to the field program, satellite images of the property, land use and topographical maps were reviewed to identify the presence of Natural Heritage Features, available habitat and the potential for SAR and SCC on the RT Preferred Routes. Background/secondary sources, including the Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) data (MNRF, 2015b), were reviewed for records of Species at Risk, Significant Plant Communities, Wildlife Concentration Areas and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) on or near the Study Area. No City of London

19 9 The Study Area (Figures 1 to 6) covered in the background review included the Rights of Way (RoW) for the planned routes plus 300 m on either side; whereas, the boundaries of the seven sites were largely determined by the extent of existing Natural Heritage Features. Field surveys considered the adjacent lands, but focused on immediate impact areas as roadway expansion is likely to have the greatest potential for impact directly within the infrastructure footprint. Table 1: Field Survey Summary SURVEY METHODS SURVEY DATES STAFF Vegetation Vegetation surveys of Sites 1 to 6 were completed on at least two dates (once in spring and once in summer/fall). Focus was placed on rare species and SAR identified in the background review. Vegetation communities and land uses within 50 m of the RT Route was classified using the Ecological Land Classification (ELC) for Southern Ontario (Lee et al. 1998). Spring flora surveys were conducted at Sites 1 to 6 on May 26, 2016 with emphasis on spring ephemeral species. Surveys of documented SAR tree occurrences within the RoW were completed to verify species identifications (August 26, and October 17, 2016). Birds Amphibians Aug 28, 2015 Aug 31, 2015 Sept 3, 2015 Sept 17, 2015 Sept 29, 2015 May 26, 2016 Aug 26, 2016 Oct 17, 2016 Two surveys were completed June 3, 2016 between May 24 and July 10, the June 13, 2016 official survey window. An active survey was conducted at Sites 1 through 6 along the RT Route to cover the range of habitats available on the Sites Three evening field surveys for breeding amphibians were conducted at each of the 7 sites Surveys were 3 minutes in duration, and began at least a half hour after sunset on evenings with suitable weather conditions. April 11, 2016 May 11, 2016 June 1, 2016 Sophie Gibbs, Torrie Pyett, Josh Vandermeulen Joshua Vandermeulen Joshua Vandermeulen City of London No

20 10 SURVEY METHODS SURVEY DATES STAFF General Wildlife Aquatic Species & Habitat Supplemental observations of mammals, birds, insects, amphibians, and reptiles observed by staff were recorded during each field visit. Evidence of use (e.g. browse, tracks / trails, scat, burrows, and vocalizations) was also noted. Water quality data (water temperature, ph, conductivity) was collected Description of stream anatomy including physical (pools, riffles runs) and biological (aquatic vegetation) features. Aug 19, 2015 Aug 28, 2015 Aug 31, 2015 Sept. 3, 2015 Sept 17, 2015 Sept 29, 2015 April 11, 2016 May 11, 2016 May 26, 2016 June 1, 2016 June 3, 2016 June 13, 2016 Aug 19, 2015 Aug 28, 2015 Joshua Vandermeulen, Sophie Gibbs, Torrie Pyett Sophie Gibbs, Torrie Pyett 4.2 VEGETATION SURVEYS The scope of vegetation fieldwork and analyses included the following: Vegetation surveys were conducted between August 2015 and October 2016 (Table 1) for Sites 1 to 6, with emphasis on the identification of rare or Endangered vegetation species. Dominant and characteristic vegetation was described, and distinguishing features were noted for individual Sites, as required. A vascular plant species list was prepared based on the botanical inventory work (Appendix B) and a copy of the field notes are provided in Appendix D. Vegetation communities and land uses within 50 m of the RT route have been mapped (Figures 13 25) using the standardized Ecological Land Classification (ELC) for southern Ontario first approximation (Lee et al., 1998). For vegetation communities where the first approximation ELC does not provide an adequate description, the pending 2008 second approximation description has been used (Lee, 2008). Vegetation communities are described in Section (Table 4). Vegetation community sensitivity and significance was evaluated with guidance from the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000) and the NHIC Ontario Plant Community (MNRF, 2015b). The potential for rare vegetation communities in the Study Area are summarized in Section The RT route was screened for Species at Risk trees. This included verifying existing City of London records of Species at Risk. Results of this screening exercise are provided in Section Plant species status was evaluated using the rankings within the Middlesex Natural Heritage Study (UTRCA, 2003) and the Regionally Rare Plants of Middlesex County Updated 2002 (UTRCA, 2002), for regional significance; the current Species at Risk in Ontario List (MNRF, 2016) for Ontario Species at Risk; and, the Species at Risk Act (Schedules 1 and 3), for Species at Risk in Canada. No City of London

21 WILDLIFE SURVEYS BIRD SURVEYS Breeding bird survey protocols were completed based on recommendations given by the Forest Bird Monitoring Protocol (FBMP; Konze and McLaren, 1997) and Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas (OBBA; Bird Studies Canada et al., 2006). The Forest Bird Monitoring Protocol recommends completing standardized point counts to survey an area for breeding birds. However, these point counts are required to be at least 250 m apart and at least 100 m from the edge of a habitat type. Due to the limitations of the point count method for small sites with variable habitat, an active search was determined to be the most accurate, thorough, and efficient way to sample the breeding bird species within the various sites. This involved looking and listening for birds while moving between the different habitats at each Site. Breeding bird surveys were conducted on June 3 and June 13, Both surveys were completed between May 24 and July 10, 2016, the window recommended by the OBBA. At least six days separated the two rounds of surveys, and the surveys were completed within five hours of sunrise, in accordance with the protocols. While completing the surveys, breeding evidence was noted for each species. Breeding evidence is divided into four categories: confirmed (CONF), probable (PROB), possible (POSS), and none (NONE). Confirmed breeding evidence includes observations involving young or eggs; observations of adult birds carrying food, nesting material, or a fecal sac; observations of adult birds involved in a distraction display; or observations of adult birds exhibiting physiological evidence of a brood patch. Probable breeding evidence includes observations of a bird occupying territory for at least 7 days, visiting a nest site, or exhibiting territorial behaviour; observations of a pair in appropriate habitat; or observations of a pair copulating. Possible breeding evidence includes observations of a singing male or observations of a bird in suitable breeding habitat. Migrant or vagrant birds are considered to have no breeding evidence HERPTOFAUNA SURVEYS Amphibian survey methodology was based on the Marsh Monitoring Program Amphibian Survey outlined by Bird Studies Canada (BSC), and is further described as follows: Three surveys were conducted between April 1 and June 30; survey dates were April 11, May 11 and June 1, Field Survey details are provided in Table 1. Surveys were three minutes in duration and commenced no earlier than one half-hour after sunset and ended before midnight; Surveys took place during evenings with little wind and minimum night air temperatures of 5 C, 10 C and 17 C for each of the three respective survey periods; Surveys were conducted using a semi-circular sampling area at each site. For the five sites located adjacent to a watercourse, two surveys were completed; one facing upstream and a second facing downstream. Subsequent surveys were conducted at the same survey locations; For each call heard, the approximate distance to each call was recorded as being greater than or less than 100 m from the survey location and call level codes were assigned as follows: Code 1: individual calls do not overlap and calling individuals can be discretely counted; Code 2: calls of individuals sometimes overlap, but numbers of individuals can still be estimated Code 3: overlap among calls seems continuous (full chorus), and a count estimate is impossible. City of London No

22 12 Sites near open water were surveyed for basking turtles during all daytime wildlife surveys. General reptile surveys were completed by visual observation during each site visit, and included an assessment of the potential for reptile hibernacula. Field surveys were conducted in forested areas, along the edges of watercourses and underneath the bridges. Debris, logs, and other suitable cover objects were randomly lifted and inspected GENERAL WILDLIFE SURVEYS Visual observations of area wildlife (including mammals, reptiles, amphibians and insects) were recorded during the field surveys. Wildlife observations were based on observations such as incidental contact, scat evidence, and tracks. Incidental wildlife observations for each site are included in Appendix B. 4.4 AQUATIC HABITAT ASSESSMENT An aquatic habitat assessment was completed in August 2015 in order to document existing aquatic habitat to complement the fish occurrence information provided by the UTRCA (discussed below). The assessment was completed using a standardized protocol documented by the province in the Environmental Guide for Fish and Fish Habitat (Ministry of Transportation, 2009). The protocol includes collection of existing condition information, determination of scale of project negative effects, and overall identification of project risk. For the London RT Project, the protocol to collect existing condition information was used HABITAT CHARACTERIZATION Various characteristics, including stream morphology and riparian features, contribute to the overall condition of the watercourse. The protocol uses the following classifications and definitions to describe the watercourse (Table 2). Table 2: Habitat Characterization Parameters CHARACTERISTIC Channel Type Permanency Aquatic Habitat Type DESCRIPTION This identifies if the channel has been altered from its original condition, such as through ditching, straightening, or realignment. The permanency of the watercourse is described as: Permanent: Intermittent: Feature flows 9 or more consecutive months of the year under average conditions and generally has a defined channel bed and bank Feature flows less than 9 consecutive months under average conditions and has a poorly defined channel Ephemeral: Feature flows for short periods during the spring or during a runoff event. It generally doesn t have any definable channels Aquatic habitat is generally classified as one as one of four types: Riffle: Areas of fast-flowing, shallow water, where the surface is broken by bed material. Velocities range between 0.25 and 0.40 m/s; Run: Areas typically found at the head of a pool, consisting of fast flowing water, with greater depths than a riffle; Pool: Areas of a watercourse which are deep with low velocity ( m/s) and smooth surface. Pools are commonly associated with the meander of a channel; or, Flats: Flats are areas consisting of slow ( m/s), unagitated flows. No City of London

23 13 CHARACTERISTIC Channel Dimensions Substrate Bank Stability Habitat Contributors DESCRIPTION The term wetted and bankfull are used to describe the observed and most extensive condition of the width and depth of the channel, respectively. The bankfull width provides an indication of what the conditions may be like during high-flow periods. The substrate of the stream is described as the percent cover of material based on size and could consist of: Bedrock: exposed rock; Large particle with a width greater than 1024 mm; Boulder: Small particle with a width between 256 and 1024 mm; Medium Boulder: Cobble: Particle with a width between 64 and 256 mm; Gravel: Particle with a width between 2 and 64 mm; and/or, Fine Particles with a width of less than 2 mm, and include, sand, clay, textures: muck and detritus. Bank stability is described by the slope, materials and presence of vegetation. Habitat contributors, including aquatic and riparian vegetation, instream debris, and substrates, critical habitat including spawning and groundwater upwellings, and migratory obstructions, all contribute to habitat quality WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS To complement habitat investigations, water quality and influence parameters were also documented, including air temperature ( C), water temperature ( C), ph, and dissolved oxygen (DO) (mg/l). In accordance with Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) (Ministry of Environment and Energy [MOEE], 1994), the parameters were used to determine if each value was within an acceptable limit for aquatic organisms TEMPERATURE Although many factors must be considered when determining the thermal regime of a water feature, in general coldwater habitat is less than 19 C, coolwater between 19 C and 25 C, and warmwater greater than 25 C (MOEE, 1994) PH The PWQO acceptable range for ph is between 6.5 and 8.5 (MOEE, 1994) DISSOLVED OXYGEN The PWQO acceptable DO limit varies by temperature (Table 3). City of London No

24 14 Table 3: Acceptable PWQO for Dissolved Oxygen Temperature C DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONCENTRATION Cold Water Biota Warm Water Biota % Saturation mg/l % Saturation mg/l CONDUCTIVITY Conductivity is a measure of Total Dissolved Salts (TDS), where the higher the TDS value, the more dissolved salts are present. There is no acceptable range for TDS and the measurement is used for baseline investigations to track changes to the TDS value over time BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY The UTRCA conducted benthic macroinvertebrate sampling at stations near the Preferred Route crossing of Mud Creek, Medway Creek, Thames River, North Thames River, and South Thames River over several years (results reported from ). Samples were collected using a Rapid Bioassessment Protocol developed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and modified by Dr. Robert Bailey of the University of Western Ontario Zoology Department. Samples were subsampled for a minimum 100 individual subsample, which was identified to family level for insects, and Phylum or Class level for other invertebrates (e.g., worms, snails, and clams or mussels). Biotic Index tolerance values were assigned to each taxon based on the bioassessment protocol. Values range from 0 (indicating high sensitivity to environmental degradation), to 10 (indicating tolerance to degradation). The Biotic Index for each station is a weighted average of the tolerance values of taxa collected at the station, and represents the overall water quality conditions at the station. The UTRCA calculated the Biotic Index for each station. The following standard set of analyses was conducted by on the raw data provided: Sample size; Taxa richness; Sensitive taxa - EPT (i.e. Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Trichoptera) taxa richness; Percent Oligochaeta (Tolerant taxa); Percent Chironomidae (Tolerant taxa); Percent EPT (Sensitive taxa); Shannon Wiener Index (H ) (Range of diversity, typically between 0 low, and 5 - high; Family Biotic Index (FBI). Ranges for the FBI values are as follows: < 4.25 = Excellent; = Good; = Fair; = Fairly Poor; = Poor; and > 7.25 = Very Poor. No City of London

25 15 Metrics reflect the overall diversity of benthic macroinvertebrates at the sample locations, and indicate the tolerance of the community to environmental degradation (i.e., communities with high tolerance values tend to occur in more degraded habitats). 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5.1 VEGETATION ECOLOGICAL LAND CLASSIFICATION Land use along the RT Route consisted primarily of highly developed cultural landscapes, including Residential and Commercial areas, roads, parking lots and university campus buildings. Cultural constructed green spaces, including cemeteries, parks, and golf courses were also commonly present, surrounded by the developed landscapes. Natural/naturalized communities along the RT Route primarily took the form of forests. Much of the RT Route follows the Thames River and its tributaries, as well as the low-lying area of Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills. A total of 57 polygons representing 18 ecosites were identified along the RT Route. Of these ecosites, five are constructed cultural landscapes, seven are forest, and one each of shoreline, wetland, meadow, thicket, shallow water and open water. These communities are shown in Figures 13 to 25 and described in Table 4. For a list of vegetation species found along the RT Route, refer to Appendix B. Table 4: Vegetation Communities in the Study Area ELC CODE (NAME) CVC_1 (Commercial Business Sector) FODM1-4 (Dry Fresh Mixed Oak Deciduous Forest) CVR_1 (Low Density Residential) POLYGON FEATURES AND SPECIES COMPOSITION Highly developed commercial areas lacking significant vegetation. If present, vegetation took the form of landscaped trees, shrubs and lawn. Red (Quercus rubra) and White Oak (Quercus alba) dominant, with White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis) and Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum). This community was highly disturbed, with garden escape Lily-of-the-valley (Convallaria majalis) as dominant ground cover. A FODM7_3 (Fresh Moist Willow Lowland Deciduous Forest) inclusion was present along the Mud Creek corridor. Highly developed residential areas consisting of detached homes. Significant vegetation was lacking. If present, vegetation took the form of landscaped trees, shrubs and lawn. FODM4-11 (Dry - Fresh Deciduous forest dominated by Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) and Manitoba Black Locust Deciduous Maple (Acer negundo) with Trembling Aspen (Populus tremuloides) and Hackberry Forest) (Celtis occidentalis). Shrub layer was dominated by European Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), while the ground layer was dominated by bare soil, with sparse Garlic Mustard (Alliaria petiolata) and Wild Lettuce (Lactuca virosa). Forest was highly disturbed. Species composition likely a result of disturbance or management. The woodlot at Mud Creek contained a water feature. CVR_2 (High Density Residential) CGL_2 (Constructed Parkland) SHOR1 (Open Shoreline) Highly developed residential areas consisting of apartment buildings. Significant vegetation was lacking. If present, vegetation took the form of landscaped trees, shrubs and lawn. Cemeteries, parks, picnic areas, playing fields, common gardens, and golf courses. Vegetation took the form of landscaped trees, shrubs and lawn. Tree cover was less than 25%, consisting of young Trembling Aspen, American Elm (Ulmus americana), and Manitoba Maple and Willow species (Salix sp.). Vegetation included sparse Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Common Ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia) and Curly Dock (Rumex crispus). City of London No

26 16 ELC CODE (NAME) POLYGON FEATURES AND SPECIES COMPOSITION WODM4-4 (Dry - Fresh Woodland was dominated by mature Black Walnut (Juglans nigra) with Virginia Creeper Black Walnut Deciduous (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), while Glossy Buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula) and Woodland) Riverbank Grape (Vitis riparia) dominated the shrub layer. Goldenrod (Solidago sp.) was prevalent within the ground cover layer. FODM3-1 (Dry Fresh Poplar Deciduous Forest) FODM11 (Naturalized Deciduous Hedge-row) CVS_1 (Education) FODM7 Fresh Moist Lowland Deciduous Forest) OAW (Open Water) FODM4-5 (Dry - Fresh Manitoba Maple Deciduous Forest) MEMM3 (Dry - Fresh Mixed Meadow) MASM1-1 (Cattail Mineral Shallow Marsh) SWTM2-3 (Grey Dogwood Mineral Deciduous Thicket Swamp) SAF1 (Floating-leaved Shallow Aquatic) Trembling Aspen dominated with American Basswood (Tilia americana), White Ash (Fraxinus americana), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina) and Black Locust. Forest was second growth likely arising from management or disturbance (e.g. cutting, clearing). Shrub layer was dominated by Glossy Buckthorn, Lilac (Syringa vulgaris) and Virgins Bower (Clematis virginiana), while the ground cover layer was dominated by Motherwort (Leonurus cardiaca) and Goldenrod species. Naturalized hedgerow consisting of Black Walnut, Staghorn Sumac (Rhus typhina), Sugar Maple, Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) and Glossy Buckthorn. Highly developed university campus. Significant vegetation was lacking. If present, vegetation took the form of lawn and landscapes trees and shrubs. Consisted primarily of Red Maple (Acer rubrum) and Trembling Aspen, with occasional Black Locust and Black Walnut. Ground cover was dominated by Joe-pye Weed (Eutrochium maculatum), Giant Ragweed and Stinging Nettle (Urtica dioica). Highly disturbed. Open water with floating or obvious submergent vegetation absent. Canopy was dominated by Manitoba Maple. Norway Maple, Red Maple, Black Walnut, and Crack Willow (Salix fragilis) were also found in the canopy. The shrub layer was dominated by young Manitoba Maple and Common Buckthorn and the ground cover layer had abundant Poison Hemlock (Conium maculatum), Giant Ragweed, Stinging Nettle, and Garlic Mustard. Naturalized sites, consisted of approximately 1:1 grasses to forbs, and included many invasive species such as Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia japonica), Everlasting Pea (Lathyrus latifolius), Bird s Foot Trefoil (Lotus corniculatus) and Queen Anne s Lace (Daucus carota). Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) was common at the edges, while dense Broad-leaved Cattail (Typha latifolia) dominated the vegetation unit. Sparse Glossy Buckthorn and Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) were also present. Ground Cover was dominated by Jewelweed (Impatiens capensis), with sparse Purple Loosestrife. Grey Dogwood (Cornus racemosa) was dominant with sparse Glossy Buckthorn, Buttonbush, and Common Privet (Ligustrum lucidum). Ground Cover layer included Purple-leaved Willow Herb (Epilobium coloratum), Jewelweed and Bugleweed (Lycopus uniflorus). Often surrounded by Willow and Silver Maple. Floating vegetation was dominated by Fragrant Water Lily (Nymphaea odorata). Buttonbush was present in more shallow areas and hummocks SPECIES AT RISK TREE SCREENING Surveys were completed by staff during August and October 2016 to verify the presence/absence of Species at Risk trees within 120 m of the RoW along the proposed RT Route. In addition to the targeted screening, the length of the RT Route was walked to document the presence of Species at Risk trees within or adjacent to the RoW. No City of London

27 17 The surveys yielded several observations of Kentucky Coffeetrees adjacent to the RT Route (Figure 26), as follows: 5 young trees, planted, less than 10 cm in diameter at breast height (dbh) in green space between Wellington Road and Nadine Ave, north of Southdale Road East; 6 young trees, planted, less than 10 cm dbh within a small park west of Wellington Road, north of Foxbar Road; 1 large (84 cm dbh) tree in the southwest corner of Victoria Park at Dufferin Avenue and Clarence Street; and, 11 trees ranging in size from 5 cm to 68 cm dbh on the Western University Campus, in a wooded area at the northwest corner of University Drive and Lambton Drive. While it was evident that the majority of these trees were planted, the two largest trees, at Victoria Park and Western University Campus may be naturally occurring. Likewise, some of the smaller trees on the University campus may have seeded naturally. According to 2012 NHIC data, naturally occurring Kentucky Coffeetrees have only been documented at 20 locations in southwestern Ontario, and none are recorded for the City of London and surrounding area (MNRF, 2015d). Consultation with the MNRF will be necessary to discuss how the Endangered Species Act, 2007 applies to the Kentucky Coffeetrees noted during the site investigation. Naturally occurring trees are protected under the Endangered Species Act, 2007, while planted trees are not FLORA ASSESSMENT A total of 179 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys completed for Sites 1 through 6. Of these identified species, 115 (64%) are native species and 64 (36%) are considered non-native. Although less dominant in terms of percentage, non-native species were prevalent based on frequency of observation; the only three species observed at all six sites, European Buckthorn, Garlic Mustard, and Norway Maple, are non-native. Significant flora observed was very limited; one Species at Risk (Kentucky Coffeetree) and two other notable species were observed. Twenty-three Kentucky Coffeetrees were present within or adjacent to the RoW (Figure 26). Kentucky Coffeetrees are listed as Threatened in Ontario; however, those that are planted are not protected under the Endangered Species Act. While the majority of the trees observed were planted, some may be naturally occurring. Consultation with the MNRF is recommended to determine whether these trees are protected. Tall Coreopsis (Coreopsis tripteris), which has an Ontario S-rank of S2 (very rare in Ontario; 5 20 occurrences) was observed at Site 6 (Figure 26); however, it occurred in a park area and was most likely planted. Also Eastern Redbud (Cercis canadensis) was observed in Sites 1 and 4. Eastern Redbud is Extirpated from Ontario (SX) and all Redbuds in Ontario are now considered garden escapes, and therefore not significant. The majority of plant species identified through the vegetation field surveys are widespread, common in Ontario and globally. A list of species observed during the site investigations, their S rank, G rank, COSEWIC and COSSARO status, and native/non-native status, is provided in Appendix B. City of London No

28 SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET Along Oxford Street, two woodlots that fall within the Study Area were surveyed; polygon 6007, located on the south side of the road, and an unnumbered polygon, located on the north (Figures 7 and 13). Both polygons are associated with Mud Creek, which flows south through the Site. In addition to this field work conducted by, an Existing Ecological Conditions Report for the Mud Creek watershed was also completed by the City of London in In 2012, Delcan Corporation was also retained by the City to provide an updated subwatershed report. The Updated Existing Ecological Conditions Report by Delcan (2013) provides a comprehensive description of the natural features found within the watershed. As part of the Report, Patches 6007 and the unnumbered polygon (labelled 6014 in that report) were surveyed. Polygon 6007, also identified as Units 7, 8, and 9 in the Mud Creek Subwatershed Study (Delcan, 2013) was classified as FODM1-4 (Dry Fresh Mixed Oak Deciduous Forest). The canopy of this relatively small forest was dominated by Red and White Oak, with White Cedar and Sugar Maple. The canopy was more closed than usually seen in this ELC type, being approximately 90% closed. The shrub layer was sparse in the interior, consisting of European Buckthorn and Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and dense on the forest edges, consisting of almost entirely European Buckthorn. The forest community was highly disturbed, with garden escape Lily-of-the-valley as a dominant ground cover, and significant patches of bare ground. Running through the polygon was a Willow Lowland Deciduous Forest Type (FODM7-3) inclusion, which follows Mud Creek. This inclusion was characterized by a dense closed canopy dominated by Willow, Trembling Aspen, and Silver Maple with a subcanopy of Willow, and Manitoba Maple. The ground layer in this inclusion was dense and diverse, with a greater portion of native species including Jewelweed, Purple Loosestrife, Motherwort and Watercress (Nasturtium officinale). The Mudcreek Subwatershed Study (Delcan, 2013) identified three distinct polygons within this patch, and s ELC categorizations are very similar. One possible reason for the discrepancies is the mowed path dividing the Oak Forest from the Willow Lowland Forest described in the Delcan (2013) report has grown in and is no longer apparent. The unnumbered polygon, or patch 6014 in the Mud Creek Subwatershed Study, was originally classified as a Mineral Cultural Woodland Ecosite (CUW1) (Delcan, 2013). This woodland was surveyed by staff and determined to be more accurately described as FODM4-11 (Dry - Fresh Black Locust Deciduous Forest Type). Since it was surveyed, the majority of the woodland adjacent to Oxford Road has been removed by the landowner. The woodland was dominated primarily by invasive species, Black Locust and Manitoba Maple with Trembling Aspen, Black Walnut and Hackberry. The shrub layer was dominated by European Buckthorn, Silky Dogwood (Cornus obliqua), and Willow species. In addition, a mature Eastern Redbud was observed near the road in the eastern section of the community. The ground layer was very sparse in large sections of the woodlot. Where it is vegetated, Garlic Mustard, Wild Lettuce, and Strawberry (Fragaria virginiana) were most common. The canopy and shrub layers remained the same around Mud Creek, and it therefore was not classified as a different ecosite or inclusion; however, some changes in the ground cover layer were observed. Sparse wetland plants such as Skunk Cabbage, Watercress and Broadleaf Arrowhead were observed in proximity to the creek. Overall the vegetation community at Site 1 was representative of the Study Area; highly disturbed in areas close to human disturbance, though retaining a wide variety of native species. A total of 86 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species 47 (55%) are native species and 39 (45%) are considered non-native. Eastern Redbud was the only notable vegetation species observed on the Site, and it is considered a garden escape and therefore not significant. All other species identified are widespread and common in Ontario and globally. No City of London

29 SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE Land use at the North Thames crossing on Riverside Drive was primarily constructed cultural areas, including parkland, residential and commercial areas. The exception was the naturalized open shoreline (SHOR1; Figures 8 and 14) along the Thames River. In addition to the field work conducted by, a SLSR for Harris Park was completed by NRSI (2013a) for the City of London. Harris Park includes the lands east of the river and north of Site 2. As part of the SLSR, vegetation surveys were conducted and much of the report is consistent with s survey results. Due to the rocky shoreline, and fluctuating water levels the SHOR1 type was sparsely vegetated with few trees, and very low canopy closure (approximately 20%). It was dominated by early successional tree species, including Trembling Aspen, Manitoba Maple, Silver Maple, and American Elm. While the majority of these trees are below 10 cm diameter at breast height (dbh), there were multiple large Trembling Aspens on the western river bank, including one over 100 cm dbh. Similarly, the ground cover layer was sparse, and included species such as Common Milkweed (Asclepias syriaca), Coltsfoot (Tussilago farfara), and Purple Loosestrife. Site 2 contained the smallest number of species recorded compared to all other sites. This was likely because of the small area, combined with the sparsely vegetated rocky shoreline. A total of 29 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species 15 (52%) are native species and 14 (48%) are considered non-native. This is the highest percentage of non-native species relative to the others sites. No significant vegetation species, including Species at Risk or S-ranked species were observed on the Site. This is consistent with the SLSR for Harris Park (NRSI, 2013), which found no naturally occurring significant vegetation SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD In addition to vegetation surveys conducted by in the summer of 2015 and spring of 2016, a Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA was completed by Dillon Consulting for the City of London in The Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA includes lands along Medway Creek from Fanshawe Park Road West, south and east to Western Road. The crossing of Medway Creek at Western Road is Site 3A (Figures 9 and 14). As part of the Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation, vegetation surveys were completed by Dillon Consulting. Land use at the crossing of Medway Creek on Western Road was primarily Low Density Residential to the north, and Education (University of Western Ontario campus) to the south. The crossing itself was mostly devoid of vegetation, given that there is a retaining wall on the north side of the crossing and rip-rap under the bridge. The north side of polygon 27 has characteristics of shoreline and forest edge influences, and includes vegetation such as Purple Loosestrife, Broad Leaved Cattail, and Catnip (Nepeta cataria). Polygon 3003 was identified as Black Walnut Deciduous Woodland Type (WODM4-4). This polygon was characterized by dominant mature Black Walnut, creating canopy a canopy closure of approximately 75%. Virginia Creeper was abundant in the shrub layer, with sparse European Buckthorn and Riverbank Grape. Virginia Creeper shaded out most vegetation; however, some Goldenrod existed in the ground cover layer. Although the classification of Walnut Deciduous Woodland was given to this polygon, evidence from orthophotos suggests this classification may change further to the north and west of the polygon, outside of the Study Area. City of London No

30 SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD Two of the woodlots along Western Road were natural forest communities, and all others parkland or naturalized hedgerows. The woodlot on the southwest corner of the Western Road/Windemere Road intersection was classified as Poplar Deciduous Forest Type (FODM3-1), and was dominated by Trembling Aspen with American Basswood, Black Cherry and Black Locust. The forest was middle aged and likely represented secondary growth arising from management or disturbance of some kind. The shrub layer was dominated by Glossy Buckthorn, Lilac and Virgins Bower, and the ground cover layer by Motherwort, and Goldenrod species. Orthophotos show an unevaluated wetland in this woodlot; however, there was no evidence for such a wetland during field investigations. These results are consistent with the Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA (Dillon, 2015), which also did not map a wetland, and classified the areas as Deciduous Forest (FOD). The naturalized hedgerows along Western Road (CVS2_2) fall within the university campus. They were populated with deciduous species such as Sugar Maple, Trembling Aspen, and Norway Maple. Denser and more diverse portions consisted of Sugar Maple, American Basswood, Black Walnut, and American Elm. The shrub layer consisted primarily of European Buckthorn, with some Staghorn Sumac, Virginia Creeper and Eastern Redbud. Overall, the vegetation community at Site 3B was representative of the Study Area; highly disturbed in areas in close proximity to human disturbance. A total of 68 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species 38 (56%) are native species and 30 (44%) are considered non-native. Eastern Redbud is the only significant vegetation species observed on site and it is considered a garden escape, and is therefore not significant. All other species identified are widespread and common in Ontario and globally. This is consistent with the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA Natural Heritage Inventory (Dillon, 2015), which found significant vegetation along Medway Creek to the west, but no significant vegetation within the Study Area SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE Land use at the North Thames crossing on University Drive was almost entirely Education (CVS_1) (University of Western Ontario campus) with Low Density Residential (CVR_1) to the south. The forest community that follows the river was classified as Lowland Deciduous Forest Ecosite (FODM7; Figures 10 and 20). The tree species varied, with abundant Red Maple, Sycamore, Black Locust, Black Cherry, Manitoba Maple, Basswood, and occasional Black Walnut. The ground cover was equally diverse; dominated by Jewelweed, Joe-pye Weed, Giant Ragweed, and Stinging Nettle. The polygon also shows evidence of the Thames River spring high watermark making its way into small depressions. A total of 66 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species 20 (30%) are native species and 46 (70%) are considered non-native. No significant vegetation species, including Species at Risk or S-ranked species were observed on the Site SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD Land use at the Thames crossing on Wellington Road is encompassed by Parkland (CGL_2) and Low Density Residential (CVR_1). The forest community that follows the river was classified as Dry - Fresh Manitoba Maple Deciduous Forest (FODM4-5; Figures 11 and 23). This forest community was very narrow, and showed little diversity, being dominated by Manitoba Maple. Norway Maple, Black Walnut, Red Maple and Crack Willow (Salix fragilis) was also found in the canopy to a lesser degree. The shrub layer was No City of London

31 21 dominated by young Manitoba Maple and Common Buckthorn, and the ground cover layer had abundant Poison Hemlock, Giant Ragweed, Stinging Nettle, and Garlic Mustard. A total of 35 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species, 21 (60%) are native species and 14 (40%) are considered non-native. No significant vegetation species, including Species at Risk or S-ranked species were observed on the Site SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD In addition to vegetation surveys conducted by in the summer of 2015 and spring of 2016, several earlier studies have been completed for the area, including the Master Plan Update for Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA (UTRCA, 2005) and an Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report completed by North-South Environmental Inc. in Site 6 is located in the western portion of the area identified as the Westminster Ponds ESA (Figures 6 and 24). The 2015 report (North-South Environmental Inc.) found 28 ELC communities, and 346 species of plants, including 3 that are provincially rare and 3 that are regionally rare. Two of the regionally rare plants, Watershield (Brasenia schreberi) and Sweetflag (Acorus americana) were recorded within the area identified as Site 6 in this study. The UTRCA report found more than 200 vegetation communities, 757 species of vascular plants, including 30 that are nationally and/or provincially rare, and 60% of the plant species found in Middlesex County. The area surveyed by was considerably smaller, focusing along the Wellington Road RoW. The results are still consistent with these two reports; the Westminster ponds area had the greatest number of plant species (114) and the highest percentage of native species compared to other sites surveyed for Project. The area surveyed by along Wellington Road contains forest, meadow and wetland ecosites. The forested polygon along Wellington Road was identified as Cultural Thicket (CUT) in the Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report, was given an updated ELC classification of Dry - Fresh Black Walnut Deciduous Woodland Type (WODM4-4). The polygon is characterized by a wide variety of tree species occupying the canopy, including abundant Black Walnut, Black Locust, Manitoba Maple, and occasional Sugar Maple, Norway Maple, and infrequent American Elm, and Red Oak. Virginia Creeper, Glossy Buckthorn and Riverbank Grape dominated the shrub layer, and Goldenrod dominated the ground cover layer. Meadow polygons within the WODM4-4 ecosite are classified as Dry Fresh Mixed Meadow Type (MEMM3). The community consisted of dominant broad-leaved cattail with sparse Glossy Buckthorn and Buttonbush. Silver Maple was common at the polygon edges. The ground cover layer had abundant Jewelweed, with sparse Purple Loosestrife. The wetland nearest Wellington Road was classified as Grey Dogwood Mineral Deciduous Thicket Swamp Type (SWTM2-3) which is consistent with the Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report. Grey Dogwood was dominant with sparse Glossy Buckthorn, Buttonbush, and Common Privet. The ground cover layer included Purple-leaved Willow Herb (Epilobium ciliatum), Jewelweed and Bugleweed. The polygon was surrounded by Willow and Silver Maple. A total of 114 vascular plants were recorded during the summer 2015 and spring 2016 field surveys. Of these identified species 80 (70%) are native species and 34 (30%) are considered non-native. Tall Coreopsis a provincially rare species with an S-Rank of S2 was observed near the southern edge of the woodland (Figure 26) and is thought to be planted. There were no other Species at Risk or S-ranked plant species observed by staff on Site 6. City of London No

32 WILDLIFE BIRDS Breeding bird surveys were conducted on June 3 and June 13, Both surveys were completed within the May 24 to July 10 window, as recommended by the OBBA. The seven Sites have been studied previously, and breeding bird surveys were often completed. In addition to the results from the breeding bird surveys completed by in 2016, the following sections also synthesize data from these previous studies. A total of 57 species of birds were observed by during the field investigation, including 37 species in Site 1, 27 in Site 2, 27 in Site 3A, 32 in Site 3B, 28 in Site 4, 39 in Site 5 and 44 in Site 6. Six provincially listed Species at Risk were observed on one or more of the sites, either during the field surveys or as referenced in previous studies. These species are: Bank Swallow, Barn Swallow, Chimney Swift, Eastern Wood-Pewee, Wood Thrush, and Bald Eagle. A complete list of the bird species observed for each Site, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET An Existing Ecological Conditions Report for the Mud Creek watershed was completed by the City of London in In 2012, Delcan Corporation was retained by the City to provide an updated subwatershed report. The Existing Ecological Conditions Report by Delcan (2013) provides a comprehensive description of the natural features found within the watershed. As part of the Report, Patch 6007 and an unnumbered polygon (identified by Delcan as Patch 6014) were surveyed, which are included in Site 1 of this report (Figure 7). Since the time of the survey, the unnumbered polygon has been mostly removed by the landowner. Breeding bird surveys were not completed by Delcan; however, birds were identified during other field visits, and a tally of all the species was appended to the report. A total of 13 bird species were identified by Delcan (2013) in Patch 6007 and the unnumbered polygon, the woodlands that form Site 1. Twelve species were noted in the unnumbered polygon (Patch 6014), the 4.0 ha woodland north of Oxford Street. One Species at Risk, the Eastern Wood-pewee, was identified. Eastern Wood-Pewee is currently listed as species of Special Concern on the SARO List (OMNRF, 2015) and as such, is not afforded habitat protection. Five bird species were identified in Patch 6007, the woodland on the south side of Oxford Street, of which none were Species at Risk. A cumulative total of 37 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 1 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed, but was not confirmed; it was considered probable for 20 species, and considered possible for 10 species. The 7 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are species that are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of RT Route. Eastern Wood-Pewee, a species of Special Concern in Ontario, was the only provincially listed Species at Risk observed on Site 1. A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE A SLSR for Harris Park was completed by NRSI (2013a) for the City of London. Harris Park includes the lands east of the river and north of Site 2. As part of the SLSR, migratory and breeding bird surveys were completed in Harris Park. Additionally, breeding evidence as provided for the species identified (NRSI, 2013a). No City of London

33 23 A cumulative total of 39 bird species were identified by NRSI within Harris Park, including 23 during migratory bird surveys, and 36 during breeding bird surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 6 species, considered probable for 6 species, and considered possible for 24 species. Two provincially listed Species at Risk were observed by NRSI in Harris Park during their investigations: Chimney Swift (THR) and Barn Swallow (THR). The Thames River Corridor Plan was completed by the City of London (2011). A total of five bird species were observed within the vicinity of Site 2, but breeding evidence was not provided. None of the five bird species mentioned are Species at Risk. A cumulative total of 27 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 2 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 2 species, considered probable for 8 species, and considered possible for 13 species. The 4 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Provincially listed Species at Risk were not observed on Site 2. A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD A Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA was completed by Dillon Consulting for the City of London in The Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA includes lands along Medway Creek from Fanshawe Park Road West, south and east to Western Road. The London RT crossing of Medway Creek at Western Road is Site 3A (Figure 9). As part of the Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation, breeding bird surveys were completed by Dillon; however, they were not completed with 1 km of Site 3A. A cumulative total of 48 bird species were identified by Dillon (2015) within the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 5 species, considered probable for 35 species, and considered possible for 1 species. Three provincially listed Species at Risk were observed over 1 km from Sites 3A and 3B: Barn Swallow (THR), Eastern Wood- Pewee (SC) and Wood Thrush (SC). A cumulative total of 27 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 3A during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 1 species, considered probable for 10 species, and considered possible for 11 species. The 5 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. One provincially listed Species at Risk, the Chimney Swift, was observed on Site 3A (Figure 26). A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD A cumulative total of 32 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 3B during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed, but was not confirmed for any species. It was considered probable for 15 species, and considered possible for 14 species. The 3 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. No provincially listed Species at Risk were observed on Site 3B. A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B. City of London No

34 SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE A cumulative total of 28 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 4 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 2 species, considered probable for 5 species, and considered possible for 16 species. The 5 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Two provincially listed Species at Risk, Chimney Swift (THR) and Barn Swallow (THR), were observed on Site 4 (Figure 26). A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD An Environmental Impact Study for the SoHo Redevelopment was completed by NRSI for the City of London (2013b). The Study Site in the NRSI study included lands along the Thames River from Wellington Road to Adelaide Street North. Site 5 (Figure 11) is located along the west boundary of the area surveyed by NRSI. As part of the EIS for the SoHo Redevelopment, breeding bird surveys were completed. A cumulative total of 72 bird species were identified by NRSI during their site investigation. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 4 species, considered probable for 16 species, and considered possible for 24 species. Three provincially listed Species at Risk were observed: Barn Swallow (THR), Eastern Wood-pewee (SC) and Chimney Swift (THR). A cumulative total of 39 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 5 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 4 species, considered probable for 16 species, and considered possible for 16 species. The 3 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. One provincially listed Species at Risk, Barn Swallow, was observed on Site 5. A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD Surveys for breeding birds were completed as part of the Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015) and the present study. The entire Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA was surveyed as part of the Ecological Inventory during 2013 and encompassed lands between Wellington Road to just east of Highbury Avenue, and Commissioners Road East to just south of Southdale Road East and Bradley Avenue. Site 6 is located in the western portion of the area identified as the Westminster Ponds ESA. A cumulative total of 73 bird species were observed by North-South Environmental Inc. during their site investigation. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 7 species, considered probably for 34 species, and considered possible for 24 species. Seven provincially listed Species at Risk were observed, including Acadian Flycatcher (END), Bobolink (THR), Eastern Meadowlark (THR), Barn Swallow (THR), Chimney Swift (THR), Eastern Wood-pewee (SC), and Wood Thrush (SC). None of these species were recorded within Site 6. The closest avian SAR observation was for Eastern Wood-pewee on the south side of Walker s Pond approximately 300 m east of the RoW. A cumulative total of 44 species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 6 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Breeding evidence was noted for each species observed and was confirmed for 5 species, considered probable for 20 species, and considered possible for 15 species. The 4 species for which breeding evidence was not observed are known to breed in the general area, but did not appear to be breeding on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Four provincially listed Species at Risk were observed on No City of London

35 25 Site 6: Barn Swallow, Bank Swallow (THR), Eastern Wood-Pewee and Wood Thrush (Figure 26). A list of the bird species observed, including breeding evidence, can be found in Appendix B HERPTOFAUNA Three amphibian surveys were conducted by between April 1 and June 30; survey dates were April 11, May 11 and June 1, The three surveys were within the respective windows as stated by the Marsh Monitoring Protocol (April 1-15, May 1-15, and June 1-15). The surveys were completed during suitable weather conditions, and commenced no earlier than 30 minutes after sunset, in compliance with the protocol. Sites near open water were surveyed for basking turtles during daytime wildlife surveys and incidental observations were recorded for all sites. The various sites have been studied previously. As part of these studies, amphibian or reptile surveys were often completed. In addition to the results from the nocturnal amphibian surveys completed by this year, the following sections in the report will also synthesize data from these previous studies. A total of 7 species of reptiles and amphibians were recorded by throughout the sites that make up the Study Area, including 1 species on Site 1, 0 on Site 2, 0 on Site 3A, 0 on Site 3B, 1 on Site 4, 2 on Site 5, and 6 on Site 6. Two Species at Risk, Northern Map Turtle (SC) and Spiny Softshell Turtle (THR) were observed within the North Thames River in the vicinity of Site 4. There were no other provincially listed Species at Risk observed at the seven sites during the field surveys. A list of the herpetofauna species observed for each Site can be found in Appendix B SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET An Existing Ecological Conditions Report for the Mud Creek watershed was completed by the City of London in In 2012, Delcan Corporation was retained by the City to provide an updated subwatershed report. The Existing Ecological Conditions Report by Delcan (2013) provides a comprehensive description of the natural features found within the watershed. As part of the Report, Patch 6007 and an unnumbered polygon (identified by Delcan as Patch 6014) were surveyed, which are included in Site 1 of this report (Figure 7). Since the time of the survey, the unnumbered polygon has been mostly removed by the landowner. Specific herpetofauna surveys were not completed by Delcan, however amphibians and reptiles were identified during other field visits, and a tally of all the species identified was appended to the report. A previous study by Biologic (2005) concluded that only a very small number of reptiles and amphibians are present in the Mud Creek Study Area. No reptiles or amphibians were observed by Delcan in Patch 6007, while American Toad and Eastern Gartersnake were identified in the unnumbered polygon on the north side of Oxford Street. Neither of these are Species at Risk in Ontario. One herpetofauna species, the Eastern Gartersnake, was observed on Site 1 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Eastern Gartersnake is not a Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE A Subject Lands Status Report for Harris Park was completed by NRSI (2013a) for the City of London. Harris Park includes the lands east of the river and north of Site 2, the North Thames Crossing on Riverside Drive. As part of the Subject Lands Status Report, turtle basking surveys and snake surveys were completed in Harris Park by NRSI. Incidental observations of herpetofauna were also noted during additional field surveys. City of London No

36 26 Northern Map Turtle was the only species identified during the field survey (NRSI, 2013a). The individual was observed basking on concrete at the west side of the river approximately 330 m north of Site 2. Northern Map Turtle is listed as a species of Special Concern in Ontario. No reptiles or amphibians were observed on Site 2 during the 2015/2016 field surveys SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD A Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA was completed by Dillon Consulting (2015) for the City of London. The Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA includes lands along Medway Creek from Fanshawe Park Road West, south and east to Western Road. The crossing of Medway Creek at Western Road is Site 3A. As part of the Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation, nocturnal amphibian call surveys following the Marsh Monitoring Protocol and targeted salamander surveys in early April were completed by Dillon. Incidental observations of herpetofauna were also noted during additional field surveys. Four species of amphibians were identified during site investigation: Spring Peeper, Gray Treefrog, American Toad, and Green Frog (Dillon, 2015). None of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. No reptiles or amphibians were observed on Site 3A during the 2015/2016 field surveys. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD No reptile or amphibian species were observed at Site 3B during the 2015/2016 field surveys SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE One amphibian species, Green Frog, and two reptile species, Northern Map Turtle and Spiny Softshell Turtle were observed in the vicinity of Site 4 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Spiny Softshell (THR) and Northern Map Turtle (SC) are Species at Risk in Ontario (Figure 26). A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD An Environmental Impact Study for the SoHo Redevelopment was completed by NRSI (2013b) for the City of London. The Study Site in the NRSI study included lands along the Thames River from Wellington Road to Adelaide Street North. Site 5 is located along the west boundary of the area surveyed by NRSI. As part of the EIS for the SoHo Redevelopment, intensive snake surveys including targeted Queensnake surveys as well as turtle basking surveys were completed by NRSI. Incidental observations of herpetofauna were also noted during additional field surveys. Three species of reptile and two species of amphibian were identified during the field surveys: Snapping Turtle, Dekay s Brownsnake, Eastern Gartersnake, American Toad, and Green Frog (NRSI, 2013b). Snapping Turtle is listed as Special Concern in Ontario. During the site investigation completed by NRSI, a female Snapping Turtle was observed laying eggs within a manicured lawn area approximately 100 m east of Wellington Road (Figure 26). Two herpetofauna species were observed on Site 5 during the 2015/2016 field surveys, including American Toad and Green Frog. Neither of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B. No City of London

37 SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD Surveys for breeding amphibians were completed as part of the Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015) and the present study. The entire Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA was surveyed as part of the Ecological Inventory during 2013 and encompassed lands between Wellington Road to just east of Highbury Avenue, and Commissioners Road East to just south of Southdale Road East and Bradley Avenue. Site 6 is located in the western portion of the area identified as the Westminster Ponds ESA. Seven species of reptile and amphibians, including one Species at Risk, were observed during the Ecological Inventory completed by North-South Environmental Inc. (2015). Snapping Turtle (SC) was observed in ponds within the eastern portion of the ESA. Green Frog was the only species recorded within the Site 6 study area. The report also identified areas of vernal pooling that were suitable breeding grounds for amphibians. One of these ponds was identified within the wetland in the eastern half of Site 6. The earlier Master Plan Update (UTRCA, 2005) mentioned that 15 species of amphibian and nine reptile species have been found within the Westminster Ponds ESA Study Site based on the results of several previous inventories dating back to Provincially listed Species at Risk include Blanding s Turtle (THR), Butler s Gartersnake (END), Eastern Massasauga (THR), Milksnake (formally SC, now delisted), Jefferson Salamander (END) and Snapping Turtle (SC). Two of these species, the Butler s Gartersnake and Eastern Massasauga are now extirpated from the region. Three species of amphibians, Spring Peeper, Gray Treefrog and Green Frog, were observed on or within 120 m of Site 6 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Additionally, Northern Leopard Frog, Midland Painted Turtle and Eastern Gartersnake were observed incidentally during other field surveys. None of the species identified on Site 6 are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B MAMMALS AND GENERAL WILDLIFE Targeted mammal surveys were not completed by during the 2016 field surveys; however incidental observations of mammals were recorded during the field visits. The various sites have been studied previously. As part of these studies, targeted mammal surveys were not completed, however incidental observations of mammals was often included, and occasionally reports from the general public. In addition to the results from the 2015/2016 field surveys, the following sections in the report synthesize data from these previous studies. A total of 6 species of mammals were observed within the sites that make up the Study Area during the site investigation, including 3 species on Site 1, 1 on Site 2, 1 on Site 3A, 1 on Site 3B, 2 on Site 4, 2 on Site 5 and 5 on Site 6. Observations of mammal species included scat and track evidence. Provincially listed Species at Risk were not observed during the 2015/2016 field surveys. In previous studies, the following Species at Risk in Ontario were either observed or have the potential to be found on one or more of the sites: Northern Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis), Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus), Tricoloured Bat (Perimyotis subflavus), and American Badger (Taxidea taxus). The bat species were identified by their vocal signatures, while the American Badger observation was of a transient individual and candidate habitat was not identified on any of the sites. A list of the mammal species observed for each Site can be found in Appendix B. City of London No

38 SITE 1: WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET An Existing Ecological Conditions Report for the Mud Creek watershed was completed by the City of London in In 2012, Delcan Corporation was retained by the City to provide an updated subwatershed report. The Existing Ecological Conditions Report by Delcan (2013) provides a comprehensive description of the natural features found within the watershed. As part of the Report, Patch 6007 and an unnumbered polygon (identified by Delcan as Patch 6014) were surveyed, which are included in Site 1 (Figure 7). Since the time of the survey, the unnumbered polygon has been mostly removed by the landowner. Specific mammal surveys were not completed by Delcan, however mammals were observed during other field visits, and a tally of all the species identified was appended to the report. All the mammals found within the Mud Creek watershed were considered common and widespread species in this part of Ontario (Delcan, 2013). No mammals were observed in Patch 6007, while Meadow Vole and White-tailed Deer were identified in the unnumbered polygon (Patch 6014) (Delcan, 2013). Neither of these are Species at Risk in Ontario. A cumulative total of 3 species were observed on Site 1 during the 2015/2016 field surveys, including Eastern Chipmunk, Eastern Cottontail and Gray Squirrel. None of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 2: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE A SLSR for Harris Park was completed by NRSI (2013a) for the City of London. Harris Park includes the lands east of the river and north of Site 2 (Figure 8). Specific mammal surveys were not completed by NRSI; however, mammals were observed during other field visits, and a tally of all the species identified, including those observations from members of the public was appended to the report. Two mammal species were identified during the field surveys: Raccoon and Eastern Chipmunk (NRSI, 2013a). The Status Report also identified candidate habitat for two provincially listed Species at Risk: Northern Myotis (END), and Little Brown Myotis (END). One mammal species, the Gray Squirrel, was observed on Site 2 during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Gray Squirrel is not a Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 3A: CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD A Natural Heritage Inventory and Evaluation for the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA was completed by Dillon Consulting (2015) for the City of London. The Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA includes lands along Medway Creek from Fanshawe Park Road West, south and east to Western Road. The crossing of Medway Creek at Western Road is Site 3A (Figure 9). Specific mammal surveys were not completed by Dillon as part of the Natural Heritage Inventory, however mammals were observed during other field visits, and a tally of all the species identified was appended to the report. Thirty mammal species were identified during the field surveys, including observations from members of the public. Four of the species observed are listed as Species at Risk in Ontario, including American Badger (END), Northern Myotis (END), Little Brown Myotis (END), and Tricoloured Bat. The bats were identified by their vocal signatures based on audio recordings taken by members of the public. The American Badger was reported by local residents and was suspected on passing through the Study Area, as the ESA does not provide suitable habitat for that species (Dillon, 2015). One mammal species, the Gray Squirrel, was observed on Site 3A during the 2015/2016 field surveys. Gray Squirrel is not a Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B. No City of London

39 SITE 3B: WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD One mammal species, the Gray Squirrel, was observed on Site 3B (Figure 9) during the 2016 site investigation. Gray Squirrel is not a Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 4: NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE Two mammal species were observed on or within 120 m of Site 4 (Figure 10) during the 2015/2016 field surveys, including Raccoon and Gray Squirrel. Neither of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 5: THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD An Environmental Impact Study for the SoHo Redevelopment was completed by NRSI (2013b) for the City of London. The Study Site in the NRSI study included lands along the Thames River from Wellington Road to Adelaide Street North. Site 5 (Figure 11) is located along the west boundary of the area surveyed by NRSI. Specific mammal surveys were not completed by NRSI as part of the Environmental Impact Study; however, mammals were observed during other field visits, and a tally of all the species identified was appended to the report. A total of 7 mammal species were identified during the field surveys, including Eastern Cottontail, Eastern Gray Squirrel, Raccoon, Red Fox, Striped Skunk, White-tailed Deer and Woodchuck (NRSI, 2013b). The Status Report also identified candidate habitat for two provincially listed Species at Risk: Northern Myotis (END), and Little Brown Myotis (END). Two mammal species were observed on Site 5 during the 2015/2016 field surveys, including Eastern Chipmunk and Gray Squirrel. Neither of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B SITE 6: WESTMINSTER PONDS EAST OF WELLINGTON ROAD An Ecological Inventory and Management Zone Report (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015) was completed for the entire Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA and encompassed lands between Wellington Road to just east of Highbury Avenue, and Commissioners Road East to just south of Southdale Road East and Bradley Avenue. Site 6 is located in the western portion of the area identified as the Westminster Ponds ESA. The earlier Master Plan Update for Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA was completed by UTRCA (2005) for the City of London. Signs of mammal presence were noted during the Ecological Inventory (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015), but dedicated searches were only completed for Coyote due to numerous sightings of the species within the area. In total, seven mammal species were observed during the Ecological inventory, including White-tailed Deer, Raccoon, Beaver, Striped Skunk, Meadow Vole, Coyote, and Red Fox. None of these species are considered Species at Risk in Ontario. The Master Plan Update mentioned that mammals found within the ESA included several species of mammals common to urban areas including Raccoon, Virginia Opossum, Red Fox, White-tailed Deer and Beaver (UTRCA, 2005). None of the mammals observed were identified as Species at Risk in Ontario. Five mammal species were observed on or Site 6 during the 2016 site investigation, including Eastern Chipmunk, Gray Squirrel, Raccoon, Muskrat, and White-tailed Deer. None of the species identified are Species at Risk in Ontario. A list of the species observed can be found in Appendix B. City of London No

40 AQUATIC HABITAT The Study Area is located within the Upper Thames River Watershed and falls within the jurisdiction of the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA). Infrastructure construction within the floodplain and adjacent to waterbodies, watercourses and wetlands within this area is regulated by the UTRCA. The Study Area is located within both The Forks and Dingman Creek watersheds of the Upper Thames River basin. The Forks watershed encompasses 3% (88 km 2 ) of the Upper Thames River basin, with approximately 76% of the watercourses occurring naturally, 19% are buried and 5% are channelized. The watershed consists of approximately 81% urban, 11% natural, 5% agricultural, 2% aggregate and 2% water. A total of 59 fish species and 24 mussel species have been documented in the watershed (UTRCA, 2012a). The Dingman Creek watershed encompasses 5% (170 km 2 ) of the Upper Thames River Basin with 56% of the watercourses occurring naturally, 29% channelized and 15% buried. The watershed consists of approximately 62% agricultural, 22% urban, 15% natural cover, 1% water and less than 1% aggregates. 43 fish species and 13 freshwater mussels species have been recorded (UTRCA, 2012b) The Thames River is the second largest river in southwestern Ontario, spanning 60 km and crossing both the Carolinian and the Great-Lakes St. Lawrence forest zones. The river is slightly entrenched by fluvial valleys, consisting of glacial till, clay and sand plains. The sinuous nature of the river has resulted in erosional and depositional activity including bank erosion, slumping, varied habitat types, and islands. Despite the fair to poor ranking of the water quality report card, the river sustains the most diverse aquatic community in Canada and is attributed to the broad range of habitat types (Quinlan, 2013) Nine (9) fish and ten (10) mussel Species at Risk have been documented in the Thames River basin (Table 5). Three (3) invasive species have been documented in the Thames River basin, including Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio), Round Goby (Neogobius melanostomus) and Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) (Source Water Protection, 2015). Table 5: Aquatic Species at Risk Documented Within the Study Area FISH Common Name SPECIES Scientific Name SARO 1 SARA 2 Black Redhorse Moxostoma duquesnei THR NAR Eastern Sand Darter Ammocrypta pellucida END THR Grass Pickerel Esox americanus vermiculatus SC SC Northern Brook Lamprey Ichthyomyzon fossor SC SC Pugnose Minnow Opsopoeodus emiliae THR SC River Redhorse Moxostoma carinatum SC SC Silver Shiner Notropis photogenis THR NAR Spotted Gar Lepisosteus oculatus THR THR Spotted Sucker Minytrema melanops SC SC No City of London

41 31 MUSSELS Common Name SPECIES Scientific Name SARO 1 SARA 2 Fawnsfoot Truncilla donaciformis END No Status Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus fasciolaris END END Mapleleaf Mussel Quadrula quadrula THR THR Rainbow Mussel Villosa iris THR END Rayed Bean Villosa fabalis END END Round Hickorynut Obovaria subrotunda END END Round Pigtoe Pleurobema sintoxia END END Salamander Mussel Simpsonaias ambigua END END Snuffbox Epioblasma triquetra END END Wavy-rayed Lampmussel Lampsilis fasciola THR SC 1 Species protected under the provincial Endangered Species Act (2007); END Endangered, THR Threatened, SC Special concern. 2 Species protected under the federal Species at Risk Act (2007) SITE 1: TRIBUTARY OF THE THAMES RIVER AT OXFORD STREET WEST Site 1 is located at the Oxford Street crossing of a Tributary to the Thames River, also known as Mud Creek. A subwatershed study was completed for Mud Creek in 2013 in order to document existing ecological conditions for the City of London. As part of this investigation, various points across the watershed were investigated for existing conditions. A sampling location located approximately 750 m upstream of Site 1 was noted as the most natural habitat within the watershed with coldwater inputs. A sampling location approximately 350 m downstream was generally considered of poor quality, was channelized with no refuge opportunities for fish. In general, it was concluded that Mud Creek watershed has been greatly altered by development activities and many areas, including Site 1, occur in an area of high sediment loading. It is suggested that due to this and with the low sensitivity of the species documented in the watercourse, these areas are more tolerant to anthropogenic disturbance (Delcan, 2013). The UTRCA completed both benthic and fish sampling upstream and downstream of Site 1. Table 6 summarizes the results of fish sampling efforts for three sites known as: TF20 ( , ): located approximately 660 m upstream from Site 1 in West Mud Creek; TF30 (17, , ): located approximately 1.1 km downstream, between Site 1 and the Thames River; and TF31 (17, , ): located approximately 370 m upstream of Site 1, also occurring adjacent to Oxford Drive, 260 m east of Site 1. City of London No

42 32 Table 6: UTRCA Fish Sampling Data for Site 1 Common Name FISH SPECIES Scientific Name TF20 (August 2013) OCCURRENCE (SITE) TF30 (September 2007) TF30 (August 2013) Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus X X Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus X TF31 (September 2007) Brook Stickleback Culaea inconstans X X X Central Stoneroller Campostoma anomalum X X Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculatus X X X Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas X X Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas X Goldfish Carassius auratus X Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum X Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae X Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae X X Rock Bass Ambloplites rupestris X Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu X Spotfin Shiner Cyprinella spiloptera X X White Sucker Catostomus commersoni X X A field survey was completed on August 28, 2015 in order to document the existing conditions at Site 1. Entrance into the watercourse was not permitted, so observations were conducted from the shoulder of Oxford Street. The watercourse was linear in nature, with moderate flows, southerly, towards the Thames River. The channel was fairly wide, yet only a small portion flooded and the remaining consisted of dry streambed. The upstream reach consisted of pool and flat habitat, while the downstream reach consisted of run and pool habitat. The watercourse was moderately turbid which is likely attributed to the silt, sand and gravel substrate complex. In-stream habitat cover opportunities, including undercut banks and the presence of large woody debris was limited to less than 1% of the stream, while in-stream and overhanging vegetation provided approximately 5% cover to the stream. Riparian vegetation consisted of floodplain type species, such as Cattails, Jewelweed, and smart weed and species typical of drier habitats, such as Burdock, Teasel and Vetch. Water quality parameters were collected for Site 1 and are summarized in Table 7. Table 7: Water Quality Parameters for Site 1 WATER QUALITY PARAMETER RESULT Upstream of Site Downstream of Site Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) ph Conductivity (TDS µs/cm) Water Temperature ( C) No City of London

43 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES Three stations were sampled in the Mud Creek system in October of Benthic taxa richness in Mud Creek was fairly low, between 11 and 12 taxa per station, with relatively low Shannon Weiner diversity of between 0.89 and 1.13 (the index generally ranges from 0 to 5). The invertebrate community in Mud Creek was generally dominated by Oligochaetes (aquatic worms) and Chironomids (midge larvae), which tend to be tolerant of degradation. Sensitive taxa (EPT) were only present in low proportions and represented by 1 to 3 taxa per station. Biotic indices calculated for Mud Creek indicate fairly poor to poor water quality conditions. Table 8: UTRCA Benthic Sampling Data for Site 1 PARAMETER STATION NAME Trott Award Drain West Mud Creek Mud Creek Abundance Taxa Richness % Oligochaetes % Chironomidae % EPT EPT taxa richness Shannon Weiner Index Family Biotic Index FBI Quality Poor Poor Fairly Poor Northing Easting Sample Date 10/3/ /3/ /3/ SITE 2: NORTH THAMES RIVER AT RIVERSIDE DRIVE AND QUEEN S AVENUE The UTRCA completed both benthic and mussel sampling up and downstream of Site 2. Mussel sampling occurred in September of 2004 at a site located 1.8 km north of Site 2 within the North Thames River. A total of six (6) mussel species were confirmed, including: Wavy-rayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola); Fluted-shell (Lasmigona costata); Zebra Mussel (Dreissena polymorpha); Giant Floater (Pyganodon grandis); Elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata); and, Mucket (Actinonaias ligamentina). The Wavy-rayed Lampmussel is considered Threatened and Special Concern, under the Endangered Species Act and Species at Risk Act, respectively. City of London No

44 34 A field survey was completed on August 19, 2015 in order to document the existing conditions at Site 2. The assessment was completed from the shoreline. The North Thames River crossing was comprised of a permanent, linear feature; however, the river itself is sinuous in nature. The watercourse was slow moving, with the presence of algae along the shoreline. The river was approximately 65 m in width (Google Earth, 2015 imagery); however, low water levels at the time of the assessment may have resulted in a reduced wetted width. The reach consisted of run and pool habitat, with both fine (silt) and coarse (gravel, cobble, boulders) material present. In-stream habitat cover opportunities were limited to less than 1% coverage by boulders and cobble material. In-stream vegetation was not noted and overhanging vegetation was estimated to shade approximately 2% of the river. Riparian and near-shore vegetation consisted of Manitoba Maple, Red Maple, Elm, and Willow species. Water quality parameters were collected for Site 2 and are summarized in Table 9. Table 9: Water Quality Parameters for Site 2 WATER QUALITY PARAMETER RESULT Upstream of Site Downstream of Site Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) ph Conductivity (TDS µs/cm) Water Temperature ( C) BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES The benthic community was sampled at 5 stations in the North Thames River, upstream of Riverside Drive (Table 10). The Natural Bank station was sampled from 2005 to 2014, and the remaining four stations were sampled only in 2014, and all sampling was conducted in the spring (May, June). The benthic community metrics at Natural Bank were variable among sampling years, likely reflecting natural variation in biological communities over time, and did not indicate any dominant trends in the data. Taxa richness in the North Thames River ranged from 9 to 20 taxa per station, with relatively low Shannon Wiener Diversity values from 0.50 to The North Thames River is a moderate to large watercourse, and diversity of benthic communities is expected to be lower in mainstem watercourses than in adjacent headwater streams (Smith and Lamp, 2008), therefore low Shannon Wiener Diversity is not unexpected at this site. Stations in the North Thames River were generally dominated by highly tolerant taxa, Oligochaetes (3.5% %) and Chironomids (23.6% %). Sensitive taxa (EPT) were present in relatively small proportions (1.2% %), and represented by 2 to 11 taxa per station. Biotic Index values calculated for North Thames River indicated fairly poor to poor water quality conditions, with no clear trends over time at Natural Bank, or from upstream to downstream stations. No City of London

45 Table 10: UTRCA Benthic Sampling Data for Site 2 PARAMETER STATION NAME Natural Bank Labatt Park / Forks North Blackfriars St. Patrick Abundance Taxa Richness % Oligochaetes % Chironomidae % EPT EPT taxa richness Shannon Weiner Index Family Biotic Index FBI Quality Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Fairly Poor Poor Poor Fairly Poor 35 Oxford North Poor Poor Poor Poor Northing Easting Sample Date 6/2/2005 6/12/2006 6/7/2007 5/13/2008 6/3/2009 5/27/2010 6/6/2011 5/15/2012 5/9/2013 5/13/2014 6/3/2014 6/2/2014 6/2/2014 6/2/2014 6/3/2014 City of London No

46 SITE 3A: MEDWAY CREEK AT WESTERN ROAD Medway Creek is a wide, slow moving, shallow watercourse with a gravel and cobble substrate, and consists primarily of riffle-pool sequences. The high erosional activity have resulted in an increase in undercut banks which provide habitat opportunities to fish, in addition to those provided by existing vegetation, boulders, and woody debris (Dillion, 2013). The UTRCA completed both benthic, mussel and fish sampling within proximity of Site 3A. Table 11 summarizes the results of cumulative fish sampling efforts across two (2) sites known as: ME28 (17, , ) is located approximately 1.1 km upstream from Site 3A in the Medway Creek Tributary, sampled on October 31, 2014; and, SAR031 (17, , ) located approximately 530 m downstream in Medway Creek, between the Site 3A and the North Thames River, sampled on twelve (12) separate occasions between 1975 and Table 11: UTRCA Fish Sampling Data for Site 3A FISH SPECIES OCCURRENCE Common Name Scientific Name ME28 SAR031 Black Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus X Black Redhorse* Moxostoma duquesnei X Blackside Darter Percina maculata X Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus X Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus X Central Stoneroller Campostoma anomalum X X Common Carp Cyprinus carpio X Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus X Fantail Darter Etheostoma flabellare X Fourspine Stickleback Apeltes quadracus X Golden Redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum X Greater Redhorse Moxostoma valenciennesi X Greenside Darter Etheostoma blennioides X Hornyhead Chub Nocomis biguttatus X Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum X X Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae X X Longnose Gar Lepisosteus osseus X Mimic Shiner Notropis volucellus X Northern Hog Sucker Hypentelium nigricans X Quillback Carpiodes cyprinus X Rainbow Darter Etheostoma caeruleum X River Chub Nocomis micropogon X Rock Bass Ambloplites rupestris X No City of London

47 37 FISH SPECIES OCCURRENCE Common Name Scientific Name ME28 SAR031 Rosyface Shiner Notropis rubellus X Shorthead Redhorse Moxostoma macrolepidotum X Silver Redhorse Moxostoma anisurum X Silver Shiner* Notropis photogenis X Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu X X Spotfin Shiner Cyprinella spiloptera X Stonecat Noturus flavus X Striped Shiner Luxilus chrysocephalus X X Walleye Sander vitreus vitreus X White Sucker Catostomus commersoni X X Yellow Perch Perca flavescens X *Silver Shiner and Black Redhorse are both considered Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Mussel sampling occurred in September of 2004 at a site located approximately 600m downstream, between Site 3A and the North Thames River. A total of seven (7) mussel species were confirmed, and include: Wavy-rayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola); Fluted-shell (Lasmigona costata); Giant Floater (Pyganodon grandis); Creeper (Strophitus undulatus); Elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata); Spike (Elliptio dilatata); and, Mucket (Actinonaias ligamentina). The Wavy-rayed Lampmussel is considered Threatened and Special Concern, under the Endangered Species Act and Species at Risk Act, respectively. A field survey was completed on August 28, 2015 in order to document the existing conditions at Site 3A. Medway Creek is a permanent, linear channel. The North Thames River crossing was comprised of a permanent, linear feature; however, the river itself is sinuous in nature. The watercourse was slow flowing, with the filamentous algae noted downstream. The watercourse was approximately 4 m across; however, the water levels at the time of the assessment were likely to have resulted in a reduced wetted width. The reach consisted of both run and riffle habitat, primarily composed of course material (gravel, cobble). Much of the stream bank and material was exposed due to seasonally dry conditions. In-stream habitat cover opportunities were limited to undercut banks (3%), boulders (4%), and cobble (12%). Instream vegetation was not noted, and overhanging vegetation was estimated to shade approximately 10% of the watercourse. Water quality parameters were collected for Site 3A and are summarized in Table 12. City of London No

48 38 Table 12: Water Quality Parameters for Site 3A WATER QUALITY PARAMETER RESULT Upstream of Site Downstream of Site Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) ph Conductivity (TDS µs/cm) Water Temperature ( C) BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES The benthic community was sampled at two stations in Medway Creek; the station at Glenmore Drive was sampled from 2005 to 2014, and the station at the University of Western Ontario (UWO) near the outlet to the North Thames River was sampled in 2003 (Table 13). Most sampling was conducted in spring (May and June), with the 2008 exceptions of Glenmore Drive, when it was sampled in summer and fall (July and September); and the UWO site, which was sampled in July. The taxa richness of the benthic community in Medway Creek was higher than at other stations, ranging from 13 to 25 taxa per station. Shannon Wiener Diversity values were variable over time at Glenmore Drive ranging from 1.36 to 2.46 (low to moderate diversity). The highest diversity index levels (>2.00) were recorded in 2008, when sampling was conducted in the summer and fall rather than spring. The benthic community in Medway Creek was dominated by the tolerant taxon Chironomidae (21.6% 60.8% of the community), with Oligochaetes present in lower numbers (1.2% 26.7%). The sensitive taxa (EPT) were present in moderate proportions of the community (11.1% %), and were represented by 4 to 11 taxa. The Biotic Index values calculated for Medway Creek generally indicates fairly poor water quality conditions. The summer and fall sampling at Glenmore Drive and UWO resulted in Biotic Index values indicating fair water quality conditions. No City of London

49 39 Table 13: UTRCA Benthic Sampling Data for Site 3A PARAMETER STATION NAME Glenmore Drive UWO Abundance Taxa Richness % Oligochaetes % Chironomidae % EPT EPT taxa richness Shannon Weiner Index Family Biotic Index FBI Quality Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fair Fair Fair Fair Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fairly Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Northing Easting Sample Date 5/106/2005 6/6/2005 5/29/2006 5/31/2007 5/14/2008 REP 1 5/14/2008 REP 2 7/7/2008 REP 1 7/7/2008 REP 2 9/25/2008 REP 1 9/25/2008 REP 2 6/1/2009 5/27/2010 5/25/2011 5/11/2012 5/9/2013 5/14/2014 7/24/2003 City of London No

50 SITE 4: NORTH THAMES RIVER AT UNIVERSITY DRIVE The UTRCA completed both mussel and fish sampling within proximity of Site 4 approximately 750 m north of the Site and up into Medway Creek and are described in Table 13. Three Species at Risk were confirmed at the sample sites, including Wavy-rayed Lampmussel, Silver Shiner, and Black Redhorse. A field survey was completed on August 19, 2015 in order to document the existing conditions at Site 4. The assessment was completed from the shoreline. The North Thames River crossing was comprised of a permanent, slow moving, linear feature. The river was approximately 60 m in width (Google Earth, 2015 imagery); however, low water levels at the time of the assessment may have resulted in a reduced wetted width. The reach consisted of run habitat, with both fine (silt) and coarse (gravel, cobble) material present. In-stream habitat cover opportunities were limited to 2% coverage by boulders, 10% by cobble material and less than 1% from woody debris. In-stream vegetation was not noted and overhanging vegetation was estimated to shade approximately 2% of the river. Riparian and near-shore vegetation consisted of Red Maple, Trembling Aspen, Black Walnut, and Black Locust. Water quality parameters were collected for Site 4 and are summarized in Table 14. Table 14: Water Quality Parameters for Site 4 WATER QUALITY PARAMETER RESULT Upstream of Site Downstream of Site Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) ph Conductivity (TDS µs/cm) Water Temperature ( C) BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES The benthic macroinvertebrate community was not sampled at University Drive. It is noted; however, that the outlet of Medway Creek to North Thames River, near the UWO station on Medway Creek is 550 m upstream of the North Thames River site at University Drive, and the Oxford site on North Thames River is 2.3 km downstream SITE 5: SOUTH THAMES RIVER AT WELLINGTON ROAD The UTRCA completed both mussel and fish sampling within proximity of Site 5. Fish sampling occurred at station TF07, located approximately 650 m downstream of Site 5 in both 2002 and A total of thirteen (13) fish species were confirmed at this sampling station and include: Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolomieu); Rock Bass (Ambloplites rupestris); Golden Redhorse (Moxostoma erythrurum); Greenside Darter (Etheostoma blennioides); Johnny Darter (Etheostoma nigrum); White Sucker (Catostomus commersoni); River Chub (Nocomis micropogon); City of London No

51 42 Bluntnose Minnow (Pimephales notatus); Northern Hog Sucker (Hypentelium nigricans); Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio); Stonecat (Noturus flavus); Striped Shiner (Luxilus chrysocephalus); and Black Bullhead (Ameiurus melas). Mussel sampling occurred in September of 2004 at a site located approximately 1.5 m upstream. A total of eight (8) mussel species were confirmed, and include: Creeper (Strophitus undulatus); Elktoe (Alasmidonta marginata); Fluted-shell (Lasmigona costata); Mucket (Actinonaias ligamentina); Spike (Elliptio dilatata); Wabash Pigtoe (Fusconaia flava); Wavy-rayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola); and White Heelsplitter (Lasmigona complanata). The Wavy-rayed Lampmussel is considered Threatened and Special Concern, under the Endangered Species Act and Species at Risk Act, respectively. A field assessment was completed on August 19, 2015 in order to document the existing conditions at Site 5. The South Thames River crossing was comprised of a permanent, slow moving, linear channel. The river was approximately 60 m in width (Google Earth, 2015 imagery); however, low water levels at the time of the assessment may have resulted in a reduced wetted width. The reach consisted of run habitat, with both fine (silt) and coarse (gravel, cobble) material present. In-stream habitat cover opportunities were limited to 2% by cobble material and less than 1% from woody debris. In-stream vegetation shaded approximately 5% of the river bottom and overhanging vegetation was estimated to shade approximately 2% of the river. Riparian and near-shore vegetation consisted of Trembling Aspen, Black Walnut, Manitoba Maple, Willow species, and ground cover species such as Spotted Joe-pye Weed, Purple Loosestrife, and Goldenrods. Table 15: Water Quality Parameters for Site 5 WATER QUALITY PARAMETER RESULT Upstream of Site Downstream of Site Dissolved Oxygen (mg/l) ph Conductivity (TDS µs/cm) Water Temperature ( C) No City of London

52 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES One station on the South Thames River at Wellington Road was sampled for the benthic macroinvertebrate community in spring (May and June) from 2005 to 2014 (Table 16). The taxa richness at the South Thames River station ranged from 10 to 20 taxa over sampling years, with relatively low Shannon Wiener Diversity index values of 1.37 to The community at the station was dominated by the tolerant taxa groups, Oligochaeta (9.1% %) and Chironomidae (27.8% 62.5%). Sensitive taxa (EPT) were present in moderate numbers (2.1% % of the community), and represented by 3 to 10 taxa. The Biotic Index values calculated in South Thames River have consistently indicated fairly poor water quality conditions at the station. Table 16: UTRCA Benthic Sampling Data for Site 5 PARAMETER WATSON STREET Abundance Taxa Richness % Oligochaetes % Chironomidae % EPT EPT taxa richness Shannon Weiner Index Family Biotic Index FBI Quality Poor Fairly Poor Northing Easting Sample Date 6/2/2005 6/12/2006 6/7/2007 Fairly Poor 5/13/2008 Fairly Poor 5/27/2010 Fairly Poor 5/24/2011 Fairly Poor 5/15/2012 Fairly Poor 5/6/2013 Fairly Poor 5/13/2014 Fairly Poor 6 SIGNIFICANCE AND SENSITIVITY 6.1 DESIGNATED AREAS The City of London Official Plan (2006) provides for protection of Environmentally Significant Areas (ESA) and Earth Science and Life Science Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) within the City of London, as mapped on Schedule B-1. The Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA and the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA occur within the vicinity of the proposed RT route. The Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA is the largest natural area in the City of London, covering approximately 250 ha. This ESA is significant for its size, variety of natural habitats, and plant diversity. The surrounding land uses include Commercial, Health infrastructure and Residential areas. The ESA includes lands between Wellington Road to the west to just east of Highbury Avenue to the east; and from Commissioners Road East in the north to just south of Southdale Road East and Bradley Avenue in the south. Site 6, being portions of Wellington Road along the London RT Preferred Route, runs along the western border of the Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA (Figure 6). City of London No

53 44 The Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA covers approximately 129 ha of publicly owned land in north London, between Windermere, Fanshawe Park, Western and Wonderland Roads. The diverse terrestrial and aquatic habitats within the ESA provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species, including Species of Conservation Concern and Species at Risk (Dillon, 2015). The eastern extent of the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA occurs within Site 3B (Figure 9). 6.2 SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS The PPS (OMMAH, 2014) and the City of London Official Plan (2006) provide for the protection of Significant Wetlands and all wetlands within the City of London, respectively. Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA contains a Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW; Figure 6), and portions of the western edge fall within the Study Area. Site 6 runs along the western edge of the PSW within the Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA (Figure 6). The RT Route itself does not fall within the PSW. 6.3 SIGNIFICANT VALLEYLANDS Significant Valleylands are provided protection under the PPS (OMMAH, 2014), and the City of London holds the Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors designation on Schedule B-1 of the Official Plan (2006) to hold the definition of Significant Valleylands for the City of London. In the Study Area, Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors are found at: Site 2: North Thames River at the Forks (Figure 8); Site 3A: Medway Creek, east of Western Road (Figure 9); Site 4: University Drive crossing of the North Thames River (Figure 10); and Site 5: Wellington Road crossing of the Thames River. By providing protection for Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors, the Official Plan also provides for protection of Fish Habitat, as described in 5.3 (Aquatic Habitat). 6.4 SIGNIFICANT WOODLANDS Both the PPS (OMMAH, 2014) and the City of London Official Plan (2006) provide for the protection of Significant Woodlands within the City of London. The City of London defines Significant Woodlands as wooded areas within London that are >0.5 ha and fit the evaluation criteria for woodland qualities listed in Section of the Official Plan. While no Significant Woodlands as mapped on Schedule B-1 of the Official Plan fall within the Study Area, several Unevaluated Woodland patches do. With the exception of the unnumbered patch at Site 1, these patches will be treated as Significant Woodlands for the purposes of this SLSR and subsequent EIS. Descriptions of these woodlands have been provided in Section These patches include: Site 1, Patch removed by owner in 2016 (previously unnumbered) (Figure 7); Site 1, Patch 6007 (Figure 7); Site 3A, Patch 3003 (Figure 9); and Site 4, Patch 3001 (Figure 10); No City of London

54 45 The unnumbered patch removed by the owner in 2016 (Figure 7) at Site 1 had not been evaluated for significance; however, the Mud Creek Subwatershed Study suggested that this woodlot should be considered significant because it met at least one high criterion score for significance (contains a hydrologic feature) (Delcan, 2013). The majority of the woodland adjacent to Oxford Road was removed by the owner in the spring of 2016 and is therefore no longer considered significant for the purpose of this SLSR. The patches of woodland east of Site 5 (Figure 11) have been evaluated and are mapped on Schedule B-1 as non-significant woodlands. These woodland patches fall within the Significant River, Stream, and Ravine Corridors area of the Thames River, and are afforded protection under that criteria. 6.5 SPECIES AT RISK AND SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN SAR are defined as species listed as Threatened or Endangered provincially by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO) and subsequently are afforded protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), The PPS (OMMAH, 2014) defines the significant habitat of Endangered or Threatened species as the habitat, as approved by the MNRF, that is necessary for the maintenance, survival and/or the recovery of a naturally occurring or reintroduced population of Endangered or Threatened species as listed on the ESA, and where those areas of occurrences are occupied or habitually occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of their life cycle. The MNRF is mandated to ensure accurate database information for the identification, listing and conduct of ongoing assessments for significant Endangered species and their related habitats. Species designated as Special Concern provincially, assigned a conservation status (S-Rank) of S1 to S3 or SH, or designated as Special Concern, Threatened, or Endangered by the Committee for the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) or under the federal Species at Risk Act, are considered Species of Conservation concern (SCC). Confirmed habitat for SCC is considered Significant Wildlife Habitat (SWH) under the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and therefore is discussed further within the context of SWH (Section 6.5). Recent direction from MNRF to assess the potential presence of SAR and SCC has been to undertake a screening exercise to identify which species have potential to be present within a given study area based on known occurrences of the species within the area and habitat present. The screening exercise involved developing a list of SAR and SCC known to occur within the vicinity of the Study Area or region from a review of various sources including: NHIC data extracted from MNRF website (MNRF, 2016), MNRF SAR and SCC correspondence for the Study Area (Appendix A), and DFO SAR mapping (Conservation Ontario, 2014). Once the list of species was developed, each species known preferred habitat was then cross-referenced against habitats identified within the Study Area or adjacent lands. SAR and SCC are listed on Table 17 based on their record of occurrence within specific portions of the Study Area. Observations of SAR made during the 2015/2016 field surveys have also been added to Table 17. Background lists and other SAR information are provided in Appendix E along with a summary table of the screening assessment. Those species identified through the completion of the screening as having potential suitable habitat and that have reasonable potential to occur within the Study Area are discussed further below. City of London No

55 46 Table 17: Historical Occurrences of Species at Risk and Species of Conservation Concern SPECIES S-RANK COSEWIC SARO/ESA SARA SITE 1 2 3A 3B Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia) Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica) Cerulean Warbler (Dendroica cerulea) Chimney Swift (Chaetura pelagica) Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna) Eastern Wood Pewee (Contopus virens) Henslow s Sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii) Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus) Louisiana Waterthrush (Seiurus motacilla) White-eyed Vireo (Vireo griseus) Wood Thrush (Hylocichla mustelina) Terrestrial Fauna Species American Badger (Taxidea taxus) Blanding's Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii) Eastern Ribbonsnake (Thamnophis sauritus) Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifuga) Northern Long-eared Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis) Northern Map Turtle (Graptemys geographica) Queensnake (Regina septemvittata) Snapping Turtle (Chelydra serpentina) Bird Species S4B, SZN NAR SC N/A S4B THR THR N/A S4B THR THR N/A S3B END THR SC S4B, S4N THR THR THR S4B THR THR N/A S4B SC SC N/A SHB END END END S3B SC SC SC S3B SC SC SC S2B N/A N/A N/A S4B THR - - S2 END END END S3 THR THR THR S3 SC SC SC S4 END END N/A S3 END END N/A S3 SC SC SC S2 END END END S3 SC SC SC No City of London

56 47 SPECIES S-RANK COSEWIC SARO/ESA SARA SITE Spiny Softshell Turtle (Apalone spinifera) Tri-colored Bat (Perimyotis subflavus) Vegetation Species American Chestnut (Castanea dentata) Bird's-foot Violet (Viola pedata) Broad Beech Fern (Phegopteris hexagonoptera) Butternut (Juglans cinerea) Drooping Trillium (Trillium flexipes) Eastern Flowering Dogwood (Cornus florida) Eastern Prairie Fringed- Orchid False Rue-anemone (Enemion biternatum) Green Dragon (Arisaema dracontium) Kentucky Coffeetree (Gymnocladius dioicus) Spoon-leaved Moss (Bryoandersonia illecebra) Striped Cream Violet (Viola stirata) Tall Coreopsis (Coreopsis tripteris) Insect Species Eastern Amberwing (Perithemis tenera) Monarch (Danaus plexippus) Slender Bluet (Enallagma traviatum) Fish Species Black Redhorse (Moxostoma duquesnei) Lake Sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens) 1 2 3A 3B S3 THR THR THR S3? END END END S2 END END END S1 END END END S3 SC SC SC S3? END END END S1 END END END S2? END END END S2 END END END S2 THR THR THR S3 SC SC SC S2 THR THR THR *along RT route S1 END END END S3 N/A N/A N/A S2 N/A N/A N/A S3 N/A N/A N/A S3 SC SC SC S1 N/A N/A N/A S2 THR THR N/A S2,S3 THR THR N/A City of London No

57 48 SPECIES S-RANK COSEWIC SARO/ESA SARA SITE Northern Brook Lamprey (Ichthyomyzon fossor) Silver Shiner (Notropis photogenis) Mussel and Mollusc Species Rayed Bean (Villosa fabalis) Round Pigtoe (Pleurobema sintoxia) Wavy-rayed Lampmussel (Lampsilis fasciola) 1 2 3A 3B S3 SC SC SC S2,S3 THR THR SC S1 END END END S1 END END END S1 THR SC SC FLORA SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL Findings of the SAR and SCC screening indicated that suitable habitat is present in the Study Area for thirteen (13) plant species. These species are listed in Table 17 along with their provincial and federal status. Two SAR/SCC were observed during the field investigation. Kentucky Coffeetree (THR) was observed in four different locations along the RT Route (Figure 26) outside Sites 1 to 6. The majority of these trees were likely planted, but two large specimens may be naturally occurring, along with several small trees on Western University Campus (refer to subsection for further information). Tall Coreopsis, which has an Ontario S-rank of S2 (very rare in Ontario; 5 20 occurrences) was observed at Site 6; however, it occurred in a park area and was most likely planted TERRESTRIAL FAUNA AND INSECT SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL Findings of the SAR and SCC screening indicated that suitable habitat is present within the Study Area for several wildlife species. These species are summarized in Table 17, along with their provincial and federal status. Of the species listed in Table 17, a total of nine species were confirmed as present during field surveys (Figure 26). A brief discussion on these species is provided below. Bald Eagle (Site 1) An individual juvenile Bald Eagle was seen flying over Site 1 in August 2015, during the botanical inventories. Although candidate raptor wintering habitat is present on Site 1 along Oxford Road (Table 18, below), the observation was made in the summer months, and this candidate habitat is not directly adjacent to a water body. The individual was only flying over, and the area is not likely breeding habitat. The Bald Eagle is listed as Special Concern in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Bank Swallow (Site 6) A single Bank Swallow was observed flying over Walker s Pond, east of Site 6 during the field surveys. Suitable nesting habitat, such as sandy riverbanks or other exposed, loose substrates were not observed within the vicinity of the RT Route, and the bird was likely using Walker s Pond as a foraging area. Bank Swallow is listed as a Threatened species in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Barn Swallow (Sites 2, 4, 5 and 6) Barn Swallows were observed nesting at Site 2, and foraging over Sites 2, 4 and 5, while an individual was also observed flying over Walker s Pond east of Site 6. While suitable structures for nesting may occur within the vicinity of the sites, Barn Swallow nests were not observed during the field surveys. Barn Swallow is listed as a Threatened species in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). No City of London

58 49 Chimney Swift (Sites 2, 3A and 4) Chimney Swifts were observed foraging for insects above Sites 2, 3A and Site 4. In each situation breeding evidence was not found. Chimney Swifts can forage over a relatively large area throughout the day, and were likely using the airspace above Sites 2, 3A and 4 for this purpose, breeding somewhere throughout London. Chimney Swift is listed as a Threatened species in Ontario (MNRF, 2016) Eastern-wood Pewee (Sites 1 and 6) A singing male Eastern Wood-Pewee was observed on suitable breeding habitat in Polygon 6 on Site 1, located on the north side of Oxford Street West. This individual was given a breeding code of S7 - Probable due to the observation of a male on territory for at least seven days. A singing male Eastern Wood-Pewee was also encountered during both bird and vegetation surveys, on the west of side of Walker s Pond, east of Wellington Road at Site 6. This individual was also given a breeding code of S7 - Probable. Eastern Wood-Pewee is listed as a species of Special Concern in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Wood Thrush (Site 6) - A singing male Wood Thrush was observed along the west edge of Walker s Pond, east of Site 6, during the field surveys. The bird was given a breeding code of S7 - Probable due to the observation of a male on territory for at least seven days. Wood Thrush is listed as a species of Special Concern in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Monarch (Site 1) A single Monarch was observed at Site 1, as were numerous milkweed plants. Milkweed is important to Monarch populations, as Monarch larvae feed exclusively on this plant. The Monarch is listed as Special Concern in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Northern Map Turtle (Site 4) Six Map Turtles were seen basking on rocks in the Thames River. The Northern Map Turtle is listed as Special Concern in Ontario (MNRF, 2016). Spiny Softshell Turtle (Site 4) Four Spiny Softshell Turtles were seen basking on rocks in the Thames River. These observations confirm significant habitat of this Threatened turtle species PREVIOUS STUDIES Additionally, SAR and SCC species were observed in previous studies within the Study Area as listed in Section 3.1 and these findings are described in more detail in Section AQUATIC SAR AND SCC HABITAT POTENTIAL The reaches of the Thames and North Thames Rivers in the Study Area have been designated by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) as under consideration for listing for protection under the Species at Risk Act (SARA) (Conservation Ontario, 2014). The fish species considered for protection in these reaches include Pugnose Minnow and Silver Shiner. Silver Shiner is also listed under the Ontario SARO list. Mussel habitat is also found within the Thames River, including at the crossing on Wellington Road (Figure 11). Note that along the reach in the Study Area, only areas that meet the criteria for critical habitat are protected. Findings of the SAR and SCC screening indicated that suitable habitat is present within the Study Area for several aquatic species. These species are summarized in Table 17, along with their provincial and federal status. Aquatic Species at Risk were confirmed at or near four (4) of the five (5) Sites with water crossings, including Silver Shiner and Black Redhorse at Sites 3 and 4, and Wavy-rayed Lampmussel at Sites 2, 3, 4 and 5. Pugnose Minnow has not been recorded near the Study Area, but within the general London area. City of London No

59 50 Silver Shiner habitat is generally characterized by flowing pools, runs and riffles; however, they also use shallow, nearshore habitats and floodplain areas. The run habitat present at Sites 3 and 4 meets the criteria of a Category 1 classification and is most sensitive to anthropogenic changes. Both sites have potential to support Silver Shiner breeding during high-water conditions found in late May to mid-june. Black Redhorse habitat is generally categorized by pool and riffle areas, in moderately sized rivers with depths less than 2 m and substrates consisting of sandy or gravel bottoms. The run habitat present at both Sites 3 and 4 suggests less than ideal habitat; however, with nearby inlets and low-moving water, there is potential for this species to occur at both sites. The species may pass through these areas during daily or seasonal movement and during foraging activities. The Wavy-rayed Lampmussel is typically found in clear, riffle habitat with gravel or sandy bottoms in depths less than 1 m. Riffle habitat at the sites was limited at the time of the assessment; however, during periods of high-flows, riffle habitat may be present and may provide suitable conditions for this species. 6.6 SIGNIFICANT WILDLIFE HABITAT Wildlife habitat is defined as areas where plants, animals, and other organisms live and find adequate amounts of food, water, shelter, and space needed to sustain their populations. Specific wildlife habitats of concern may include areas where species concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual life cycle and areas that are important to migratory or non-migratory species (OMMAH, 2014). Wildlife habitat is referred to as significant if it is ecologically important in terms of features, functions, representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area or Natural Heritage System (OMMAH, 2014). Development and site alteration within significant wildlife habitat is not permitted under the PPS (OMMAH, 2014) or the Official Plan for the City of London (2006). Guidelines and criteria for the identification of significant wildlife are detailed in the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000), Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 7E (MNRF, 2015c), and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (OMNR, 2010). Significant wildlife habitat is described under four main categories: Seasonal concentrations of animals; Rare vegetation communities or specialized habitats for wildlife; Wildlife movement corridors; and Habitats of species of conservation concern. A review of available information resources identified significant wildlife habitat areas on or within 120 m of the RT Route. These areas include turtle wintering habitat, and amphibian breeding habitat (woodland). Discussions on the four main categories of significant wildlife habitat are provided below SEASONAL CONCENTRATION AREAS Areas of seasonal concentrations of animals are defined as areas where animals occur in relatively high densities at specific periods in their life cycle and/or particular seasons. At these times, species are vulnerable to ecological interferences or weather impacts. Areas of seasonal concentration are typically small in comparison to the larger habitat areas used by species at other times of the year. The identification of habitats associated with seasonal concentrations of species is typically based on known occurrences (OMNR, 2000). No City of London

60 51 An assessment was carried out to determine the potential for wildlife concentration areas on or within 120 m of the RT Route with a specific focus on Sites 1 through 6. Resources and protocols outlined in the OMNR Significant Wildlife Habitat: Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000) and the Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 7E (MNRF, 2015c) were utilized to evaluate the potential for species concentration area occurrence. Seasonal concentration areas with the potential to be on or within 120 m of the RT Route are examined in Table 18, below. Table 18: Seasonal Concentration Areas within 120 m of the Study Area HABITAT TYPE Waterfowl Stopover and Staging Areas (Terrestrial) Waterfowl Stopover and Staging Areas (Aquatic) Shorebird Migratory Stopover Area Raptor Wintering Area Bat Hibernacula Bat Maternity Colonies Turtle Wintering Areas Reptile Hibernaculum CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Habitat is not present. Meadows or agricultural fields of a suitable size that hold sheet water in the spring were not identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Some of the Westminster ponds, the closest being Walker s Pond, qualify as candidate SWH; however, they are over 120 m from the RT Route, and therefore surveys did not confirm SWH. No other water bodies of a suitable size to qualify as candidate habitat were identified within 120 m of the RT Route. While small sections of the Thames River shoreline within the vicinity of the sites contain some muddy edges and gravel islands which may be conducive to very small numbers of migrant shorebirds, in general very little suitable shorebird habitat is present. Typically, excellent inland shorebird migratory stopover areas consist of much larger areas of exposed mud habitat, such as the edges of a drawn-down lake, or a partially drained sewage pond. None of the previous studies have identified any areas of the Thames River as good shorebird stopover areas. While there is potential for singles or very small groups of migrant shorebirds to stop along the Thames River, the numbers would be far below the threshold to be considered candidate habitat. Small sections of the shoreline of the Thames River within 120 m of the RT Route are un-vegetated, and exhibit some seasonal changes in water level. These areas are therefore not considered SWH. None of the defining criteria to confirm SWH were met during field surveys, including no shorebirds observed. Candidate SWH is present north of Oxford Road and Site 1. Approximate 46 ha of mixed forest and upland habitat exists to the north of the road; however, large portions of the woodland closest to Oxford Road, in the unnumbered polygon, were removed by the owner in One juvenile Bald Eagle was observed nearby; however, this observation was made in the summer. Further, this candidate habitat is not directly adjacent to a water body, and is therefore not confirmed as being significant. Habitat is not present. No caves, mine shafts, underground foundations or karsts were found on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Candidate habitat is present within wooded ELC types throughout the study area. Moderate to high potential may exist within the larger forested areas associated with the Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA and Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA in Sites 3b and 6, respectively. Confirmed SWH habitat is present along the North Thames River within the vicinity of Site 4 and within the South Thames River at Site 5 (Figure 26). The North and South Thames Rivers possess suitable soft and muddy substrate. Further, numerous turtles, including Northern Map Turtle, Spiny Softshell (current study) and Snapping Turtle (NRSI, 2013b) were identified during the field surveys. Suitable areas of bedrock and deep rock fissures were not identified within 120 m of the RT Route, nor were caves or talus slopes. Conifer or shrub swamps or other suitable wetland types were not identified in the Study Area. City of London No

61 52 HABITAT TYPE Colonially-nesting Bird Breeding Habitat (Bank/Cliff) Colonially-nesting Bird Breeding Habitat (Tree/Shrub) Colonially-nesting Bird Breeding Habitat (Ground) Migratory Butterfly Stopover Areas Landbird Migratory Stopover Areas Deer Winter Congregation Areas CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Habitat is not present. Exposed sand piles, eroding banks, or borrow pits were not identified during the field surveys. While not observed directly adjacent to Sites 1 through 6, suitable habitat consisting of eroding banks does exist along the Thames River in areas. The banks of the Thames River near Sites 1 through 6 have the possibility of becoming suitable habitat in a relatively short amount of time due to erosion. Habitat is not present. Nests within live or dead trees, shrubs or emergent vegetation that would signify the area is used by colonial tree/shrub-nesting birds were not observed within wetland areas located on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. The Study Area does not contain areas with rocky islands or peninsulas that are suitable for colonial ground-nesting birds such as gulls and terns. In addition, preferred nesting habitat for Brewer s Blackbird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), which includes agricultural fields close to clear, flowing water is not present. Habitat is not present. The RT Route is not located within 5 km of the Lake Ontario shoreline. Habitat is not present. The RT Route is not located within 5 km of the Lake Ontario shoreline. MNRF determines this habitat. Records of Deer Yarding Areas on or within 120 m of the RT Route were not identified by the MNRF during the information request RARE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES OR SPECIALIZED WILDLIFE HABITATS Rare or specialized habitats include rare vegetation communities or concentrations of rare plant species. These specialized areas may also support rare animal species. Sites 1 through 6 lacked significant old growth forest features which, if present, might provide specialized habitats and food sources for other species dependent on these features. The vegetation communities identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route were not designated as rare or Threatened in Ontario. An assessment of the presence/absence of rare vegetation communities and specialized wildlife habitat for this ecoregion is provided in Tables 19 and 20. Of the potential candidate rare vegetation communities or specialized wildlife habitats, only woodland amphibian breeding habitat was identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route. No City of London

62 53 Table 19: Rare Vegetation Communities within 120 m of the Study Area HABITAT TYPE Cliffs and Talus Slopes Sand Barren Alvar Old Growth Forest Savannah Tallgrass Prairie Other Rare Vegetation Communities CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Table 20: Specialized Wildlife Habitats within 120 m of the Study Area HABITAT TYPE Waterfowl Nesting Area Bald Eagle and Osprey Nesting, Foraging and Perching Habitat Woodland Raptor Nesting Habitat Turtle Nesting Areas Habitat is not present. Exposed cliffs or talus slopes were not observed on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. Areas of sandy soil and characteristic sand barren plant species and landforms were not observed on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. Calcareous bedrock is not present in this area. Furthermore, areas of exposed bedrock were not observed on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. Forests in and within 120 m of the RT Route were not characterized by heavy mortality of mature over-storey trees resulting in a mosaic of gaps and multi-layered canopy. The Study Area is primarily urban land, and included forested areas are fragmented and representative of secondary growth. Habitat is not present. Tallgrass prairie habitat with 25-60% tree cover was not observed on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. Tallgrass Prairie and associated plant species were not identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Habitat is not present. Provincially rare (S1-S3) vegetation communities were not identified within 50 m of the proposed RT Route, as shown on Figures 13 to 25. CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Habitat is not present. Suitably sized wetlands flanked by grassy or shrubby fields were not present within 120 m of the RT Route. One Bald Eagle was observed during the field surveys, however habitat is not present. Nests were not observed within forest communities directly adjacent to wetlands within 120 m of the RT Route. An active osprey nest is located on a man-made light structure at the Forks of the Thames in Labatt Park approximate 155 m north of the proposed RT Route at Site 2 (L. McDougall pers. comm., 2016). As the nest is on a manmade structure it does not qualify as Significant Wildlife Habitat. Candidate habitat is not present. Woodland stands including interior forest habitat was not identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route. Additionally, candidate raptor species were not identified during the field surveys. Two turtle species were observed by during the field surveys; however, nesting females and signs of nesting were not observed. Confirmed Snapping Turtle nesting was observed by NRSI (2013b) within a manicured lawn area approximately 200 m east of Wellington Road (Figure 26). Sandy or gravelly areas adjacent to wetlands and away from roads were not observed within 120 m of the RT Route. Seeps / Springs Candidate habitat was not identified. Forested headwaters of streams were not located within 120 m of the RT Route. Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Woodland) Candidate habitat is present in Site 6 approximately 50 m east of Wellington Road, in a pond west of Walker s Pond. Three species of amphibian were identified during the amphibian surveys, including Spring Peeper, Gray Treefrog, and Green Frog, two of which are identified as target species for significance. City of London No

63 54 HABITAT TYPE CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Wetlands) Candidate habitat was not identified. Wetland areas within the Study Area were located within a woodland or within 120 m of a woodland, and would be considered under the Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Woodland) section of this table. For habitat to qualify under this category, it would have to be located >120 m from the nearest woodland. Habitat is not present within 120 m of the RT Route. During field surveys, criteria species American Toad, Spring Peeper and Gray Treefrog were observed; however concentrations observed do not support the threshold to define the area as Significant Wildlife Habitat. This would require observance of over 20 breeding individuals of a minimum of 2 criteria species. Woodland Area-Sensitive Bird Breeding Habitat Candidate habitat is not present. While several area-sensitive bird species, characteristic of this Habitat Type, have been observed within the wooded areas within the Westminster Ponds ESA (North-South Environmental Inc., 2015), suitable interior forest habitat (> 200 m from the forest edge) is very limited in this area. In particular, the wooded areas within the western portion of the ESA, adjacent to Wellington Road in Site 6 do not meet the criteria for candidate significant woodland area-sensitive bird breeding habitat SPECIES OF CONSERVATION CONCERN HABITAT Species of Conservation Concern include those that have been listed as S1 to S3 by the NHIC or are listed as Special Concern by SARO or COSEWIC. While these species are currently not afforded protection under the Endangered Species Act, 2007, species of conservation concern are tracked and monitored for changes in their populations and distributions. The NHIC maintains lists of all species found in Ontario. Provincial S ranks are used by the NHIC to set protection priorities for rare species and natural communities within Ontario. By comparing global G and provincial S ranks, the status, rarity, and the urgency of conservation needs can be ascertained. The NHIC evaluates provincial ranks on a continual basis and produces updated lists at least annually. The SARO and COSEWIC classification of Special Concern means the species lives in the wild in Ontario, is not considered Endangered or Threatened, but may become so due to a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats. The observance of a species of conservation concern on-site does not necessarily define the area as Significant Habitat; this is determined using the guidelines and criteria identified below. In addition to the species and habitats identified in Sections and 6.5.2, species of conservation concern are often associated with specific habitat types. The presence/absence of specific habitats for species of conservation concern within Ecoregion 7E (MNRF, 2015c) is provided in Table 21, below. No City of London

64 55 Table 21: Habitats of Species of Conservation Concern within 120 m of the Study Area HABITAT TYPE Marsh Bird Breeding Habitat Open Country Bird Breeding Habitat Shrub Early Successional Bird Breeding Habitat Terrestrial Crayfish CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Candidate habitat was not identified within 120 m of the RT Route. Wetland areas within the Study Area did not contain shallow water with abundant emergent aquatic vegetation. None of the candidate species were observed during the field surveys. Large grassland areas, >30 ha in size, are not present within 120 m of the RT Route. Further, none of the criteria species were observed during field investigations. Habitat is not present within 120 m of the RT Route. In addition, bird species associated with early successional habitat were not observed during the field surveys. Candidate habitat such as meadows at the edge of shallow marshes was not identified within 120 m of the RT Route. Special Concern and Rare Wildlife Species Habitat for SAR species is discussed in Section 6.5 (Table 17), and Appendix E ANIMAL MOVEMENT CORRIDORS The Natural Heritage Reference Manual (OMNRF, 2010) describes animal movement corridors as habitats that link two or more wildlife habitats that are critical to the maintenance of a population, species, or group of species, or habitats with a key ecological function to enable wildlife to move, with minimum mortality between areas of SWH or core natural areas. The Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (OMNR, 2000) further describes animal movement corridors as elongated, naturally vegetated parts of the landscapes used by animals to move from one habitat to another. Examples may include riparian zones and shorelines, wetland buffers, stream and river valleys, woodlands, and anthropogenic features including hydro and pipeline corridors, abandoned road and rail allowances, and fencerows and windbreaks. The presence/absence of animal movement corridors within 120 m of the RT Route is provided in Table 22. Table 22: Animal Movement Corridors HABITAT TYPE Amphibian Movement Corridors CANDIDATE SWH CRITERIA AND FIELD SURVEY RESULTS Amphibian movement corridors are only determined if amphibian breeding habitat (wetlands) is confirmed as SWH. As no candidate areas of amphibian breeding habitat (wetlands) were identified on or within 120 m of the RT Route, amphibian movement corridors do not apply. City of London No

65 56 7 CLOSURE This report has been prepared by Canada Inc. The assessment represents the conditions at the subject property only at the time of the assessment, and is based on the information referenced and contained in the report. The conclusions presented herein respecting current conditions represent the best judgment of the assessors based on current environmental standards. attests that to the best of our knowledge, the information presented in this report is accurate. The use of this report for other projects without written permission of the client and is solely at the user s own risk. Thank you for the opportunity to complete this report. We trust that this information is satisfactory for your requirements. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance. Report prepared by: Canada Inc. Reviewed by: Erin Fitzpatrick, M.Sc. Biologist Dan Reeves, M.Sc. Project Biologist No City of London

66 57 8 REFERENCES Bird Studies Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Environment Canada, Ontario Nature, and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas Internet Site. City of London City of London Official Plan, Available at: City of London City of London: Environmental Management Guidelines. 154 pp. Available at: Management-Guidelines-2007.pdf City of London Thames Valley Corridor Plan. Final Report, December City of London Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) Guidelines and Checklist. Available at: Studies.aspx Conservation Ontario Distribution maps for the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority Aquatic Species at Risk. Available on-line at: Delcan Corporation (Delcan) Dingman Creek Subwatershed Study Update. Volume 1: Main Report. Prepared for The Corporation of the City of London, Environmental Services Water, Sewer and Drainage Division. Delcan Corporation (Delcan) Existing Ecological Conditions Report Mudcreek Subwatershed, City of London. Prepared for The Corporation of the City of London. Dillon Consulting Limited (Dillon) Natural Heritage Evaluation and Inventory, Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA. Project Number Government of Canada. 1985a. Fisheries Act c. F-14. Available online at Government of Canada. 1985b. Navigation Protection Act. Available online at Government of Canada Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 (S.C. 1994, c. 22). Available at: Government of Canada Species at Risk Act (SARA). Available online at: Government of Canada Species at Risk Public Registry. Available online at: Government of Ontario Public Lands Act. Available online at: Government of Ontario Ontario Regulation 157/06: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority: Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. Available at: Act_ pdf Government of Ontario Endangered Species Act (ESA). Available online: City of London No

67 58 Konze, K. and M. McLaren Wildlife Monitoring Programs and Inventory Techniques for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Northeast Science and Technology. Technical Manual TM pp. Lee, H.T Ecological Land Classification Evolution update. ELC Portal Website: Lee, H.T., Bakowsky, W.D., Riley, J., Bowles, J., Puddister, M., Uhlig, P., and S. McMurray Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02. Middlesex County Middlesex Natural Heritage Systems Study: A study to identify the natural heritage systems in Middlesex County. Project management by Upper Thames River Conservation Authority in cooperation with Middlesex County Conservation Authorities. 48 pp. Ministry of the Environment and Energy Water Management: Policies, Guidelines, Provincial Water Quality Objectives. Queen s Printer for Ontario. Natural Resources Solutions Inc. (NRSI). 2013a. Subject Lands Status Report Harris Park. Project No Prepared for the City of London. Natural Resources Solutions Inc. (NRSI). 2013b. SoHo Redevelopment Environmental Impact Study. Project No. 1354A. Prepared for the City of London. North-South Environmental Inc. (2015). Westminster Ponds/Pond Mills ESA: Ecological Inventory & Management Zone Report. Volume pp. Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy Water Management: policies, guidelines, provincial water quality objectives. Available at: Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (OMMAH) Provincial Policy Statement. Queen s Printer for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) Significant Wildlife Habitat: Technical Guide. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR) Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement. Second Edition. Queen s Printer for Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015a. Natural Heritage Areas Mapping Make-a-Map Online Tool. Available at: Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015b. Natural Heritage Information Centre Species Lists. Available at Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015c. Significant Wildlife Habitat Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 7E. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) list. Available at: html Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) Environmental Guide For Fish And Fish Habitat. Available at: ocument No City of London

68 59 Quinlan, K., Upper Thames River Conservation Authority The Thames River, Ontario: Canadian Heritage River System Ten Year Monitoring Report Smith, R.F. and W.O. Lamp Comparison of insect communities between adjacent headwater and main-stem streams in urban and rural watersheds. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 27(1): Source Water Protection Thames-Sydenham and Region Source Protection Committee: Upper Thames River Source Protection Area Assessment Report. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) Regionally Rare Plants of Middlesex County Updated Available at: Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) The Middlesex Natural Heritage Study: A Natural Heritage Study to Identify Significant Woodland Patches in Middlesex County. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (UTRCA) Master Plan Update 2005 Westminster Ponds / Pond Mills Environmentally Significant Area. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority. 2012a. The Forks: 2012 Watershed Report Card. Upper Thames River Conservation Authority. 2012b. Dingham Creek: 2012 Watershed Report Card. City of London No

69 Figures

70 SARNIA ROAD CHEAPSIDE STREET OXFORD STREET EAST OXFORD STREET WEST QUEENS AVENUE RIVERSIDE DRIVE KILALLY ROAD GAINSBOROUGH ROAD ROBINS HILL ROAD KIPPS LANE HURON STREET TRAFALGAR STREET CRUMLIN SIDEROAD WORTLEY ROAD Ü VETERANS MEMORIAL PARKWAY WESTCHESTER BOURNE HIGHWAY 401 ADMIRAL DRIVE GRENFELL DRIVE FANSHAWE PARK ROAD EAST HIGHBURY AVENUE NORTH GLENORA DRIVE CLARKE ROAD FIGURE 4 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 5 FIGURE 6 HURON STREET SANDFORD STREET BRIARHILL AVENUE 2ND STREET FIGURE 3 DUNDAS STREET WAVELL STREET HALE STREET BRYDGES STREET EGERTON STREET TRAFALGAR STREET HAMILTON ROAD GORE ROAD 0 1,000 2,000 m MAP INDEX LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 LEGEND MAP INDEX GRID BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March PROJECT: SCALE: 1:55000 FILE. NO.: F1 FIGURE 1 THOMPSON ROAD POND MILLS ROAD COMMISSIONERS ROAD EAST HIGHBURY AVENUE SOUTH OLD VICTORIA ROAD HIGHWAY 401 FANSHAWE PARK ROAD WEST SUNNYSIDE DRIVE DOON DRIVE WESTERN ROAD WONDERLAND ROAD NORTH ADELAIDE STREET NORTH COLBORNE STREET RICHMOND STREET ST GEORGE STREET DUFFERIN AVENUE KING STREET YORK STREET HORTON STREET EAST SPRINGBANK DRIVE GREY STREET RIDOUT STREET SOUTH EMERY STREET WEST BASELINE ROAD EAST COMMISSIONERS ROAD WEST WELLINGTON ROAD UPPER QUEEN STREET FERNDALE AVENUE ANDOVER DRIVE BRADLEY AVENUE WHITE OAK ROAD ERNEST AVENUE EXETER ROAD SOUTHDALE ROAD EAST JALNA BOULEVARD VISCOUNT ROAD WHARNCLIFFE ROAD SOUTH WONDERLAND ROAD SOUTH HYDE PARK ROAD SOUTHDALE ROAD WEST BOSTWICK ROAD CAMPBELL STREET

71 MALDON PLACE RAMSAY ROAD SLEIGHTHOLME AVENUE SARNIA ROAD BLYTHWOOD ROAD FOX AVENUE GOWER STREET FOSTER AVENUE PAUL STREET ANN STREET MILL STREET COLBORNE STREET WALNUT STREET WYATT STREET STANLEY STREET UNIVERSITY DRIVE MEDWAY THE FORKS MUD CREEK North Thames River Unnumbered (*Removed) Site STEELE STREET HURON DRIVE HURON STREET REGENT STREET THE PARKWAY WESTERN ROAD WELLINGTON STREET SHERWOOD AVENUE VICTORIA STREET EDGAR DRIVE RICHMOND STREET PLATTS LANE ST GEORGE STREET WATERLOO STREET ST JAMES STREET CHEAPSIDE STREET GROSVENOR STREET PROUDFOOT LANE OXFORD STREET EAST OXFORD STREET WEST PICCADILLY STREET HYMAN STREET WILSON AVENUE RIVERSIDE DRIVE DUFFERIN AVENUE QUEENS AVENUE CLARENCE STREET COOMBS AVENUE CASTLEGROVE BOULEVARD TROTT DRIVE ESSEX STREET HORIZON DRIVE GUNN STREET FARRAH ROAD PALL MALL STREET JOHN STREET CENTRAL AVENUE ALBION STREET WOODWARD AVENUE BEAVERBROOK AVENUE ALBERT STREET KENT STREET FORWARD AVENUE DUNDAS STREET KING STREET YORK STREET RIDOUT STREET NORTH BECHER STREET BATHURST STREET THAMES STREET BROUGH STREET BROUGHDALE AVENUE WESTVIEW DRIVE EMPRESS AVENUE BLACKFRIARS STREET TOZER AVENUE CHARLES STREET TALBOT STREET BRITANNIA AVENUE BRESCIA LANE KININVIE DRIVE COLUMBIA AVENUE CHEPSTOW CLOSE FORD CRESCENT CHRISTIE STREET BEAUFORT STREET CHERRYHILL PLACE ST PATRICK STREET CAVENDISH CRESCENT SHERWOOD AVENUE WALMER GARDENS KENNETH AVENUE WOLFE STREET WORTLEY ROAD WHARNCLIFFE ROAD SOUTH RIVERVIEW AVENUE SPRINGBANK DRIVE VICTOR STREET DUKE STREET SEAWOOD AVENUE PINEWOOD DRIVE HORTON STREET EAST CONCORD CRESCENT BLUE FOREST DRIVE BEAVERBROOK AVENUE PICCADILLY STREET Ü m NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES - WEST AREA LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: LEGEND PROPOSED BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE PROPOSED RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA SITE 1 BOUNDARY WATER FEATURES SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARY PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS UNEVALUATED WETLANDS UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WOODLANDS ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT BIG PICTURE META-CORES & META-CORRIDORS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER * PATCH REMOVED BY LANDOWNER IN 2016 Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA SCALE: 1:15000 FILE. NO.: F2 FIGURE 2 CENTRAL AVENUE MAURICE STREET KENSINGTON AVENUE BATHURST STREET GREENSIDE AVENUE CAPULET LANE REDOAK AVENUE CAPULET WALK THORNWOOD DRIVE KINGSWAY AVENUE OAKRIDGE DRIVE WONDERLAND ROAD NORTH SAMUEL PLACE MARY AVENUE TROWBRIDGE AVENUE

72 CHEAPSIDE STREET ELIAS STREET PRINCESS AVENUE VICTORIA DRIVE CAMPUS DRIVE WETHERED STREET OAKSIDE STREET LORNE AVENUE DUFFERIN AVENUE QUEENS AVENUE FLORENCE STREET LITTLE SIMCOE STREET BEATTIE AVENUE WILTON AVENUE LITTLE GREY STREET YORK STREET BURSLEM STREET DOULTON STREET LANGMUIR AVENUE MARDELL PLACE SANDFORD STREET MICHAEL STREET THE FORKS POTTERSBURG CREEK ALUMNI ROAD TECHNOLOGY DRIVE JIM ASHTON STREET OXFORD STREET EAST HOWLAND AVENUE 1ST STREET COMMERCIAL CRESCENT SPRUCE STREET SPRUCE STREET KIWANIS PARK DRIVE GRAYDON STREET IRVING PLACE MARK STREET SUSAN AVENUE GODFREY DRIVE HALE STREET FLANDERS ROW DUNDAS STREET EASTMAN AVENUE HIGHBURY AVENUE NORTH LANDOR STREET RHINE AVENUE CECILIA AVENUE WISTOW STREET EMPIRE STREET OAKLAND AVENUE ASHLAND AVENUE BARKER STREET LINWOOD STREET BOULLEE STREET APPEL STREET MCNAY STREET LYMAN STREET STUART STREET CLEMENS STREET FLEET STREET MORNINGTON AVENUE SALISBURY STREET CONNAUGHT AVENUE QUEBEC STREET NIGHTINGALE AVENUE MCCORMICK BOULEVARD WOODMAN AVENUE CHARLOTTE STREET DORINDA STREET BURBROOK PLACE KELLOGG LANE FRANCES STREET EGERTON STREET BRYDGES STREET STERLING STREET HURON STREET REGENT STREET TAYLOR STREET HARRISON AVENUE VICTORIA STREET BRAMPTON ROAD HARLEY STREET ELLIOTT STREET ROSS STREET GROSVENOR STREET WALLACE STREET ST JAMES STREET THORNTON AVENUE MAITLAND STREET COLBORNE STREET WATERLOO STREET HELLMUTH AVENUE BRANT STREET WATLING STREET PICCADILLY STREET MCMAHEN STREET AMY CRESCENT SEVILLA PARK PLACE CHALMERS STREET LAMBTON STREET LEROY AVENUE LOGAN AVENUE WOLSELEY AVENUE ELIZABETH STREET GAMMAGE STREET CLIFFORD STREET MILES STREET FALAISE ROAD REGINA STREET PALL MALL STREET CENTRAL AVENUE ENGLISH STREET PALACE STREET CHRISTIE STREET RENWICK AVENUE PARTRIDGE STREET KING STREET ELIAS STREET PRINCESS AVENUE Ü m NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES - EAST AREA LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: LEGEND PROPOSED BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE PROPOSED RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA WATER FEATURES SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARY PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS UNEVALUATED WETLANDS UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WOODLANDS ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT BIG PICTURE META-CORES & META-CORRIDORS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. SCALE: 1:15000 FILE. NO.: F3 FIGURE 3 ASHLAND AVENUE ROCK STREET BARKER STREET STERLING STREET WILLINGDON AVENUE BEDFORD ROAD ST JAMES STREET CARLTON AVENUE ALFRED STREET ROSEDALE STREET CARTWRIGHT STREET CENTRAL AVENUE MAITLAND STREET PRINCESS AVENUE DUFFERIN AVENUE ONTARIO STREET PETER STREET PICTON STREET HEWITT STREET LYLE STREET WILLIAM STREET KING STREET YORK STREET RECTORY STREET BATHURST STREET HORTON STREET EAST GREY STREET HAMILTON ROAD SIMCOE STREET CABELL STREET LOVETT STREET HENRY STREET WATERLOO STREET MAITLAND STREET

73 PHILLBROOK DRIVE ROLAND LANE CAMDEN ROAD Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA Site 3 LAWSON ROAD DOON DRIVE Site 4 KININVIE DRIVE PHILIP AZIZ AVENUE HASTINGS DRIVE NORTH CENTRE ROAD BOBBYBROOK DRIVE SHAWNA ROAD DALEVIEW CRESCENT FANSHAWE PARK ROAD EAST GEARY AVENUE FAWN COURT NATHANIEL COURT ROLAND CRESCENT SPENCER CRESCENT HILLVIEW BOULEVARD ROBINSON LANE ADELAIDE STREET NORTH ELMDALE AVENUE SPRUCEDALE AVENUE HILLSIDE DRIVE STONEY CREEK SUNNYSIDE DRIVE SHAVIAN BOULEVARD CARRICK LANE AMBLESIDE DRIVE LAVENDER WAY WINDERMERE ROAD RICHMOND STREET CANTERBURY ROAD COLLIP CIRCLE PAISLEY STREET DENALI TERRACE THE FORKS PERTH DRIVE ELGIN DRIVE RAYMOND AVENUE MIDDLESEX DRIVE BERNARD AVENUE MAYFAIR DRIVE EPWORTH AVENUE OXFORD DRIVE UNIVERSITY DRIVE North Thames River LAMBTON DRIVE HURON DRIVE WESTERN ROAD REGENT STREET VICTORIA STREET MCGARRELL DRIVE FANSHAWE PARK ROAD WEST WYCHWOOD PARK MEDWAY CREEK SARNIA ROAD HURON STREET BROUGH STREET THE PARKWAY WILLIAM STREET HARRISON AVENUE MAITLAND STREET COLBORNE STREET CHRISTIE STREET ST GEORGE STREET SHERWOOD AVENUE LOUISE BOULEVARD SHARON DRIVE KATHRYN DRIVE TOOHEY LANE MORAINE CRESCENT HESKETH STREET GLENMORE DRIVE Ü m NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES - NORTH AREA LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London HURON STREET DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: LEGEND PROPOSED BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE PROPOSED RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA SITES 3 & 4 BOUNDARY WATER FEATURES SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARY PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS UNEVALUATED WETLANDS UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WOODLANDS ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT BIG PICTURE META-CORES & META-CORRIDORS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA SCALE: 1:15000 FILE. NO.: F4 FIGURE 4 MAPLEDALE AVENUE MILFORD CRESCENT RIDGE ROAD SHADY LANE MASONVILLE CRESCENT ST BEES COURT ORKNEY PLACE TALLWOOD STEELE STREET FRASER AVENUE RIVERTRACE CLOSE BUTTERCUP COURT GERALDINE AVENUE MCCLURE DRIVE MARCUS CRESCENT CARNFORTH ROAD GRANGEOVER AVENUE GREEN ACRES DRIVE GLOUCESTER ROAD CORLEY DRIVE RYERSIE ROAD DONCASTER AVENUE FRIARS WAY LONSDALE DRIVE FORD CRESCENT STIRRUP COURT COOMBS AVENUE EDGAR DRIVE CASTLEGROVE BOULEVARD CHESHAM AVENUE

74 LITTLE SIMCOE STREET Site 5 VAN STREET WORTLEY ROAD YORK STREET HORTON STREET EAST EGERTON STREET HAMILTON ROAD GREY STREET HILL STREET SIMCOE STREET SOUTH STREET BATHURST STREET MAITLAND STREET WILLIAM STREET BRUCE STREET NELSON STREET Thames River EDWARD STREET TRAFALGAR STREET Ü m NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES - SOUTH CENTRE LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: LEGEND PROPOSED BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE PROPOSED RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA SITE 5 BOUNDARY WATER FEATURES SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARY PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS UNEVALUATED WETLANDS UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WOODLANDS ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT BIG PICTURE META-CORES & META-CORRIDORS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA SCALE: 1:15000 FILE. NO.: F5 FIGURE 5 RECTORY STREET COLBORNE STREET GRAND AVENUE CATHCART STREET ADELAIDE STREET SOUTH RIDOUT STREET SOUTH HIGH STREET BELGRAVE AVENUE KING EDWARD AVENUE THOMPSON ROAD FAIRVIEW AVENUE WELLINGTON ROAD BASELINE ROAD EAST POND MILLS ROAD COMMISSIONERS ROAD EAST Westminster Ponds/ Pond Mills ESA FLORENCE STREET ETHEL STREET WELLINGTON STREET ASKIN STREET WHARNCLIFFE ROAD SOUTH OAK STREET MARLEY PLACE CLARENCE STREET RICHMOND STREET TALBOT STREET BEACONSFIELD AVENUE VICTOR STREET EUCLID AVENUE BYRON AVENUE EAST CRAIG STREET PINE STREET CARFRAE CRESCENT ELMWOOD AVENUE EAST OLIVER STREET PRICE STREET BRISCOE STREET EAST TECUMSEH AVENUE EAST LANGARTH STREET EAST WESTON STREET BAKER STREET JOSEPHINE STREET JACQUELINE STREET DREANEY AVENUE SACKVILLE STREET WALKER STREET LOVETT STREET HYATT AVENUE STEDWELL STREET REDAN STREET MAMELON STREET ARDAVEN PLACE BRIGHTON STREET ELM STREET ELM STREET PEGLER STREET HYDRO STREET MCKENZIE AVENUE PHILIP STREET ADA STREET BROOKSIDE STREET BOND STREET TREVITHEN STREET FOXBAR ROAD DEVONSHIRE AVENUE VERONICA AVENUE MOORE STREET IROQUOIS AVENUE EMERY STREET EAST ELWORTHY AVENUE MCCLARY AVENUE WINDSOR AVENUE GARFIELD AVENUE ROSEL CRESCENT SCENIC DRIVE UPPER QUEEN STREET EMERSON AVENUE HELENA AVENUE GLADSTONE AVENUE WESTMINSTER AVENUE CHESTER STREET BELHAVEN ROAD CLEVELAND AVENUE CAIRN STREET BUCKINGHAM STREET BELLEVUE AVENUE DEANE STREET LUNDY LANE PRICE STREET TENNYSON STREET FRANK PLACE EMERY STREET EAST MURRAY STREET CHESTER STREET ST NEOTS DRIVE AILSA PLACE AVERILL CRESCENT HIGHLAND HEIGHTS MARKLAND DRIVE BASELINE ROAD EAST DOVER PLACE BALDERSTONE AVENUE CARNEGIE LANE CHIPPENDALE CRESCENT EAGLE DRIVE LEATHORNE STREET HUNTINGDON DRIVE COWAN AVENUE HARMONY ROAD SUMNER ROAD OUTLOOK ROAD CHIDDINGTON AVENUE FRONTENAC ROAD CHEVIOT ROAD DEVERON CRESCENT WILKINS STREET VINCENT CRESCENT FERNDALE AVENUE

75 Site Ü m NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES - SOUTH AREA LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: LEGEND PROPOSED BLUE LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE PROPOSED RED LINE RAPID TRANSIT ROUTE RAPID TRANSIT STUDY AREA SITE 6 BOUNDARY WATER FEATURES SUBWATERSHED BOUNDARY PROVINCIALLY SIGNIFICANT WETLANDS UNEVALUATED WETLANDS UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WOODLANDS ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT BIG PICTURE META-CORES & META-CORRIDORS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA SCALE: 1:15000 FILE. NO.: F6 FIGURE 6 BURLINGTON STREET BUCKINGHAM STREET EMERSON AVENUE HELENA AVENUE BASELINE ROAD EAST CHIPPENDALE CRESCENT EAGLE DRIVE LEATHORNE STREET COMMISSIONERS ROAD EAST HARMONY ROAD SUMNER ROAD WELLINGTON ROAD Westminster Ponds/ Pond Mills ESA OUTLOOK ROAD FRONTENAC ROAD CURTIS AVENUE JERMYN PLACE Area of Natural Scientific Interest (ANSI) MILLERS ROAD EBURY CRESCENT MILLBANK DRIVE ANTRIM CRESCENT ADELAIDE STREET SOUTH WILLOW DRIVE WELLINGSBORO ROAD GRIEVE PLACE BRIDLINGTON ROAD UPCOTT CRESCENT ASHBURY AVENUE DUDLEY CRESCENT BEXHILL CLOSE ADSWOOD ROAD DEARNESS DRIVE OSGOODE DRIVE DOW ROAD KINBURN CRESCENT HILLHEAD ROAD HARDING CRESCENT POND MILLS ROAD SURREY CRESCENT BEXHILL DRIVE BRADLEY AVENUE NEWBOLD STREET HIGH STREET CHIDDINGTON AVENUE NADINE AVENUE GLENBANNER ROAD HIGHLAND HEIGHTS CARNEGIE LANE HUNTINGDON DRIVE COWAN AVENUE HIGHVIEW AVENUE EAST CHEVIOT ROAD UPPER QUEEN STREET WILKINS STREET THE FORKS COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE DINGMAN CREEK HOMEVIEW ROAD FERNDALE AVENUE CRAWFORD STREET EDEN AVENUE CRESTON AVENUE WINBLEST AVENUE NIXON AVENUE MATHERS STREET DULANEY DRIVE CLIFTON CRESCENT DUNDALK DRIVE JOSSELYN DRIVE SOUTHDALE ROAD EAST KRISTINA CRESCENT ELVIRA CRESCENT DEVON ROAD COLETTE DRIVE JUTTA CRESCENT ROSAMOND CRESCENT SASHA CRESCENT MURIEL CRESCENT MONTGOMERY ROAD ASHLEY CRESCENT JALNA BOULEVARD PATIENCE CRESCENT LACEY CRESCENT CHESWICK CIRCLE SARAH CRESCENT CONWAY LANE CONWAY DRIVE ERNEST AVENUE RENNY CRESCENT ALAYNE CRESCENT FAIRCHILD CRESCENT

76 PROUDFOOT LANE LEGEND SITE 1 BOUNDARY k AMPHIBIAN SURVEY LOCATION UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES WATERCOURSE UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER * PATCH REMOVED BY LANDOWNER IN 2016 Unnumbered (*Removed) k OXFORD STREET WEST BEAVERBROOK AVENUE Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA Ü m EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 1 - WOODLANDS ALONG OXFORD STREET LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 SCALE: 1:3000 PROJECT: FILE. NO.: F7 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe FIGURE 7

77 LEGEND HAR SITE 2 BOUNDARY RIS K PAR k AMPHIBIAN SURVEY LOCATION WATER FEATURES RY E NT SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS North WILSON AVENUE UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT iver G ARK IS P es R MES THA ATE STR EET RIVER R HAR T ha m AVENUE QU EENS SIDE D R IVE DU k ND AS ST RE ET DUNDAS STREET 0 50 m Ü Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 2 NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON RIVERSIDE DRIVE Thames R iv LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London er DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: SCALE: 1:1500 FILE. NO.: F8 FIGURE Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the 8

78 CAN W C ES T HES D T ER RIV TE R IR LEGEND RI CH M ON SITE 3A & 3B BOUNDARY D ST RE ET k CLE AMPHIBIAN SURVEY LOCATION UNEVALUATED WETLANDS YR B UR WATER FEATURES UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES OA PC LLI CO E D ESA UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT ATE PG LLI CO SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS UN TY RSI IVE WOODLAND PATCH NUMBER HO SPI E TAL Y N TR k k T PER HD RIV E R OR ED Medway Valley Heritage Forest ESA NM E RM D GL E DE WIN OA ER RIV E m Ü Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA CO RL E YD RIV E EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 3A - CROSSING OF MEDWAY CREEK ON WESTERN ROAD SITE 3B - WOODLANDS ALONG WESTERN ROAD WELLINGTON DRIVE WESTERN ROAD Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: SCALE: 1:3000 FILE. NO.: F9 FIGURE 9

79 LEGEND k AMPHIBIAN SITE 4 BOUNDARY SURVEY LOCATION PERTH DRIVE WATER FEATURES UNEVALUATED VEGETATION PATCHES SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT UNIVERSITY DRIVE k SUNSET STREET LAMBTON DRIVE North Thames River WESTVIEW DRIVE THE PARKWAY 0 30 m Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA Ü EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 4 - NORTH THAMES CROSSING ON UNIVERSITY DRIVE LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT - SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 SCALE: 1:1250 PROJECT: FILE. NO.: F10 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the FIGURE 10

80 LEGEND SITE 5 BOUNDARY k AMPHIBIAN SURVEY LOCATION WATER FEATURES WOODLANDS SIGNIFICANT RIVER, STREAM & RAVINE CORRIDORS UTRCA REGULATION LIMIT LL WE ON GT IN R ST T EE k r ive WE sr me a Th LL IN ON GT AD RO 0 Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Base Mapping, March City of London, Official Plan, Schedule B-1. UTRCA HIGH S TREE T F RO T RE NT S 30 m FRO ET T RE NT S EXISTING CONDITIONS: SITE 5 - THAMES CROSSING ON WELLINGTON ROAD ET NN KE ON E AC PL Ü LONDON RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SUBJECT LANDS STATUS REPORT For City of London DATE: FEBRUARY 2017 PROJECT: SCALE: 1:1000 FILE. NO.: F11 FIGURE Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the 11