Regional Municipality Of Waterloo Ecological and Environmental

Media Release: Friday, May 23, 2014, 4:30 p.m .
Regional Municipality Of Waterloo
Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee
Agenda
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Dinner: 6:00 p.m
Meeting: 6:30 p.m.
Room 110
150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario
1.
Declarations Of Pecuniary Interest Under The “Municipal Conflict
Of Interest Act”
2.
Minutes: February 25, 2014
3.
Delegations
a)
Ms. Kristen Barrisdale (GSP Group) & Ms. Shari Muscat (Stantec)
EEAC-14-004, Proposed Mixed Use Development, Fairway Road and
Lackner Boulevard, City of Kitchener, Lackner Woods [ESPA 25] and
Core Environmental Feature
b)
Mr. Paul Puopolo (Polycorp Inc.), Mr. Jim Dougan & Mr. Steven Hill
(Dougan & Associates)
EEAC-14-005, Proposed Bos Development Plan of Subdivision 30T13103, Wesley Boulevard, City of Cambridge, Moffat Creek
Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area
4.
Reports
1639076
1
EEAC Agenda
-2-
May 27, 2014
a)
EEAC-14-004, Proposed Mixed Use Development, Fairway Road and
Lackner Boulevard, City of Kitchener, Lackner Woods [ESPA 25] and
Core Environmental Feature
9
b)
EEAC-14-005, Proposed Bos Development Plan of Subdivision 30T13103, Wesley Boulevard, City of Cambridge, Moffat Creek
Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area
23
5.
Information/Correspondence
a)
Ontario Municipal Board Hearing, Grimm/Brewer Lands, City of
Cambridge – Oral Report from Staff (Chris Gosselin)
b)
Creation of Turtle Nesting Habitat, Regional Road 46 (Roseville Road)
and Barrie’s Lake [ESPA 57], Township of North Dumfries – Oral Report
from Staff (Chris Gosselin, Albert Hovingh)
c)
Ontario Nature’s Natural Heritage Systems Workshop – Oral Report
from Staff (Tim Van Hinte)
d)
Regional Forests Update, Ice Storm Clean-Up – Oral Report from Staff
(Albert Hovingh)
e)
P-14-050, A Community-Based Conservation Land Trust in Waterloo
Region: Proposed Discussion Forum – For Information
6.
Other Business
a)
Motion with Respect to Former Chair John Jackson
b)
Nomination of Representative for Laurel Creek Headwaters
Environmentally Sensitive Landscape Public Liaison Committee
7.
Active EEAC Subcommittees
8.
Next Meeting: June 24, 2014
9.
Adjourn
1639076
39
1
1
Regional Municipality Of Waterloo
Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee
Minutes
Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Dinner: 6:00 p.m
Meeting: 6:30 p.m.
Room 110
150 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario
Present were: Chair A. Featherstone*, W. Caston, E. Cejudo, A. Dean, L. Ehnes, A.
Merry*, G. Michalenko, C. Millar, Y. Muhammad, C. Priddle and A. Woroch
Members absent: T. Creese, L. Cymbaly, R. Donaldson, P. Duxbury and J. Ehgoetz
Election of Chair and Vice Chair for 2014
Tim Brubacher, Committee Clerk, called the meeting to order and explained the election
process. A call was made for nominations for Chair. A. Featherstone was nominated
and accepted the nomination.
Moved by A. Merry
Seconded by W. Caston
That the nominations for Chair of the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee
be closed.
Carried
A. Featherstone was acclaimed as Chair.
A call was made for nominations for Vice-Chair. A. Merry was nominated and accepted
the nomination.
Moved by W. Caston
1581268
2
2
EEAC
-2-
14/02/25
Seconded by A. Dean
That the nominations for Vice-Chair of the Ecological and Environmental Advisory
Committee be closed.
Carried
A. Merry was acclaimed as Vice-Chair.
A. Featherstone assumed the Chair.
Introduction Of New Member: Eduardo Cejudo
E. Cejudo introduced himself to the Committee. He stated that he was excited to join
and looks forward to working with the Committee.
The Committee members provided self introductions.
Declarations of Pecuniary Interest Under The “Municipal Conflict Of Interest Act”
Chair A. Featherstone declared a conflict in regards to items 4(a), 4(b), 5(a) and 5(b)
due to her employment.
*A. Featherstone left the meeting at 6:40 p.m.
Vice-Chair A. Merry assumed the Chair.
Minutes: December 17, 2013
Moved by C. Millar
Seconded by A. Woroch
THAT the minutes of the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee of
December 17, 2013 be approved.
Carried
Reports
a)
EEAC-14-001, River Road Extension Class Environmental Assessment:
Comments on Proposed Alignment 5
Wayne Cheater, Senior Project Manager, provided a presentation on the latest option
for the proposed River Road extension. A copy of the presentation is appended to the
original minutes. He explained that the latest option will consist of a four lane road with
multi-use trails on either side that will address the current traffic issues and minimize the
effect on the Hidden Valley area. He outlined the measures that staff are proposing to
mitigate the environmental impacts of the project including minimizing the loss of
Provincially Significant Wetland and low vertical walls in the Hidden Valley area to
prevent Jefferson Salamanders and small animals from entering the road.
1581268
3
3
EEAC
-3-
14/02/25
Daphne Nicholls, Kitchener, appeared to provide a presentation encouraging the
Committee to oppose the extension of River Road. A copy of the presentation is
appended to the original minutes. She explained that while the latest option impacts the
woods and wetlands less than any previous plans she remains opposed to the project
for various reasons.
G. Michalenko presented the subcommittee’s report. He provided an overview of the
history of the project and noted that the subcommittee is happy that option 5 has the
River Road extension running closer to Highway 8. The subcommittee noted that the
section of the wetland that would be removed contains a population of Phragmites
which poses a danger to the rest of the wetland. Two small creeks flow into the wetland
from the proposed road alignment, and there is therefore a need to keep chloride from
road salting out of the wetland in winter months. He noted that it is a complex issue but
that option 5 represents an improvement over option 4.
C. Millar noted that due to personal reasons she has not been active with the
subcommittee.
In response to a question from the Committee, W. Cheater stated that there will be a
substantial area of trees that will be removed but that native trees will be replanted as a
part of an offsetting reforestation project. He also noted that staff are aware that land in
the area is owned by private developers but that staff are unaware of any specific plans
they may have for the land. C. Gosselin noted that most of the trees to be removed are
located in a small woodland adjacent to Highway 8 rather than in the more ecologically
significant woodlands within the Hidden Valley Core Environmental Feature.
Moved by C. Millar
Seconded by A. Dean
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee advise Planning, Housing,
and Community Services staff that:
a.
proposed new Alignment 5 poses fewer potential adverse environmental impacts
on the Hidden Valley Core Environmental Feature than previous preferred new
road alternatives;
b.
proposed Alternative 5 may be adopted pursuant to Regional Official Policies
Plan Policies 4.3.17 and 4.4.9 and Regional Official Plan policy 7.C.12(c); and
c.
the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee continue to be involved in
the review of the detailed design of the proposed new road at a subsequent
stage in the Environmental Assessment process.
Carried
1581268
4
4
EEAC
b)
-4-
14/02/25
EEAC-14-002, Proposed Cambridge Aggregates Pit, 1830 Wrigley Road, North
Dumfries Township, Cedar Creek Spillway [E.S.P.A. 41], McCrone Lake
[E.S.P.A. 46]
Bob Long (Long Environmental) and Ken Zimmerman (Essroc Cambridge Aggregates)
appeared before the Committee to note that they are largely satisfied with the
subcommittee’s report. B. Long explained that the request in section 3.2 of the
subcommittee’s recommendation to clear the natural regeneration area of “nonindigenous species such as Common and/or Glossy Buckthorn” would require warmer
weather before the area could be evaluated. It was also noted that Buckthorn can be
very difficult to clear entirely. The Committee agreed to change the wording of 3.2 to
reflect the need to “control” rather than “clear” the Buckthorn.
B. Long explained that timing requested in 3.4 would not be possible. He stated that the
soil required for the oak savanna would not be available until stage two of the project.
This is due to the soil from stage one being required for berms. The soil from stage two
will be used for berms as well as the oak savanna area but B. Long could not commit to
it being completed within the time frame noted in 3.4. The Committee agreed to remove
3.4 from the recommendation.
B. Long noted that they planned to create four turtle nests and stone piles for snake and
small mammal habitats and suggested that the subcommittee assist with locating the
areas. The Committee agreed to reflect this in the recommendation.
B. Long noted that they were not prepared to undertake the extended groundwater
monitoring requested in 3.11. He felt that this request was excessive given that it is a
relatively small pit that is above the water table. The Committee agreed to remove 3.11
and requested that well water at neighbouring properties be tested if the property
owners agreed. B. Long agreed to ask neighbours that are within 100-150 metres but
noted that in other projects many property owners do not agree to have their water
tested.
B. Long noted that in their plans the “enhancement” plan and area referred to in 3.5 and
3.12 is called the “rehabilitation” plan and area. The Committee agreed to change the
term in the recommendation.
Moved by C. Priddle
Seconded by G. Michalenko
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee provide the following advice
to Community Planning staff with respect to the proposed zone change and aggregate
licence on part of the lands at 1830 Wrigley Road, North Dumfries Township on lands
contiguous to the Cedar Creek Spillway Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area [E.S.P.A.
41] and the Dumfries Carolinian Environmentally Sensitive Landscape.
1581268
5
5
EEAC
-5-
14/02/25
1.
that the scoped Environmental Impact Statement required in support of the
proposed zone change and aggregate licence application pursuant to Regional
Official Policies Plan Policies 4.2.7, 4.3.13, and 4.4.5 and Regional Official Plan
Policies 7.B.12, 7.C.9 and 7.G.4(b) satisfactorily fulfills the Terms of Reference
adopted on August 13, 2013, and that the Committee has no objection in
principle to the approval of the required zone change application.
2.
that the boundary of the Cedar Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area
[E.S.P.A. 41] be interpreted as shown on Attachment 1 such that it follows the
southern rim or the main kettle feature and also includes the small kettle feature
on the western boundary of the subject property;
3.
2.1
that only the proposed extraction area be re-zoned to permit aggregate
extraction, and that the Cedar Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy
Area and the recommended buffer strip be re-zoned for environmental
conservation pursuant to Regional Official Policies Plan Policy 4.3.6 and
Regional Official Plan policy 7.A.2;
2.2
that the ‘taking of water’ be specifically excluded from the re-zoning;
Advise Community Planning staff that the Region request the Ministry of Natural
Resources to consider including the following in the Site Plan of the proposed
Class A, Category 3 Pit Licence:
3.1
That a detailed planting plan for the 1.8 hectare tableland area between
the Limit of Extraction boundary and the kettle feature be prepared in
consultation with the Region;
3.2
That invasive non-indigenous species such as Common and/or Glossy
Buckthorn in the natural regeneration area be controlled before allowing
natural successional processes to proceed;
3.3
That planting of the oak savanna component of the Enhancement Plan
outside the Limit of Extraction boundary start within five years of Licence
approval, and be completed prior to commencement of Stage 2 extraction;
3.4
That planting of the oak savanna component of the Rehabilitation Area
inside the Limit of Extraction boundary in Stage 2 be completed at least
two years before the Licence is surrendered;
3.5
That exclusion fencing be installed along the northern edge of the Limit of
Extraction boundary to deter turtles from the kettle feature from entering
the pit to find nest sites;
3.6
That at least four stone piles be created within the buffer area to provide
habitat for snakes and small mammals;
1581268
6
6
EEAC
4.
-6-
14/02/25
3.7
That at least four areas of turtle nesting habitat be created on a southfacing slope within the buffer area using methods recommended by the
Toronto Zoo;
3.8
That the Site Plan notes contain detailed erosion and sedimentation
control measures;
3.9
That a groundwater monitoring programme as described in section 13.6 of
the Goodban report be implemented, subject to the following revisions;
3.10
That a detailed ecological monitoring program be established, in
consultation with the Region to monitor the ecological integrity of
contiguous portions of Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area 41, as well
as the progress of the plantings within the Rehabilitation Areas inside and
outside the Limit of Extraction boundary, and that such monitoring plan
also document remedial actions undertaken to address previously-noted
deficiencies in meeting the targets of the approved Rehabilitation Plan;
3.11
That the results of water resources and ecological monitoring be reported
by a qualified professional on an annual (calendar year) basis to the
M.N.R., Township, GRCA and Region by April 30 of the year following.
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee be given the
opportunity to review the completed Site Plan prior to submission to the MNR as
part of the Licence application package.
Carried
*A. Featherstone returned to the meeting at 8:23 p.m.
A. Featherstone assumed the Chair.
*A. Merry left the meeting at 8:23 p.m.
c)
EEAC-14-003, Regional Forest Management Plan: Operating Management Plan
for Gibney Regional Forest [ESPA13]
Albert Hovingh, Principal Planner, provided a presentation outlining the draft operating
plan for Gibney Regional Forest. A copy of the presentation is appended to the original
minutes. He provided an overview of the different areas of the forest and the species
found within it. Some of the key issues for the forest include deciding whether to remove
or manage the conifer plantation, how to ensure stability in the short and long term for
the sandy slope adjacent to Sandhills Road, identifying the entrance to the forest, and
possibly creating a short walking loop.
A. Featherstone, A. Woroch, A. Dean, C. Priddle, L. Ehnes and C. Millar expressed
interest in participating in the subcommittee.
Moved by C. Priddle
1581268
7
7
EEAC
-7-
14/02/25
Seconded by G. Michalenko
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee:
a) receive the Draft Operating Management Plan for Gibney Regional Forest as
attached to Report EEAC-14-003, dated February 25, 2014, and
b) strike a subcommittee to review proposed property and forest management
activities on-site and make recommendations as necessary.
Carried
Information/Correspondence
a)
P-14-020, The Cornerstone Standards Council’s Draft Responsible Aggregate
Standards – Regional Comments
Chris Gosselin, Manager, Environmental Planning, noted that he has been sitting on the
Cornerstone Standards Council’s Standards Development Panel which is responsible
for drafting the standards. He noted that a colleague rather than he drafted this report.
He explained that the report had been accepted at Planning and Works Committee and
would be submitted to Regional Council on February 26, 2014 and if approved would
constitute the Region’s comments of the draft standards. Committee members are
welcome to submit their own comments on the draft standards directly to Cornerstone.
In response to a question from the Committee, C. Gosselin stated that the final
standards will be purely voluntary. Aggregate operations, not necessarily firms, that are
certified will be able to market their products as socially and environmentally
responsible aggregate in a manner similar to Forest Sustainability Council forest
products. He also noted that these standards are the first draft. The Standards
Development Panel will re-convene after the circulation period to review all the
comments and prepare a final draft to be released in the summer or fall of 2014.
Received for information.
Other Business
W. Caston informed the Committee that the new Provincial Policy Statement was
released on February 24, 2014 and will come into effect on April 30, 2014.
Active EEAC Subcommittees
C. Gosselin noted that the scoped EIS reports for the Granval Industrial Subdivision and
the Bosdale Subdivision have been received and reports on the projects will be coming
to the Committee in the near future. The snowy winter has delayed site visits by the
respective sub-committees.
Received for information.
1581268
8
8
EEAC
-8-
Next Meeting: March 25, 2014
Adjourn
Moved by A. Dean
Seconded by C. Priddle
That the meeting adjourn at 9:05 p.m.
Carried
Committee Chair, A. Featherstone
Committee Clerk, T. Brubacher
1581268
14/02/25
9
9
Report: EEAC-14-004
Region of Waterloo
Planning, Housing, and Community Services
Community Planning
To:
Chair Allison Featherstone and Members of the Ecological and Environmental
Advisory Committee
Date:
May 27, 2014
File Code: D04-20025
Subject: Proposed Mixed Use Development, Fairway Road and Lackner
Boulevard, City of Kitchener, Lackner Woods [ESPA 25] and Core
Environmental Feature
Recommendation:
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee advise Planning, Housing
and Community Services staff as follows:
1. That the Chicopee Hills, Kitchener (Fairway Rd. / Lackner Blvd.) Environmental
Impact Study (Stantec, February 26, 2014) is generally acceptable, and the
Committee has no objection in principle to the approval of proposed Zone Change
Application ZC14/04/L/AP within and contiguous to Lackner Woods (ESPA 25) and
Core Environmental Feature, subject to the following conditions:
a) That the southern boundary of the Lackner Woods Environmentally Sensitive
Policy Area (ESPA 25) and Core Environmental Feature be interpreted to include
the Forb Mineral Marsh (Unit MAM2-10a) and the Dry-Fresh White Cedar Mixed
Forest (Unit FOM4) as shown on Figures 2 and 3 of the Chicopee Hills,
Kitchener (Fairway Rd. / Lackner Blvd.) Environmental Impact Study
(Stantec, February 26, 2014) following field verification by a sub-committee of the
Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee on May 8, 2014., and that the
area of Cottonwoods to be retained be considered an appropriate buffer to the
ESPA/Core Environmental Feature from the proposed development.
b) That ESPA 25, the Core Environmental Feature and associated buffers on the
subject lands be placed in suitable conservation open space zoning (P-2) as
shown on Map No. 1 of the Zone Change Application, pursuant to Policy 7.A.2 of
the Regional Official Plan.
1639422
Page 1 of 14
10
10
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
2. That the City of Kitchener consider implementing the following conditions through
the site plan approval process:
a) That no clearing of vegetation occur on the site during the bird breeding season
(May 1 - July 31) in compliance with the “Migratory Birds Convention Act” unless
it can be ascertained by a qualified expert to the satisfaction of the City of
Kitchener that no birds covered by the Act are observed to be breeding in or
adjacent to the affected area.
b) That prior to any land clearing, grading or other site alteration, the owner ensure
compliance with the “Endangered Species Act.”
c) That, prior to site plan approval or any site alteration, the owner install permanent
fencing along the Tree Protection Line as identified on the proposed master plan
(GSP Group, January 28, 2014) and along the boundary of the stormwater
management area in the southeastern corner of the site with signage identifying
the Lackner Woods Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area and Core
Environmental Feature to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener in consultation
with the Region.
d) That, prior to any land clearing, grading, or the installation of services, the owner
submit a detailed erosion and sediment control plan acceptable to the City of
Kitchener and the Grand River Conservation Authority in order to prevent
sedimentation into ESPA 25 and Core Environmental Feature.
e) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner submit a detailed stormwater
management plan, to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener and the Grand
River Conservation Authority.
f) That, prior to site plan approval, any wells on site be decommissioned in
compliance with applicable regulations to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener
in consultation with the Region of Waterloo.
g) That, prior to site plan approval the Cottonwoods within the area to be retained
be assessed by a certified arborist in terms of health and structural soundness,
and that any trees that could pose a hazard to the adjoining future school be
appropriately pruned or removed, if necessary.
h) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner submit landscaping and planting plans
for all buffer areas contiguous to ESPA 25 and the Core Environmental Feature
and for the stormwater management area, and that recommended plantings
consist of locally-appropriate, self-sustaining native vegetation to the satisfaction
of the City of Kitchener in consultation with the Region.
i) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner submit a detailed monitoring plan for
ESPA 25, the Core Environmental Feature and adjoining stormwater
management facility on the subject lands as outlined in the Chicopee Hills,
1639422
Page 2 of 14
11
11
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
Kitchener (Fairway Rd. / Lackner Blvd.) Environmental Impact Study
(Stantec, February 26, 2014) to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener, GRCA,
and Region.
j) That the owner consider dedicating through consent the portion of ESPA 25, the
Core Environmental Feature and associated buffers areas on the subject lands to
the City of Kitchener.
k) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner submit a detailed stewardship
management plan to the City of Kitchener in consultation with the Region for the
portion of ESPA 25 and the Core Environmental Feature within the subject lands
including but not limited to removal and/or control of invasive species and
retention of Virginia Stickseed, only if these natural areas are not dedicated to
the City of Kitchener.
l) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner develop a brochure and other
information tools for new residents which provides information about the natural
heritage features contiguous to the site along with advice about how they can be
good stewards of these areas, and that the brochure be to the satisfaction of the
City of Kitchener, Ministry of Natural Resources and Grand River Conservation
Authority.
m) That, prior to site plan approval, the owner remove any debris/furniture from
ESPA 25 and the Core Environmental Feature within the subject lands, in
addition to the stone fence along the eastern property boundary, to the
satisfaction of the City of Kitchener in consultation with the Region.
Report:
On September 25th 2012, EEAC approved the recommendation in report EEAC-12-008
that a subcommittee be established to review the required Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the proposed mixed use development located at the northeast
corner of Lackner Boulevard and Fairway Road in Kitchener. The subject lands are
within and contiguous to the Lackner Woods Core Environmental Feature and
Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA 25) (see Figure 1). Currently, the lands
are owned by the Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) and the proposal for
the lands includes an elementary school and playing fields as well as a mix of
residential and commercial buildings and associated parking areas for all uses.
In October 2012, following discussions among Regional environmental staff, City of
Kitchener staff, and the applicant, it was determined that review the proposed
development would occur in two phases. Since Regional Official Plan (ROP) Policy
7.C.8 prohibits development or site alteration within a Core Environmental Feature, the
first phase in the review of the application was for EEAC to interpret the boundary of the
Core Environmental Feature on the subject property in accordance with Policy 7.A.6.
This will define a development envelope to guide site planning for the subject lands in
Phase 2. This approach was necessitated by the fact that the boundary of the feature
contiguous to the site had become indistinct since it was last interpreted due to the
1639422
Page 3 of 14
12
12
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
growth of a grove of poplars.
To this end, EEAC passed the following recommendations at its August 13, 2013
meeting (see EEAC 13-009):
a) That in order to interpret the boundary on the subject property of the Lackner
Woods Core Environmental Feature consisting of Environmentally Sensitive
Policy Area 25, the Idlewood Creek Provincially Significant Wetland, and an
associated Significant Woodland, it is first necessary to confirm whether the
poplar trees at the northern end of the property are Regionally significant Eastern
Cottonwood or a Carolina Poplar hybrid.
b) That if the poplars are confirmed to be Regionally significant Eastern
Cottonwood, the boundary of the Significant Woodland component of the
Lackner Woods ESPA/Significant Woodland be interpreted to retain some part of
the population on site, so that this species continues to be represented in the
Core Environmental Feature.
c) That if some of the poplar population is retained, reasonable effort should also be
made to retain the habitat of the Regionally significant Virginia Stickseed
(Hackelia virginiana) within the refined boundary or buffer, and that if it is
determined that all or part of the poplar grove may be removed, reasonable
efforts be made to relocate the Virginia Stickseed to suitable habitat within ESPA
25.
d) That staff seek clarification from the Grand River Conservation Authority as to
whether the small pond in the eastern corner of the site warrants inclusion within
the PSW boundary.
The consultant team for the proposed development has now had the opportunity to
study these issues and have submitted the following documents in support of the
application, which have been reviewed by the subcommittee:
-
Chicopee Hills, Kitchener (Fairway Rd./Lackner Blvd.) Environmental
Impact Study (Stantec Consulting Ltd., February 26, 2014)
-
Chicopee Hills, Kitchener (Fairway Rd./Lackner Blvd.) Functional Servicing
and Stormwater Management Report (Stantec Consulting Ltd., February 2014)
-
Fairway Lackner Site – Wetland Hydrologic Assessment (Stantec Consulting
Ltd., February 27, 2014)
-
Master Plan, Chicopee Hills (GSP Group, January 28, 2014)
In addition, on May 8, 2014, a representative from the subcommittee (Andrew Dean)
met on site with staff from Regional environmental planning, the City of Kitchener,
Grand River Conservation Authority and the consultant team to verify the boundary of
1639422
Page 4 of 14
13
13
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
and buffers to ESPA 25 and the Core Environmental Feature within the subject lands.
The subcommittee finds that the EIS is generally acceptable and conforms to the Terms
of Reference for the study as outlined in the following sections.
1. Boundary of Lackner Woods Core Environmental Feature
Significant natural features on the subject lands and recommended buffers are shown
on Figure 3 of the EIS (reproduced in Figure 2 of this report). The Core Environmental
Feature consists of three components which partially, but not completely overlap.
a) ESPA 25
Designated in 1976, the Lackner Woods ESPA is a Provincial Area of Natural and
Scientific Interest (ANSI) and is approximately 36 hectares in size. It includes a large
Sugar Maple-Beech-Hemlock forest located on hilly topography around a large central
swamp forest of Black Ash, Yellow Birch, White Cedar and Silver Maple. Idlewood
Creek flows in a southeastern direction through the ESPA and is the primary
hydrological feature draining the associated Provincially Significant Wetland complex
(see Figure 1).
The southwestern boundary of the ESPA on the subject property was interpreted by
Regional staff in 1994 in anticipation of a development application. The application did
not materialise at that time, and over the intervening 19 years, the feature boundary has
altered significantly through natural succession.
In summary, the subcommittee finds the ESPA boundary on Figure 3 of the EIS
acceptable.
b) Idlewood Creek Provincially Significant Wetland and Other Wetlands
Subsequent to the designation of the ESPA, the Province identified portions of the
subject lands as the Idlewood Creek Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW), generally
located in the northern and eastern parts of the property. Most of the wetland complex,
with two exceptions, is within ESPA 25. The PSW boundary extends in a western
direction towards Lackner Boulevard in the northern part of the site. The PSW also
extends towards a small pond in the eastern corner of the site adjacent to Fairway
Road. In addition, a small non-PSW wetland pocket is located in the southern corner of
the property adjacent to the intersection of Lackner and Fairway (see Figure 1). The
removal of this small wetland has been proposed as part of the site’s development
pursuant to GRCA policies.
Recognising that the delineation of PSWs is ultimately the responsibility of the Ministry
of Natural Resources and that it is often carried out in the field by GRCA staff, the
subcommittee accepts the delineation of wetlands on the subject lands as shown on
Figure 3 of the EIS.
With respect to the small pond in the eastern corner of the site, the subcommittee
recommended previously that the wetland be evaluated to determine whether it should
be included within the PSW. To date, this evaluation by MNR and GRCA has not
1639422
Page 5 of 14
14
14
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
occurred. In addition, the EIS presents a rationale for removal of this wetland based on
the GRCA’s wetland removal policy. Regional environmental planning staff has
followed-up with GRCA staff on this issue but to date GRCA staff has not issued
comments on the consultant’s evaluation contained in the EIS.
c) Significant Woodland
As previously mentioned, the southwestern boundary of the Lackner Woods ESPA has
changed over time through natural succession. In 2009, the new ROP designated a
Core Environmental Feature (Significant Woodland) over the ESPA, a designation
which extends beyond the interpreted 1994 ESPA boundary to include a
Poplar/Cottonwood grove (see Photo 1 and Figure 1). At issue with respect to this
application is whether or not the grove should be considered part of a larger Significant
Woodland and therefore part of the Core Environmental Feature and/or ESPA. Policy
7.A.6 of the ROP directs that boundaries of Core Environmental Features be interpreted
through the review of EISs. Confirmation of the boundary on this site will then facilitate
evaluation of whether potential removal of all or part of the woodland would result in an
adverse environmental impact to the Core Environmental Feature.
Photo 1: Cottonwood Grove within Core Environmental Feature (Significant
Woodland) (Photo: Tim Van Hinte, Region of Waterloo, May 8, 2014)
1639422
Page 6 of 14
15
15
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
Section 4.5.2 of the EIS (p.4.4), (Vegetation Communities) describes the poplar grove
as a Mineral Cultural Woodland (CUW1) based on the Ecological Land Classification
(ELC) for Southern Ontario:
The canopy is open in many sections throughout the community. The canopy is
dominated by Eastern Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) with occasional associates of
Black Locust (Robinia pseudo-acacia) and Crack Willow (Salix euxina). Manitoba
Maple (Acer negundo) is an abundant component of the sub-canopy. The understory
is dominated by Glossy and European Buckthorns, as well as Riverbank Grape (Vitis
riparia). The ground layer is densely covered by weedy species including Garlic
Mustard (Alliaria petiolata), Canada Goldenrod (Solidago canadensis), Dame’s
Rocket (Hespersis matronalis) and seedlings of Glossy and European Buckthorn.
In addition, the subcommittee notes that a population of Regionally significant Virginia
Stickseed (Hackelia virginiana) has been observed within the poplar grove (see page
4.6 of the EIS). Staff advise that this species was previously noted in ESPA 25 in a
1996 floristic survey carried out for one of the adjoining subdivisions.
To this end, at its August 13, 2013 meeting, EEAC asked the proponents to confirm
whether or not the trees within the Significant Woodland were in fact Eastern
Cottonwoods, a Regionally significant species if native-occurring (see EEAC 13-009). In
addition, EEAC recommended that if the poplars are confirmed to be Eastern
Cottonwood, the boundary of the Significant Woodland component of the Lackner
Woods ESPA/Significant Woodland be interpreted to retain some part of the population
on site, so that this species continues to be represented in the Core Environmental
Feature.
Subsequently, the consultants confirmed, through genetic testing, that the trees were in
fact Eastern Cottonwoods (see page 4.6 of the EIS). Furthermore, the consultant team
completed a Detailed Vegetation Plan for the lands which resulted in a preservation
plan for the Cottonwoods. In summary, the proposed Tree Protection Area will protect
65 of 163 Eastern Cottonwoods (40%) within the woodland which is consistent with the
recommendation in EEAC Report 13-009. Considering the nature of the habitat in which
the Cottonwoods are growing and the representative population to be preserved, the
subcommittee is satisfied with the revised boundary of the Significant Woodland and no
adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as this population of Cottonwoods will
be protected in perpetuity.
Having reviewed the EIS, the sub-committee recommends that staff consider revising
the southern boundary of the Lackner Woods ESPA/Core Environmental Feature to
include the Forb Mineral Marsh (Unit MAM2-10a) and the Dry-Fresh White Cedar Mixed
Forest (Unit FOM4). The Cottonwoods to be retained will in effect form the required ten
metre buffer to the ESPA.
The trees observed on May 8, 2014 were relatively young and for the most part in good
condition. We did, however, notice a few which might have some structural defects.
Given the rapid growth of this species and the large size at full maturity, the subcommittee recommends that, as part of the site preparation process contiguous to the
retained woodland, the trees within the area be assessed by a certified arborist in terms
1639422
Page 7 of 14
16
16
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
of health and structural soundness. Any trees that could pose a hazard to the adjoining
school should be appropriately pruned or removed, if necessary.
2. Delineation and design of buffers around ESPA 25 and Core Environmental
Feature
Proposed buffers from ESPA 25 and Core Environmental Features on the property are
shown on Figure 3 of the EIS. Buffers of 20-30 metres from the Idlewood Creek PSW
and 10 metres from the ESPA/Significant Woodland boundary have been applied. In
summary, the subcommittee is satisfied with the proposed buffers and finds that the
proposal conforms to ROP Policy 7.C.10. In addition, the subcommittee recommends
that ESPA 25, the Core Environmental Feature and associated buffers on the subject
lands be placed in suitable conservation open space zoning (P-2) as shown on Map No.
1 of the Zone Change Application (City of Kitchener, April 9, 2014) pursuant to Policy
7.A.2 of the Regional Official Plan.
3. Biophysical survey of natural habitats and species
Various field surveys were conducted on the subject lands between 2008 and 2013
including but not limited to Ecological Land Classification (ELC), vascular flora
inventories, breeding bird surveys, wetland delineation, and reptile surveys. The
subcommittee is of the opinion that the type and frequency of biophysical surveys
undertaken by the consultant is consistent with the “Region of Waterloo Greenlands
Network Implementation Guideline” with respect to a scoped EIS.
Noteworthy results of the various surveys are as follows:
 Four (4) Regionally significant plants/trees were observed: Eastern Cottonwood,
Hackberry, Rough Sedge, and Virginia Stickseed.
 Three (3) Regionally significant birds were observed: Brown Creeper and Swamp
Sparrow (both possible breeders) and Osprey (flyover, no suitable habitat).
 Other bird species of conservation concern observed previously within ESPA 25
by Ecoplans circa 1995 include Chimney Swift, Wood Thrush, Red-headed
Woodpecker, Swainson’s Thrush (Regionally significant), Ovenbird and Scarlet
Tanager.
Due to the presence of several Regionally significant breeding birds, the subcommittee
recommends that no clearing of vegetation on the site occur during the bird breeding
season in compliance with the “Migratory Birds Convention Act”, unless it can be
ascertained by a qualified expert that no birds covered by the Act are observed to be
breeding in or adjacent to the affected area. In addition, the subcommittee recommends
that prior to any land clearing, grading or other site alteration, the applicant ensure
compliance with the “Endangered Species Act.” In addition, the subcommittee
recommends that appropriate fencing be installed to limit intrusion from the future
development into the ESPA. It is expected that the school board will require fencing
around the schoolyard.
1639422
Page 8 of 14
17
17
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
In summary, the subcommittee is satisfied with the level of habitat protection as ESPA
25 and the Core Environmental Feature on and contiguous to the subject lands will be
protected and afforded suitable buffers from proposed development.
4. Hydrological and hydrogeological regimes sustaining ESPA 25 and Core
Environmental Feature
In summary, the following hydrological features are located within or contiguous to the
subject lands:

Idlewood Creek (east branch) flows in a southeasterly direction contiguous to the
subject lands, across Fairway Road, eventually spilling into the Grand River;

Idlewood Creek PSW complex is located in the northern and eastern portions of
the subject lands, which forms part of ESPA 25; and

One small pond/wetland is located in the southwest corner of the property.
Surface water from most of the site (5.3 hectares) generally flows east and southeast
across the site towards Idelwood Creek and eventually to a culvert that crosses Fairway
Road. However, a small portion of the site (1.7 hectares) drains to the wetland in the
southwest corner of the property. In terms of groundwater, the EIS states the following
(page 4.2):
“Groundwater level measurements indicated that local groundwater flow at the site
is predominantly towards the wetland (south-east direction) from areas of
topographic highs. Vertical hydraulic gradients within the wetland and creek area
indicate recharging with the exception of one location which exhibited minimal
discharging function.”
The stormwater management strategy for the subject lands recommends the
development of a stormwater management facility adjacent to the creek in the
southeastern corner of the site. The facility will be equipped with a cooling trench to
ensure that water is cooled before it leaves the site. The pond would discharge flows to
an existing culvert and eventually to Idlewood Creek across Fairway Road. In addition,
the consultants note that soils on-site are not conducive to infiltration and recommend
that the water balance across the site be maintained by infiltration structures on a lot-bylot basis to the extent feasible.
In summary, the subcommittee finds the stormwater management approach acceptable
and recommends that, prior to site plan approval, the owner submit a detailed
stormwater management plan to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener and the GRCA.
In addition, any wells not needed for ongoing monitoring should be decommissioned
pursuant to applicable regulations.
5. Monitoring Program
The conceptual environmental monitoring strategy for the proposed development is
presented in Section 8.6 of the EIS and the subcommittee finds it acceptable. The
1639422
Page 9 of 14
18
18
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
program includes standard during-development monitoring procedures, such as
inspection of sediment controls and tree protection measures. Further, post-construction
performance monitoring will include terrestrial, stormwater and ground water monitoring.
In summary, the subcommittee recommends that, prior to site plan approval, the owner
submit a detailed monitoring plan for ESPA 25, the Core Environmental Feature and
adjoining stormwater management facility on the subject lands to the satisfaction of the
City of Kitchener and the GRCA in consultation with the Region.
6. Stewardship Plan
Recommended stewardship/management measures have been included in the
proposed Detailed Vegetation Plan in Appendix G of the EIS. The plan includes
preserving 65 of 163 Eastern Cottonwoods (40%) within the woodland in addition to
forest edge management measures. While the recommended management measures
are acceptable, the subcommittee would like to make the following additional
recommendations for consideration by the City during the site plan approval process:
-
That the owner consider dedicating through consent the portion of ESPA 25, the
Core Environmental Feature and associated buffers areas on the subject lands to
the City of Kitchener in order to consolidate the ESPA under municipal ownership
and stewardship.
-
That the owner submit a detailed stewardship management plan to the City of
Kitchener for the portion of ESPA 25 and the Core Environmental Feature within
the subject lands including but not limited to removal and/or control of invasive
species and retention of Virginia Stickseed, only if these natural areas are not
dedicated to the City of Kitchener. The invasive Phragmites noted at the
southern edge of the CUW1 community should be removed and disposed of in
an ecologically appropriate manner to prevent its re-colonization elsewhere.
-
That the owner develop a brochure and other information tools for new residents
which provides information about the natural heritage features contiguous to the
site along with advice about how they can be good stewards of these areas, and
that the brochure be to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener, Ministry of
Natural Resources and Grand River Conservation Authority.
-
That, that prior to site plan approval, the owner remove debris/furniture that the
subcommittee observed within the cedar woodland on the subject lands,
-
That the stone fence along the eastern property boundary be retained, or, if
necessary, re-located to provide wildlife habitat adjacent to Idlewood Creek, to
the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener.
Area Municipal Consultation/Coordination:
The report will be shared with staff from the City of Kitchener and the Grand River
Conservation Authority.
1639422
Page 10 of 14
19
19
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
Corporate Strategic Plan:
The review of the scoped EIS for the subject application will help achieve the strategic
objective to preserve sensitive natural areas.
Financial Implications:
The usual fee for the review of a scoped EIS has been received.
Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:
Other aspects of this application are being reviewed by Transportation and Water
Services staff.
Attachments
Figure 1
Subject Lands in Relation to Core Environmental Features
Figure 2
Proposed Development Plan Envelope and Buffers to Core Environmental
Features
Figure 3
Proposed Master Site Plan Concept
Respectfully submitted,
Lauren Cymbaly
Andrew Dean
Ron Donaldson
Allison Featherstone
Greg Michalenko
WRDSB Fairway/Lackner Lands Sub-committee
1639422
Page 11 of 14
20
20
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
Figure 1 Subject Lands in Relation to Core Environmental Features
Cottonwood Grove
1639422
Page 12 of 14
21
21
May 27, 2014
Figure 2
1639422
Report: EEAC-14-004
Proposed Development Plan Envelope and Buffers to Core Environmental Features
Page 13 of 14
22
22
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-004
Figure 3 Proposed Master Site Plan Concept
1639422
Page 14 of 14
23
23
Report: EEAC-14-005
Region of Waterloo
Planning, Housing, and Community Services
Community Planning
To:
Chair Allison Featherstone and Members of the Ecological and Environmental
Advisory Committee
Date:
May 27, 2014
File Code: D04-20/Moffat
Subject: Proposed Bos Development Plan of Subdivision 30T-13103, Wesley
Boulevard, City of Cambridge, Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy
Area
Recommendation:
That the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee take the following actions
with respect to the proposed Bos Development Plan of Subdivision 30T-13103, Wesley
Boulevard, City of Cambridge contiguous to the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive
Policy Area:
1.
advise Planning, Housing, and Community Services staff that the Scoped
Environmental Impact Study, John Bos Property (Dougan & Associates,
September 2013) and the Stormwater Management Report, Bosdale
Subdivision, City of Cambridge (IBI Group, September 16, 2013) generally
fulfill terms of reference for a scoped Environmental Impact Statement adopted
by the Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee on May 29, 2007; and
2.
advise Planning, Housing, and Community Services staff that it has no objection
in principle to the draft approval of the proposed Bos Development Draft Plan of
Subdivision, (IBI Group, August 2013) 30T-13103, subject to the following
conditions:
2.1
That the boundary of the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy
Area be interpreted as shown on Figure 3 of the Scoped Environmental
Impact Study, and more specifically that the boundary be revised to
coincide with the western boundary with the stormwater management
facility;
2.2
That the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area and
1639039
Page 1 of 16
24
24
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
Provincially Significant Wetland, along with the required buffers, be placed
in appropriate conservation open space zoning as required by Regional
Official Plan policy 7.A.2;
2.3
That, prior to final approval, all required details of the Wesley Boulevard
crossing of Moffat Creek, including dimensions, materials, design
specifications, construction staging, temporary flow by-pass, erosion and
sediment control, fluvial geomorphology design, and other
recommendations submitted by the Ecological and Environmental
Advisory Committee, be provided to the Region along with the City and
Grand River Conservation Authority at the detailed design stage;
2.4
That, prior to registration, a detailed design and planting plan be submitted
for approval to the Region, City of Cambridge, and Grand River
Conservation Authority for the wetland compensation/ restoration areas in
the floodplain either side of Moffat Creek or along the periphery of the
marsh in Block 15 in the southern portion of the site, and that all proposed
plantings be locally-appropriate native species consistent with Regional
Official Plan Policies 7.I.12 and 7.I.13;
2.5
That, prior to registration, a detailed planting and vegetation management
plan consistent with Regional Official Plan Policies 7.I.12 and 7.I.13 for the
stormwater management facility adjacent Moffat Creek Environmentally
Sensitive Policy Area be submitted to the satisfaction of the Region, City
of Cambridge, and Grand River Conservation Authority;
2.6
That, prior to registration, the detailed design for the future Faith Street
assess potential options to alter the hydrology of the eastern portion of the
marsh in order to reduce the further spread of Phragmites and Reed
Canary Grass and encourage native marsh wetland vegetation consistent
with the Grand River Conservation Authority Wetland Policy and City of
Cambridge road design standards;
2.7
That, prior to registration, a final stormwater management plan be
submitted to the satisfaction of the Region, City, and Grand River
Conservation Authority, and that it incorporate groundwater flow data to
Moffat Creek and the marsh from a representative sample of wet and dry
years and that it be utilized to inform the location of infiltration facilities,
proposed spreader swale designs, and peak flow rates to the wetland
areas;
2.8
That, prior to registration, a detailed monitoring plan to the satisfaction of
the City of Cambridge, Grand River Conservation Authority, and Region
be developed to address the functioning of the stormwater management
facility, the state of plantings in the stormwater management facility and
the restoration areas, the effectiveness of measures to protect and
enhance the ecological integrity of Moffat Creek during construction of the
crossing structure, changes to the hydrology of the marsh south of the
site, and the effectiveness of measures to control invasive non-indigenous
species on site;
1639039
Page 2 of 16
25
25
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
2.9
That, prior to registration, the owner, in consultation with the City of
Cambridge and Region carry out an assessment of the health and safety
of the woodlands within the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy
Area with special attention to the Green Ash community along the creek
corridor, and that trees considered diseased or structurally compromised
be pruned or removed by a certified arborist to the satisfaction of the City
of Cambridge;
2.10
That prior to registration the owner remove all rubbish and debris piles
from within the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area and its
associated buffers to the satisfaction of the Region and City of Cambridge;
2.11
That, prior to registration, detailed erosion and sedimentation plans be
submitted to the Grand River Conservation Authority, the City of
Cambridge, and Region for the Wesley Boulevard crossing of the Green
Ash swamp along Moffat Creek, the upgrading of the Bibby farm lane
across the marsh for the proposed Faith Street, and the removal of the
cultural meadow adjacent to accommodate the stormwater management
facility;
2.12
That, prior to registration, fencing and sediment barriers acceptable to the
City of Cambridge in consultation with the Region be installed around the
perimeter of Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area and
wetland on proposed Blocks 8, 9, and 10 of the Draft Plan;
2.13
That prior to registration a trails plan for lands within or adjacent to the
Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area be developed to the
satisfaction of the City of Cambridge in consultation with the Region and
Grand River Conservation Authority;
2.14
That outdoor lighting installed on the townhouse and multiple residential
Blocks 2, 9, and 10 and street lighting along the future Wesley Boulevard
and Faith Street crossings of the Moffat Creek Provincially Significant
Wetland be designed and placed so as not to project light into the natural
areas;
2.15
That interpretative signage be provided as part of the plan to educate
future residents of the natural heritage features and functions of the Moffat
system, and also that signage be installed along the common boundary
between the proposed residential blocks and the Moffat Creek
Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area; and
2.16
That an informational brochure be designed for future residents of
community in consultation with the City of Cambridge, Grand River
Conservation Authority, and Region.
1639039
Page 3 of 16
26
26
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
Report:
1.
Background
The Ecological and Environmental Advisory Committee has had a long involvement with
the Southeast Galt area. Beginning in mid-1997, a sub-committee worked with staff to
evaluate the woodlands and wetlands along Moffat Creek which had earlier been
investigated in the Moffat Creek Watershed Plan (1992-96). The sub-committee advised
staff that the natural features along the creek corridor fulfilled sufficient criteria to
warrant designation as a new E.S.P.A. (Report PC-EEAC-SC-97-012, dated October
28, 1997). A sub-committee also participated in the review of a Class Environmental
Assessment for a road crossing of Moffat Creek (Reports PC-EEAC-SC-98-002, dated
January 27, 1998, PC-EEAC-SC-98-007, dated March 31, 1998, and PC-EEAC-SC-98018, dated October 27, 1998). E.E.A.C. also provided advice on the Southeast Galt
Community Servicing Study Class Environmental Assessment with respect to the
stormwater management system, the sanitary trunk sewer, and watermains (Report PCEEAC-SC-99-004, dated April 27, 1999). Subsequently the committee reviewed a Plan
of Subdivision for the lands north of the creek corridor (Report, PC-EEAC-SC-03-008,
dated November 25, 2003).
On May 29, 2007, E.E.A.C. approved terms of reference for a scoped Environmental
Impact Statement for a proposed Plan of Subdivision on two large properties in
Southeast Galt south of the Moffat Creek corridor. As per Report EEAC-07-007, dated
May 29, 2007, the terms of reference were scoped to address the following:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
1639039
confirmation of an ecologically and topographically appropriate boundary
of the proposed Moffat Creek ESPA on the subject lands;
the delineation and design of suitable buffers and/or setbacks from the
proposed ESPA and the PSW on the subject lands;
the ecological significance and role of the subject lands within larger
landscape and particularly with regard to the proposed Moffat Creek
ESPA and associated PSWs and how this will be affected by the proposed
development;
maintaining and/or enhancing natural linkages between major natural
heritage features on adjacent properties as well as between the subject
area and the rest of the proposed Moffat Creek ESPA;
completion of a bio-physical survey of the property and environs and
identification of any Regionally significant plant and animal species
present;
maintaining the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the hydrological and
hydrogeological regimes sustaining the PSW on the subject properties
and the rest of the proposed Moffat Creek ESPA;
methods for preventing sedimentation from the proposed development
areas into the PSW and the proposed Moffat Creek ESPA;
the management of the trees/hedgerows along the boundaries of the
subject properties and adjacent parcels and the forest /ESPA edge
adjacent to the development area; and
proposed stewardship options for the ESPA and buffer areas on the
subject property;
Page 4 of 16
27
27
May 27, 2014
2.
Report: EEAC-14-005
Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-13013
Regional staff has now received a draft Plan of Subdivision for a portion of the lands
addressed in Report EEAC-07-007 located immediately south and east of the creek
corridor in what is known as Neighbourhood 2. They will be accessed by the creek
crossing approved in 1998 (Wesley Boulevard) and by the up-graded former Bibby farm
lane which runs north from Dundas Street across a Provincially Significant marsh (the
proposed Faith Street). Due to attrition since 2007, the sub-committee has been
reconstituted. We have reviewed the following documents:






Draft Plan of Subdivision, Bos Development (IBI Group, August 2013)
Scoped Environmental Impact Study, John Bos Property (Dougan & Associates,
September 2013)
Stormwater Management Report, Bosdale Subdivision, City of Cambridge (IBI
Group, September 16, 2013)
Functional Servicing Report, Bosdale Subdivision (IBI Group, September 16,
2013)
Hydrogeology Study, Residential Subdivision Site (Parcel 1), Dundas Street
South, Cambridge, Ontario (Naylor Engineering Associates, December 2008)
Supplementary Hydrogeology Investigation Report, 1261-1265 Dundas Street
South, Cambridge, Ontario (LVM, August 30, 2013)
In addition, the sub-committee and Regional staff (C. Gosselin, S Rafalski-Misch) met
on site with Jim Dougan (Dougan & Associates), Andy Kroess (IBI Group), Paul
Puopolo (Polocorp Inc.) and the owners John and Gerald Bos on the morning of April
25, 2014. The site visit had been postponed for several weeks due to the very cold
winter weather and deep snow covering the site. After our preliminary review of the
supporting studies, the sub-committee forwarded some comments and questions to the
consultants in anticipation of the site visit. Following the site visit, the sub-committee
and staff sent additional comments. The responses to these questions and our review of
the studies have informed this report. The structure of the report will generally follow the
items in the 2007 terms of reference.
2.1
Confirmation of an ecologically and topographically appropriate boundary
and buffers of the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A. on the subject lands
Figure 3 in the scoped E.I.S. illustrates the woodlands and wetlands comprising the
Moffat Creek Core Environmental Feature. This includes what was recommended in
1997 as the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A. as well as an area of Provincially Significant Wetland
which was excluded from the E.S.P.A. at that time because the former swamp and
cattail marsh had been degraded by tile-draining in 1991 and had become overrun with
Reed Canary Grass and Phragmites.
The E.S.P.A. boundary in the vicinity of the proposed stormwater management facility
shown on Figure 3 in the E.I.S. does not appear to match the Regional Core
Environmental Feature layer shown on Figure 1 which is based on mapping in the
Regional Official Plan (R.O.P.). In addition, the proposed boundary on Figure 3 does not
appear to be consistent with E.E.A.C.’s interpretation of the boundary which was
completed in 1997 (Report PC-EEAC-SC-97-012). The consultants have informed us
1639039
Page 5 of 16
28
28
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
that this area of shrubby meadow was cleared in 2010 so that corn could be planted on
the tableland areas at the top of the valley slope. The mapping in Figure 1 represents
an interpretation of the Region’s high level Official Plan mapping, and Figure 3 is the
flagged boundary based on field review of existing conditions with Regional staff on
September 1, 2011. Some of the area will be utilised for the stormwater management
facility and the proposed restoration area. It is recommended that the E.S.P.A.
boundary in this locality be interpreted to coincide with the western boundary of the
stormwater management block.
For the most part, the boundary around the Core Environmental Feature on the subject
property is relatively well-defined due to ongoing agricultural cultivation on the adjoining
fields. A ten metre buffer has been delineated from the dripline and a 30 metre buffer
from the wetland within the Core Environmental Feature. The greater of the two buffers
forms the limit of proposed development.
The original terms of reference were adopted in 2007, well before the approval of the
new R.O.P. which contains a policy requiring a minimum ten metre buffer around Core
Environmental Features. The sub-committee is generally satisfied with the buffer as
delineated, but has noted an encroachment into the 30 metre wetland buffer east and
west of proposed Faith Street. We have reviewed the consultants’ justification that part
of this buffer area is essentially a manicured lawn associated with the existing heritage
home. It is further proposed to construct a retaining wall which is expected to help to
control access and encroachment into the wetland and direct surface drainage back into
the wetland feature to maintain the water balance. As this area is Provincially Significant
Wetland and not part of the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A., it is recommended that the matter be
referred to the G.R.C.A. and City for resolution. As the wetland is considered a Core
Environmental Feature in the R.O.P., a minimum buffer of ten metres is required.
2.2
Ecological context and maintaining and/or enhancing natural linkages
between the subject area and the rest of the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A.
The Bos property is located within a larger landscape context of a large linear E.S.P.A.
and Provincially Significant Wetland complex. It is important to ensure that the
ecological integrity of that landscape is not unduly fragmented by new development. As
articulated by the predecessor of this sub-committee in 1998, the proposed road
crossing over Moffat Creek is a potential threat to ecological connectivity along the
Moffat Creek corridor.
2.2.1 Moffat Creek crossing
The preliminary information provided to the G.R.C.A. for the proposed culvert crossing
was also circulated to the sub-committee. The proposed culvert is not what we normally
think of as a culvert (i.e., pipe). A single-cell open-bottom culvert structure is proposed
in the form of a concrete arch 14.6 metres wide by 3.0 metres high at its apex. It will
have the capacity to convey the Regional Storm event with minimal impacts on the
floodline elevation. The consultants advise that the culvert dimensions are expected to
be wide enough to contain the main channel of Moffat Creek along with some adjacent
bed and bank during low-flow conditions. Under normal flow conditions, it is expected
that dry terrestrial benches can be incorporated to facilitate the movement of terrestrial
wildlife throughout most of the year. While it may differ to some extent from what was
1639039
Page 6 of 16
29
29
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
considered in 1998, the sub-committee is of the opinion that the crossing structure will
be sufficiently large to allow the passage of deer along the creek corridor.
Given the amount of fill required to construct the crossing, there would seem to be
opportunities to create dry eco-passages in the restoration areas either side of the creek
to allow smaller animals to pass safely beneath the road.
The sub-committee requests that all required details of the crossing, including
dimensions, materials, design specifications, construction staging, temporary flow bypass, erosions and sediment control, fluvial geomorphology design, etc., be provided to
the Region as well as to the City and G.R.C.A. at the detailed design stage.
2.2.2 Moffat Creek floodplain enhancement area
In addition to the Core Environmental Feature, the floodplain of Moffat Creek extends
well beyond the buffers in the western part of the property on either side of the
proposed Wesley Boulevard crossing. This will not be developed except to construct
part of that road. It is further proposed to create wetland and upland habitat in the
floodplain either side of Moffat Creek in the vicinity of the creek crossing. The subcommittee strongly supports this concept in that it can be expected to support the
corridor function as the lands on either side are converted to urban uses. We
recommend that a detailed design and planting plan for the wetland compensation/
restoration areas in the floodplain either side of Moffat Creek or along the periphery of
the marsh south of the site be submitted for approval to the Region, City, and G.R.C.A.,
and that plantings consist of locally-appropriate indigenous species, consistent with
ROP policy 7.I.12.
In addition, proposed landscape and planting plans for buffer areas will require review
by Regional staff as a condition of final approval. Proposed plantings should be locallyappropriate native species as listed in the Listing of Trees and Shrubs Native to the
Regional Municipality of Waterloo (1993), in accordance with ROP Policies 7.I.12 and
7.I.13. It is expected that such plans would include the type/amount, location and
monitoring of all plantings.
2.3
Bio-physical survey of the property
The scoped E.I.S. contains considerable detail about the vegetation communities on
and in proximity to the subject property. Several plant species not previously recorded
for the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A. have been noted. Nine species of Regionally significant
breeding birds were also noted.
The sub-committee requested further detail on Species at Risk on the site. Dougan staff
has informed the sub-committee that salamander and snake surveys were conducted at
MNR request in 2007 and 2011. They will contact MNR again to ensure that Species at
Risk are adequately addressed in light of the recent additions and potential additions to
the listings.
2.4
Maintaining the hydrological and hydrogeological regimes
The Bos property is surrounded on three sides by the Moffat Creek Provincially
Significant Wetland which comprises both wooded riparian swamp and open marsh
1639039
Page 7 of 16
30
30
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
communities which are sustained by different hydrological and hydrogeological regimes.
The sub-committee is concerned that inappropriate stormwater management practices
could adversely affect hydrology or cause erosion and sedimentation into the wetlands.
If groundwater contributions to the wetlands are reduced, localized conversion from a
moist to fresh condition may result in a long-term vegetation composition shift in the
lowland Green Ash forest (Vegetation units 5.2, 6.1). Conversely, added surface or
groundwater inputs could contribute to waterlogging the soils in the swamp forest along
the creek and cause significant die-off of trees. From our discussions at the site
meeting, it appears that the area occupied by the marsh (Units 7.2, 8.1, and 8.2) was
once drier than it is at present, and that some alteration of local hydrology has occurred.
Measures to avoid such changes are considered in the preliminary engineering and
stormwater management design. The sub-committee notes that the hydrogeology report
mentions groundwater monitoring in 2007-08 and 2013. This seems rather sporadic. We
feel that groundwater monitoring from a representative sample of wet and dry years is
necessary to inform the design of the stormwater management system and it
component parts.
2.4.1 Enhancement of the marsh ecosystem
The large open marsh habitat along the southern frontage of the property complements
the wooded swamp wetlands along Moffat Creek. Marshes are not particularly common
in Waterloo Region, and the sub-committee supports the conservation of the area as
marsh rather than attempting to restore it back to the swamp forest that it is reported to
have been in the past. Nevertheless, we view with concern the establishment of beds of
Phragmites within the marsh. Ensuring a sufficient depth of water within the marsh
either side of the future Faith Street (i.e., the existing farm lane) may suppress the
Phragmites and Reed Canary Grass and favour re-colonisation of the area by native
cattails (Typha spp.) The sub-committee requested that this be discussed in the context
of the stormwater management plan as well as the design of the future Faith Street
crossing of the marsh. The sub-committee would like to initiate a discussion as to
whether it may be feasible and desirable to alter the hydrology of the marsh to enhance
native wetland vegetation either by altering the quantity or distribution of surface or
groundwater inputs, or by adjusting flows through the culvert beneath the proposed
Faith Street.
Phragmites removal was not considered as part of the E.I.S. The consultants have
advised the sub-committee that they will consider options for the design of the future
Faith Street and stormwater management facility that may have some potential to
reduce the further spread of Phragmites. It is understood that high water levels could
facilitate Typha re-colonisation, deter Phragmites, or possibly both. This could
potentially be achieved by diverting more surface run off to the marsh or alternately by
manipulating the water level in the eastern section of the marsh by raising the invert
elevation of the proposed culvert. Any such options would have to be evaluated in the
light of G.R.C.A. wetland policies.
The subcommittee supports the recommendations in Section 7.2.3.1 which
recommends consideration for the main drainage culvert to also accommodate wildlife
movement, in addition to equalization culverts and wildlife directional curtains.
Accommodation of wildlife movement or prevention of animal-vehicle conflicts will need
1639039
Page 8 of 16
31
31
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
to be balanced against managing the hydrological regime in this area.
2.4.2 Surface hydrology
The stormwater management report shows that the central part of the site is an
internally draining catchment. The peripheral areas of the subject property drain toward
Moffat Creek to the west and southwest and to the marsh to the south which contains a
tributary of Moffat Creek. The proposed post-development pattern directs most of the
stormwater to a stormwater management facility beside Moffat Creek south of the
proposed creek crossing.
It is proposed to reduce the catchment draining directly to the upper or eastern part of
the marsh from 4.212 hectares to 1.237. Maintaining the water balance of the marsh
wetland is required. Nevertheless, it is also important to maintain the distribution of
surface water flows to the marsh in light of the fact that Faith Street appears to act like a
weir across the marsh. In this regard, the sub-committee wishes to ensure that the
upper or eastern portion of the marsh is not starved of surface and groundwater inputs.
The consultants have replied that maintaining the water balance of the wetland east of
the future Faith Street has been one of the focal concerns of the stormwater
management design. They are working to ensure that the future urban catchment routes
sufficient surface water to the wetland east of the future Faith Street. It is noted that the
surface catchment area for this wetland encompasses lands east of the Bos property
and other areas south of Dundas Street. The Bos lands contribute approximately 4.2 ha
or only 7 % of the total 58 ha drainage area. Assuming no significant reduction of
surface discharge throughout the entire catchment, the consultants do not expect to see
impacts to the surface hydrology of this wetland.
The sub-committee is concerned about potential water quality impacts on adjacent
wetlands. The stormwater management plan currently provides for an oil-and-gritseparator (OGS) for run-off from catchments 202 and 205 to the wetland. This will
achieve an Enhanced Protection Level as per MOE requirements. Additional polishing
for finer sediments will occur within the spreader swales. This is not able, however, to
remove road salt. This issue can only be addressed by the City in its winter road
maintenance practices and through salt management plans for applicable types of
developments. The sub-committee had also been concerned initially about whether the
proposed flow from catchment 203 would be clean in that part of this catchment (Figure
2 in stormwater management report) may include parts of driveways for single detached
lots in Block 8 of the draft plan. The sub-committee has been informed that drainage
from catchment 203 will consist of overflow from roof areas and rear-yard drainage
which does not require additional quality treatment since it is considered clean.
2.4.3 Maintaining the groundwater regime
Much of the residential area is underlain with silt till which has a low infiltration rate of 2
to 5 millimetres per hour. This is below the minimum 15 mm/hr infiltration rate
recommended by the Ministry of the Environment. Nonetheless, it is proposed to
1639039
Page 9 of 16
32
32
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
infiltrate the first 25 mm of roof run-off in this catchment by directing it to soakaway pits.
This will support recharge toward the marsh.1
Given the reported low infiltration rates (2-5 mm/hr vs. MOE recommended minimum of
15 mm/hour), the sub-committee inquired about potential alternative measures in the
event the system does not work effectively. The consultants have stated that the
infiltration strategy will be effective provided the infiltration facilities are designed to
contain at least the first 25 mm of roof runoff, are located in areas of unsaturated soils,
and are constructed with an overflow to grade. Revised preliminary water balance
calculations indicate that if all subdivision roofs are directed to a lot-level infiltration
facility, the existing annual infiltration rate will be exceeded. The exact locations of lotlevel infiltration facilities will be determined at the detailed design stage when additional
geotechnical information becomes available. If all roof runoff cannot be infiltrated on the
lots and additional infiltration is required to meet the water balance, other options can be
explored including infiltration of treated road runoff, or a ‘third pipe’ system for roof
runoff. In addition, options for on-site stormwater management best management
practices (BMPs) such as permeable pavements can be explored for areas in the
subdivision that require a Site Plan Application.
The study mentions the existence of unconfined, confined and even pressurized local
groundwater conditions in certain areas. The sub-committee has inquired how these
conditions might affect the operation of infiltration facilities / soak-away pits. The
consultants have replied that it is standard practice to install infiltration facilities only in
unsaturated soils with a separation between them and the groundwater table. This is
straightforward for unconfined groundwater conditions. Infiltration can also occur in soils
overlying confined conditions provided those soils are not saturated as this is similar to
pre-development conditions where infiltration is determined by soil type and topography.
The sub-committee inquired whether research or monitoring was completed with
respect to the hydroperiod in the marsh wetland. The consultants have advised that the
surface flow water balance toward the wetlands is based on matching existing
conditions based on an annual runoff volume. Recharge is based on matching existing
conditions using active infiltration in lot-level galleries. It is suggested that continuous
groundwater flow monitoring for a representative sample of wet and dry years is
required to supplement the 2007-08 and 2013 monitoring. Monitoring data would be
utilized to refine the proposed spreader swale designs and peak flow rates discharging
to the wetland areas.
2.4.4 The stormwater management facility
Proposed landscape and planting plans for the stormwater management area will also
require review by Regional staff as a condition of final approval. Proposed plantings
should be locally-appropriate native species as listed in the Listing of Trees and
Shrubs Native to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (1993), in accordance with
ROP Policies 7.I.12 and 7.I.13.
The stormwater management facility will be constructed in the first phase of the project,
and immediately planted and stabilized so that it will function properly. Throughout site
1.
Stormwater Management Report, p. 5-6.
1639039
Page 10 of 16
33
33
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
development, it will be monitored. In addition, temporary sedimentation ponds will be
located throughout the development since the stormwater management pond will not
serve this function. The consultants will provide further details in the final stormwater
management plan. Monitoring and warranty inspection for plantings associated with the
stormwater management facility will also be outlined during detailed design.
Typically, monitoring activities continue until 90% build-out of a subdivision (as opposed
to five years after development is initiated or 75% build-out as proposed in the EIS). The
consultants are proposing to consider the monitoring requirements of all approval
agencies to inform the monitoring plan.
2.5
Erosion and sedimentation control
Development activities always have the potential to generate sediment and runoff into
low-lying areas. Given the relatively steep slopes from the proposed development area
down to the Moffat Creek wetlands, effective erosion and sedimentation control will be
critical at all phases of development on this property.
Table 8 of the E.I.S. lists a number of instances where clearing and grubbing are
proposed. Some of these have the potential to affect the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A.:




Areas of cultural thicket north and south of the marsh will be removed
A swath of the Green Ash deciduous swamp will be cleared to construct the
previously-approved road crossing of Moffat Creek
The Bibby farm lane across the marsh will be widened and upgraded to become
the proposed Faith Street
The cultural meadow adjacent to the creek corridor will be removed to
accommodate the stormwater management facility
We recommend that detailed erosion and sedimentation plans for each of these areas
be submitted to the Region along with the City and G.R.C.A. While each of these
activities has the potential for sedimentation, the construction of the Wesley Boulevard
crossing of Moffat Creek is of particular concern to the sub-committee, as it was to our
predecessor sub-committee in 1998.
2.6
Management of the trees/hedgerows along the boundaries
Since the Moffat Creek corridor is largely defined by forest/woodland features, the
management of trees within the Moffat Creek E.S.P.A. will be a significant
environmental management issue over time.
2.6.1 Woodlands in Moffat Creek E.S.P.A.
A significant proportion of the site abuts treed areas, either E.S.P.A. woodlands or
hedgerows. Although the woodlands will receive appropriate buffers from the proposed
new development, the sub-committee sees a need for some additional care. For
example, there is evidence of damage from the December 22, 2013 ice storm along the
edge of the woodland. The sub-committee is of the opinion that the damaged trees
should be tended before the E.S.P.A. is dedicated to a public agency. There is also
evidence of refuse dumping by previous owners along the woodland edges which
1639039
Page 11 of 16
34
34
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
should be removed prior to conveyance.
The Green Ash swamp community along the Moffat Creek corridor appears to be
relatively healthy, but given the advance of Emerald Ash Borer, and the disturbance that
will be caused by the construction of the Wesley Boulevard crossing, its long-term
prospects may be in question. We recommend that before it is conveyed, that it be
examined for evidence of Emerald Ash Borer mortality, and that, if it is the case, that a
woodland management plan be developed. The presence of numerous ash trees along
the creek corridor may warrant longer term monitoring by the City forestry staff in
coming years.
2.6.2 Hedgerows
The hedgerows throughout the southeast Cambridge area were identified in the Moffat
Creek Watershed Study as providing a number of functions, ecological and aesthetic,
and must therefore be taken into account and managed accordingly. The hedgerows
form a network of small fields. Many of them contain stone piles created by previous
farmers as they cultivated these stony fields. Some hedgerows on the subject property
cannot be retained, but the sub-committee notes that Hedgerow 7 which frames the
eastern boundary of the subject property and the City of Cambridge property to the
north will remain to link the Provincially Significant Wetland to the south to a woodland
adjoining the Moffat Creek corridor to the north. Nevertheless, the sub-committee notes
that in the event Wesley Boulevard is extended to the east to service future
development applications, there could be impacts to this hedgerow in particular and
landscape connectivity in general. The consultants have stated that Impacts to
connectivity posed by a future road connection would need to be addressed as part of a
future E.I.S. in support of the development of neighbouring lands. They add that
preliminary grading information suggests that a dry culvert may be feasible to allow
movement by smaller terrestrial wildlife.
2.7
Proposed stewardship options for the E.S.P.A. and buffers
The Moffat Creek E.S.P.A. and Provincially Significant Wetland on the subject property
are part of a much larger natural system in southeast Cambridge. It is anticipated that
as the open agricultural lands are developed, many of the natural areas will be
dedicated to the City or some other public agency. The sub-committee wishes to make
some recommendations with respect to areas or features on the subject property that
may warrant special stewardship measures.
2.7.1 Delineation of the Moffat Creek Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area
Given the impacts of adjoining residential development on natural areas, it is
recommended that fencing be installed along rear lot lines where they abut the Moffat
Creek E.S.P.A. or Provincially Significant Wetland to limit encroachments and
unauthorised trail creation. Signage should be affixed to the fencing to inform adjacent
homeowners and the general public that the area is ecologically sensitive. In addition, it
is recommended that consideration be given to installing interpretive or educational
signage at appropriate locations along the E.S.P.A. boundary.
1639039
Page 12 of 16
35
35
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
2.7.2 Trails
As the extensive Moffat Creek valley provides an opportunity for trail development
within southeast Cambridge, the sub-committee anticipates that a potential
multipurpose trail will be developed by the City of Cambridge to tie into the proposed
community centre planned for the north side of Wesley Boulevard. A well-designed trail
system can guide the public safely through natural areas and help minimise
encroachments and inappropriate uses. At this time, the consultants have advised that
it is being considered in consultation with City staff. The sub-committee recommends
that a trails plan for the area be developed preferably before residents move into the
area in order to minimise negative impacts to the natural features. It is anticipated that
the buffers around the E.S.P.A. may provide suitable opportunities for trails.
2.7.3 Artificial Lighting
In recent years, it has come to be understood that artificial lighting can have disruptive
effects on the physiology and behaviour of native plants and animals in natural areas. It
is therefore becoming standard practice to design outdoor lighting on structures and
along roads so that it is directed away from natural areas. It is recommended that
lighting along the proposed Wesley Boulevard creek crossing, the upgraded Faith Street
crossing of the marsh habitat, and also outdoor lighting required for the multiple
residential properties on proposed Blocks 2, 9, and 10 be designed and placed so as
not to shine into the adjoining natural areas.
2.7.4 Homeowner Information
As has been recommended for other significant new residential developments, the subcommittee also recommends that the owners, in consultation with the City, G.R.C.A.
and Region develop an informational brochure for future residents of the area to help
them become better informed neighbours of a significant natural area.
Area Municipal Consultation/Coordination:
The report will be shared with staff from the City of Cambridge and the Grand River
Conservation Authority.
Corporate Strategic Plan:
The review of the scoped EIS for the subject application will help achieve the strategic
objective to preserve sensitive natural areas.
Financial Implications:
The usual fee for the review of a scoped EIS has been received.
Other Department Consultations/Concurrence:
Other aspects of this application are being reviewed by Transportation and Water
Services staff.
1639039
Page 13 of 16
36
36
May 27, 2014
Report: EEAC-14-005
Attachments
Figure 1
Subject Lands in Relation to Core Environmental Features
Figure 2
Proposed Development Plan and Buffers to Core Environmental Features
Respectfully submitted,
Eduardo Cejudo
Jared Ehgoetz
Allison Featherstone
Greg Michalenko
Claudette Millar
Bosdale Lands Sub-committee
1639039
Page 14 of 16
37
37
May 27, 2014
Figure 1
1639039
Report: EEAC-14-005
Subject Lands in Relation to Core Environmental Features
Page 15 of 16
38
38
May 27, 2014
Figure 2
1639039
Report: EEAC-14-005
Proposed Development Plan and Buffers to Core Environmental Features
Page 16 of 16
39
39
Active EEAC Sub-Committees
Application
Members
Date
Struck
Status
Gibney Regional Forest
Operating and Management
Plan
Holcim Cedar Creek & Alps Pits
AD LE AF, CM
CP AW
Feb 25/14
Awaiting suitable
conditions for site visit
WC AD GM
Dec 17/13
Cambridge Aggregates Pit, 1830
Wrigley, North Dumfries
WC, AD, LC,GM
Aug 13/13
Granval Industrial Subdivision,
Bishop & CanAmera, Cambridge
WRDSB Property, Lackner &
Fairway, Kitchener
Cambridge Golf Club
GM, CP, RD, TC
Aug 13/13
Awaiting submission of
scoped E.I.S.
Reported Feb. 25/14;
Awaiting detailed site
plans
Scoped EIS under review
LC, RD, AD,
GM, AF
WC, LE, AF,
AD, RD, GM
LC AF AM GM
CP
TC GM CP
Sep 25/12
655 New Dundee Road,
Kitchener
Empire Riverland 2 Subdivision,
Breslau
CIGI Conference Centre
Apr 24/12
Subcommittee reporting
May 27/14
Awaiting Scoped EIS
Jan 31/12
Awaiting Scoped EIS
CM AF TC PD
AM YM
AF GM TC
Oct 25/11
Awaiting info for ESPA
designation
Awaiting Scoped EIS
Oct 25/11
Awaiting Scoped EIS
TC JE AF GM
CP YM
CM DM TC
TC PD AF GM
CP
Mar 29/11
Awaiting Scoped E.I.S.
Jan 26/10
Mar 27/09
Dec 15/09
Waterloo North Water Supply
Class EA
Highway 24 E.A.
GM CP
Dec 16/08
Awaiting Scoped E.I.S.
Public Meeting held Mar
8/11; awaiting final
approval following R.O.P.
appeals
Pending
AF CM TC
June 26/07
Southeast Galt Neighbourhoods
2&3 (Bosdale Subdivision)
Wideman Road and Erbsville
Road
River Road Extension E.A.
AF JE EC GM
CM (site visit only)
GM TC CM YM
May 29/07
1140 Townline Road
Grandview Woods Trail
Scott St & Wrigley Rd, Ayr
Greenlands Network
Implementation Guideline
Ecogen E.A.
Highway 7 E.A.
Revised: May 20, 2014
Oct 25/11
Sep 26/06
(site visit only)
TC, LC, JE LE,
GM, CM
Mar 30/04
Oct 29/13
Sep 24/02
Feb 25/03
Sept 25/01
Feb 27/01
Reviewing study
protocols
Subcommittee reporting
May 27/14
Awaiting submission of
EIS
Reported Feb. 25/14;
Awaiting detailed design
Awaiting E.A.
Awaiting detailed design