Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Final Draft Report

Reference: RQQ-2014-C1-092

Prepared for: Metrolinx 20 Bay Street, 6th Floor Toronto ON M5J 2W3

Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 300W-675 Cochrane Drive Markham ON L3R 0B8

File: 165011004 July 31, 2020

This page intentionally left blank Sign-off Sheet

Re: Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report (the “Project”); Ontario Infrastructure and Lands Corporation (“Infrastructure Ontario”) RFP No. OIPC-09-●-IO● (the “RFP”) – Reliance on Reports

This document entitled Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. (“Stantec”) for the account of Metrolinx (the “Client”). Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec’s professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document.

Notwithstanding the foregoing limitations on reliance, Stantec will consent to reliance on this report by the proponent who is ultimately successful under the above-referenced RFP (the “Preferred Proponent”), its successors and permitted assigns, and the Preferred Proponent’s lenders and/or lenders’ agent as listed in the Preferred Proponent’s submission documents for the RFP (the “Preferred Proponent’s Lenders and Agent”, as applicable), but such reliance will only be granted pursuant to the terms of the reliance letter template that has been negotiated between Stantec and Metrolinx in connection with this Project, including Schedules “A” and “B” to the reliance letter template which are incorporated therein by reference.

Prepared by Reviewed by (signature) (signature)

Janice Ball, B.Sc. Dan Eusebi, BES, MCIP, RPP Terrestrial Ecologist Senior Environmental Planner

Approved by (signature)

Alex Blasko, B.Sc. Project Manager

This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Executive Summary

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Metrolinx to complete a Natural Environment Technical Report for the Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project (the Project) in the City of Toronto, Ontario. Potential environmental effects of the Project are being assessed to meet the requirements of the Transit Project Assessment Process, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 231/08: Transit Projects and Metrolinx Undertakings and with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. The objectives of this report are to characterize the terrestrial and aquatic environments and terrestrial and aquatic Species at Risk (SAR) within the Site Investigation Area, provide background information regarding natural environment features, document standard mitigation measures and site-specific environmental management options, and to identify requirements for SAR approvals. The report also identifies avoidance and mitigation strategies that will reduce potential impacts to the natural environment in the Site Investigation Area.

A desktop screening was conducted to confirm and update aquatic and terrestrial information, including potential SAR and rare species, designated natural areas (i.e., Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI), Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), and Environmentally Significant Areas) and other relevant natural heritage data.

Terrestrial site investigations were completed on May 3, June 7 and July 11, 2019. Site- specific surveys of aquatic habitat were not required as Massey Creek occurs beyond the west side of the Site Investigation Area and influence area. No federally-protected SAR, or habitats for federally protected SAR, are present within the Site Investigation Area. No in-water works involving harm to fish habitat are required. As such, no federal permits and approvals are anticipated as a result of the proposed work.

During detailed design, it is recommended that consultation with the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) be carried out to address suitable habitat for species that are protected by the Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA 2007) and may be present within the Project Footprint, including bridges for Barn Swallow nesting.

In addition, although not a threatened or endangered species in Ontario, suitable habitat for Monarch (meadow MEMM3), a species of special concern, may occur in the Site Investigation Area. Surveys for new occurrence of milkweed, the host plant for Monarch, should be undertaken and mitigation applied prior to construction clearing.

In general, given the highly urbanized nature of the Site Investigation Area, it is anticipated that appropriate mitigation measures can be implemented so that impacts to the natural environment will be limited.

i This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ...... i

Abbreviations ...... vii

1.0 Introduction ...... 1.1 1.1 Purpose of the Report ...... 1.3 1.2 Site Investigation Area ...... 1.3

2.0 Policy and Regulatory Overview ...... 2.1 2.1 Federal Context ...... 2.1 2.1.1 Species at Risk Act ...... 2.1 2.1.2 Migratory Birds Convention Act ...... 2.1 2.2 Provincial Context ...... 2.1 2.2.1 Planning Act ...... 2.1 2.2.2 Endangered Species Act ...... 2.2 2.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act ...... 2.3 2.2.4 Conservation Authorities Act ...... 2.3

3.0 Site Investigation Methods ...... 3.1 3.1 Background Review and Agency Consultation ...... 3.1 3.1.1 Species at Risk ...... 3.2 3.1.2 Species of Conservation Concern ...... 3.2 3.2 Field Data Collection ...... 3.3 3.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Botanical Inventory ...... 3.3 3.2.2 Breeding Bird Survey ...... 3.4 3.2.3 Bat Habitat Assessment ...... 3.4 3.2.4 Wildlife Habitat Assessment ...... 3.6 3.2.5 Significant Species Assessment ...... 3.6 3.2.6 Incidental Wildlife Observations ...... 3.6

4.0 Existing Conditions ...... 4.1 4.1 Background Data ...... 4.1 4.1.1 Physiography ...... 4.1 4.1.2 Landscape Ecology ...... 4.1 4.1.3 Species at Risk and Provincially Rare Species ...... 4.2 4.1.4 Designated Natural Areas ...... 4.3 4.2 Field Investigation Results ...... 4.3 4.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Flora ...... 4.3 4.2.2 Breeding Birds ...... 4.4 4.2.3 Bat Habitat ...... 4.5 4.2.4 Wildlife Habitat ...... 4.6 4.2.5 Incidental Wildlife ...... 4.12 4.2.6 Aquatic Habitats ...... 4.12

iii Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

4.3 Natural Heritage Features Summary ...... 4.12

5.0 Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations ...... 5.1 5.1 Vegetation ...... 5.1 5.2 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat ...... 5.2 5.3 Aquatic Resources ...... 5.3 5.4 Mitigation Recommendations ...... 5.3 5.5 Standard Measures for Sedimentation and Spills ...... 5.12

6.0 Permits and Approvals ...... 6.1 6.1 Federal ...... 6.1 6.2 Provincial ...... 6.1 6.2.1 Conservation Authority Permits ...... 6.1 6.3 Municipal ...... 6.1

7.0 Conclusions ...... 7.1 7.1 Designated Natural Areas ...... 7.1 7.2 Vegetation ...... 7.1 7.3 Wildlife ...... 7.1 7.4 Aquatic Habitat ...... 7.2

8.0 References ...... 8.1

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: GO Transit Networks ...... 1.1

List of Tables

Table 3.1: Field Investigation Summary ...... 3.3 Table 4.1: Background Review of SAR and Provincially Rare Species ...... 4.2 Table 4.2: Summary of Vegetation Terrestrial Communities ...... 4.4 Table 4.3: Candidate Bat Maternity Roost Trees ...... 4.5 Table 4.4: Candidate Bat Maternity Roost Tree Suitability ...... 4.5 Table 4.5: Significant Wildlife Habitat Assessment ...... 4.6 Table 5.1: Summary of Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Monitoring ...... 5.4

iv Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

List of Appendices

Appendix A Figures Figure 1: Location of Site Investigation Area Figure 2: Detail of Site Investigation Area Figure 3: Environmental Features Figure 4: Ecological Land Classification

Appendix B MNRF Correspondence

Appendix C Wildlife List Atlases

Appendix D Plant List

Appendix E Wildlife List Field

Appendix F Habitat Suitability Assessment for Significant Species Identified in Background Review

v This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Abbreviations

ANSI Area(s) of Natural and Scientific Interest

CAA 1990 Conservation Authorities Act, 1990

CNR Canadian National Railway

CPR Canadian Pacific Railway

COSEWIC Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada

COSSARO Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario

DFO Department of Fisheries and Oceans

ESA 2007 Endangered Species Act, 2007

EA Environmental Assessment

ECCC Environment and Climate Change Canada e.g. exempli gratia (Latin term meaning, “for example”)

EPR Environmental Project Report

ESC Erosion and Sediment Control i.e. id est (Latin term meaning, “that is”)

LIO Land Information Ontario

MBCA 1994 Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994

MECP Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (formerly MOECC)

MNRF Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

MTO Ministry of Transportation

NHIC Natural Heritage Information Centre

NHRM Natural Heritage Reference Manual

vii Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

O. Reg. Ontario Regulation

PPS Provincial Policy Statement

ROW right-of-way

SCS Site Condition Standards

SAR Species at Risk

SARA Species at Risk Act, 2002

SARO Species at Risk in Ontario

SWH Significant Wildlife Habitat

SWHTG The Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide

TRCA Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

viii Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Introduction July 31, 2020

1.0 Introduction

Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by Metrolinx, an agency of the Province of Ontario, to complete Natural Environment Technical Report for the Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project (the Project) located in the City of Toronto, Ontario.

Metrolinx is undertaking GO Expansion, a Program that will transform GO Rail into a comprehensive regional rapid transit network that will provide faster and more frequent two-way, all-day service to core parts of the rail network (refer to Figure 1.1 for the GO Transit Networks). Metrolinx completed a full business case for GO Expansion illustrating its benefits and costs, and core requirements to successfully implement the Program (Metrolinx 2018). The long-term goal and vision of the GO Expansion Program is to provide 15-minute two-way all-day service along the Lakeshore East and Stouffville Rail Corridors.Infrastructure modifications are being planned to support the introduction of additional trains on the Stouffville and Lakeshore East Rail Corridors which will enhance on time performance and operational flexibility/reliability.

Figure 1.1: GO Transit Networks

The Lakeshore East and Stouffville tracks both run east from Union Station along the same corridor until separation at the Scarborough Junction (Figure 1, Appendix A). From the Scarborough Junction, the Stouffville Rail Corridor runs north to the Lincolnville GO Station in Whitchurch-Stouffville and the Lakeshore East Rail Corridor runs east to the Oshawa GO Station. The Project is being planned to support Metrolinx’s GO Expansion Program along these two rail corridors.

The Scarborough Junction is located just east of the existing Scarborough GO Station, near the intersection of Midland Avenue and St. Clair Avenue East, in the City of Toronto. The purpose of the proposed Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project (the Project) is to accommodate the expansion of the Stouffville Rail Corridor at this

1.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Introduction July 31, 2020 location through infrastructure improvements at the Scarborough Junction. These improvements will reduce train conflicts (rail-rail grade separation) and traffic conflicts (rail under road grade separation), while maintaining pedestrian and cyclist access (Corvette multi-use crossing).

Given the service increases and resulting increased train volumes, current track configuration at the Scarborough Junction will not provide effective train movement between the Stouffville and Lakeshore East Rail Corridors. Currently, north-south trains along the Stouffville Rail Corridor would need to cross three tracks at-grade, creating potential train conflicts and delays. With future increased service and additional tracks, at-grade switching will not be feasible to maintain train flow. Therefore, a grade separation between the Stouffville Rail Corridor and the Lakeshore East Rail Corridor is proposed at the Scarborough Junction for the purpose of removing train conflicts between the Stouffville and Lakeshore East Rail Corridors and meeting service targets. In addition, a rail under road grade separation at Danforth Road is also proposed to eliminate potential rail-road conflicts. Furthermore, a grade separation is proposed at the current at-grade Corvette multi-use crossing to facilitate pedestrian and cyclist activity over the rail corridor.

With the planned increase in service along the Stouffville and Lakeshore East Rail Corridors, Metrolinx anticipates the need to have day-time storage for railcars to accommodate passenger demand. Metrolinx is considering several locations for layover areas throughout their system, one of which is the Midland Layover site located in the vicinity of the Scarborough Junction.

The addition of the new track on the Stouffville Rail Corridor will require the relocation of the existing Scarborough GO Station building. The Scarborough GO Station building will be shifted south of its existing location as configuration of the new track on the Stouffville Rail Corridor cannot avoid the existing station.

Storm and sanitary sewers aligned beneath the Danforth Road/Midland Avenue intersection will require relocation to accommodate the rail under road grade separation at this location. Other utility realignments and relocations will occur where the Project conflicts with existing utilities.

Metrolinx is conducting preliminary planning studies and developing conceptual design for the Project. Potential environmental effects of the Project are being assessed to meet the requirements of the Transit Project Assessment Process, in accordance with Ontario Regulation 231/08: Transit Projects and Metrolinx Undertakings and with the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act.

1.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Introduction July 31, 2020

1.1 Purpose of the Report

This Natural Environment Technical Report provides supporting documentation for the Project, including characterization of the terrestrial environment and terrestrial Species at Risk (SAR) within the Site Investigation Area, as defined in Section 1.3.

The objectives of this report are to:

• Document Designated Areas including Environmentally Significant Areas and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest, Provincially Significant Wetlands, landforms and other physical features

• Document existing terrestrial natural habitats, including riparian zones, valley and stream corridors, vegetation communities and wildlife habitat

• Document the sensitivities of vegetation communities, including an assessment of candidate significant wildlife habitat and habitat suitability for potential SAR and provincially significant species

• Document standard mitigation measures and site-specific environmental management options

• Identify requirements for SAR authorizations 1.2 Site Investigation Area

A Site Investigation Area has been identified based on the footprint of the Reference Concept Design drawings. The Project includes the following areas of focus: the Project Footprint and the Site Investigation Area. The broader Local Study Area was considered with regard to general existing conditions. The Site Investigation Area and Project Footprint for the Project are provided on Figure 2, Appendix A. The Local Study Area is shown on Figure 3, Appendix A.

The Project Footprint includes the total area potentially affected by the proposed construction activities, and includes, but is not limited to, Scarborough Junction rail-rail grade separation, Danforth Road rail under road grade separation, Midland layover, road/rail detours, expanded bridge at St. Clair Avenue East, depressed rail/tunnel from Corvette Park through to approximately St. Clair Avenue East, track realignment, Scarborough GO Station building modification / relocation, Corvette multi-use crossing, retaining walls and barriers, utility realignments and temporary laydown areas for the Project.

1.3 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Introduction July 31, 2020

The Site Investigation Area includes a 120-metre (m) area of review to assess potential detrimental impacts (NHRM, MNR 2010) around the edge of the Project Footprint and was established for field investigations to conservatively characterize the area with the highest potential for direct or indirect impacts.

The Local Study Area encompasses the Site Investigation Area for the Scarborough Junction site and is generally one kilometre (km) from the edge of the Project Footprint to conservatively capture the extent of existing and future effects and relevant regulatory requirements. This area is used to illustrate the existing conditions in the local area from a contextual perspective (Figure 3, Appendix A).

1.4 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Policy and Regulatory Overview July 31, 2020

2.0 Policy and Regulatory Overview

An assessment of the natural heritage features and functions within the Site Investigation Area was undertaken to comply with the requirements of the following legislation, policy and guideline documents discussed below.

2.1 Federal Context

2.1.1 Species at Risk Act

Federally protected Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species are identified in Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act, 2002 (SARA 2002). SARA 2002 applies to federally owned lands, with the exception of fish species that are covered by the Fisheries Act and migratory birds (i.e., species covered under the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA 1994)), which are afforded protection on all lands. This report will address migratory birds that are listed on Schedule 1 of the Act.

2.1.2 Migratory Birds Convention Act

The Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA) 1994 prohibits the killing or capturing of migratory birds, as well as any damage, destruction, removal or disturbance of active nests. The main tool used to avoid contravention of this Act is to restrict vegetation removal during the potential nesting period, generally March 30 through August 31 Should vegetation removal during this timeframe be unavoidable, a nest search of the area that is scheduled for vegetation clearing or removal will be undertaken by qualified avian biologists to determine that no active nests covered by the MBCA 1994 are destroyed.

2.2 Provincial Context

2.2.1 Planning Act

Although the Project does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Planning Act (1990), the terms and categories of the following technical documents are used to describe natural heritage features and identify significance and sensitivity of existing features:

• The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing 2020)

• The Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (SWHTG) (MNR, 2000) and Ecoregion Criteria Schedule for 7E (MNRF 2015a)

2.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Policy and Regulatory Overview July 31, 2020

• The Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the PPS (NHRM) (MNR 2010)

• The Significant Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Support Tool (SWHMST) (MNR 2014) In the absence of structured technical guidelines for the assessment of natural heritage features, these documents provide clarity to the terminology and standards used in the field.

2.2.2 Endangered Species Act

The Ontario Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA 2007) protects habitat and individuals of wildlife species designated as Threatened, Endangered, or extirpated in Ontario. Provincial SAR are identified and assessed by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO).

The ESA 2007 protects species listed as Threatened, Endangered, or extirpated on the SAR in Ontario list by prohibiting anyone from killing, harming, harassing or possessing protected species. The ESA 2007 also prohibits damage or destruction to the habitat of the listed species. All listed species are provided with general habitat protection under the ESA 2007, which is aimed at protecting areas that species depend on to carry out their life processes, such as reproduction, rearing, hibernation, migration or feeding. Some species have detailed habitat regulations that go beyond the general habitat protection to define specifically the extent and character of protected habitats.

Activities that may impact a protected species or its habitat may require an Overall Benefit Permit from the MECP, unless the activities are exempted under Regulation. The current Ontario Regulation (O. Reg.) 242/08 identifies activities that are exempt from the permitting requirements of the Act subject to rigorous controls outside the permit process, including registration of the activity and preparation of mitigation. Activities not exempt under O. Reg. 242/08 require a complete permit application process.

The ESA 2007 applies on all private and Crown lands in Ontario. Habitat protection under the ESA 2007 is typically comprehensive, including all habitats that directly or indirectly support SAR.

2.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Policy and Regulatory Overview July 31, 2020

2.2.3 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act

The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 (FWCA 1997) provides protection for fish and wild animals in Ontario. The FWCA 1997 prohibits the capture, killing, and harassments of specially protected wildlife, and regulates the hunting season and limits of some species that area not protected. Specially protected animals include mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and invertebrates that are listed in the Schedules of the FWCA 1997.

The FWCA 1997 also prohibits the taking or possession of eggs and nests of including species nests of wild birds, including birds that are not protected by the MBCA 1994, such as raptors, and intentional damage or destruction of a den or dwelling of some mammals and beaver dams without a licence. Licences are issued by the MNRF for hunting and trapping.

2.2.4 Conservation Authorities Act

The Site Investigation Area is located within the jurisdiction of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Pursuant to O. Reg. 166/06 (Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses), prior permission is required from the TRCA for any development within a floodplain, valleyland, wetland, or other hazardous land. Permission is also required from the TRCA for any alteration to a river, creek, stream or watercourse or any interference with the hydrological function of a wetland. Generally, any development, interference or other alteration that may negatively impact the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land are not permitted.

Further to Section 28(10) of the Conservation Authorities Act, 1990 (CAA 1990), a Conservation Authority must ensure that its Regulation and policies do not interfere with the rights or powers of any board or commission that is performing its functions for or on behalf of the Government of Ontario, which includes Metrolinx. Further, the CAA 1990 does not specifically bind the Crown, meaning that Metrolinx is not legally required to obtain permission under the CAA 1990. This is supported by the TRCA (2016) Administrative Fee Schedule for Environmental Assessment and Infrastructure Permitting Implementation Guidelines. However, Metrolinx policy is to adhere to the general intent of the relevant permits, approvals, and requirements of the TRCA for the protection of the natural environment. Where possible, mitigation and monitoring plans will be developed to meet TRCA’s general requirements, to be confirmed through feedback provided by the TRCA as appropriate.

2.3 This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020

3.0 Site Investigation Methods

3.1 Background Review and Agency Consultation

A desktop screening was conducted to confirm and update aquatic and terrestrial information, including potential SAR and rare species, designated natural areas (i.e., Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI), Provincially Significant Wetlands (PSW), and Environmentally Significant Areas), other relevant natural heritage data within the Site Investigation Area and from secondary sources (as available, including existing Lakeshore East Expansion Project, Network Electrification Project, Stouffville Corridor Expansion Project and Danforth Road Grade Separation Project reports), and the City of Toronto Official Plan. This review was completed through aerial photo interpretation and a review of relevant federal and provincial databases as follows:

• MNRF’s Land Information Ontario (LIO) database (MNRF 2018)

• MNRF’s Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database (MNRF 2018)

• Species at Risk (SAR) in Ontario List

• Ontario Nature’s Reptile and Amphibian Atlas (Ontario Nature 2018)

• Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (Cadman et al. 2007)

• Online eBird database (eBird 2018)

• Fisheries and Oceans Canada Species at Risk Mapping (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2018)

• Ontario Butterfly Atlas (Toronto Entomologists’ Association 2018)

• Ontario Mammal Atlas (Dobbyn 1994) An information request was submitted to the MNRF on January 15, 2019 to confirm the results of the background review and request additional natural heritage information, if available (Appendix B).

The results of the background review were used to guide field investigations, and to identify potential SAR and SOCC that have the potential to overlap with the Site Investigation Area. The species databases generally do not note the exact locations of a species occurrence, with accuracy ranging from 1 km² (NHIC) to 10 km² (wildlife atlases), to municipal boundaries or watersheds. As such they are used as an indicator

3.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020 of potential occurrence in the Site Investigation Area. SAR and SOCC are defined in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 below.

3.1.1 Species at Risk

For the purpose of this assessment, SAR are species classified as Threatened (THR) or Endangered (END) by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). The Ontario Endangered Species Act, 2007 (ESA) prohibits harm or harassment to threatened or endangered species, and damage or disturbance to their habitat. The ESA applies on all private and Crown owned lands in Ontario. Habitat protection under the ESA typically includes all habitats that directly or indirectly support SAR.

Federally protected endangered, threatened, and special concern species are classified by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and listed in Schedule 1 of the Species at Risk Act, 2002 (SARA) and apply only to federally owned lands. For this report, species listed on Schedule 1 are only included as SAR if they are also listed as Threatened or Endangered by COSSARO. Otherwise, they are considered as SOCC as described below.

3.1.2 Species of Conservation Concern

SOCC are considered at a number of levels, including globally, nationally, and provincially. For this report, SOCC includes species that are provincially rare (with a Provincial S-rank of S1 to S3), listed as Special Concern (SC) on the Species at Risk in Ontario list (SARO), or listed on Schedule 1 of SARA but not included on the SARO list.

Provincial ranks (subnational S-ranks) are used by the NHIC to set protection priorities for rare species and vegetation communities. They are based on the number of factors such as abundance, distribution, population trends and threats in Ontario and are not legal designations. By comparing the global and provincial ranks, the status, rarity, and the urgency of conservation needs can be determined. Species with provincial ranks of S1 to S3, and those tracked by the MNRF, are considered SOCC. Provincial S-ranks are defined as follows:

S1: Critically imperiled; usually fewer than 5 occurrences S2: Imperiled; usually fewer than 20 occurrences S3: Vulnerable; usually fewer than 100 occurrences S4: Apparently secure; uncommon but not rare, usually more than 100 occurrences S5: Secure, common, widespread and abundant

S-rank followed by a “?” indicates the rank is still uncertain

3.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020

3.2 Field Data Collection

Field Investigations were conducted by qualified Stantec ecologists for the Site Investigation Area. The Site Investigation Area is outlined on Figure 2, Appendix A. Terrestrial natural heritage features examined included vegetation communities, vegetation species, breeding birds, candidate significant wildlife habitat including potential bat roost locations, and potential species at risk habitat. Incidental wildlife observations were also recorded during field investigations. Table 3.1 below provides a summary of the field investigations conducted.

Table 3.1: Field Investigation Summary

Surveys Types of Surveys Date Surveyors Vegetation Communities Ecological Land June 7, 2019 J. Ball and Botanical Surveys Classification and Botanical Inventory Wildlife Surveys Bat Maternity Roost May 3, 2019 N. Burnett Assessment Wildlife Habitat Assessment June 7, 2019 J. Ball Species at Risk Habitat June 7, 2019 J. Ball Assessment Breeding Bird Surveys June 7, 2019 J. Ball Tree Entry/Exit Survey – Bat July 11, 2019 C. Pengelly Roosts Incidental Wildlife During all field All Staff Observations visits

3.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Botanical Inventory

Ecological Land Classification (ELC) mapping was completed using the ELC field guide for Southern Ontario (Lee et al. 1998), including the 2008 updated catalogue. Vegetation communities were first identified on aerial imagery and then confirmed in the field. ELC surveys included documentation of flora species by natural vegetation community type. Species at Risk and rare species were recorded by location using a hand-held GPS. Surveys were conducted during a suitable season to identify potential SAR and provincially rare species. ELC data were not collected for developed lands, manicured lawns, and gardens because these areas do not contain natural vegetation communities.

3.3 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020

One botanical survey was conducted for the Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project given its location in highly modified environments with limited fragmented vegetation cover. Vegetation areas directly adjacent to the railroad tracks were not readily accessible in all areas but reviewed from distance. Vegetation that was accessible was highly disturbed with an abundance of non-native species and SAR were highly unlikely to occur in these disturbed habitats. Generally, all areas seem to have similar traits consistent with fringe vegetation units, highly disturbed areas adjacent to infrastructure and commercial development.

Scientific nomenclature of plant species generally followed Newmaster et al. (1998), with updates taken from published volumes of the Flora of North America Editorial Committee (1993+, accessed 2012). Additional sources included Michigan Flora Online (Reznicek et al. 2011), and Brouillet et al. (2010+, accessed 2016). English colloquial names and scientific binomials of plant species generally followed Newmaster et al. (1998).

3.2.2 Breeding Bird Survey

A breeding bird survey was conducted by Stantec on June 7, 2019. This survey consisted of recording all species of birds that were seen or heard within the Site Investigation Area. The survey focused on recording bird species in natural vegetation communities within the Project Footprint, but also included commercial and residential properties in the Site Investigation Area. A highest breeding evidence code was assigned to each of the species based on the field observation. All birds seen or heard in suitable habitat during the breeding season were assumed to be breeding in the Site Investigation Area. Rail bridges are not proposed for removal and therefore structures were not inspected for use by nesting birds during the survey.

The survey was conducted between 9:40 am and 10:30 am. Weather conditions (i.e., precipitation and visibility) were within the parameters required by monitoring programs such as Environment Canada’s Breeding Bird Survey (Environment Canada 2016). Locations of bird nests protected by the MCBA 1994 were identified with a hand- held GPS unit.

3.2.3 Bat Habitat Assessment

A bat maternity colony survey was conducted by Stantec on May 3, 2019 during leaf-off. The survey protocol followed the recommended methods in the MNRF Guelph District Bat and Bat Habitat Surveys of Treed Habitats (MNRF 2017) which was based in part on the Bat and Bat Habitat Guidelines (MNRF 2011). Although the protocol was developed for treed communities, Stantec took a conservative approach and also

3.4 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020 applied the protocol to isolated trees and hedgerows in the Site Investigation Area that are proposed for removal.

According to the MNRF Guelph District protocol, the best candidate trees for maternity colonies are likely to contain several characteristics (to be considered a potential treed roost habitat, not all habitat characteristics listed below needed to be present), which include:

• Height – where trees are tallest in the stand

• Diameter – where trees have a large DBH

• Loose/peeling bark – where trees have a large amount of peeling/loose bark

• Cavity height – where cavity height is high on the tree (>10 m high)

• Open canopy – located in an area of open canopy for accessibility in and out of tree

• Decay – where the tree exhibits early stages of decay Surveys focused on all trees that were > 10 cm in DBH on the Subject Property.

The following data were also recorded for any trees over 10 cm DBH that had cavities or a large amount of peeling bark:

• GPS location

• tree species

• DBH

• tree height

• cavity height An assessment of trees that have the potential to support Tri-Coloured Bat roosts was conducted during the ELC vegetation survey. Suitable habitat includes oak trees with dead leaf clusters that usually occurs in forest settings.

Additional exit/entry surveys at suitable roost trees were conducted on July 11, 2019, commencing half an hour before dusk and ending one hour after dusk. Refer to Section 4.2.3 for survey results.

3.5 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Site Investigation Methods July 31, 2020

3.2.4 Wildlife Habitat Assessment

Wildlife habitat assessments took place concurrently with vegetation surveys to identify potential significant wildlife habitat features. The wildlife habitat assessment was conducted according to the Significant Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide (SWHTG; MNR 2000), the Ecoregion Criteria Schedules (MNRF 2015) and the Natural Heritage Reference Manual (NHRM; MNR 2010). Significant Wildlife Habitat features documented during field studies were carried forward to the impact assessment. Locations of potential significant wildlife features were identified with hand-held GPS units.

3.2.5 Significant Species Assessment

Habitat assessments took place concurrently with vegetation surveys to identify suitable habitat for significant species, including SAR and provincially rare species. The assessment was based on a list of significant species that have the potential to occur in the Site Investigation Area obtained from the background review (Section 4.1.3 and Appendix C). The assessment included provincially SRank (S1-S3) which are those species considered provincially rare/unique or species locally rare (L1-L3) flora within the municipality, or highly sensitive plants of conservation concern (CC = 9-10) most susceptible to change. Locations where field encounters of SAR and provincially rare species and/or their habitat were identified with hand-held GPS units. Based on this assessment, the following species were carried forward to the Impact Assessment:

• SAR and provincially-rare species documented during field studies

• Suitable habitat for SAR and provincially-rare species documented during field studies 3.2.6 Incidental Wildlife Observations

Incidental wildlife observations were recorded during all field investigations. All wildlife species identified by sight, sound or distinctive signs were recorded.

3.6 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

4.0 Existing Conditions

4.1 Background Data

4.1.1 Physiography

The Site Investigation Area is located in Ecoregion 7E-4 (Lake Erie-Lake Ontario Ecoregion). Ecoregion 7 is generally characterized as having a flat topography overlain by deep undulating deposits of ground moraine, underlain by Silurian and Devonian limestone bedrock (Crins et al. 2009). The landscape has been highly developed, with 78% of the Ecoregion having been converted to cropland and pasture, and 7% of the Ecoregion having been developed (Crins et al. 2009). Where natural covers remain, forest is the prevalent cover type, including dense deciduous forest (10.3%), sparse deciduous forest (1.0%), and mixed deciduous forest (0.8%, Crins et al. 2009). Ecoregion 7E is located within the Great Lakes Watershed, with many small aquifers in sand and gravel deposits throughout the region. However, most wetlands have been eliminated (Crins et al. 2009).

The Site Investigation Area is located within the South Slope Physiographic Region (Chapman and Putnam 1984). The South Slope covers an area of approximately 2400 km2 and is located along the southern slope of the Oak Ridges Moraine, with an average width of approximately 9 to 11 km, reaching from the Niagara Escarpment to the Trent River. In the Local Site Investigation Area, the slopes are generally smoothed, faintly drumlinized, and scored at intervals by valleys tributary to the Rouge, Don, and Humber River systems (Chapman and Putnam 1984). The South Slope contains a variety of soils, which in the Site Investigation Area are considered clayey, with shale present (Chapman and Putnam 1984).

4.1.2 Landscape Ecology

Although largely developed and urbanized in nature, the Local Site Investigation Area is located within the Deciduous Forest Region, D.1 – Niagara (Rowe 1972), also known as the Carolinian Life Zone, or simply the Carolinian Forest. The extreme southern tip of Ontario represents the maximum northern limit of Carolinian Forest. Forests in this region are dominated by broadleaved trees including sugar maple, American beech, basswood, red maple, red oak, white oak, and bur oak, butternut, bitternut hickory, rock elm, silver maple and blue beech. Species such as black cherry, black walnut, sycamore, swamp white oak, and shagbark hickory are also occasionally present. Species considered rare to the province, such as pignut hickory, tulip-tree, chinquapin oak, pin oak, black oak, black gum, blue ash, cucumber-tree, paw paw, Kentucky coffee-tree, red mulberry and sassafras are sporadically present. Needle-leaved trees

4.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020 such as hemlock, white pine, tamarack, eastern white cedar, eastern red cedar and black spruce may be found in isolated patches where soil conditions are favorable.

Based on aerial photography (First Base Solutions 2018), the Site Investigation Area is dominated by urban uses.

4.1.3 Species at Risk and Provincially Rare Species

There were no recent records (within the past 30 years) of SAR or provincially rare species identified in the NHIC database during a search on November 22, 2018.

Based on the results of a wildlife atlas search conducted on November 22, 2018 (Appendix C) and a desktop habitat assessment prior to conducting field investigations, the following SAR species were identified as having the potential to reside in the Site Investigation Area:

Table 4.1: Background Review of SAR and Provincially Rare Species

Provincial Status SARO Type Species SARA List (S-rank) List Plant Butternut (Juglans cinerea) S3? END END Plant Red Mulberry (Morus rubra) S2 END END Insect Monarch (Danaus plexippus) S4B, S2N SC SC Bird Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia) S4B THR THR Bird Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica) S4B THR THR Bird Chimney Swift S4B THR THR (Chaetura pelagica) Bird Common Nighthawk S4B SC THR (Chordeiles minor) Bird Eastern Meadowlark S4B THR THR (Sturnella magna) Mammal Little Brown Myotis S4 END END (Myotis lucifugus) Mammal Northern Myotis S3? END END (Myotis septentrionalis) Mammal Tri coloured Bat S3? END END (Perimyotis subflavus)

4.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

The species in Table 4.2 were presented to the MNRF in the information request submitted by Stantec on April 25, 2019 (Appendix B). A response from the MNRF received on June 3, 2019 indicated that the MNRF did not have any additional records of SAR for the Site Investigation Area (Appendix B). These species were further assessed during field investigations, and only species with potential suitable habitat were carried forward to the impact assessment. A habitat suitability assessment table is provided in Appendix F.

4.1.4 Designated Natural Areas

A review of Designated Natural Areas such as wetlands, Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) and Environmentally Sensitive Areas was conducted for the Greater Site Investigation Area. No Designated Natural Areas were identified in the Site Investigation Area during the background review. The closest feature is the Scarborough Bluffs Life Science ANSI that is found greater than 1 km from the site along the shores of Lake Ontario, as shown on Figure 3, Appendix A.

4.2 Field Investigation Results

4.2.1 Vegetation Communities and Flora

Four natural vegetation communities were identified in the Site Investigation Area, including meadows, woodlands and hedgerows. Vegetation communities are summarized in Table 4.2 below, and mapped on Figure 4, Appendix A. Vegetation communities generally demonstrated a high degree of disturbance that is typical of urban environments, including a high proportion of non-native and invasive plant species. No rare or unique communities were documented.

No flora SAR, provincially (S1-S3) or locally rare (L1-L3) flora, or highly sensitive plant (CC = 9-10) species were documented during the botanical inventory. Twenty-six (26) species of vascular plants were recorded within the Site Investigation Area, of which 14 (54%) were native. All of the native plants documented had a provincial rank of S5, indicating they are common and secure within Ontario. The list of flora documented during field investigation is located in Appendix D.

4.3 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Table 4.2: Summary of Vegetation Terrestrial Communities

Code Description Dominant Species FOD Deciduous Forest (along Massey Creek Crack Willow, Siberian Elm, Manitoba in the Pine Hills Cemetery) Maple, Green Ash, Tartarian Honeysuckle, Common Buckthorn, Garlic Mustard, Dog-strangling Vine, Goldenrod species FODM11 Naturalized Deciduous Hedgerow Manitoba Maple, Siberian Elm WOD Deciduous Woodland Manitoba Maple ME Meadow Kentucky Bluegrass, Smooth Brome, Staghorn Sumac, Dog-strangling Vine, Goldenrod species, Manitoba Maple

The Project Footprint area includes ornamental and streetscape trees that are found along roadways and parking lots. These trees may be removed during development of the Project.

4.2.2 Breeding Birds

A total of 10 bird species were observed during the breeding bird survey conducted by Stantec (Appendix E). All species were presumed to be breeding in the Site Investigation Area and they are all provincially ranked as common species in Ontario. No bird nests were confirmed in the Site Investigation Area; however, nests of common urban adapted species are expected to occur.

There are two existing bridges associated within the Site Investigation Area at St. Clair Avenue East and Midland Avenue. Construction is proposed at the St. Clair Avenue East bridge. Confirmatory surveys for Barn Swallow nests at these bridges should be conducted during the active nesting period (June – early July) if construction activities have the potential to disturb these structures, as determined during detailed design.

4.4 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

4.2.3 Bat Habitat

Two potential bat roost trees were observed within the Project Footprint on May 3, 2019 during the bat roost assessment (shown on Figure 4, Appendix A and described in Table 4.3 below) with the potential to be impacted as a result of the Project. Both trees were mid-aged Manitoba Maples growing at the edge of a small cultural meadow located near the intersection between Midland Avenue and Danforth Road. The trees were approximately 70 cm and 50 cm in diameter (DBH) with cavities from 2 m to 6 m in height.

Table 4.3: Candidate Bat Maternity Roost Trees

Tree Approximate DBH Estimated Tree Estimated Cavity Species # (cm) Height (m) Height (m) 1 Manitoba Maple 70 9 2,4 2 Manitoba Maple 50 9 6

The trees exhibited some characteristics that are preferred by bats including a relatively large diameter (DBH), an open canopy and early signs of decay (Table 4.4). However, the trees were short and cavities were low in the trees, two characteristics that are not preferred by bats due to the increased chance of predation that occurs with roosts located close to the ground.

Table 4.4: Candidate Bat Maternity Roost Tree Suitability

Exhibits Within Cavity or One of cavities/ highest Large Early Largest crevice tallest crevices/ density amount stages Tree DBH in is high Open trees in scars/ or of loose, of decay # comm- up in canopy comm- wood- cluster peeling (class 1- unity tree unity pecker of cavity bark 3) (>10m) holes trees 1 X X X X X 2 X X

4.5 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

No large oak trees in forest setting were recorded in the Site Investigation Area. Potential habitat for Tri-Coloured Bat is therefore considered absent. On July 11, 2019, an evening exit/entrance survey was completed at the two trees to determine if bats were using the trees for maternity roosting. Conditions were noted to be clear and warm, appropriate for surveying. During the surveys, no bats were observed entering or exiting the trees and no bats were observed flying in the area. These results are consistent with the lack of habitat in the immediate area. No further acoustic surveys were conducted at this location based on the lack of bat observations during the exit survey in the area and the known limited habitat conditions.

The Scarborough GO Station is subject to removal. Should final design include this removal, additional bat exit/entry surveys should be conducted to confirm the absence of bats at this location.

4.2.4 Wildlife Habitat

The Site Investigation Area is highly urbanized, surrounded by residential, commercial and industrial/institutional land uses. Generally, the Site Investigation Area provides limited wildlife habitat, including narrow areas of old field and regenerating woody vegetation.

A candidate SWH assessment of the Site Investigation Area was conducted using guidance provided in the SWH Criteria Schedules for Ecoregion 7E (MNRF 2015). The SWH Criteria Schedules include four (4) general types of significant wildlife habitat: seasonal concentration areas, rare or specialized habitat, habitat for species of conservation concern, and wildlife movement corridors. A summary table of the SWH assessment is provided in Table 4.5 below.

Table 4.5: Significant Wildlife Habitat Assessment

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH Seasonal Bat hibernacula Abandoned mine shafts, Not present. Concentration underground foundations, Areas caves, and crevices Deer wintering Deer yards are mapped Not present: No deer congregation areas and by MNRF yards are mapped by deer yards MNRF in the Site Investigation Area (MNRF 2018a).

4.6 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH Colonially – nesting bird Not present. breeding habitat (bank and cliff) Colonially – nesting bird Dead trees in large Not present. breeding habitat marshes and lakes, (trees/shrubs) flooded timber, and shrubs, with nests of Great Blue Heron, Great Egret, Green Heron, or Black-crowned Night- Heron Colonially – nesting bird Rock islands and Not present. breeding habitat (ground) peninsulas in a lake or large river Waterfowl stopover and Fields with evidence of Not present. staging areas annual spring flooding from meltwater or runoff; aquatic habitats such as ponds, marshes, lakes, bays, and watercourses used during migration, including large marshy wetlands Shorebird migratory Muddy and unvegetated Not present. stopover area shorelines, beach areas, bars Raptor wintering areas Combination of fields and Not present: The Site woodland (>20 ha) Investigation Area does not contain the appropriate size and combination of candidate habitat types to support SWH for raptor wintering areas. Bat maternity colonies Mixed and deciduous Not present: Field forests and swamps with investigations identified large diameter dead or two candidate bat dying trees with cavities maternity trees in the Site Investigation Area; however, these trees were not located in a wooded community and do not qualify as significant wildlife habitat.

4.7 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH Reptile hibernacula Rock piles or slopes, Not present. stone fences, crumbling foundations Turtle wintering area Permanent waterbodies Not present: The existing and large wetlands with stormwater management sufficient dissolved pond (shown on Figure 4, oxygen; man-made Appendix A) may provide ponds are not considered artificial habitat for turtle SWH. wintering areas, but this habitat does not qualify as significant and is outside of the Project Footprint. Migratory butterfly Fields and forests that Not present: Although the stopover area are a minimum of 10 ha Site Investigation Area is and are located within within 5 km from Lake 5 km of Lake Erie or Lake Ontario, there are no Ontario forests or fields 10 ha or greater to qualify as significant. Landbird migratory Woodlands of a minimum Not present: Although the stopover area size located within 5 km Site Investigation Area is of Lake Erie or Lake within 5 km from Lake Ontario Ontario, there are no forests or fields 5 ha or greater to qualify as significant. Rare Vegetation Sand barren, alvar, cliffs Sand barren, Alvar, Cliff Not present. Communities and talus slopes and Talus ELC Community Classes, and other areas of exposed bed rock and patchy soil development, near vertical exposed bedrock and slopes of rock rubble Prairie and savannah Open canopy habitats Not present. (tree cover < 60%) dominated by prairie species Old growth forest Relatively undisturbed, Not present. structurally complex; dominant trees > 100 years’ old

4.8 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH Other rare vegetation Vegetation communities Not present. communities ranked S1-S3 by the NHIC. Specialized Waterfowl nesting areas Upland habitats adjacent Not present. Habitat for to wetlands Wildlife Bald Eagle and Osprey Treed communities Not present. nesting, foraging and adjacent to rivers, lakes, perching habitat ponds, and other wetlands with stick nests of Bald Eagle or Osprey Woodland raptor nesting Stick nests in forested Not present. habitat ELC communities >30 ha with 10 ha of interior habitat Turtle nesting areas Exposed soil, including Not present. sand and gravel in open sunny areas in proximity to wetlands Seeps and springs Any forested area with Not present. groundwater at surface within the headwaters of a stream or river system Amphibian breeding Treed uplands with Not present. habitat (woodland and vernal pools, and wetland wetland) ecosites Woodland area sensitive Large mature forest Not present. breeding bird habitat stands, woodlots >30 ha with interior forest habitat (i.e., at least 200 m from edge) Habitat for Open country bird Large grasslands and Not present: The Species of breeding habitat fields (>30 ha) with two or meadow habitat within Conservation more of the following the Site Investigation Concern species; Upland Area is not large enough Sandpiper, Grasshopper to provide candidate Sparrow, Vesper SWH for open country Sparrow, Northern breeding birds. Harrier, Savannah Sparrow OR with nesting Short-eared Owls Shrub/early successional Large shrub and thicket Not present: The Site bird breeding habitat habitats (>10 ha) with: Investigation Area does not contain the candidate

4.9 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH • At least one Brown habitat types to support Thrasher or Clay- SWH for shrub/early colored Sparrow successional breeding breeding, OR birds. • At least two of Field Sparrow, Black-billed Cuckoo, Eastern Towhee and Willow Flycatcher; or • nesting Yellow- breasted Chat or Golden-winged Warbler Marsh bird breeding Wetlands with shallow Not present: The Site habitat water with emergent Investigation Area does aquatic vegetation with not contain the candidate American Bittern, Virginia habitat types to support Rail, Sora, Common SWH for marsh breeding Moorhen, American Coot, birds. Pied-billed Grebe, Marsh Wren, Sedge Wren, Common Loon, Sandhill Crane, Green Heron, Trumpeter Swan, Black Tern, Yellow Rail Terrestrial Crayfish Wet meadows and edges Not present: The Site of shallow marshes with Investigation Area does burrows or chimneys not contain the candidate habitat types to support SWH for terrestrial crayfish. Special Concern and An assessment of habitat Potential suitable provincially rare (S1-S3) for special concern and habitat for Monarch wildlife provincially rare wildlife is was identified in the included in Appendix F Site Investigation Area. Animal Amphibian movement Associated with Not present: No potential Movement corridors confirmed amphibian candidate SWH was Corridors breeding habitat identified in the Site Investigation Area; therefore amphibian movement corridors are absent. Deer movement corridors Associated with Not present: No deer confirmed deer wintering wintering habitat was habitat identified by the MNRF;

4.10 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

Habitat Type Assessment of Habitat Category Habitat Description (MNRF 2015) Candidate SWH therefore, there is no candidate habitat for deer movement corridors in the Site Investigation Area.

4.2.4.1 Seasonal Concentration Areas

Seasonal concentration areas are those sites where large numbers of a species congregate at one time of the year, or where several species congregate. Field investigations identified two candidate bat maternity trees in the Site Investigation Area; however, these trees were not located in a wooded community and do not qualify as significant wildlife habitat. Potential habitat for bat maternity colonies was therefore not carried forward to the impact assessment.

4.2.4.2 Rare or Specialized Habitat

Rare or specialized habitats are two separate components of SWH. Rare habitats are those with vegetation communities that are considered rare in the province. It is assumed that these habitats are at risk and that they are also likely to support additional wildlife species that are considered significant. There were no rare vegetation communities identified in the Site Investigation Area.

Specialized habitats are microhabitats that are critical to some wildlife species. The SWHTG (MNR 2000) identifies a number of habitats that could be considered specialized habitats, such as habitat for area sensitive species, forests providing a high diversity of habitats, amphibian woodland breeding ponds, turtle nesting habitat, highly diverse sites, seeps, and springs. There were no specialized habitats identified in the Site Investigation Area.

4.2.4.3 Habitat for Species of Conservation Concern

Habitat for species of conservation concern includes habitat for those species that are not covered under the Endangered Species Act 2007 including species ranked as special concern and provincially ranked as S1-S3. Data from the background review and field surveys were used to assess the potential for habitat of species of conservation concern to occur within the Site Investigation Area. A habitat assessment completed in Appendix F identified suitable habitat for Monarch in the Site Investigation Area. Potential habitat for Monarch was therefore carried forward to the impact assessment.

4.11 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

4.2.4.4 Animal Movement Corridors

Migration corridors are areas that are traditionally used by wildlife to move to one habitat from another. This is usually in response to different seasonal habitat requirements. There is one type of animal movement corridor in Ecoregion 7E: amphibian movement corridors. This corridor is identified after amphibian breeding habitat (woodlands) has been confirmed. Amphibian breeding habitat can be identified by conducting amphibian surveys to target potential breeding features. There was no suitable amphibian breeding habitat identified in the Site Investigation Area; therefore, amphibian movement corridors are not expected to be present.

4.2.5 Incidental Wildlife

No incidental wildlife observations were recorded during the field investigations, however, common species that are tolerant of urban conditions are expected to occur throughout the Site Investigation Area.

4.2.6 Aquatic Habitats

There is a stormwater management (SWM) pond adjacent to the Project Footprint that may support fish and water-dependent reptiles and amphibians. Despite the potential presence of fish, SWM ponds are not regulated under the federal Fisheries Act. The SWM pond discharges stormwater to Massey Creek to the north (via buried infrastructure).

There are no surface water features that support fish and fish habitat directly affected by the Project; therefore, an aquatic habitat assessment was not conducted.

4.3 Natural Heritage Features Summary

The following natural heritage features were identified within the Site Investigation Area and will be carried forward to the Impact Assessment in Section 5.0:

• Vegetation:

− Naturalized vegetation located in ELC vegetation communities identified in Figure 4, Appendix A.

− Planted/ornamental trees and shrubs on city and private lands

• Bird Nesting Habitat:

− Migratory Bird Nesting Habitat in the Site Investigation Area

4.12 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Existing Conditions July 31, 2020

• Species at Risk

− Potential Barn Swallow habitat in bridge at St. Clair Avenue East

− Potential SAR Bat habitat at Scarborough GO Station

• Species of Conservation Concern:

− Monarch habitat in the meadow communities

4.13 This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

5.0 Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations

5.1 Vegetation

Direct loss of vegetation will occur where the Project Footprint overlays small natural areas. This includes landscape trees along the roadside where vegetation removal is required to facilitate construction, including temporary work areas. The Project Footprint overlaps with natural ELC vegetation communities as follows:

*Area Overlapping the Area Outside of the Total Area of ELC ELC Community Conceptual Project Footprint to Community Project Footprint (ha) be Retained (ha) ME 4.87 2.40 2.48 ME/FODM11 0.29 0.29 0 WOD 2.58 0.47 2.58 *Permanent area of vegetation loss will not be known until detailed design has been completed.

Permanent loss of vegetation will generally be restricted to areas along the existing rail and road right-of-ways (ROW), and no additional habitat fragmentation is anticipated. These areas are considered to be minimal and will have a limited effect on natural features. Clearing of work areas may also result in short-term disturbance, but no permanent loss or degradation of natural terrestrial habitat is anticipated. Standard mitigation measures are available to reduce the extent of permanent impacts, protect vegetation during construction, and revegetate temporary work areas post-disturbance. Recommendations are provided in Table 5.1 in Section 5.4.

5.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

5.2 Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat

Potential impacts on wildlife and wildlife habitat from construction include direct mortality from construction vehicles, habitat destruction through vegetation removal, habitat degradation through spills, and sensory disturbance of wildlife during construction. However, the urban landscape precludes an abundance of wildlife and/or wildlife habitat. Limited habitat for wildlife present in the Site Investigation Area includes hedgerows and landscape trees along urban street fronts and small culturally influenced vegetated parcels. A habitat suitability assessment for significant species is provided in Appendix F, additional details are discussed below.

The Project Footprint overlaps with suitable habitat for Monarch (special concern) in the meadow (ME) communities that is a candidate significant wildlife habitat (SWH). Removal and temporary disturbance to meadow habitat is not expected to have a significant impact on this species since there was no milkweed (the larval host plant for Monarch) recorded in the Site Investigation Area. Preconstruction surveys should be undertaken to ensure milkweed patches have not become established within the construction footprint.

Barn Swallow was not recorded in the Site Investigation Area. There are two existing bridges associated within the Site Investigation Area at St. Clair Avenue East and Midland Avenue. A new span is required at St. Clair Avenue East and will be located immediately south of the existing bridge. Although no construction will occur at the Midland Avenue bridge, construction activities will be ongoing within the vicinity. Confirmatory surveys for Barn Swallow nests at these bridges should be conducted during the active nesting period (June – early July) if construction activities have the potential to disturb these structures, as determined during detailed design.

Based on the assessment of potential bat maternity habitat trees on May 3, 2019 and July 11, 2019, no bat maternity roosts were observed in the Site Investigation Area. If other structures such as the Scarborough GO Station are confirmed for demolition, additional bat surveys should be conducted as it has potential to provide bat habitat.

There is potential for construction to disturb or destroy nests of migratory birds, particularly during vegetation clearing and structural removal. Timing restrictions for vegetation clearing are recommended to protect species during construction. As described in Table 5.1 in Section 5.4, the Primary Nesting Period for migratory birds within the Site Investigation Area is March 30 through August 31.

5.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Other slow-moving and ground-dwelling wildlife could be encountered in work areas during construction, including reptiles (snakes and turtles) and amphibians. General wildlife mitigation measures are recommended to reduce the potential for harm to these animals.

Recommendations to avoid or reduce impacts on wildlife are provided in Table 5.1 in Section 5.4. Recommendations related to habitat removal or disturbance are consistent with the measures outlined for vegetation also outlined in Table 5.1.

5.3 Aquatic Resources

The Project Footprint outlined for the location does not affect fish or fish habitat within the Site Investigation Area. Massey Creek is the nearest natural surface water feature; however, it is outside of the area of potential influence. A SWM Pond occurs outside of the Project Footprint, but within the Site Investigation Area. There are no plans for infrastructure or construction activities within the functional SWM Pond area, and no direct effects to the SWM Pond are anticipated. Indirect impacts could include sedimentation of the pond during adjacent construction activities, or potential contamination of the pond from accidental spills.

No direct loss of fish habitat will occur within the Project Footprint. Indirect impacts to fish and fish habitat (e.g., sediment transport) as a result of Project activities, are not anticipated given the distance between the Project Footprint and potential fish habitat. Fish and wildlife that may occur in the SWM Pond can be protected by exercising due diligence during construction activities and implementing standard sediment and spill mitigation.

5.4 Mitigation Recommendations

Vegetation and wildlife mitigation and protective measures during construction and operation are summarized in Table 5.1.

5.3 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Table 5.1: Summary of Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Monitoring

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects Vegetation  Tree/Vegetation  An Arborist Report will be prepared  On site inspection will be undertaken to Removal and removal, injury and which meets regulatory requirements confirm the implementation of the mitigation Compensation protection and is completed by an I.S.A. Certified measures and identify corrective actions if Plans Arborist. The report will also be required. Corrective actions may include completed with regard to the Metrolinx additional site maintenance and alteration of Vegetation Guideline (2020), the activities to minimize impacts. Ontario Forestry Act R.S.O. 1990, the  The success of vegetation compensation Endangered Species Act, and other activities will be monitored in accordance regulations, municipal by-laws and best with Metrolinx’s Vegetation Guideline (2020). management practices as applicable. The approach to compensation monitoring  The Arborist Report will include, but not will be determined by property ownership, be limited to the individual identification applicable governing bylaws/regulations and of all trees within the Project Study Area location with respect to ecological including those that require removal or functioning. preservation, or trees that may be  Monitoring requirements will be undertaken injured as a result of the Project. Trees in accordance with conditions of permits and to be identified within the Project Study approvals. Area will include those on Metrolinx  Monitoring and management of property, trees on public and private trees/vegetation within the rail corridor right- lands, and boundary trees. Municipal of-way will be undertaken in accordance with by-laws will dictate the minimum the IVM Program. Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) which requires inventory and additional requirements for tree inventories and tree protection plans. The Arborist Report will include all information needed to establish compensation ratios and tree end use (including identification of high value trees) as per the Metrolinx Vegetation Guideline (2020).

5.4 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects  If a tree requires removal or injury, compensation and permitting/approvals (as required) will be undertaken in accordance with Metrolinx’s Vegetation Guideline (2020). Adhere to all applicable bylaws and regulations for tree removals outside of Metrolinx properties.  Pruning of branches will be conducted through the implementation of proper arboricultural techniques.  Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) fencing will be established to protect and prevent tree injuries in accordance with local by- law requirements.  Prior to the undertaking of tree removals, a Tree Removal Strategy, building upon the considerations and elements set out in the Metrolinx Vegetation Guideline (2020), will be developed and implemented in adherence with best practices, standards and regulations on safety, environmental and wildlife protections.  Compensation for tree removals will be undertaken in accordance with provisions outlined in the Metrolinx Vegetation Guideline (2020). Adhere to all applicable bylaws and regulations for tree removals outside of Metrolinx properties. The compensation plan will be to the approval and satisfaction of Urban Forestry.

5.5 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects  Vegetation removals will also consider and mitigate potential impacts to sensitive species, e.g., migratory birds and Species at Risk (SAR), and features, e.g., Designated Natural Areas and Significant Wildlife Habitat.  A permit is required prior to the commencement of work for the Injury or removal of trees regulated by the City of Toronto's Tree Protection By-laws; with the exception of the Parks By-law, where the injury and removal of park trees require the approval of Urban Forestry and not a permit.  Permits and compensation within Metrolinx owned lands will abide by the Metrolinx Vegetation Guideline (2020) and approvals. Integrated  Footprint Impacts and  An IVM Plan will be developed and  The presence, density, and location of Vegetation potential for the implemented that is in adherence with compatible and incompatible species will be Management establishment of the Metrolinx Vegetation Guideline monitored as per the frequency and (IVM) invasive species and (2020) and the IVM Program. The methodology established in the Bi-Annual other incompatible Guideline’s selection criteria will be Monitoring Program within the Metrolinx species. used to assess the vegetation present Vegetation Guideline (2020). The Bi-Annual as compatible or incompatible, and Monitoring Program is made up of pre- manage it, if necessary, in a way which treatment and post-treatment monitoring meets safety needs in a timely manner, events that will be carried out via field, aerial, is sensitive to environmental conditions, and high-rail vehicle or train surveys and maximizes cost-effectiveness. conducted by qualified specialists. Tree Removal  Potential for the  Removal of ash trees, or portions of ash  On site inspection will be undertaken to Strategy spread of emerald trees, will be carried out in compliance confirm the implementation of the mitigation ash borer, Agrilus with the Canada Food and Inspection measures and identify corrective actions if

5.6 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects planipennis Agency Directive D-03-08: required. Corrective actions may include (Fairmaire) Phytosanitary Requirements to Prevent additional site maintenance and alteration of associated with the Introduction into and Spread within activities to minimize impacts. removal, handing and Canada of the Emerald Ash Borer,  Ensure precautions are being taken to transport of ash trees. Agrilus planipennis (Fairmaire) (2014), minimize the spread of invasive species by as amended from time to time. To cleaning equipment prior to moving sites. comply with this Directive, all Ash trees requiring removal, including any wood, bark or chips, will be restricted from being transported outside of the emerald ash borer regulated areas of Canada. Wildlife  Disturbance,  Prior to construction, investigation of the  On-site inspection will be undertaken to (General) displacement or Project Footprint for wildlife and wildlife confirm the implementation of the mitigation mortality of wildlife habitat that may have established measures and identify corrective actions if following the completion of previous required. Corrective actions may include surveys will be undertaken, as additional site maintenance and alteration of appropriate. activities to minimize effects.  If wildlife is encountered, measures will  Regular inspections under and around be implemented to avoid destruction, equipment and vehicles left overnight will be injury, or interference with the species, conducted. its residence and/or its habitat. For example, construction activities will cease or be reduced and wildlife will be encouraged to move offsite and away from the construction area on its own. A qualified biologist will be contacted to define appropriate buffer. In many cases a minimum 30 metre operating distance will be established from wildlife.

5.7 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects  Wildlife exclusion fencing will be installed around the construction area to protect wildlife and mitigate the ingress of wildlife onto the site as recommended by a qualified biologist.  Construction sites will be regularly maintained; litter and debris will be removed as soon as possible to deter the presence of wildlife on-site.  Construction activities and facility design will minimize off-site noise, vibration and light disturbance to nearby wildlife, to the extent possible.  Visual inspections will be completed of and around equipment and vehicles left overnight to avoid effects to wildlife. Migratory  Disturbance or  All works must comply with the  Regular monitoring will be undertaken to Breeding Birds destruction of Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA), confirm that activities do not encroach into and Nests migratory bird nests. including timing windows for the nesting nesting areas or disturb active nesting sites. period (April 1st to August 31st in Ontario).  If activities are proposed to occur during the general nesting period, a breeding bird and nest survey will be undertaken prior to required activities. Nest searches by an experienced searcher are required and will be completed by a qualified biologist no more than 48 hours prior to vegetation removal.  If a nest of a migratory bird is found outside of this nesting period (including

5.8 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects a ground nest) it still receives protection. Barn Swallow  Habitat loss,  Field surveys will be undertaken prior to  On-site inspection will be undertaken to disturbance and/or construction to confirm the number of confirm the implementation of the mitigation mortality to Barn nests present at the known locations measures and identify corrective actions if Swallow (detailed and whether the nests remain active. required. Corrective actions may include design will determine  Where loss or disturbance cannot be additional site maintenance and alteration of if construction avoided (e.g., due to work on bridges or activities to minimize impacts. Additional activities have the banks), all requirements under the ESA monitoring measures will be developed with potential to disturb will be met, including any registration, the MECP, if required. potential nesting compensation, replacement structures structures) and/or permitting requirements.  If construction activities are scheduled during the nesting season for Barn Swallow (April 1st to August 31st), a nest search will be undertaken to confirm that no Barn Swallow are nesting on structures or banks that may be affected by construction activities on or near these areas. If possible, the area will be netted prior to nesting season to dissuade use of these areas for nesting.

5.9 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects SAR Bats  Habitat loss,  Disturbance to bat roosting habitat will  On-site inspection will be undertaken to disturbance and/or be avoided during the bat roosting confirm the implementation of the mitigation mortality to SAR Bats period of March 31st to September 1st, measures and identify corrective actions if (Scarborough GO with emphasis on avoiding potential required. Corrective actions may include Station building to be effects during the maternity period of additional site maintenance and alteration of confirmed during June 1st to July 31st and in accordance activities to minimize impacts. Additional detailed design). with MECP requirements. monitoring measures will be developed with  Additional monitoring, mitigation and the MECP, if required. compensation for removal of suitable cavity trees may be required based on the results of additional surveys and consultation with the MECP. Monarch Habitat  Disturbance or  Opportunities to plant milkweed or  Monitoring replanting areas for one year after destruction of forage vegetation outside of the ROW seeding and reseed if area has not Migratory Butterfly will be undertaken, where possible, and reestablished. Stopover Areas used in accordance with the Metrolinx  Monitoring will follow the Vegetation by Monarch Vegetation Guideline (2020). Guideline (2020). Butterflies (low  Planting of milkweed and forage probability, no vegetation within the ROW should be milkweed observed). avoided to prevent attracting butterflies to an area of elevated risk of mortality due to collisions with trains.  Where possible, the application of herbicides and mowing of areas containing milkweed and other wildflowers where Monarch Butterflies are present should be delayed until after the fall migration period.

5.10 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

Description of Potential Feature Mitigation Measures Monitoring Activities Effects SWM Pond  Sedimentation of the  Construction activities will maintain the  On site inspection will be undertaken to SWM Pond from Project Footprint established during the confirm the implementation of the mitigation construction; risk of design phase to reduce potential measures and identify corrective actions if contamination of negative impacts to the SWM Pond. required. Corrective actions may include SWM Pond as a  Banks disturbed by construction alteration of activities to reduce impacts and result of spills. activities associated with the Project will enhance mitigation measures. be immediately stabilized to reduce the risk of erosion and/or sedimentation, preferably through re-vegetation with native species suitable for the site.

5.11 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

5.5 Standard Measures for Sedimentation and Spills

Mitigation measures should be implemented to prevent sediment and spills from entering natural features. The primary principles associated with these protection measures are to: reduce the duration of soil exposure; retain existing vegetation, where feasible; encourage revegetation; divert runoff away from exposed soils; keep runoff velocities low; and to trap sediment and spills as close to the source as possible. An ESC Plan for the work site will be prepared and implemented during construction. The plan will include the following mitigation measures:

• Silt fencing and/or barriers will be used along all construction areas adjacent to any natural areas. These measures will be maintained and enhanced as needed until construction is complete and the site has been permanently stabilized. No equipment will be permitted to enter any natural areas beyond the protection fencing.

• To minimize erosion and sedimentation, the area of soil disturbance will be limited to within the established Project Footprint.

• If any clearing/removal of riparian vegetation and/or manicured grass is required, it will be kept to a minimum. When practicable, vegetation will be pruned or topped instead of grubbing/uprooting, if required.

• Existing vegetation will be retained within the study area, to the extent practicable. Vegetation removal will be kept to a minimum, limited to within the Project Footprint and use existing trails, roads or cut lines wherever possible to avoid disturbance to vegetation and prevent soil compaction and changes to topography and drainage.

• Construction activities near water will be scheduled in order to avoid wet, windy and rainy periods that may increase erosion and sedimentation, when possible.

• Where/when feasible, vegetation removal and grading activities will be scheduled to avoid times of high runoff volumes (spring and fall) and storm events to minimize the potential increase in erosion and/or sedimentation.

• Stockpiled material will be covered and located away from the edge of the Project Footprint to prevent sediment from entering adjacent areas.

• Measures will be implemented for managing water flowing onto the site, as well as water being pumped/diverted from the site such that sediment is filtered out prior to the water entering a waterbody. For example, pumping/diversion of water to a vegetated area, construction of a settling basin or other filtration system.

5.12 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

• Measures will be implemented for containing and stabilizing waste material (e.g., dredging spoils, construction waste and materials, uprooted or cut aquatic plants, and accumulated debris) above the high water mark of nearby waterbodies to prevent re-entry.

• In addition to any specified requirements, additional silt fence should be available on site, prior to grading operations, to provide a contingency supply in the event of an emergency.

• All sediment and erosion controls should be monitored regularly and properly maintained, as required. Controls should be removed only after the soils of the construction area have been stabilized and adequately protected or until cover is re-established.

• The shoreline and/or banks disturbed by any activity associated with construction will be immediately stabilized to prevent erosion and/or sedimentation.

• This plan will consider the TRCA’s Erosion and Sediment Control Guide for Urban Construction (TRCA 2019) and OPSS 805 (Erosion and Sediment Control Measures) (MTO 2015).

• All exposed soil areas will be stabilized and revegetated promptly upon completion of construction activities. Disturbed areas where slopes are ≥10% should be stabilized with the installation of erosion control blankets or equivalent.

• If disturbances or impacts to on-site or off-site areas are observed, activities will be altered to minimize these impacts, the mitigation measures being implemented will be altered and/or enhanced, and the area(s) will be restored as soon as possible.

• The construction activities should be monitored by an onsite Environmental Specialist to verify that the contract constraints and provisions are adhered to and to recommend remedial action in the event of an emergency or unforeseen situation. Inspections may be bi-weekly, as well as before and after any significant runoff event (i.e., thaw or storm).

• The duration that disturbed soils are exposed should be limited by requiring that the disturbed soils are restored with vegetation, erosion control blanket or rock protection promptly.

• Refer to the “Vegetation Communities and Vascular Flora” environmental component for mitigation measures and the associated monitoring, specifically for re-vegetating of disturbed areas.

5.13 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Impact Assessment and Mitigation Recommendations July 31, 2020

A Construction Emergency Response and Communications Plan will be developed and implemented during construction. The plan will include the following mitigation measures:

 A spill response team member will be appointed as a point of contact in the case of an accident or spill to ensure the proper and timely implementation of site response controls.

 Absorbent materials and equipment required to control and clean up spills of deleterious substances will be available onsite. Spills and leaks of deleterious substances will be immediately contained and cleaned up in accordance cleaned up in accordance with the Construction Emergency Response and Communications Plan and with regulatory requirements. Incidents will be reported immediately to the Ontario Spills Action Centre at 1-800-268-6060.

 The contractor should be reminded of the requirement to report contaminant spills as per the Environmental Protection Act. All toxic chemicals and any contaminants must be properly managed. Any excess impacted soils generated shall be disposed of offsite at an approved disposal site under appropriate MECP regulations.

 A Hazardous Materials and Fuel Handling Plan will be developed prior to construction to guide the safe handling and storage of fuels and other hazardous materials during the construction process.

 The transportation, storage and handling of fuel shall be in accordance with the Technical Standards and Safety Act, 2000.

 Machinery and equipment will be routinely inspected for leaks during construction and preventative maintenance will be undertaken, as required, to ensure that it is functioning properly. If repairs are not feasible, equipment will be removed from site immediately.

 Machinery will be washed, refueled and serviced property at a minimum of 30 metres away from any wetland or waterbody.

 Topsoil and subsoil will not be mixed or contaminated with deleterious material. Natural or benign synthetic polymer used for the purposes of dewatering are not considered deleterious and may mix with topsoil and subsoil material.

5.14 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Permits and Approvals July 31, 2020

6.0 Permits and Approvals

6.1 Federal

No federally protected SAR, or habitat for federally protected SAR are present in the Site Investigation Area. No in-water works affecting fish and fish habitat are required. As such, no Federal permits and approvals are required.

6.2 Provincial

Consultation with the MECP is recommended to address suitable habitat for SAR protected by the ESA 2007 including potential for bat and barn swallow if additional survey confirm species presences.

6.2.1 Conservation Authority Permits

TRCA notification and review is applicable to areas that are regulated by O. Reg. 166/06 (Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses) of the CAA 1990. Regulated areas are absent from the Project Footprint.

6.3 Municipal

A permit is required for the injury or removal of trees regulated by the City of Toronto's Tree Protection By-laws; with the exception of the Parks By-law, where the injury and removal of park trees require the approval of Urban Forestry and not a permit.

6.1 This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Conclusions July 31, 2020

7.0 Conclusions

7.1 Designated Natural Areas

There are no designated natural areas within the Project Footprint, or within the Site Investigation Area. Therefore, no impacts on designated natural areas are anticipated.

7.2 Vegetation

Direct loss of terrestrial features will occur where the Project Footprint overlays vegetated areas, including temporary work areas. Permanent loss to natural features is generally restricted to areas along the existing rail and road ROWs, and no additional habitat fragmentation is anticipated. These areas are considered to be minimal and will not have a significant effect on natural features. Compensation for permanent loss will follow Metrolinx’s Vegetation Guideline (2020).

Work areas will result in short-term disturbance, and no permanent loss or degradation of terrestrial habitat is anticipated if recommended mitigation measures are applied, including revegetation where possible. Permanent loss and construction phase disturbance can be offset and mitigated through standard environmental protection measures for vegetation protection discussed in this report.

7.3 Wildlife

Protection of natural areas, including one candidate SWH, is provided by standard environmental protection measures discussed in this report. Protection of nesting birds, including potential SAR is provided by implementing the timing restrictions for vegetation/structure removal identified for MBCA 1994 protected species.

Pre-construction surveys for Monarch and milkweed are recommended to confirm the continued absence of the species and plant in the meadow areas. Should the species be encountered, revegetation initiatives should include seeding or transplanting of milkweed.

Generally, the Site Investigation Area has been observed not to provide preferred bat and barn swallow habitat, however undertaken supplementary survey at the St. Clair Avenue East bridge during detailed and the Scarborough GO Station scheduled for removal.

7.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Conclusions July 31, 2020

Generally, sediment and construction fencing will prevent wildlife access to the work area; however, there is some potential that individuals may enter the limits of construction. Regular visual searches for reptiles (turtles and snakes) and small mammals are recommended to address potential interaction with wildlife. A thorough visual search for wildlife within all active work areas should be conducted by construction contractors before work commences each day.

7.4 Aquatic Habitat

The Project Footprint outlined for the location does not affect any natural surface water features within the Site Investigation Area. Potential indirect sediment impacts to fish and fish habitat are not anticipated given the distance to natural surface water features. Implementation of standard sediment and spill mitigation measures adjacent to the SWM Pond will protect fish and wildlife that may occur in the pond.

7.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

References July 31, 2020

8.0 References

Brouillet L, Desmet P, Coursol F, Meades SJ, Favreau M, Anions M, Bélisle P, Gendreau C, Shorthouse D, and contributors (2010+). Database of Vascular Plants of Canada (VASCAN). Online at http://data.canadensys.net/vascan and http://www.gbif.org/dataset/3f8a1297-3259-4700-91fc-acc4170b27ce, released on 2010-12-10. Version [xx]. GBIF key: 3f8a1297-3259-4700-91fc- acc4170b27ce. Data paper ID: doi: http://doi.org/10.3897/phytokeys.25.3100 [accessed on April 18, 2016]

Cadman, M. D., D.A. Sutherland, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage, A.R. Couturier. 2007. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario, 2001-2005. (eds) Bird Studies Canada, Environment Conada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto, xxii + 318pp

(DFO) Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2018. Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Aquatics Species at Risk Map. Accessed Online: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/sara-lep/map-carte/index-eng.html

Dobbyn, J. 1994. Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists. eBird Canada. 2018. eBird Canada Species Maps. Accessed Online: https://ebird.org/canada/map

Environment Canada. 2016. North American Breeding Bird Survey Instructions and Safety Guidelines. Last updated April 8, 2016. https://ec.gc.ca/reom- mbs/default.asp?lang=En&n=5EE0ADBA-1

[ECCC] Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2017. General nesting periods of migratory birds in Canada. Available online: http://www.ec.gc.ca/paom- itmb/default.asp?lang=En&n=4F39A78F-1#_tab01

Metrolinx. 2020. Vegetation Guideline.

Michigan Flora Online. A.A. Reznicek, E.G. Voss, and B.S. Walters. February 2011. University of Michigan. http://michiganflora.net/acknowledgments.aspx

Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Provincial Policy Statement. Available online at: https://files.ontario.ca/mmah-provincial-policy-statement-2020-accessible- final-en-2020-02-14.pdf

8.1 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

References July 31, 2020

(MNRF) Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. 2018. Land Information Ontario (LIO) Natural Heritage Areas Make-a-Map Website. Available online at https://www.ontario.ca/page/land-information-ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2018.

Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF). 2015. Ontario Vascular Plants. Online at from https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-natural-heritage-information. Accessed on May 3, 2016.

Ministry of Natural Resources. March 2010. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005. Second Edition. Toronto: Queen’s Printer for Ontario. 248 pp.

Morrsion Hershfield Ltd. 2020. Vegetation Guideline - Final Draft. Markham: Metrolinx, 2020.

Newmaster, S.G., A. Lehela, P.W.C Uhlig, S. McMurray and M.J. Oldham. 1998. Ontario plant list. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Forest Research Institute, Sault Ste. Marie, ON, Forest Research Information Paper No. 123. 550 pp. + appendices.

Oldham, M.J., W.D. Bakowsky and D.A. Sutherland. 1995. Floristic quality assessment for southern Ontario. MNR, Natural Heritage Information Centre, Peterborough. 68 pp.

Ontario Nature. 2018. Reptiles and Amphibians of Ontario. Accessed Online. https://ontarionature.org/programs/citizen-science/reptile-amphibian-atlas/

Stantec. 2017. Natural Environment Technical Report – Danforth Road. Stouffville Corridor Grade Separation Program.

Toronto Entomologists’ Association. 2018. Ontario Butterfly Atlas. Accessed Online: http://www.ontarioinsects.org/atlas_online.htm

(TRCA) Toronto Region Conservation Authority. 2019. Erosion and Sediment Control Guide for Urban Construction. Prepared under the Sustainable Technologies Evaluation Program (STEP).

Updated ELC Catalogue. 2008. http://conservationontario.ca/events_workshops/ELC_portal/

VASCAN. 2016. Canadensys [Online database]. http://data.canadensys.net/vascan/search

8.2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix A Figures

This page intentionally left blank

638000 640000 642000 644000

L e

v t i LOT 31, CON 1, i

l e r C d t

i LOT 30, CON 1, P LOT 22, CON D, e e iah

a r t tre r L m D e e a

n e e S t

LOT 32, LOT 28, a a B tr lk n LOT 16, CON D,

SCARBOROUGH v e S e

v F S a d e i n SCARBOROUGH e l K e n w r

D iv a o o r r SCARBOROUGH o

e r L n C s a lm a s e

e u m l N e

r l o v A i l e e

e D rg e n l n r N v CON D, A J SCARBOROUGH

r CON 1, D e r

y a a u T e L i i

M a s s m D v e u y d m r D o P ik c e B y l c m e M s a b

w t o r P r n e R D LOT 17, s o SCARBOROUGH B n e SCARBOROUGH o y a A cos a u i E Dr r u a T r e r v a l a e e r s ive n l o o u s M a d R n t u b z e B n r c e r e e l v n o v h n A c a e CON D, A u y r o h gar Court D r F G w k t u e d e le e a o LOT 33, CON 1, nc m e B a s e C LOT 16, l o k r e C i a r e o i in e a R e i w t P d m e d l SCARBOROUGH v a R z a e o y h l L a r a o S e t e d R B e o c S SCARBOROUGH n oa e g ld r u N r CON C, H ie C C a R s i rf l o o t or b e Th e o D g e d i d r e c D c u r P e r b v r e g e c n k a l e SCARBOROUGH e r M o e t s iv e LOT 18, CON D, $ $ c i t h la v n a e r LOT 34, CON 1, P n l e r v t y t e e tr c D a U e nt u S d or e n r a rive c A ve h le e e SCARBOROUGH M d s tw d D n oa re A g oodD A r n h ethu

SCARBOROUGH R Ca v d t B n Legend

d e e i r t

n c

g e a s y e d i l iv K e id l ¯

tr P l H S n n a t av e m i n d a LOT 19, CON li D ol s r t n B r i

F r LOT 29, n e e n e o n u S e A S e F w n i w tre tr g ha v K S h et S n s o a e e t

r r e e ( m m u e L M ou ac n D, SCARBOROUGH Site Investigation Area iv e i e e ns A r o e r t A v CON D, u ta bu e t G l y y e i n S ry le v r T e r e C y e ou C r M a D x v a n e r D A re r C o v C a t G n R s u r s cen u o r u a

e a a o d r SCARBOROUGH e C i b m r T riv ag r

u r l D e LOT 21, CON D, a i r

R o e L a l S an e itad e o r r d e F T C lu e v Project Footprint D B n e s o P e D ri u K r u R s n C l e n c e c a a LOT 27, CON D, e SCARBOROUGH d r D v i v e a e e c A e A o v i d r d c n v C r R ri v a o a t D c e o n o e e lg da a i n w g h E e R n n v n e i r K c re e n l

he t s r SCARBOROUGH rt t l a r i ou S o G k t a S k t l C Major Road i ero e e t l d o l N ll L e a r p f e d S a o o n u d o L a a a W r LOT 24, CON D, r d o r w d T R c C y S t d d a D o o M

a g M r o o r h n R r a e A W i R r d u A o l a c B e y n SCARBOROUGH s i e W u LOT 30, CON D, le i e B u Minor Road k o D v v v LOT 23, CON LOT 21, CON C, r

o r n n

a C R f A t v k

e e le i

e T r h e m h e M e

D u n t e e iv h R y e

t o t r t i S e n u d

x e SCARBOROUGH u R e n D n a l v o b n a r n r n t b a d b y D, SCARBOROUGH SCARBOROUGH a e o e

f d C e e n d a m rb

e i e ro m c a o c v e e D g

v v L c B r h s D t s d v

r f h s o e n

s A e r o LOT 17, a Watercourse

o p a e a e

r tan e

d A o t W e l r r

v S r C e

o k i v R

e s t i n t

r r LOT 31, z n ft r G B v i i

M p r e v l e

o o r d d o C B v t r ne r e o

o t M R D d e

i D u a a r R e

C a c L CON C, n o a u

LOT 23, CON C, D

e o r n n v a P

o D w t e e ls O e

n v l a e l y n o r o ri ri l l LOT

u CON D, z S r F v r u o o

A D o a d l u e r e a i e a o s o d B s a

a v N r a B Waterbody

i n v e m SCARBOROUGH

l d w SCARBOROUGH l

v y o e g v r t c e L v d n r t O

p i r

t A e r e 19, CON C, o n e SCARBOROUGH m a l v e

v i e e i y D n D le r i o e k d F D w l

a e A n i D r c e

g u e g r i R h e u r n r m iv S n s v

r ve v u i r o B c M o i i

o v SCARBOROUGH

d a D n r e A v i w d r

e e u r le o V r

0 d a n 0 r e Wooded Area x r r t LOT 25, d G o LOT 32, CON D, e ld r R a e d f n n o i a e B D 0 n 0

f in o ce t G ev r a C LOT 1, CON 5, o D H l a d e M u r s r u o G s l 0 e o o 0

r r B d l d

r e C a t o a i l

CON D, n A

4 d SCARBOROUGH t S t 4 e C h h P SCARBOROUGH iv t d o H e 4 Dr m n o a i 4 A ol ce K e L r f Municipal Boundary - Lower Tier 8 h s u u k 8 v o id e LOT 26, SCARBOROUGH n a h r e t 4 e M v t n c 4 e nu R r C W ve A e i h a

h e i k r ce M u e r v e

n c n d D y n e

r t A e a ci ry o e

A d o CON D, B v H

u n n n i tu c R w s e e ra n r n en A

l rt e e C c al e c e e b e o se t ni t Lot/Concession Boundary

r s B d e F o lo u g LOT 20, CON C, a e an SCARBOROUGH o D

r C L w C d n

D r a a d d M C o r e

r C A l R v r

e a e A i a e m l i a SCARBOROUGH v I

v o v n d n e A

o s o n R S ti R e o

m e Ty rt r

c n C ne u a n n d R o R M o LOT 27, CON C, n u C a

e v i a a m H s

s h u t o v v

n i h l o e

e a u e S a i o n y

e o t n R

l t t r R SCARBOROUGH

a m w n A a n LOT 24, CON C,

V i n v ue d e o LOT S a n t t e

d d w v l n

i o R y i e e a r a a e M y v u D

n o M n e A e n

R u e L e W d c R SCARBOROUGH v in e e g dy V o e o i n u A r Rid D 18, CON C, b n a o e ge n d t e i r t o a o u n r v t s o w i h t l l C v e s d a t e e l A rd a e e e va h n v A e g D e d n e SCARBOROUGH n l A l u i nsway C r u A A l n r ra d l l e Be S iv T o y i v llehav

e v v s A A en C B A is res e a t ll c

t e e v hy e

n e v w P LOT 33, CON D, ouleva i n n LOT 25, CON C, e B r e e g r n d r F B k u n

r u a A a t m n e a t e e k u

P m i l

a SCARBOROUGH v l SCARBOROUGH u r n j S a e

h W e ri S e c m

K e e n fa

a LOT 34, a e n n r y

a e S u o

r n u a B e P R m H r t v L f s K A e t CON D, d a n i a E t u e n v a a e n rd o B e ue ce rt e B v e i k n s u V i b n c n e n e o o e v r C r r R i P o

m A C i C y SCARBOROUGH n a i e t u d r e n v u g e n m D

A r o iv e e n e

t r e h e S e k e A i in D S v l

u gl e A e D g

v rn d l d A E l e r

v d fe e g R e c v i u i e e d y rf la v

e h o y d P a

o a o t e v n e i v a H r r e r i

n e a d v R b LOT 1, CON 5,

u i R n l d r

a k M

o r S a u m R W fe A d H n e l v a ic o o en o dge Road D e D u Le v e i a W e a t u C a O SCARBOROUGH C G k c l e a n ra e i d d d l w nu

i a h a C e d o

g e s o Av iv t M a o

t r e e M r rr m D A R t e o n u n u cF a M r

d en e e en al w i a c v v a s A B e o G A s S e M re n c A tt c o n c n o e c ff C ns n l i a rv u A a if v n o a d e LOT 22, CON C, w fe w C b i l r n LOT 35, CON D, l n e t g o D l h h t e o C n o B r w SCARBOROUGH iv t LOT 28, CON C, o d o e

SCARBOROUGH R t o e LOT 20, CON B,

L l c u R o i a L o a rr H

a e C l d T e a o SCARBOROUGH e A ie a e u r t v SCARBOROUGH b d a L h m i a

D r v e g o d i e o d n e C ive r v e k r h r r l D r d v d D a i i i n t a v A G e N o l s LOT 34, c r e u e e r B d P iv v r r A oa D r n e e e R D e a s l d e J i Roa v ry k g n e l e u t d

CON C, r d A n a m s in

e e c o ri t F H f o h LOT 31, x g V n t P S v u e a o f

u o Fo e e t l a s re n l e D

v e t i r R y

b ri e e i eS d n

w e v A

u D r e r e

SCARBOROUGH W

B r r

e y r n i u a o t t n m

e CON C, e t w i o e

m A v o A v

i a u a r a r m H n A

u S e a o o e

t R v R v

c S e v r d M e l n e LOT 21, CON B, n a e o e

e H h e in y n

SCARBOROUGH a

c r c t M d n

n n R

s a m R o t s

e t u L

u o

r r d A o i s A SCARBOROUGH r e B

a o C o e y o t i r e g

C s R a v m

k u a r v a t n

c l e d i o e

r o e

t n C

P s d

N ad

d n K o n o e

a m

F o a t t e R a t

a C o u k u y

h R R u a n le r a e l y v l e lo R n 0 630 1,260 le e

k u l D d A t a S e a o y e M n ee e

l n o tr w g r D k a m S c

City Of i e ar a E g n LOT 32, CON C, v l d r H lg n

r metres a O i

e a s i E S B G A s v K n s e e SCARBOROUGH t r d Toronto t r t v C i d n n a e a v 1:25,000 (At original document size of 11x17) Ro c Q e g R s i s e T d l n u r M u l s o m d LOT 29, C w e u

y a h e H o e o 0 a R 0

w a n e A e n k B n 0 d to 0

p t t l Valdane Drive e CON C, o c l v U e a t i

0 A 0

l u v n e

l ent o D e

resc n sa s h u C M r a

2 n 2 LOT 33, CON C, e ew C s ead A

n ve

i e m Notes H h r v A b l 4 SCARBOROUGH l B i u d 4 e

G d r v a

d

o A v

8 8 A e r i e k SCARBOROUGH e o A e o 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N

Edge Par v w u D i e r 4 n 4 M e s

e e K m e a n

nu iv Av v n B

e r r e t e r e d LOT 22, D n v i l e u 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and e

t i n e C t

rs t g e v e e n n d u hu en A R n e c

a c s t r t y

s d o a e t r u

L re v e e ls CON B, Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2019.

K e il s c o u R

C e S e H v e H

e C s i

s e o e e

a o l t a R r n LOT 3, CON r r s n r u c o e m r t C D C d

r a u r e k SCARBOROUGH s e a r n C b l C

e n h n Ba

t o e e S o t n o a d r

d e s

3 FROM THE w a en r t A N r

e o c h t t t t r

R s n s t r i i o re nt o S n

p e e o

n C n c o t f W i e o K o d x N r A e o w y fa n n u BAY, YORK ll r n H o d o i S e t t e o u

H a s o h v a Av

g a A c P e t E r e ie t p D F r lk A b e D

d u t B v i a h y e i e n h n W n

: n

r es ve e t l u e e n o u l y r e S u i C P A M e

n v c ir W n e a t g n

B a v le l e e A e ir e C u A h D la t n a t e e o 0 i C E S e a l n i r A v 12 r w n e 1 b o LOT 23, 7 l o t l l s u e - LOT 24, CON B, a o l f en v e Richmond Hill G e d y r d g h v 6 u t A n n n e e u e D e r t e 0 v LOT 30, CON B, h u A r c C o o R c n n CON B, Markham - y iv s d Blan SCARBOROUGH le e re n e e 0 e w u d u C o A a o ar n S v LOT 25, 2 Y e n e Y o r k R e g i o n a l v u SCARBOROUGH a A e n A A

0 B SCARBOROUGH Pickering

o S M L B a

d r d Ajax g r d 2 n ia t v n a a i T o i a o C a M u n i c i p a l i t y

: e CON B,

r a l e 48 A d h n

p t u v r u o d p r l t LOT 32, n a n m K a l o l i t o o R

e C o a l u e u s

n d e i r l

s l w

d r D e SCARBOROUGH i e e o v v e m

oa A A e v a g

CON B, r n C

l R S A r a a m K 404 v

S e P

e a i v v a d d e

v t v e v r i Vaughan i h a l r n r h t A r R a d e e o r e C d e v o

u e n e

F r N n i i SCARBOROUGH u r v 401 m e n n n i t e n R

r a o o l e SS e r

u u l a e n l o u k k u i e e q t c p r D S a u a h a r

f d G e e e A P t n G d r B k a LOT 1, CON o a r a a u L S t

in A D x t v 407

g l

r l s P o l r e c

e A v e V n 400 P p A e r

m G a s . LOT 35, CON C, r i v e n a r

3 FROM THE r l e v w v e r c

a e e n e

e iv i e n u o b f e f

r a e e f e r n iv f D u i

n r N n u b S r s i n e d a r o l SCARBOROUGH b T e D n T v r u u l io o A BAY, YORK e r t l

e L A le e u n r s d u e u r o C 427

u d a n

_ n r e e a B a S y a t v g e y l A

w h a e S C e e r d A i h N o t u R E M r 409 t v r A e e C i t y o f

S o u d t v s

_ n LOT 35, H M p g e e c n u e e e e T o r o n t o e n o r Lake Ontario

i e d r l t n t r y u va CON B, r t t a ule r LOT 33, e S t O n t a r i o o LOT 29, CON B, S e e k c L a Bo A l Toronto n e l o st t

e r v r e L r SCARBOROUGH

e t c d e n nu A CON B, e SCARBOROUGH e

_ le v P G ve a e n ri S e

1 P A v D R iv 403 y o t u S e i r 0 c e le d i n SCARBOROUGH J h g D

t a e o ig e g N n R a s m f i t W e e r f u C li

F u o A B a u o c e t t r Mississauga _ B e o v e e P v n h n e s t i r E e a lk i d e x t i o e n

d t s ng B c A e N n b h r E n v e u U

a M t ll e to v n

_ e

C o i h e n u o M

u e A

o l B ce v D s QEW

4 a l a i c n e a r s n e R e u r r n r e i h

0 e v A

u y A T e e n r l t 0 s l

d i n b A e D v g v r n v B r i i 1 a r e el n LOT 26, o e e v h s e e A LOT 28, CON B, 1 t r e v E l g et u n e e n e 0 E M r e c F A t C a t a t A n h lta v 5 r u u t o S i CON B, r d a r e n v R r 6 s SCARBOROUGH n e u e e n D e h O o 1 s e e L k e LOT 26,

\ t l e r o i i A a Project Location t t n ou ly w v n SCARBOROUGH 165011004 REVA h r A C i B u rvalley u C s v r a o i g e v t F u W u i e e s p e e D m CON B,

p e n

o e tr D A l e o Greater Toronto Prepared by BCC on 2020-06-10

e e n v e e S t u e v ue A d R

n ir a e y n u i R a A n e n w s l M n A v f

e u e i u A e e f SCARBOROUGH _ i e i Area Technical Review by CV on 2019-05-29 r e e l l P LOT 34, CON B, v n v

v e y o u F d c C a e d h o

a a ig n l

c c D H s i t n H r e

r e L e o u Terrace Independent Review by TC on 2019-05-29 e e v f a n r SCARBOROUGH t n r d St r u i e A e o l r h i v n e l u A n o v i o c nt

e n n h S t e e r C

B g e t Client/Project T n e r E u

n t a v

_ o e e 0 ve v o f ve 0

ri l A n A ri E c b n 0 D k 0

pman Avenue e ac n d i a D METROLINX

N h s a id a M u 0 h e g 0

C d ns A a D i

_ B v e

o t le

0 LOT 27, 0

a A r D r J h

P M v o s

4 LOT 1, CON r i 4 SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT: o u

S v e C a F

\ ve g 8 y e 8 i e o

s n n R r t i CON A, s 4 h 4

lp in D t n P e 2 FROM THE Do e u C r is t NATURAL ENVIRONMENT TECHNICAL REPORT s u v r i e e

u A e c nu e w u e V s M e v SCARBOROUGH g n A i e v o A e e

f BAY, YORK i

A w c k c iln i y n v _ e e v M

a d t ls t e r a n a T ylor Cr e H o A o

D M o r n e n p i v v n a ri u Figure No. L a e e D e

r e e S e y a iri n l d \ t P d LOT 30, W s a y c s P i r u f a V a P o rk t e A o m o r t r LOT 31, CON B, e k e d CON A, t c n v i t la a 1 e n s P LOT 29, A A e e A n y l a A SCARBOROUGH c sd v s v Tee v u SCARBOROUGH s v Title e e o e e e CON A, s e e c re ce n c r C n n n la e t u n P C \ e u u tte u u ke t s T e n e ar SCARBOROUGH e ve e P s d o A e r

c rt Location of Study Area x LOT 2, CON w po u

a e w h m n C l u e

\ N R r n e LOT 31, CON A, e s o

ad P e u k i 2 FROM THE e v en LOT 32, CON A, a g s A v \ A cent on on LOT 33, CON A, SCARBOROUGH L d BAY, YORK bi nt a l De SCARBOROUGH c A SCARBOROUGH _ s i

g 638000 640000 642000 644000 \ :

O Disclaimer: This figure has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited under the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. This page intentionally left blank 640000 641000 642000

ad d Ro a sels o ue e rus R ven riv B ay ly A rg D dw ave bI u r St ns o O Re n F v a T C i e l h h m w r rd a t u a o v L as s le r W R u i u E o t o

e h B t

n y i o u i e h w

n m n

v

ve R ja a i R

A n e t A e e r u d n B n e o o o e e l

t v r v u l lin Crescen D A en g y t a a e e $ v $ A

E wa d in A A e a ns d rr n ee

ra C o H v r v T c L u C e

o u e n e n n

m n e e Legend u t u u m ¯ e i

d n n e e K n o g L v e n t o d p o A ( r i a m e Site Investigation Area v d w m le In n y u a o e b B C A w rk a a a C o l v r g t m u e d a n h h k Project Footprint e y r n K e t A S t u e v ee C iv r tr v e r o S M ri e G r D fa e n t a n c en S l s e sc u e ue c re c g n C e n d e o ue e i Av n s r s w ve n lli A h k hy un t a P a rd e n e p O V ent t h R esc our a o fe Cr C r a od r n va d o n e e d W ge Sh A D u D a l r S l i r i v i s e v t e e d r oa od R A wo v ie ue e nn e d en Bo v oa Av n ace i R d u l r an fiel rt P D d rri or e lbe a Me H Ha k o Go c ue rdo i R ven nridg hw d e fe A e P s o rcl ol lac A o i W e C w 0 l t D 0

0 e o 0

h i E o

0 0 ni p r

C s

3 p 3 M le e 4 w 4 R t 8 o 8 R 4 r a 4 t o h n d a R ue nt a d o n e l ve sc l a B e A r C

d tte f C

e r uf rv i d r C

o e c

C m a e v M

s a

i l r t

e c

N e h D u y n e e M ve i A n d

ce R c n la k e o

a o s t r P l n

e c o A a

t H a e g l

a a a l

rg a v n r

A o B i r n e d

r p o e l

v W u

i e l T t R i r r D a f

e f e u o s D c nt i

L A n d r ce r o a s a D

k e o

o e v d s r C c t m t C u ri o e o v u M s e r n b w e y C a e a u n h l e e d o r t A e a t r r L W R o v a i G r n e i n G k d n r o e u a n D e P r A Co d i o u v H v n rt o G e e ra o a t e n r s v w r a a i t u P r y n A e a g D v M e e riv e e D r r e n t F idg e A R e r u v e rin oa e x ri v a d o e D d m F r e an r e e r A M a m m t l

l d m n n a u i o S S o R

u d rl l W y a e r E a e R C n G w o l o l i e e B t n A a e t J t a i a d a r e v e e N S a n e D nu n n d t ve N A u W r r e a i a V e v e v r e t ne a i e t i i e C v e M W l t t s i e r a a o e S r n l n s t t W r o s c R e w H A n e e i M e l ill a v d o i l rr n c o e e a t Ph r t a e w e n o d w u R R L o e 0 275 550 o h a o t a r e n d u d e o en f Av A metres n y on t v K a m e ar Stre e 1:11,000 (At original document size of 11x17) D H n e lga n O u n d e e t G Roa d ur i y o d le y d C Slo ee le R ns Notes oo y o M a R 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N d o a 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and d B Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2019. r o o 3. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2019. Imagery Date, 2018. k S l a t w K

r Q i d n e d a u p b o A A e w r R s n v o o 0 a 0 B M n e c T t 0 M o 0 a o i n b ews o n k t h 0 0 : s s u ad Ave e n a e nue y A 2 i g e m 2 l t t d B 12 4 d C v n c v 4 7 i E a o a e o Richmond Hill 8 8 0 r K h a r n l n 1 4 e e e 4

- s B Markham u s r G t 6 C C D e v c A 0 r Pickering r Y o r k R e g i o n a l - h e a i e r v l

0 l i n i Ajax M s n v e d e 2 t M u n i c i p a l i t y e c e e w 48 0 n u i A n d 2 e e u e Av D v : e l n e l v a l e d ee t r 404 n i D n e R v

s d u i e r Vaughan A e

v i A v e n st a v e a E R d ny ue e oa n po 401 c n R Su i e n y n v o A e r gl t 407 i u a n la H lls C d C e i 400 d t H x S ne r a de e m rk .

A Ba s a

v c e e e 427

r t

n H r n A u K u t

_ H e i o y 409

e a C u t l d l s a C i t y o f b r u e o ir t B e A n W S i r r e T o r o n t o _ t u v l c n D

i e h A Av e a e r n t a r i o t i k e O n L a m v lk i Toronto C i v e e W u e o o D n e u _ t t u B 2 n o A e 403 0 t r n t i g l m i R e A F e o l Mississauga _ v e a M A

E e y L d n v a

N a e R _ r u r s o w QEW 4 e n

0 h u a o

0 e e d o u R 1 n ve d 1 S A o p 0 o N nl a o B 5 u N D o d u 6 o o r t

1 u t h \ r Project Location t h e 165011004 REVA t l r h nu e S ve o B A v p i W B he Greater Toronto Prepared by BCC on 2020-06-10 l o lanc S a e v e u r o n n a R i e o v d n A n _ o e Area Technical Review by CV on 2019-05-29 l th i r d A d n o u a w s o n c v r g e i l o y N e Independent Review by TC on 2019-05-29 e t A w n v w o a h n n A n t c rd u a B a a e v A i le e A l Client/Project T u o o e v n B u A _ n o ll E u v ve e e e A s E n v l t in l l on n s METROLINX r f e n s e a N T e r id u d E L v u v t _ e a n K a n D e ce J e a a e u s d riv o re SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT: S r r a D e R C \ h m d K d A it n s n la B e i e d e n Z e l g e r NATURAL ENVIRONMENT TECHNICAL REPORT m V S R

n o r d u C a i e e

u a h e r

g a

v t i n s a t n i f l l n e n M C r e a e Sca

e u b re r W n e r t _ n r t a b l n t S o e v a o ve r p Park t r c r D o e e r L o s A u G re a u e e C D o r w u C r c o m r t g g n r d

p n i a r k s n e e t a Figure No. v d t la S r dl e h w s e G e o t s r R e A A \ v r t o c d P A r S e s e d a v v A e e r e h v n n o m e h c A e f h i e a t f e s R n n l t i t l v n l 2 g u u i o S s i p t k e u C r y e e e d l n e n a s oa A i Title a u o R c P ff v c a R e st e s e g M r \ a Fl n e s e f u u f

d n ve lu Detail of Study Area x A e e ira B m u o \ en e M s v v i ds A Dri g n r \ wla adle d Ne S a c _ s i

g 640000 641000 642000 \ :

O Disclaimer: This figure has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited under the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. This page intentionally left blank

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! 638000 ! 63!9000 640000 641000 642000 643000 ! L

O ! ! ! ! T ! L

! O 2 ! L ! 4 O T

! C

! ! ! T 2 5 O ! 2

! 6 C N 17PJ3844! 17PJ3944 17PJ4044 17PJ4144 17PJ4244 17PJ4344 ! L O ! C D

O ! ! O N T S ! N ! L D C ! 2

O A ! 7 D S ! T R C L

! ! C S ! B O ! 2 O A C $ $ O 8 R T N A ! x ! ! L C R R B n 2 ! L O D i Legend L O O O l 0

O B O ! T ! o N S O R U r C ¯ ! T t ! T L 2 C G R O e O O ! D 3 9 3 A H O U N T Project Footprint ! 0 M 1 (

C S R ! ! G U – 1

C C C !C O ! B G H t 9 O i O A ! N O s S H C Ionview R ! ! N R C Site Investigation Area N n D O ! B a O A D r D N

! S O R ! U T ! ! S 0 S C R 0 ! G B C 0 C O 0 Local Study Area (1 km buffer) C A O O H 0 ! S 0 A R G ! ! A U R 4 R C 4 R B

4 ! G O 4 ! A B O

8 B 8 ! L H U Thermal Regime, Cold O R ! 4 ! O O R 4 L G ! R B T R O O H O O ! O T 3 U

! ! R U ! Thermal Regime, Warm 2 U G 2 ! O G L ! C G H 1 O U H ! ! O H C ! T G N T O Railway ! a ! 2 H ! y N ! D 2 lo ! C L C S r L ! ! ! O C C O O S ! ! ! Hydro Line r T A T N C ! e L

R e A 2 O ! k 2 C ! 7 R ! B 5 T S Watercourse (Permanent)

! O C B ! C 2 C ! R O O ! ! O 3 A R O N N C ! R U O O ANSI, Earth Science C ! C B ! ! G ! U N O S ! H S G R C C ! 17PJ3843 17PJ3943 17PJ4043 C 17PJ4143 17PJ4243 H 17PJ4343 ! ! A O ANSI, Life Science A S ! R L U ! R C O ! B G B A ! ! T O H O R ! Conservation Area Administrative R 2 R B ! l 4 ! O ! ! O O a C ! U U R B n O G e ! G Waterbody ! o O l ! i N l H ! t H U a ! m ! a C G y ! ! N S H R ! a Wetland, Not evaluated per OWES n C v ! ! in ! ! ia A e ! R Cr d L e Wooded Area B e ! a O k ! O ! n T ! ! R a The Golden 2 ! O 0 0 Lot ! C 6 L ! 0 U 0 ! O C

0 Mile 0 ! G

3 ! T O 3 ! H

4 4 ! ! 2 N Municipal Boundary, Lower 8 8 ! 8 ! 4 C 4

! C

! S ! O ! ! C 1 km UTM Grid N ! A ! City Of ! C ! R B ! ! S O Toronto ! ! C Cliffcrest R ! A L ! R O ! O ! B U ! L T ! O G O ! 2 ! T R H ! 1 ! O 3 C L ! 0 U ! O ! O G ! C N ! T Kennedy Park O H

! 3 B ! N ! 1 ! ! S C ! C C ! O ! ! 17PJ3842 S 17PJ3942 17PJ4042 17PJ4142 17PJ4242 A 17PJ4342 N C R

! A B ! C ! ! R O ! S ! B R ! C O ! ! O A R ! U ! R ! ! O G ! B U ! H O T o r o n t o a n d R e g i o n ! ! G 0 1 R H L O !! ! km ! O U C o n s e r v a t i o n T G

3 H 3 1:19,000 (At original document size of 11x17) ! ! A u t h o r i t y C

O N Notes

! 0 C 0 ! 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 0 0 S 0 0 C 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and 2 2

! 4 A 4 Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2018. 8 R ! 8 4 4 B r

e O p ! R w

o O L ! c O U b

T : G ! y 2 H B

4 Scarborough

0 ! C 1 ! - O

6 Bluffs

0 N -

0 B 2 ! ! 0 S D u r h a m R e g i o n a l H 2

C : G d A Y o r k R e g i o n a l M u n i c i p a l i t y U ! e R s i O B v M u n i c i p a l i t y ! e ! R O Oshawa R

O R !

B L O

! O U Vaughan R 17PJ3841 17PJ3941 17PJ4041 17PJ4141 17PJ4241 17PJ4341 d

! T

x G ! A

m 2 H C . P e e l

! s 6 S

e ! r C R e g i o n a l C u t O ! T o r o n t o ! a M u n i c i p a l i t y N N e F ! O D i v i s i o n

_ B l C a Brampton

! t S 4 n ! Toronto C e 3 L L

! Birchmount A O O m T

n R ! T T o

O Park B r i 2 Mississauga L 2

! v O ! a r i o 7 n t 8 k e O n L a L R ! E O C C

_ O T O O 3 ! U

0 L 2 N N

g O G i 9 ! ! H a l t o n F

0 B 0 T B H

_ C 0 L L 0 S ! E 3 S R e g i o n a l 0 O O O 0 0 C

N C 1 T T N 1 ! _ M u n i c i p a l i t y 4 L C A A 4 ! 4

8 3 O 3 B R 8 ! 0 O R 0 4 3 1 4 T B N S B ! 1 C C 1 O O 3 C

0 O O B 2 R R

5 A ! 6 N ! C N S R O O 1

\ C Cliffside Project Location O B U t U 165011004 REVA L B B ! r A O O G G o Lake Ontario N S S R p Greater Toronto Prepared by BCC on 2020-06-10 T R H H e C B C B O ! R 3 A A S O _ Area Technical Review by ABC on yyyy-mm-dd

l 4 U ! R R C R

a C G

c B B i A O Independent Review by ABC on yyyy-mm-dd O H

n O O R U h N R ! R ! c B G

e O O O Client/Project T B H

_ U R U S E G G METROLINX C O ! N H H _ U A ! J G SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT: R S \ B H s

! e O r NATURAL ENVIRONMENT TECHNICAL REPORT

u R 17PJ3840 17PJ3940 17PJ4040 17PJ4140 17PJ4240 17PJ4340 ! g i

f O _

t U

! r

o G

p Figure No. H e

! r \

! s m e t 3 DRAFT s y ! ! s Title o c e \ s

d Local Study Area and Environmental ! x m \ s i g

\ Features d

! a c _ s i

g 638000 639000 640000 641000 642000 643000 \ :

O Disclaimer: This figure has been prepared based o! n information provided by others as cited under the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result.

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! This page intentionally left blank 640000 641000 642000

ad d Ro a sels o ue e rus R ven riv B ay ly A rg D dw ave WOD bI u r St ns o O Re n F v a T C i e l h h m w r rd a t u a o v L as s le r W R u i u E o t o

e h B t

n y i o u i e h w

n m n

v

ve R ja a i R

A n e t A e e r u d n B n e o o o e e l

t v r v u l lin Crescen D A en g y t a a e e $ v $ A

E wa d in A A e a ns d rr n ee

ra C o H v r v T c L u C e

o u e n e n n

m n e e Legend u t u u m ¯ e i

d n n e e K n o g L v e n t o d p o A ( r i e va m d w m Site Investigation Area le In n y u a o e b B C A w rk a a a C o l v r g t m u e d a n h h k e r n y Project Footprint

K e t A S t u e v e C iv re v WOD r t e r o S M ri e G r D fa e n t a n c en S l s e sc u e ue c (! Potential Bat Habitat re c g n C e n d e o ue e i Av n s r s w ve n lli A h k hy un t a P a rd e n Ve p O WOD Ecological Land Classification ent t h R esc our a o fe Cr C r a od r n va d o n e e d W ge Sh A D au D Ecological Land Classification Description S CGL l r l i r i v i s e v t e e ad r o CGL - Parkland od R A wo e v ie CGL_4 u e nn e d en Bo v oa Av n ace i R d u l r an fiel rt P CGL_2 - Parkland D d rri or e lbe a Me G H Ha k o ordo ic R e nr enu idge hw d e Av Pla CGL_4 - Recreational s o rcl lfe ce A o i o ME C W w 0 l t CGL_4 D 0

0 e o 0

h i E o 0 0 ni ME - Meadow p r

C s

3 p 3 M le e 4 w CGL_2 4 R t 8 o 8 R 4 r a 4 t o ME/FODM11 - Meadow/Naturalized Deciduous h n d a R ue nt a d o n G ce l Hedgerow ve s l a B e A r r C d te C et a r ff v u r or n i cd C C m a e g G M re s a l e y t e c h SWM Pond - Stormwater Management Pond s N ue r y n e e M t ve A o i A n d ce R c n la n e o r P a v o ns t

e e c o A a

t H e a e g l a a l

rg a v

A n n W r B WOD - Deciduous Woodland

o i r n e CGL d

r o u e l

p u

v a

i e l e T t R i r

r D f

a l f

k e u o D c t i s

n L A ME o d r ce r a D

k e s a D New Construction

o e v d

c s t Cr m C r u r i

o e o v u M i

r e

n v b e w e (! C a e a u n h l ME e (! d o r t A e a t r L W R o v a i r n e i n G k d n r o e u a n D e P r A Co d i CGL_2 o ur v v n t o H e e ra o a t e n s v w r t a i t u P r y e A e ME a e D r M e v t riv e e D S r e n F dg l e ri u e nRo x riv a ari ad e o e D d m F r an r e n A M a m m l

l d m o n a u ME i i o S t o d l R

a r W y a r E N e R C G w l o l e e B n A a e t J t i a d a r e v e e S a n e D nu n n d t ve N A u W r ME/FODM11 r e a i a e v e v r e t e a e t in i e C e M W l t t s e r a o e S r l n s t t W V r o s c e ew H A i n e i M v e l ill a v d i l rr n i c e e a a t o Ph r t e e o n w n w u R R R L o e 0 250 500 o h o a o t a r e a n d u d e o en d f Av A metres n y on t v K a m e ar Stre e 1:11,000 (At original document size of 11x17) D H n e lga n O u n d e e G Roa d i y d le y Slo le R Notes y o SWM Pond R a ME 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N d o a 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and d B Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2019. r o CGL_2 o 3. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2019. Imagery Date, 2018. k S l a t w K Q i d n d a u b o A A e s r R v o n 0 a 0 B M n e T t 0 M o i 0 ew a o n n s k o t h 0 s u 0 n s ad Aven e a A e ue 2 i g e m 2 l t t d 12 4 v 4 d C in c v E a 7 o a e o Richmond Hill 8 r K h a r 8 r n l n 4 e 4 e e s B e Markham u G s r t p C C c D e v A r Pickering w r Y o r k R e g i o n a l h e a i e r v l o i i l Ajax n n v d e c M s e t M u n i c i p a l i t y b w e c e e n 48 u i A

: n e d e v u e v y D A l e a n e l e B ev l e t r 404 R n i D n 0 v d u 1 e r Vaughan - A i e A v 6 n t s e 0 a v a E - d ny ue e oa n po 401 0 c n R Su i e n y n 2 v o r A gle t 407 0 i u a n la H lls C 2 C e i 400

d t H : S ne r a e e

d rkd A s

e Ba s

v c i e 427

v t e

e n H r n u K R H e u t o i 409

e a C u t l s a l C i t y o f b r e r B ME o i d e A n W x i T o r o n t o r r ue c t n v D m e . h A Av e e r O n t a r i o C i k e n L a m v lk i Toronto C i v L e W u e o o E n e u _ t u CGL_2 t B 4 n o A e 403 0 t r n t i g l m i R e A F e o l Mississauga _ v e a M A

E e y L d n v a

N a R N e _ r u r s o w QEW 4 e a n

0 h u a t o 0 e a e d o u R 1 en l v d 1 S A o A p e 0 o N u nl a v n o B 5 u N ve D o d e A u 6 o o h r rt t 1 n o u t h \ r w Project Location t h e s 165011004 REVA t u l

r u e h n yl e S ve e A o B A v p i W B he Greater Toronto Prepared by BCC on 2020-06-10 l o lanc S a e v r o n a R i o d n n _ o e Area Technical Review by CV on 2019-05-29 l i d A d n u a o n c v r g i o e Independent Review by TC on 2019-05-29 e t w n New Construction v w o h n n A n c rd u a B a e v A i le e A Client/Project T u o e n Bo u v _ n o ll E u v ve e e e A s E n l t in l l on n s METROLINX r f e n s a N T e r id u d E L v u v t _ e a K a n D e ce J e a a e s d riv o re SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT: S r r a D R C \ h m d K d A it n s n la B e i e d e n Z e l g e r NATURAL ENVIRONMENT TECHNICAL REPORT m V S R

n o r d u C a i e e

u a h e r

g a

v t i n s a t n i f l l n e n M C r e a e Sca

e u b re r W n e r t _ n r t a b l n t S o e v a o ve r p Park t r c r D o e e r L o s A u G re a u e e C D o r w u C r c o m r t g g n r d

p n i a r k s n e e t a Figure No. v d t la S r dl e h w s e G e o t s r R e A A \ v r t o c d P A r S e s e d a v v A e e r e h v n n o m e h c A e f h i e a t f e s R n n l t i t l v n l 4 g u u i o S s i p t k e u C r y e e e d l n e n a s oa A i Title a u o R c P ff v c a R e st e s e g M r \ a Fl n e s e f u u f

d n ve lu Ecological Land Classification x A e e ira B m u o \ en e M s v v i ds A Dri g n r \ wla adle d Ne S a c _ s i

g 640000 641000 642000 \ :

O Disclaimer: This figure has been prepared based on information provided by others as cited under the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result. This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix B MNRF Correspondence

This page intentionally left blank Stantec Consulting Ltd. 200-835 Paramount Drive, Stoney Creek, ON L8J 0B4

January 15, 2019 File: 165011004

Attention: ESA Aurora Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Aurora District 50 Bloomington Rd Aurora, ON L4G 0L8 [email protected]

To Whom it May Concern,

Reference: METROLINX SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION – NATURAL HERITAGE BACKGROUND DATA REQUEST

INTRODUCTION Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) has been retained by Metrolinx to complete an environmental assessment, under the Transit Project Assessment Process (O.Reg 231.08) for the Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project. The Scarborough Junction is located just east of the existing Scarborough GO Station, near the intersection of Midland Avenue and St. Clair Avenue East in the City of Toronto. As part of Metrolinx’s GO Expansion program, Metrolinx is committed to increased service and additional tracks have been approved. In order to eliminate potential train conflicts and meet service targets, a grade separation between the Stouffville Line and the Lakeshore East Line is proposed at the Scarborough Junction. A rail- road grade separation at Danforth Road is also proposed to eliminate potential rail-road conflicts and a grade separation is proposed at Corvette Avenue to accommodate pedestrian crossing.

Information obtained through this request will be used to document existing natural heritage conditions in the Study Area (Figure 1). We would like to request natural heritage information for the Project Footprint and any records within a 1 km buffer area of the Project Footprint. Given our knowledge of the Study Area and background review results, there is potential to encounter Species at Risk (SAR).

NATURAL HERITAGE REVIEW Stantec completed a background review on November 22, 2018 of the following online databases:

• MNRF’s Land Information Ontario (LIO) (MNRF 2018a) database

• MNRF’s Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database (MNRF 2018b)

• Ontario Nature’s Reptile and Amphibian Atlas (Ontario Nature 2018)

• Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (Cadman et al. 2007)

• Online eBird database (eBird 2018)

January 15, 2019 ESA Aurora Page 2 of 4

Reference: METROLINX SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION – NATURAL HERITAGE BACKGROUND DATA REQUEST

• Fisheries and Oceans Canada Species at Risk Mapping (Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2018)

• Ontario Butterfly Atlas (Toronto Entomologists’ Association 2018)

• Ontario Mammal Atlas (Dobbyn 1994)

Based on our background data and desktop habitat assessment, we believe that the following SAR species have the potential to reside in the Study Area:

• Two (2) plant species: Butternut (Juglans cinereal), Red Mulberry (Morus rubra)

• One (1) insect species: Monarch (Danaus plexippus)

• Five (5) bird species: Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia), Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica), Common Nighthawk (Chordeiles minor), Eastern Meadowlark (Sturnella magna), Chimney Swift (Chaetura pelagica)

• Three (3) mammal species: Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus), Northern Myotis (Myotis septentrionalis), Tri-coloured Bat (Perimyotis subflavus)

The following natural heritage areas are present in the Study Area:

• Natural features – Scarborough Bluffs, ANSI Life and Earth Sciences (Figure 1). The Scarborough Bluffs are not within the project footprint.

January 15, 2019 ESA Aurora Page 3 of 4

Reference: METROLINX SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION – NATURAL HERITAGE BACKGROUND DATA REQUEST

INFORMATION REQUEST

Stantec would like to request any additional records of SAR, Species of Conservation Concern designated natural features, including additional records that are not in the NHIC or LIO databases for the Study Area.

If you require any additional information regarding this project or have any questions, please contact the undersigned.

Regards,

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

Debbie Giesbrecht M.Sc., Senior Ecologist Phone: (905) 381-3214 [email protected]

Attachment: Figure 1: Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Environmental Features tc \\cd1215-f01\work_group\01650\active\165011004\scarborough junction\16_environmental\16.1_terrestrial\mnrf correspondence\final request letter\165011004_sj_mnrfaurora_backgroundinformationrequest_20180109_fnl-dft.docx

REFERENCES

Cadman, M.D., D.A. Sutherland, G.G. Beck, D. Lepage and A.R. Couturier (eds). 2007. Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario 2001- 2005. Bird Studies Canada, Environment Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, and Ontario Nature, Toronto. 706 pp.

Dobbyn, J. 1994. Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists. eBird. 2018. eBird Hotspots Data Online. Accessed November 2018. Available online: https://ebird.org/hotspots

Fisheries and Oceans Canada 2018. Fisheries and Oceans Canada Species at Risk Mapping. Accessed November 2018. http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/sara-lep/map-carte/index-eng.html

MNRF [Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry]. 2018a. Land Information Ontario (LIO). On-line Natural Heritage Mapping and Natural Heritage Information Database. Accessed, November 2018.

January 15, 2019 ESA Aurora Page 4 of 4

Reference: METROLINX SCARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION – NATURAL HERITAGE BACKGROUND DATA REQUEST

MNRF [Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry] 2018b. Natural Heritage Information Centre element occurrence data. Accessed November 2018. Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Peterborough. http://www.gisapplication.lrc.gov.on.ca/mamnh/Index.html?site=MNR_NHLUPS_NaturalHeritage&vi ewer=NaturalHeritage&locale=en-US

Ontario Nature. 2018. Ontario Reptile and Amphibian Atlas. Accessed November 2018. Available online: https://ontarionature.org/oraa/maps/

Toronto Entomologists’ Association [Ontario Butterfly Atlas]. 2018. Ontario Butterfly Atlas Online. Accessed November 2018. Available online: http://www.ontarioinsects.org/atlas_online.htm

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! 638000 ! 639000! 640000 641000 642000 643000 !

LOT 29 CON D SCARBOROUGH ! ! ! C

e ! el D ve C d i i v e t ad r h Torrance Road

F ri ! u a n

D ! ve il scent Elgar Avenue t ive

o ! A l e r er

a e er D

l r ! t re a

R o t n

C n a e S

! y Glenda Road a

t e k

! l

t n l

g u r

s ! Lord Roberts Drive e e

n

! Cr c ve d

r es

n u

r A i r

e n

! e Nero Court T a y

r

r p B e e

p l

i

e v

l

t ! LOT 25 CON D SCARBOROUGH

o

c i

v en

h i M d

a

r 17PJ3844 17PJ3944 17PJ4144 17PJ4244 17PJ4344

! ! o m D a

s

! Kingsdown Drive A

C D Bellamy Road South

w e

LOT 26 CON D SCARBOROUGH ue d o M ! b o Argo Road ! e r r St R Crouse Road r n r

! o Belmuir Place

e ! e d o c

n ! C e i Yorkshire Road k iv Lochleven Drive U r v

! e b D y y r nu l b R rb ! e i e

s v e h

! ! n o t Knowlton Drive e ! e

e A g Mason Road Markham Road

rd a W

! a z

G n M m d $$ S

t

d e o e Cr o e i L

! n n t o r n D

to o e t T v la e t r S Storebridge Drive v

! s p i S ri

e F ta n ! n a s a r D

a em r s

R l r c o i Legend

LOT 31 CON D SCARBOROUGH ! F c t d v n D n r

LOT 30 CON D SCARBOROUGH S r

u va e

C ! ne

Crockford Boulevard ! Lozoway Drive e a d le w t

o Rutledge Avenue L u n s o o ¯ ! ! h Treverton Drive h ll m LOT 19 CON C SCARBOROUGH

M n ri B

f o F o t t d d

! t p o ar

LOT 28 CON D SCARBOROUGH m N a d p n

o t Marengo Avenue a Adanac Drivea n Preliminary Study Area Footprint

n e Barbados r e Gr

! i C e Oswego Road r v

z e ( n i c k a ! ! Iondale Place u r

a s

r e Boulevard e

! ! n v D L

r O B

A i r

t a e e tt

k e ! v l v l w e G

! ! A v o u ro R Adjacent Preliminary Study Area e o A g V ! v n o Glen Muir Drive e le e a

u r Gilder Drive d v c

! n e m id i s

t !

e r r k v Footprint

! ! h u levar t

u Ionview i u

B o r D ! e o Bo D

C nt t D on e L ! e r rt r LOT 32 CON D SCARBOROUGH c a Ho p i ! ! r s r v a e o e

! m h leth Chatterton BoulevardWhitecap Boulevardn Thermal Regime, Cold ! t P l K s e ho t Ca a ! Reno Drive id n ! 4844000 ! M e r 4844000 C sc e LOT 21 CON C SCARBOROUGH k

t u ! re c

r o C Boyce Avenue LOT 22 CON C SCARBOROUGH en ! u rin v r k Thermal Regime, Warm Commonwealth Avenue F

Ionview Road A e

c

! ! o i ! l a Century Drive ia s

! Bertrand Avenue n n C w l lo t e Landseer Road Winter Avenue m o

R C ! e

! e Annis Road D ! om C e g o

ch r Railway i n d u i ! R r v

e Metrolinx–GO Transit Rockwood Drive s e t e ! ! h o

s b ! ! S Tl c Martindale Road l T u A d Ty g ! e ne Co !! r a Mccowan Road a Hydro Line v u City Of a g t ! n e o r t y e ! ! R t n Ravine Drive t

l D ! R Lowell Avenue

o u M n ! o r i LOT 23 CON C SCARBOROUGH v Toronto r e y e s e a

! e e c Watercourse (Permanent) C e u ! e Charity Road

! w en w s

Thermos Road r m v d S v

i r A

! e t s e r a y

! O vel r

! e o t Windy Ridge Drive

k D C ! ! u n t

l

n e n ANSI, Earth Science e l

! i t c e

! c d c Cree Avenue D ! ar n H

! ! s ev s l e

! r e ou Kim Court e i answay d

v Tr Cr B r Bellehaven Crescent ANSI, Life Science

! 17PJ3843 e n Lorraine Avenue C 17PJ4143 17PJ4343

t e n

i

! e ! s v

Ea y i

! Ashtonbee Road r

e d

l m

nu ! p t r

e a leva a Huntington Avenue rd D

v u e e a ! A n o j d P

n B In e Conservation Area Administrative ! ! b i

o k n Phyllis Avenue n

int io r r d e l a r

! g t e t e

E m m v R

n S a i

B

! a e i o r Faircroft Boulevard id ! ! ! K ar h Boundary

N Saf L D g ! p e e Skagway Avenue g D B ! n e LOT 24 CON C SCARBOROUGH d r e ! ! a h ri iv ll ! i ! e s k e a Waterbody d sc n n a m ! re t e ! a n C Sheva Court l O Stobo Lane y ! ee G e R g Randall Crescent ! n u v a Prudham Gate a i

a r v ! ! S in Wetland, Not evaluated per OWES Brimley Road ! ! Woodfern Drive C D e C ! Allister Avenue e r f e ! f e Horfield Avenue i k

! l ! e Wooded Area ! ! lfe LOT 25 CON C SCARBOROUGH Halbert Place c iv Merrian Road o Ave ! The Golden Bonniewood Roadr e W nue w Ledge Road d l LOT 28 CON C SCARBOROUGH

Civic Road D c E o ! k a ir ! ic p d

! Mile w o C p t

h a Lot

! s R l

o

! e e i A w

! d S M

n

M o o t ! M ! o i n e c

! r LOT 26 CON C SCARBOROUGH c c a lw s

! 4843000 t 4843000 M H re ar e h n

! n e f C Municipal Boundary, Lower o uf a Airmont Drive ! h R dNicolan Road bo Fenwood Heights ! v c c b p a a il C ! o Corvette Avenue M ! Sinnott Road Linden Avenue Laurel Avenue r B e Brenda Crescent ro l a ! e ou e c er

! v d T u 1 km UTM Grid

! i r R t

r e Anson Avenue gh l ! G e r C evar

o D Argate Place i

s u LOT 21 CON B SCARBOROUGH a r

! a ! M Hart Avenue Magnolia Avenue a

o ! k r t t t He ! d LOT 30 CON C SCARBOROUGH n

c a t e h

C c C h om ! res e d

u r w C d i ! b t r ght ! e o na a

! o e l

! o r d B o Cliffcrest ! i a Dorset Road l R n W u s d f ! o Cleta Drive fs ! ! B

D D

D oul ! W r r LOT 31 CON C SCARBOROUGH ! i r i

! v i G d v

! Sherry Road v i a

! e e t l o e evar t R

Kennedy Road Andrew Avenue l in oad

r e a o

! Foxridge Drive a R P

P e

e y r

n r m y

! d u A

t o ! Waltonice Road r d g l

! a e e

! ! e S y

o Jeanette Street m Kennedy r l r r

! R e Maywood Park A a e ! C

n e ! 17PJ3842 17PJ3942 n 17PJ4142 iv F 17PJ4342

! W Birchmount Road v Dr r

Park o a i e

Summer Drive e i Neilson Avenue

t v ! n i

a a ! ! Harewood Avenue s

u

! V cent ! r N d e ! e nue ! ! n ve ! va A ! A er Pherrill Mews t ! ! n n v i e

! ! e M t c

! n Gidley Road Toronto and n s 0 1

! u L e ! e r

e Malley Road y C c Lakehi ll

m LOT 33 CON C SCARBOROUGH s !! ! Olga Street km

! Region Conservation Harmony Avenue e e r Sloley RoadBrooklawn Avenue R C e g is 1:19,000 (At original document size of 11x17) S Eastville Avenue Hymus Road ! ! A u t h o r i t y Montvale Drive t

Quent Gradwell Drive

As t Thatcher Avenue Notes A n

ce Kingston Road ! n a

Upton Road ! s 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N

M e a e r i e

ws n nu c C 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and d roadmead Ave

o a A t n B

! en n o venue Forestry © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2018. c o

Gerigs Street ! es da R

4842000 r d 4842000

C l A t e i

Mendelssohn Street h u u t n s

y Avenue r ve n A a e t o e

! f ev

r s Re B n s t ! B

e

Howe Avenue a C n h r

D i r m e

e C ! c

s l Hubert Avenue Hagley Road e Barkdene Hills s Scarborough

c ve

t ri y e

! s a r

t e E D rt

e n R ! en t u u C

c M n n o Bluffs

s e o v o t

re Pidgeon Street A Cotton Avenue C

C o r s l a

i a n

x a t r D u r h a m fa l i r r n i d i i C Atlee Avenue Heale Avenue LOT 24 CON B SCARBOROUGH

a t Midland Avenue W a S K o ! ! F S R e g i o n a l s Larwood Boulevard p o

t Marsh Road y P nn

e ne u u York Regional Municipality La e t S

! ry h n g Municipality

! ! e Oshawa

! Roper Road l l y e ! 17PJ3841 17PJ3941 Dunlop Avenue enu 17PJ4041 17PJ4141 17PJ4241 17PJ4341 Vaughan C e Av ! o ch ! t Elfreda Boulevard Silvio Avenue Blan LOT 27 CON B SCARBOROUGH en u c r Natal Avenue P e e l ! s t LOT 28 CON B SCARBOROUGH e Sandown Avenue

! r R e g i o n a l C K

! apper il T o r o n t o

! n Cl m Municipality e a

T Annan Drive rn LOT 26 CON B SCARBOROUGH

! d r o D i v i s i o n r i

n c A Zenith Drive Brampton ! t n k on

! e Kelsonia Avenue Toronto A d l a ! l o

v C A LOT34 CON C SCARBOROUGH B e R ! S v o n h rk

e Glenridge Road i u u n a a nue Birchmount Mississauga ! LOT 32 CON B SCARBOROUGH l e

! n e Cli e P l Sharpe Street ffcrest Lake Ontario

i C

t v Park StreetVanbrugh Avenue a North Woodrow Boulevard s r a r

! Georgina Gate a Park e D r

m r Scarboro Crescent e T s f d r f ! c i Presley Avenue o e v u Claremore Avenue C l Dr n e a ive u n B ! ob a ! i l t H a l t o n i c i L re f a Moira Avenue f ! o LOT 33 CON B SCARBOROUGH LOT 31 CON B SCARBOROUGH Sadler Drive c R e g i o n a l r B ! nue M Hibberts Drive e Ave o s Municipality ! ey u t ! nn l D

4841000 a e 4841000 Vi Herron Avenue Newlands Avenue r ! v N iv

a e t o r d H r ! Rupert Street t

u h ! our

d Project Location C 165011004 REVA E ! d Haslam Street Phillip Avenue d Lake Ontario l Mewburn Avenue Cliffside Greater Toronto n g Prepared by BCC on 2019-01-09 e to Pell Street s e Highvale Road S ! l Sandown Lane y Area Technical Review by ABC on yyyy-mm-dd ! o A u R Pell Street Lane

t id LOT 34 CON B SCARBOROUGH d v g Independent Review by ABC on yyyy-mm-dd h Preston Street

e e Nancy Avenue a Craiglee Drive m

n B o o o ! ! u r

o e A t Client/Project R D n v

te Pilkington Drive n Mcintosh Street e e n ParnellJeavons Avenue Avenue

ta LOT 30 CON B SCARBOROUGH i n l e

s n a Undercliff Drive METROLINX u t c ! Pharmacy Avenue E g n ll e e ! e o n B t v s o i r e e P r n c S D CARBOROUGH JUNCTION GRADE SEPARATION l s C Raleigh Avenue A ac e n e e l kl s v r i

17PJ3840 r 17PJ3940 t 17PJ4240 17PJ4340 i C e

Florens Avenue Ethel Bell Terrace e e e C c

! e

n tr v e s e

W S c a k

e u a

Bertha Avenue lt Romana Drivea C n Ma r !! Bexhill Avenue e H D

Se t t Figure No.

C mi s n a ! a

L of E

t E

f a

! a il S

t s

y re Aylesworth Avenue e r t

C e u

a t u m

p n Margate Crescent

q 1

A e v v

u e o

! ! i re n A r C s u e o Title C ge c e u nt lan en r ce Be t Haddon Avenue e n C r es e e u v r e n ov rr e bl tt ve A Te a Study Area m D A s Environmental Features ! a gr a c B ri ew r e c ve hvi e th o ig n r n e H i fo o n P n S e t a riv Mack Avenue D Fishle gh D Donside Drive ! i Glen Everest Road 638000 639000 640000 641000 642000 643000

\\CD1215-F01\work_group\01650\active\165011004\Scarborough Junction\16_environmental\1609_gis\03_data\gis_cad\gis\mxds\apc\internal_maps\2018_MxS_Fig01_Environmental_Features_Scarborough_Junction3_1.mxdDisclaimer: Revised: 2019-01-09 By: BCowper This figure has been prepared based on! information provided by others as cited under the Notes section. Stantec has not verified the accuracy and/or completeness of this information and shall not be responsible for any errors or omissions which may be incorporated herein as a result.

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! This page intentionally left blank Please forward the completed form to: [email protected]

Or send by mail: Aurora District, Ministry of Natural Resources 50 Bloomington Rd Aurora, ON L4G 0L8 From: ESA Aurora (MNRF) To: Giesbrecht, Debra Subject: RE: Information Request - Scarborough Junction, Metrolinx Date: Monday, January 21, 2019 10:23:39 AM Attachments:

Ms. Giesbrecht;

We find your background information to be extensive and complete. MNRF has nothing further to add.

Thank you for your time

JEFF J. ANDERSEN

MANAGEMENT BIOLOGIST || ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES & FORESTRY || AURORA DISTRICT

50 Bloomington Road, Aurora ON L4G 0L8 | [email protected] | 905.713.7341

From: Giesbrecht, Debra Sent: January 15, 2019 11:48 AM To: ESA Aurora (MNRF) Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Information Request - Scarborough Junction, Metrolinx

Attention : ESA Aurora,

I have attached an information request letter for Scarborough Junction Grade Separation (a Metrolinx project). I conducted a background review following guidance outlined in the Southern Region Natural Heritage Information Request Guide. I am requesting any additional information, which may not be in the NHIC database.

Thanks in advance for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

Debbie Giesbrecht

Debbie Giesbrecht M.Sc. Senior Ecologist

Direct: 905 381-3214 Mobile: 289 775-6249 Fax: 905 385-3534 [email protected]

Stantec 200-835 Paramount Drive Stoney Creek ON L8J 0B4

The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately.

This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix C Wildlife List Atlases

This page intentionally left blank Appendix C: Wildlife Atlas Background Review

AMPHIBIANS

Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference Red-spotted Newt Notophthalmus viridescens S5 G5T5 - - - - L1 - - - - - Spotted Salamander Ambystoma maculatum S4 G5 - - - - L1 - - - - - Northern Redback Salamander Plethodon cinereus S5 G5 ------American Toad Anaxyrus americanus S5 G5 ------Tetraploid Gray Treefrog Hyla versicolor S5 G5 - - - - L2 - - - - - Western Chorus Frog (great lakes - shield) Pseudacris triseriata S3 G5 NAR THR - - L2 - - - - - Spring Peeper Pseudacris crucifer S5 G5 - - - - L2 - - - - - Bullfrog Lithobates catesbeiana S4 G5 - - 1 - L1 - - - - - Northern Green Frog Lithobates clamitans S5 G5 ------Pickerel Frog Lithobates palustris S4 G5 NAR NAR - - L2 - - - - - Wood Frog Lithobates sylvatica S5 G5 - - - - L2 - - - - - Northern Leopard Frog Lithobates pipiens S5 G5 NAR NAR - - L3 - - - - -

REPTILES

Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina S3 G5 SC SC - - L3 - - - - - Midland Painted Turtle Chrysemys picta marginata S5 G5T5 ------Slider Trachemys scripta SNA G5 ------Northern Map Turtle Graptemys geographica S3 G5 SC SC 30-50 ------Blanding's Turtle Emydoidea blandingi S3 G4 THR THR - - L2 - - - - - Eastern Gartersnake Thamnophis sirtalis S5 G5 ------Redbelly Snake Storeria occipitomaculata S5 G5 - - - - L3 - - - - - Brown Snake Storeria dekayi S5 G5 - NAR ------Smooth Greensnake Opheodrys vernalis S4 G5 - - - - L3 - - - - - Eastern Milksnake Lampropeltis triangulum S3 G5 SC SC - - L3 - - - - -

1 of 7 BIRDS

Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference Canada Goose Branta canadensis S5 G5 ------Wood Duck Aix sponsa S5 G5 - - - - L3 - - - - - Gadwall Anas strepera S4 G5 - - - - X - - - - Mallard Anas platyrhynchos S5 G5 ------Ring-necked Pheasant Phasianus colchicus SNA G5 ------Ruffed Grouse Bonasa umbellus S5 G5 - - 20 L3 - - - - Sandilands 2005 Green Heron Butorides virescens S4B G5 - - - - - X - - - Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura S5B G5 - - - - - X - - - Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus S5 G5 NAR NAR 20-30 - L3 X - - - Sandilands 2005 Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii S4 G5 NAR NAR 4-50+ - L3 X - - - Sandilands 2005 Red-tailed Hawk Buteo jamaicensis S5 G5 NAR NAR ------American Kestrel Falco sparverius S4 G5 ------X - - Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus S3B G4 SC SC - - - - - X - - Virginia Rail Rallus limicola S5B G5 - - - - L3 X - - - - Sora Porzana carolina S4B G5 - - - - L3 X - - - - Killdeer Charadrius vociferus S5B, G5 ------S5N Spotted Sandpiper Actitis macularia S5 G5 ------American Woodcock Scolopax minor S4B G5 - - - - L3 - - - - - Rock Pigeon Columba livia SNA G5 ------Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura S5 G5 ------Yellow-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus S4B G5 - - - - L3 X - - - Black-billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus S5B G5 - - - - L3 X - X - - Eastern Screech-Owl Megascops asio S5 G5 NAR NAR ------Great Horned Owl Bubo virginianus S5 G5 ------Common Nighthawk Chordeiles minor S4B G5 SC THR - - - X - - - Chimney Swift Chaetura pelagica S4B, G5 THR THR - - - - - X - - S4N Ruby-throated Hummingbird Archilochus colubris S5B G5 - - - - - X - - - Belted Kingfisher Ceryle alcyon S4B G5 - - - - - X - X - - Downy Woodpecker Picoides pubescens S5 G5 ------Hairy Woodpecker Picoides villosus S5 G5 - - 10 - - X - - -

2 of 7 Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference Northern Flicker Colaptes auratus S4B G5 X Pileated Woodpecker Dryocopus pileatus S5 G5 30-50* L3 X Naylor et al., 1996 Eastern Wood-Pewee Contopus virens S4B G5 SC SC-NS X Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii S5B G5 X X Least Flycatcher Empidonax minimus S4B G5 L3 X Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe S5B G5 Great Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus S4B G5 Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus S4B G5 X Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus S5B G5 X Red-eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus S5B G5 Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata S5 G5 American Crow Corvus brachyrhynchos S5B G5 Horned Lark Eremophila alpestris S5B G5 Tree Swallow Tachycineta bicolor S4B G5 Northern Rough-winged Swallow Stelgidopteryx serripennis S4B G5 Bank Swallow Riparia riparia S4B G5 THR THR-NS X Cliff Swallow Petrochelidon pyrrhonota S4B G5 Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica S4B G5 THR THR-NS Black-capped Chickadee Poecile atricapillus S5 G5 Red-breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis S5 G5 0 X White-breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis S5 G5 10 House Wren Troglodytes aedon S5B G5 Blue-gray Gnatcatcher Polioptila caerulea S4B G5 30 X Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina S4B G5 SC THR-NS L3 X American Robin Turdus migratorius S5B G5 Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis S4B G5 Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum S4B G5 L3 X X Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos S4 G5 X European Starling Sturnus vulgaris SNA G5 Cedar Waxwing Bombycilla cedrorum S5B G5 Mourning Warbler Geothlypis philadelphia S4B G5 30 X Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas S5B G5

3 of 7 Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference American Redstart Setophaga ruticilla S5B G5 20-30 L3 X Yellow Warbler Setophaga petechia S5B G5 Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina S5B G5 Field Sparrow Spizella pusilla S4B G5 L3 X Vesper Sparrow Pooecetes gramineus S4B G5 L3 X X Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis S4B G5 X Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia S5B G5 Swamp Sparrow Melospiza georgiana S5B G5 X Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis S5 G5 Rose-breasted Grosbeak Pheucticus ludovicianus S4B G5 X Indigo Bunting Passerina cyanea S4B G5 Bobolink Dolichonyx oryzivorus S4B G5 THR THR-NS 10 X Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus S4 G5 Eastern Meadowlark Sturnella magna S4B G5 THR THR-NS X Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula S5B G5 Brown-headed Cowbird Molothrus ater S4B G5 Orchard Oriole Icterus spurius S4B G5 X Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula S4B G5 X House Finch Haemorhous mexicanus SNA G5 American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis S5B G5 House Sparrow Passer domesticus SNA G5

4 of 7 MAMMALS

Local Status Region of PIF AREA ECO Local Waterloo Priority Area ONTARIO GLOBAL SENSITIVITY REGION Status Regionally Species Sensitive COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS COSSARO COSEWIC (ha) (OWES) TRCA Significant Source (BCR 13) COMMENTS Reference Masked Shrew Sorex cinereus S5 G5 Smoky Shrew Sorex fumeus S5 G5 L2 Northern Short-tailed Shrew Blarina brevicauda S5 G5 Hairy-tailed Mole Parascalops breweri S4 G5 L3 Star-nosed Mole Condylura cristata S5 G5 Little Brown Myotis Myotis lucifugus S4 G5 END END Silver-haired Bat Lasionycteris noctivagans S4 G5 L3 Red Bat Lasiurus borealis S4 G5 Big Brown Bat Eptesicus fuscus S5 G5 Hoary Bat Lasiurus cinereus S4 G5 Eastern Cottontail Sylvilagus floridanus S5 G5 Eastern Chipmunk Tamias striatus S5 G5 Woodchuck Marmota monax S5 G5 Grey Squirrel Sciurus carolinensis S5 G5 Red Squirrel Tamiasciurus hudsonicus S5 G5 Beaver Castor canadensis S5 G5 L3 White-footed Mouse Peromyscus leucopus S5 G5 Deer Mouse Peromyscus maniculatus S5 G5 Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus S5 G5 Meadow Vole Microtus pennsylvanicus S5 G5 Norway Rat Rattus norvegicus SNA G5 House Mouse Mus musculus SNA G5 Meadow Jumping Mouse Zapus hudsonicus S5 G5 L3 Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum S5 G5 7 L2 Coyote Canis latrans S5 G5 Red Fox Vulpes vulpes S5 G5 Black Bear Ursus americanus S5 G5 NAR NAR L1 Raccoon Procyon lotor S5 G5 Mink Mustela vison S4 G5 L3 Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis S5 G5 White-tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus S5 G5

5 of 7 Explanation of Status and Acronymns

COSSARO: Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario COSEWIC: Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada REGION: Rare in a Site Region S1: Critically Imperiled—Critically imperiled in the province (often 5 or fewer occurrences) S2: Imperiled—Imperiled in the province, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), S3: Vulnerable—Vulnerable in the province, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer) S4: Apparently Secure—Uncommon but not rare S5: Secure—Common, widespread, and abundant in the province SX: Presumed extirpated SH: Possibly Extirpated (Historical) SNR: Unranked SU: Unrankable—Currently unrankable due to lack of information SNA: Not applicable—A conservation status rank is not applicable because the species is not a suitable target for conservation activities. S#S#: Range Rank—A numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate any range of uncertainty about the status of the species S#B- Breeding status rank S#N- Non Breeding status rank ?: Indicates uncertainty in the assigned rank G1: Extremely rare globally; usually fewer than 5 occurrences in the overall range G1G2: Extremely rare to very rare globally G2: Very rare globally; usually between 5-10 occurrences in the overall range G2G3: Very rare to uncommon globally G3: Rare to uncommon globally; usually between 20-100 occurrences G3G4: Rare to common globally G4: Common globally; usually more than 100 occurrences in the overall range G4G5: Common to very common globally G5: Very common globally; demonstrably secure GU: Status uncertain, often because of low search effort or cryptic nature of the species; more data needed. GNR: Unranked—Global rank not yet assessed. T: Denotes that the rank applies to a subspecies or variety Q: Denotes that the taxonomic status of the species, subspecies, or variety is questionable. END: Endangered THR: Threatened SC: Special Concern 2, 3 or NS after a COSEWIC ranking indicates the species is either on Schedule 2, Schedule 3 or No Schedule of the Species At Risk Act (SARA) NAR: Not At Risk IND: Indeterminant, insufficient information to assign status DD: Data Deficient 6: Rare in Site Region 6 7: Rare in Site Region 7 Area: Minimum patch size for area-sensitive species (ha) H- highly significant in Hamilton Region (i.e. rare) m- moderately significant in Hamilton Region (i.e. uncommon) L1- extremely rare locally (Toronto Region) L2- very rare locally (Toronto Region) L3- rare to uncommon locally (Toronto Region)

6 of 7 LATEST STATUS UPDATE Odonata: April 2015 Butterflies: July 2014 Bumble Bees: January 2016 Other Arthropods: July 2014 Terrestrial Molluscs: January 2016 Amphibans: July 2014 Reptiles: April 2015 Birds: January 2016 Mammals: January 2016 S and G ranks and explanations: December 2011 NOTE All rankings for birds refer to breeding birds unless the ranking is followed by N REFERENCES COSSARO Status Endangered Species Act, 2007 (Bill 184). Species at Risk in Ontario List. COSEWIC Status COSEWIC. 2007. Canadian Species at Risk. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. \ Local Status Dwyer, Jill K. 2003. Nature Counts Project Hamilton Natural Areas Inventory 2003. Species Checklists. Hamilton Naturalists Club. Ontario Partners in Flight. 2006. Ontario Landbird Conservation Plan: Lower Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Plain (North American Bird Conservation Region 13), Priorities, Objectives and Recommended Actions. Environment Canada and Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. Draft, February 2006. Region of Waterloo. 1996. Regionally Significant Breeding Birds. TRCA. 2003. Revised Fauna Scores and Ranks, February 2003. Toronto Region Conservation Authority. Area-sensitive information Austen, M.J.W., M.D. Cadman, and R.D. James. 1994. Ontario birds at risk: status and conservation needs. Toronto and Port Rowan, ON: Federation of Ontario Naturalists and Long Point Bird Observatory. 165 pp. Dunn, Erica H. and David J. Agro. 1995. Black Tern (Chlidonias niger), The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, Ed.). Ithaca: Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Retrieved from the Birds of North America Online: http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/species/147 Herkert, J.R. 1991. An ecological study of the breeding birds of grassland habitats within Illinois. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Illinois, Urbana, IL. 112 pp. Hejl, S.J., J.A. Holmes, and D.E. Kroodsma. 2002. Winter Wren (Troglodtyes troglodytes). In Poole, A., and F. Gill, eds. The birds of North America, No. 623. Philadelphia, PA: The Birds of North America, Inc. 31 pp. Naylor, B. J., J. A. Baker, D. M. Hogg, J. G. McNicol and W. R. Watt. 1996. Forest Management Guidelines for the Provision of Pileated Woodpecker Habitat. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Forest Management Branch, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario. 26 pp. Page, A.M., and M.D. Cadman. 1994. Status report on the Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens in Canada. Prepared for the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 27 pp Robbins, C.S. 1979. Effect of forest fragmentation on bird populations. Pp. 198-212 in DeGraaf, R.M., and K.E. Evans, eds. Management of northcentral and northeastern forests for nongame birds. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service General Technical Report NC-51. 268 pp. Sandilands. A. 2005. Birds of Ontario. Habitat Requirements, Limiting Factors and Status. UBC Press.

7 of 7 This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix D Plant List

This page intentionally left blank Appendix D: Plant List Vascular plant species recorded in the Scarborough Junction Site Investigation Area (June 7, 2019)

Wetland Coefficient of Wetness Plant Weediness Provincial OMNR COSEWIC TRCA Latin Name Common Name Conservatism Index Species Index Status Status Status Status Gymnosperms Conifers ------Pinaceae Pine Family ------Picea Glauca White Spruce 6 3 T - S5 - - X+ Pinus Sylvestris Scotch Pine - 5 - -3 Se5 - - X Dicotyledons Dicots ------Anacardiaceae Sumac Or Cashew Family ------Rhus Typhina Staghorn Sumac 1 5 - - S5 - - X Apocynaceae Dogbane Family ------Cynanchum Rossicum Swallow-Wort - - - - Se5 - - X Asteraceae Composite Or Aster Family ------Solidago Sp. Goldenrod Sp. ------Betulaceae Birch Family ------Alnus Sp. Alder Sp. ------Brassicaceae Mustard Family ------Alliaria Petiolata Garlic Mustard - 0 - -3 Se5 - - X Hesperis Matronalis Dame's Rocket - 5 - -3 Se5 - - X Caprifoliaceae Honeysuckle Family ------Lonicera Tatarica Tartarian Honeysuckle - 3 - -3 Se5 - - X Cornaceae Dogwood Family ------Cornus Foemina Ssp. Racemosa Red Panicled Dogwood 2 -2 T - S5 - - X Cornus Sericea Red-Osier Dogwood 2 -3 I* - S5 - - X Fagaceae Beech Family ------Quercus Rubra Red Oak 6 3 - - S5 - - X Oleaceae Olive Family ------Fraxinus Pennsylvanica Green / Red Ash 3 -3 T - S5 - - X Rhamnaceae Buckthorn Family ------Rhamnus Cathartica Common Buckthorn - 3 T -3 Se5 - - X Rosaceae Rose Family ------Amelanchier Sp. Serviceberry Species ------Physocarpus Opulifolius Ninebark 5 -2 T - S5 - - R6

1 of 2 Wetland Coefficient of Wetness Plant Weediness Provincial OMNR COSEWIC TRCA Latin Name Common Name Conservatism Index Species Index Status Status Status Status Salicaceae Willow Family ------Populus Deltoides Ssp. Deltoides Eastern Cottonwood 4 -1 T - Su - - X Salix Sp. Willow Species ------Salix Interior Sandbar Willow 3 -5 T - S5 - - X Salix X Fragilis Hybrid Crack Willow - -1 T -3 Se5 - - X Sapindaceae Maple Family ------Acer Negundo Manitoba Maple 0 -2 T - S5 - - X Acer Platanoides Norway Maple - 5 - -3 Se5 - - X Acer Saccharinum Silver Maple 5 -3 I S5 - - X Ulmaceae Elm Family ------Ulmus Pumila Siberian Elm - 5 - -1 Se3 - - X Vitaceae Grape Family ------Vitis Riparia Riverbank Grape 0 -2 - - S5 - - X Monocotyledons Monocots ------Poaceae Grass Family ------Phragmites Australis Ssp. Australis European Reed - - T - Snr - - - Bromus Inermis Awnless Brome - 5 - -3 Se5 - - X Dactylis Glomerata Orchard Grass - 3 - -1 Se5 - - X Poa Pratensis Ssp. Pratensis Kentucky Bluegrass 0 1 - - S5 - - X Typhaceae Cattail Family ------Typha Angustifolia Narrow-Leaved Cattail 3 -5 I - S5 - - X

2 of 2 Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix E Wildlife List Field

This page intentionally left blank Appendix E: Wildlife List Wildlife recorded in the Scarborough Junction Site Investigation Area during 2019 Field Investigations

ONTARIO COSSARO COSEWIC TRCA COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME STATUS STATUS STATUS STATUS Rock Pigeon Columba livia SNA NAR NAR - Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura S5 NAR NAR - Warbling Vireo Vireo gilvus S5B NAR NAR - American Robin Turdus migratorius S5B NAR NAR - European Starling Sturnus vulgaris SNA NAR NAR - House Sparrow Passer domesticus SNA NAR NAR - Baltimore Oriole Icterus galbula S4B NAR NAR - Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus S4 NAR NAR - Common Grackle Quiscalus quiscula S5B NAR NAR - Yellow Warbler Setophaga petechia S5B NAR NAR -

COSSARO: Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario COSEWIC: Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada S1: Critically Imperiled—Critically imperiled in the province (often 5 or fewer occurrences) S2: Imperiled—Imperiled in the province, very few populations (often 20 or fewer), S3: Vulnerable—Vulnerable in the province, relatively few populations (often 80 or fewer) S4: Apparently Secure—Uncommon but not rare S5: Secure—Common, widespread, and abundant in the province SNA: Not applicable—Conservation status rank not applicable because the species is not a suitable target for conservation activities. S#B- Breeding status rank S#N- Non Breeding status rank END: Endangered THR: Threatened SC: Special Concern NAR: Not At Risk

1 of 1 This page intentionally left blank Scarborough Junction Grade Separation Project: Natural Environment Technical Report

Appendix F Habitat Suitability Assessment for Significant Species Identified in Background Review

This page intentionally left blank Appendix F: Habitat Suitability Assessment for Significant Species Identified in Background Review

Suitable habitat COSEWIC Species recorded Carried over to Taxonomic present in Site Species S-Rank COSSARO Habitat Description during site Impact Group (SARA Investigation investigations Assessment Schedule 1) Area

Plant Butternut (Juglans S3? END END Commonly found in a variety of habitats cinerea) including woodlands and hedgerows ideal habitat includes rich, moist, and well- drained soils often found along streams, but may also be found on well-drained y n n gravel sites, particularly those made of limestone. Intolerant of shade and occurs singly or in small groups with a variety of associates. Plant Red Mulberry S2 END END Occurs in moist forests habitats including (Morus rubra) river valleys, floodplains, swales, n n n sandspits, and slopes of the Niagara Escarpment. Insect Monarch (Danaus S4B, S2N SC SC Found primarily wherever milkweed and plexippus) wildflowers (including goldenrods, asters and purple loosestrife) exist. The Larvae occur only where milkweed exists; adults are more generalized, feeding on a variety y n y of wildflower nectar. This includes abandoned farmland, along roadsides, and other open spaces where these plants grow Nests in a wide variety of naturally and anthropogenically created vertical banks, Bank Swallow Birds S4B THR-NS THR which often erode and change over time n n n (Riparia riparia) including aggregate pits and the shores of large lakes and rivers. Prefers farmland; lake/river shorelines; wooded clearings; urban populated areas; Barn Swallow rocky cliffs; and wetlands. They nest Birds S4B THR THR y n y (Hirundo rustica) inside or outside buildings; under bridges and in road culverts; on rock faces and in caves etc. Chimney Swift Historically found in deciduous and Birds (Chaetura S4B THR THR coniferous, usually wet forest types, all y n n pelagica) with a well-developed, dense shrub layer;

1 of 2 Suitable habitat COSEWIC Species recorded Carried over to Taxonomic present in Site Species S-Rank COSSARO Habitat Description during site Impact Group (SARA Investigation investigations Assessment Schedule 1) Area now most are found in urban areas in large uncapped chimneys Generally, prefer open, vegetation- free habitats, including dunes, beaches, recently harvested forests, burnt-over Common areas, logged areas, rocky outcrops, rocky Birds Nighthawk S4B THR SC barrens, grasslands, pastures, peat bogs, y n n (Chordeiles minor) marshes, lakeshores, and river banks. This species also inhabits mixed and coniferous forests. Can also be found in urban areas (nest on flat roof-tops). Generally, prefers grassy pastures, Eastern meadows and hay fields, but may also Birds Meadowlark S4B THR THR nest in park-like settings. Nests are always y n n (Sturnella magna) on the ground and usually hidden in or under grass clumps. Overwintering habitat: Caves and mines Little Brown Myotis that remain above 0 degrees Celsius; Mammals S4 END END Maternal Roosts: Often associated with y n y (Myotis lucifugus) buildings (attics, barns etc.). Occasionally found in trees (25-44 cm dbh). Mammal Northern Myotis S3? END END Roosts in colonies in tree cavities in a y n n (Myotis wide variety of deciduous and coniferous septentrionalis) forest stands. Little is known about the effect of tree density on maternity roost selection for this species, but bats tend to avoid large open areas. Small forest gaps, such as over streams or ponds, are used for foraging. Mammal Tri coloured Bat S3? END END Roosts in colonies in tree cavities in a y n n (Perimyotis wide variety of deciduous and coniferous subflavus) forest stands. Little is known about the effect of stand composition on maternity roost selection for this species, but it is strongly associated with forest watercourses and streamside vegetation.

2 of 2