Appendix C Limitation of Tree Studies Including the Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette

Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016

Distribution List

No. of Hard PDF Email Organization Name Copies 0 Yes Yes Metrolinx

Caledonia GO Station Transit Project Record of Revisions Assessment Process Tree Inventory Revision Date Description Plan 0 January 13, 2015 Draft Submission to Metrolinx 1 July 27, 2015 Second Draft Submission to Metrolinx Metrolinx 2 September 4, 2015 Final Draft Submission with Draft EPR to Metrolinx 3 February 16, 2016 Final Submission to Metrolinx for Review 4 February 22, 2016 Final EPR

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited

Report Prepared By:

Kevin Butt, B.Sc. (Env). Eco. Rest. Cert. Certified Arborist & Terrestrial Ecologist KB:mp

Report Reviewed By:

Jennifer Vandermeer, P.Eng. Environmental Engineer

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 6990 Creditview Road, Unit 2 Mississauga ON L5N 8R9 CANADA

Nicholle Smith, B.A., EMPD February 2016 Senior Terrestrial Ecologist 300034767.0000

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx ii Metrolinx 1 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 1.0 Introduction ...... 1 2.0 Study Area ...... 1 Metrolinx, an agency of the Province of Ontario, has retained R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited (Burnside) to complete an Environmental Assessment (EA) and Preliminary 3.0 Methodology ...... 1 Design Update to support the development of the future Caledonia GO Station. This 4.0 Findings ...... 3 4.1 Trees Found Within the Rail Corridor...... 3 new station will be located near the intersection of Eglinton Avenue West and Caledonia 4.2 Trees Located on Lands Adjacent to the Rail Corridor ...... 6 Road, where the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit (LRT) line intersects with the GO 4.2.1 2-4 Croham Road (Tree Nos. 3 and 4), East of Rail Corridor ...... 6 Transit Barrie Rail Corridor (northwest quadrant of Eglinton Avenue West and Croham 4.2.2 Retail Plaza (Tree Nos. 5 to 11), West of Rail Corridor...... 7 Road). The preparation of a tree inventory plan is included as a component of the EA, to 4.2.3 6 Croham Road (Tree No. 13), East of Rail Corridor ...... 8 determine impacts to trees onsite and on adjacent lands, as prescribed by the Transit 4.2.4 Traffic Island (Tree Nos. 14 to 17), East of Rail Corridor ...... 8 Project Assessment Process (TPAP), as outlined in Ontario Regulation 231/08, Transit 4.2.5 York Beltline Trail (Tree Nos. 18 to 24), East of Rail Corridor...... 9 Projects and Metrolinx undertakings (Government of Ontario). 4.2.6 Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette, East of Rail Corridor...... 10 The intent of the report is to recognize tree impacts that may result from the construction 4.2.7 Ravine and Natural Feature Protection By-Law Protected Lands, of the proposed station; however, Metrolinx properties are not subject to the City of West of Rail Corridor...... 11 Toronto’s Private Tree By-law or the Ravine and Natural Feature Protection By-law. 4.3 Categorization of Trees by City of Toronto Private Tree By-law Categories ...... 12 The Caledonia Station Arborist Report – Eglinton Scarborough Crosstown LRT 4.4 Trees Removed from Eglinton Crosstown LRT Project Area...... 12 completed by Beacon Environmental (dated November 2012) was reviewed during the 5.0 Tree Preservation and Protection...... 12 preparation of this report to address trees that are located on lands that overlap with the 6.0 Tree Replacement and Compensation ...... 13 study areas of both the Caledonia GO and LRT station. 7.0 Conclusion...... 13

Figures 2.0 Study Area Figure 1: Tree Inventory Plan The site of the future Caledonia GO Station is located in the City of Toronto, in an area comprised of mixed commercial, residential and industrial land uses. The Study Area for Appendices the tree inventory extends approximately 60 m south and 300 m north of Eglinton Appendix A Tree Study Methodology Avenue West. The boundaries of the Study Area, as illustrated on Figure 1 (provided Appendix B Tree Assessment Data sheet before appendices), include lands adjacent to the development area (Project Area) Appendix C Limitation of Tree Studies including the Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette.

3.0 Methodology

The tree inventory and assessment was completed by Kevin Butt, ISA Certified Arborist on October 1, 2014 and March 12, 2015 according to the City of Toronto’s Private Tree By-Law (Article III of Chapter 813 of the Toronto Municipal Code) and the Guidelines for Completion of an Arborist Report (City of Toronto, January 2011). Trees were mapped using the Existing Property Plan (ECLE1-2C-SKG0011) and the Property Requirements Plan (ECLE1-2C-SKG0012) within the Reference Concept Design (RCD) prepared by ARUP and NORR Limited Architects (September 2013) overlaid on an air photo and property surveys to determine lands and the ownership of trees and which trees that will be impacted as a result of the design. Other elements of the RCD were reviewed in conjunction with the tree inventory.

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 2 Metrolinx 3 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

Lands accessed and reviewed within the Study Area comprised of the following Category 3 Trees of all diameters situated on City owned parkland within 6 metres of properties: the subject site. (Parks By-Law, Article VII of Chapter 608 of the Toronto Municipal Code) x Commercial lands immediately west (retail plaza) and east (2-4 Croham Road) of the Category 4 On lands designated under City of Toronto Municipal Code, Chapter 658, rail corridor; Ravine and Natural Feature Protection, trees of all diameters situated x Rear yards of residential lands abutting the rail corridor for trees that may be within 10 metres of any construction activity. impacted, but the properties were not accessed (i.e. reviewed from the rail corridor); Category 5 Trees of all diameters situated within the City road allowance adjacent to x South trailhead of the York Beltline Trail; and the subject site.(City Street Tree By-Law, Article II of Chapter 813 of the x Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette. Toronto Municipal Code) Most trees within the Study Area were individually measured and assessed. Trees Preliminary recommendations of tree preservation and removal are assigned based on Diametres at Breast Heights (DBH) were measured using a DBH tape at 1.4 m above the RCD (September 2013) and anticipated impacts that will occur within the rail corridor the ground, assigned a condition rating of “Good”, “Fair”, “Poor” or “Dead” based on and adjacent lands to accommodate construction. biological health and structure observations (in some cases with additional qualifying information, e.g., ornamental planting) and photographs were taken where access permitted. Trees with multiple stems were still measured at 1.4 m above the ground, like 4.0 Findings the single stemmed trees. The tree inventory and assessment findings have been detailed on Figure 1 and in Trees that are not subject to the City’s tree by-laws (i.e., private trees less than 30 cm Appendix B. DBH) were included in the study (i.e., tree nos. 3, 4, 7, 8 and 9 and tree group nos. 26 and 27) where their removal to accommodate development is anticipated. They were 4.1 Trees Found Within the Rail Corridor included to get a more complete understanding of tree removals that may occur and affect neighbouring properties (e.g., diminished aesthetics). Immature Trees within Rail Corridor Slopes (Tree Group Nos. 26 and 27 that are Not Subject to the Private Tree Protection By-Law) In cases where there are assemblages of immature trees not subject to the City’s tree by-laws, the assessment was carried out by grouping and assigning ranges to the trees’ All onsite trees are located on slopes adjacent to the east and west property limits of the characteristics. This grouping was done to ensure these trees were included in the rail corridor, abutting residential, commercial and industrial land uses. The majority of inventory while reasonably scoping the inventory to prevent hundreds of immature trees these trees are immature and multiple-stemmed with trunks 5 to 15 cm Diameter at from being individually assessed. Breast Height (DBH) within continuous hedgerows and have been delineated as Tree Group nos. 26 and 27 (no By-Law category), which span west and east of the rail Some of the trees investigated were tagged by others for a separate study. These tag corridor, respectively. Manitoba Maple (Acer negundo) is the dominant species within number were recorded and are provided in the data sheets of this study. the hedgerows with lesser associates of White Mulberry (Morus alba), Black Walnut (Juglans cinerea), Apple (Malus pumila), Siberian Elm (Ulmus pumila) and Norway Following assessment of the trees, the trees were assigned categories as per the Maple (Acer platanoides). Photograph 1 illustrates these conditions. Guidelines for completion of an Arborist Report. Keeping with the intent of the City’s tree protection by-laws, all trees with the following attributes were assessed and detailed on data sheets provided in Appendix B.

Table 1: City of Toronto Tree By-Law Categories Category 1 Trees with diameters of 30 cm or more, situated on private property on the subject site.(Private Tree By-Law, Article III of Chapter 813 of the Toronto Municipal Code) Category 2 Trees with diameters of 30 cm or more, situated on private property, up to within 6 metres of the subject site. (Private Tree By-Law, Article III of Chapter 813 of the Toronto Municipal Code)

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 4 Metrolinx 5 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

self-seeded apple tree with crooked trunks, epicormic sprouts and trunk fork that is low to the ground.

Photograph 1: Northview of Hedgerows and Group No. 26 and 27, west and east of rail corridor, respectively

Trees within Rail Corridor (Tree Nos. 1, 2, 12 and 25) that are Subject to the Private Tree Protection By-Law

Tree Nos. 1, 2, 12 and 25 have DBH’s greater than 30 cm and are located on west side of the railway corridor adjacent to commercial properties. Tree Nos. 1 and 2 (Category 1) are Manitoba Maples with poor condition due to severe leans and crooked trunks, resulting in an overall poor growth form. The trees are leaning toward the slope and are not anticipated to strike the track in the event of tree failure. Photograph 4: Tree No. 12

Removal of Trees Nos. 1, 2 and 12 may be required to accommodate the construction of the new station and improvements to the tracks.

Tree No. 25 is a multi-stemmed Manitoba Maple that appears to be shared (Categories 1 and 2) between railway lands and 115 Carnarvan Street (as per the Reference Concept Design). A rating of good condition is assigned to this tree. Impacts to this tree by the proposed work are not known at this stage.

Photograph 2: Tree No. 1 Photograph 3: Tree No. 2

Tree No. 12 (Category 1) is an Apple tree in fair condition with multi-stemmed structure with DBH’s of approximately 20, 25 and 35 cm. It displays characteristics of a

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 6 Metrolinx 7 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

Photograph 6: Trees East of 2 4 Croham Road

4.2.2 Retail Plaza (Tree Nos. 5 to 11), West of Rail Corridor

Tree Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are located at the north limit of the grassed portion of land on the retail plaza property located west of the railway corridor. This grouping of trees consists of White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis), Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Black Photograph 5: Tree No. 25 Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) and Manitoba Maple. Their condition ranges from good to fair.

4.2 Trees Located on Lands Adjacent to the Rail Corridor

4.2.1 2-4 Croham Road (Tree Nos. 3 and 4), East of Rail Corridor

The property at 2-4 Croham Road was reviewed from the sidewalk and rail corridor. Two Manitoba Maple trees (Tree No. 3 and 4) were found growing immediately in front (east) of the building, one is 10 cm DBH and the other is multiple-stemmed with stems ranging in diameter from 5 to 10 cm, respectively (no By-law category).

Photograph 7: Tree Nos. 5 to 11

Tree no. 11 appears to be shared with the adjacent residential lands at 101 Canarvan Street. This tree is a mature Manitoba Maple with a DBH of 68 cm.

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 8 Metrolinx 9 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

Photograph 9: Southwest View of Tree Nos. 14, 15, 16 and 17

4.2.5 York Beltline Trail (Tree Nos. 18 to 24), East of Rail Corridor

Tree Nos. 18, 19 and 20 are Serviceberries (Amelanchier sp.) that are found at the southern trailhead of the York Beltline Trail, on City-owned parklands, at the west terminus of Bowie Avenue (Category 3). These trees are immature and all have a DBH Photograph 8: Tree No. 11 of 8 cm. All trees have basal trunk damage that is consistent with string trimmer damage that occurs during turf maintenance. This damage is severe on Tree Nos. 19 Tree Nos. 5 to 11 are required for removal to accommodate the west access of the and 20. This damage is relatively less severe on Tree No. 18 but the tree has two pedestrian tunnel. Tree Nos. 6, 10 and 11 are Category 2 trees, the remaining trees do moderately severe trunk wounds. All of these trees will require removal to fall under any of the 5 categories. accommodate the construction of the east access to the pedestrian tunnel.

4.2.3 6 Croham Road (Tree No. 13), East of Rail Corridor

Tree No. 13 is a Manitoba Maple is located on the rear yard of 6 Croham Road with a DBH that appears to be close to 30 cm (Category 2). It is immediately adjacent to the building on the 2-4 Croham Road site, and removal of the building may result in impacts to this tree. No photograph is provided of this tree due to the obstructed view.

4.2.4 Traffic Island (Tree Nos. 14 to 17), East of Rail Corridor

Tree Nos. 14, 15, 16 and 17 are four Thornless Honeylocust (Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis) trees (DBHs 17, 19, 26 and 16, respectively) found in a traffic island within the City-owned right-of-way at the northeast corner of the Croham Road – Eglinton Avenue West intersection. All trees have been assigned ratings of good condition. These trees are not anticipated to be impacted by the proposed development since construction does not require alteration of the existing roads that could impact the traffic island through Photograph 10: Southward View of Tree Nos. 18, 19 and 20 encroachment.

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 10 Metrolinx 11 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

Tree and Tree Group Nos. 21, 22, 23 and 24 are located at the north side of the same trailhead, on the west side of the trail (Category 3). Tree No. 21 is another Serviceberry with a DBH of 8 cm and a good condition rating with no significant basal damage. Tree Nos. 22 and 23 are ornamental Norway Maples (Acer platanoides) with DBH’s of 19 and 20 cm, respectively, and both are assigned good ratings of condition. Tree group No. 24 is a naturalized grouping of 12 stems of Manitoba Maples, immediately adjacent to the railway fence, that have self-seeded from the tree thicket found on the railway property. All of these trees are adequately setback from the proposed west access to the pedestrian tunnel and no impacts are anticipated. Trees found north of this area are mainly within rows of Manitoba Maple on both sides of the trail, with a few ornamental plantings that are immediately adjacent the asphalt path.

Photograph 12: Westward View of Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette

4.2.7 Ravine and Natural Feature Protection By-Law Protected Lands, West of Rail Corridor

An area subject to the City’s Ravine and Natural Feature Protection (RNFP) By-Law is located to the west of the Project Area beginning at the intersection of Strathnairn Avenue and Carnarvan Street and extending northwest along Woodborough Avenue (see Figure 1). This feature continues westward to meet up with the regulated area associated with Black Creek. These RNFP designated lands are also designated as regulated area by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), also shown Photograph 11: Trees Found North of the Trailhead at Bowie Avenue, Adjacent to on Figure 1. No impacts to these lands will occur as a result of the proposed work. Asphalt Path

4.2.6 Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette, East of Rail Corridor

Impacts to trees within the City-owned Eglinton-Gilbert Parkette located at the southwest corner of Eglinton Avenue West and Gilbert Avenue are not anticipated to accommodate the proposed GO train service improvements. The park is dominated by ornamental plantings of Green Ash and Thornless Honeylocust that are located on the tableland portion of the park.

Photograph 13: Westward View of Woodborough Avenue, RNFP By-Law Protected Lands

R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 R.J. Burnside & Associates Limited 300034767.0000 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx 034767_GO Caledonia Tree Inventory Report.docx Metrolinx 12 Metrolinx 13 Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan Caledonia GO Station Environmental Assessment Tree Inventory Plan February 2016 February 2016

4.3 Categorization of Trees by City of Toronto Private Tree By-law offsite tree nos. 3,-11, 13, 18, 19 and 20. Categories Tree protection accomplished through the use of fencing (e.g., paige wire or wood Table 2 provides totals of trees found in each category. hoarding) should be illustrated on a tree preservation plan to be prepared at the 50% design stage. Details and notes regarding fence monitoring, construction standard and Table 2: Categorization of Trees by City of Toronto Private Tree By-law by-law requirements are elements to be incorporated into this plan. Categories Trees with diameters of 30 cm or more, situated on private Category 1 4* 6.0 Tree Replacement and Compensation property on the subject site. Trees with diameters of 30 cm or more, situated on private 4* Tree replacement will occur where the trees’ function is being lost for screening or Category 2 property, up to within 6 metres of the subject site. landscape aesthetics where reasonable and space permits. Compensation plantings will Trees of all diameters situated on City owned parkland within 7** be detailed in the landscape plan so that it can be coordinated with the other design Category 3 6 metres of the subject site. components. On lands designated under City of Toronto Municipal Code, 0 Chapter 658, Ravine and Natural Feature Protection, trees of Reasonable onsite planting locations for trees removed within the rail corridor may be Category 4 all diameters situated within 10 metres of any construction immediately adjacent 107 Carnarvan Street where the rail property becomes wider activity. relative to lands to the south on this site. Trees of all diameters situated within the City road allowance 4 Category 5 Plantings incorporated into the landscaping of the new Caledonia GO Station and adjacent to the subject site platform may enhance the lost function of removed trees, including shading and habitat *- Tree No. 11 is a shared tree that falls into category 1 and 2. ** - Tree Group No. 24 is represented by 12 trees for beneficial wildlife. Plantings must be selected and located so they will not be problematic to operations and potential future expansion of service. 4.4 Trees Removed from Eglinton Crosstown LRT Project Area City-owned parkland and road rights-of-way are recommended to receive compensation The Study Area of this investigation overlaps with the lands reviewed in the Beacon plantings, if acceptable to City staff. It is recommended that enhancements to parklands Environmental study (dated November 2012). Trees adjacent to railway corridor on the adjacent to the subject site such as Woodborough Avenue Park and the adjacent north side of Eglinton Avenue West have been removed to accommodate construction of expanded right-of-way are the priority for compensation plantings. It is also the Eglinton Crosstown LRT. These removals are trees within Group B (east of the rail recommended that plantings occur within the Eglinton Gilbert Parkette which was corridor) and individual trees south of the retail plaza (west of the rail corridor). impacted by removals of many Ash trees in Fall 2014. The York Beltline Trail would benefit from installation of specimen plantings to offset lost habitat and compensate lost canopy cover within the Project Area. Compensation within offsite lands, ravine areas 5.0 Tree Preservation and Protection and TRCA lands will be discussed with TRCA and City staff at the detailed design phase of the Project. Tree preservation and removal will be determined at the 50% completion detailed design stage when limits of grading are being determined. Opportunities for grading Compensation plantings are recommended to be native or non-invasive ornamental adjustments to promote tree retention, where reasonable, may occur through species with tolerance to urban conditions. Species that require no maintenance once collaboration between the project arborist and the grading plan designer. established should be the priority for plant selection. The preservation and removal of trees reviewed in this study are illustrated on Figure 1. It is anticipated that the following trees: 7.0 Conclusion x Will be preserved Tree preservation and removal has been anticipated to provide a preliminary shared tree no. 25; and determination of tree removal required to accommodate the construction of the new offsite tree and tree group nos. 14 to17 and 21 to 24. elements associated with the Caledonia GO Station project. No removals are required x Will require removal: at this stage; however, the grading plan should be reviewed at the detailed design stage onsite tree nos. 1, 2, and 12; (i.e., 50% design completion) to ensure impacts to all onsite and offsite trees subject to, onsite tree groups 26 and 27; and or exempt from the City’s tree by-laws are adequately addressed, as needed.

Appendix A. Tree Studies: Methodology

The list provided below represents all data that may be collected in the analysis of trees. Methodology descriptions should be reviewed with the column headings provided in the data. The columns represent the scope and extent of the tree assessment carried out.

Tree #: This number may be assigned by the tree assessor or predetermined by the surveyor or client. The number corresponds with the tree tag affixed to the tree, if tree tagging is part of the study’s scope.

Appendix A Appendix A Species: Botanical name of the species and commonly used English name. DBH (cm): Diameter at Breast Height measured using DBH tape or tree caliper.

Tree Study Methodology TPZ (m): Tree protection zone required based on the required setback from the trunk, as designated by the agency (e.g., municipality). The TPZ is calculated by doubling the setback and including the trunk diameter to create a diameter of circle of protection around the tree.

Condition (G, F, P, D): A qualitative score of the combination of biological health and structural condition assigned as Good, Fair, Poor or Dead.

Potential Conflict with RCD: Potential Conflict with the Reference Concept Design (RCD) is anticipated that to require the removal of trees and/ or tree groups. Final determination of preservation and removal of the trees and / or tree groups to occur at 50% design stage.

Additional Notes: This section is intended to list additional information about the trees, as needed. Additional details on tree health or structure, as components of Condition, and the severity of the factor (e.g., severe crown dieback) may be included in this section that assisted the arborist with the qualification of the tree as Good, Fair or Poor.

1 Butt 5 2015 12, 4 Kevin Categories Mar. 3 & Assessor: 2 2014 Toronto 1, of 1 10000 00000 00000 01000 01000 10000 01000 10000 00000 00000 01000 00000 00000 Oct. City stubs crooked of of

Appendix B poor (moderate), Assessment: and out out (low) southward) northward), of (moderate), fence,

Tree Assessment Data sheet into Date (severe) trunk growing growing dieback branches (severe, deadwood (moderate), (severe, (severe) (severe) southward) (low) (low) form growing crown crown broken crooked slope slope gall Notes growth stemmed, stemmed, roots on on Sheet building tree, development (moderate), growth (moderate, sided fork flower #0299, #0298, #0295 Data Appendix B Low Additional against sidewalk sidewalk unbalanced trunk Tag One Multiple Leaning Multiple (moderate), Leaning Tag lean Poor Shared leader Tag Ash Girdling RCD* Assessment Conflict Potential with Tree B (G,F,P,D) Condition Appendix (m) TPZ 12 3.7 P Yes Ͳ 62 9.0 F Yes 30 5.1 P Yes 33 5.1 P10 3.7 Yes P Yes 16 3.8 F Yes 68 9.1 F Yes 24 3.8 F Yes 34 5.1 G(F) Yes 27 3.9 G(F) Yes 27 3.9 G(F) Yes DBH 5 (cm) 35,35 5.3 P Yes 35,20,25 6.5 F Yes EA Station a Cedar Caledonia Maple Maple Maple Maple Maple Maple Maple pennsylvanica pennsylvanica pennsylvanica White pseudoacaci GO sp. Ash Ash Ash occidentalis Locust negundo negundo negundo negundo negundo negundo negundo 300035344 cer cer cer cer cer cer #: Name: Apple Malus Species Thuja Black A A A A A A Eastern Manitoba Manitoba Acer Manitoba Manitoba Manitoba Manitoba Manitoba Green Fraxinus Green Fraxinus Robinia Green Fraxinus 4 5 1 2 3 6 7 9 8 # 13 12 11 10 Tree Project Project Project#:300035344 AppendixBTreeAssessmentDataSheet DateofAssessment:Oct.1,2014&Mar.12,2015 ProjectName:GOCaledoniaStationEA Assessor:KevinButt

Tree Potential # DBH TPZ Condition Conflict CityofTorontoCategories Species (cm) (m) (G,F,P,D) withRCD* AdditionalNotes 12345 Tag#665,epicormicsprouts(low),in 14 Gleditsiatriacanthosvar.inermis 17 3.8 G(F) No trafficisland 00001 ThornlessHoneylocust Tag#668,intrafficisland 15 Gleditsiatriacanthosvar.inermis 19 3.8 G No 00001 ThornlessHoneylocust Tag#666,intrafficisland 16 Gleditsiatriacanthosvar.inermis 26 3.9 G No 00001 ThornlessHoneylocust Tag#667,intrafficisland 17 Gleditsiatriacanthosvar.inermis 16 3.8 G No 00001 ThornlessHoneylocust Amelanchiersp. Basaltrunkwound(low),2trunkwounds 18 83.7F Yes 00100 Serviceberrysp. (moderate) Amelanchiersp. Basaltrunkwound(severe) 19 83.7F(P)Yes 00100 Serviceberrysp. Amelanchiersp. Basaltrunkwound(severe) 20 83.7F(P)Yes 00100 Serviceberrysp. Amelanchiersp. 21 8 3.7G No 00100 Serviceberrysp. Acerplatanoides Ornamentalplanting 22 19 3.8 G No 00100 NorwayMaple Acerplatanoides Ornamentalplanting 23 20 3.8 G No 00100 NorwayMaple Acernegundo 12stemsinagrouping,growingwithin 24 8Ͳ14 3.8 G No 00100 ManitobaMaple 1moffenceonCityproperty Acernegundo Lessthan1mfromfence 25 30,35,25 7.7 G No 11000 ManitobaMaple

Project#:300035344 AppendixBTreeAssessmentDataSheet DateofAssessment:Oct.1,2014&Mar.12,2015 ProjectName:GOCaledoniaStationEA Assessor:KevinButt

Tree Potential # DBH TPZ Condition Conflict CityofTorontoCategories Species (cm) (m) (G,F,P,D) withRCD* AdditionalNotes 12345 ManitobaMaple(dominant),Siberian Elm,BlackLocust,Apple,NorwayMaple, 26 Multiplespecies(hedgerow) 5Ͳ15 n/a F Yes 00000 WhiteMulberry,BlackWalnut

ManitobaMaple(dominant),Siberian Elm,BlackLocust,Apple,NorwayMaple, 27 Multiplespecies(hedgerow) 5Ͳ15 n/a F Yes 00000 WhiteMulberry,BlackWalnut

Total 45704

*ͲPotentialConflictwithReferenceConceptDesign(RCD)anticipatedrequiringtreeortreegroupstoberemoved.Finaldeterminationofpreservation andremovaltooccurat50%designstage.

CityofTorontoCategories(asperArboristReportforDevelopmentApplications ,June2010) 1.Treeswithdiametersof30cmormore,situatedonprivatepropertyonthesubjectsite. 2.Treeswithdiametersof30cmormore,situatedonprivateproperty,uptowithin6metresofthesubjectsite. 3.TreesofalldiameterssituatedonCityownedparklandwithin6metresofthesubjectsite. 4.OnlandsdesignatedunderCityofTorontoMunicipalCode,Chapter658,RavineandNaturalFeatureProtection,treesofalldiameterssituatedwithin 10metresofanyconstructionactivity. 5.TreesofalldiameterssituatedwithintheCityroadallowanceadjacenttothesubjectsite.

3 7UHH6WXGLHV/LPLWDWLRQV

7KLVUHSRUWGUDZLQJVDQGGDWD LHTXDOLWDWLYHDQGTXDQWLWDWLYHPHDVXUHPHQWV DUHLQWHQGHGWR LQIRUPWKHUHFLSLHQWDQGUHYLHZHU V RIWKHUHSRUWRIWKHWUHH V FRQGLWLRQDWWKHWLPHRIWKH DVVHVVPHQW7KHDVVHVVPHQWPD\EHOLPLWHGE\WKHIROORZLQJFRQVWUDLQWV

$FFHVV±WUHHLVORFDWHGRIIVLWHRUWKHRQVLWHORFDWLRQLVQRWUHDVRQDEO\DFFHVVHG

:HDWKHU±DFFXPXODWHGVQRZDURXQGWKHEDVHRULQEUDQFKDWWDFKPHQWVPD\REVFXUH GHIHFWV Appendix C 6HDVRQ±ELRWLFLQGLFDWLRQV HJIROLDJHFKORURVLVRUIXQJDOIUXLWLQJERGLHV DUHRQO\REYLRXV IRUDSRUWLRQRIWKH\HDU Limitation of Tree Studies 9LVXDOREVWUXFWLRQV±(OHPHQWVVXFKDVRWKHUWUHHV¶FDQRSLHVFDQSUHYHQWWKHYLHZRIWKH HQWLUHWUHH

7KHVWXG\LVFRPSOHWHGIURPWKHJURXQGXVLQJD'%+WDSHRUWUHHFDOLSHU1RQLQYDVLYHWRROV VXFKDVELQRFXODUVDQGDVRXQGLQJKDPPHUPD\EHXVHGWRSURYLGHDGGLWLRQDOLQIRUPDWLRQ DERXWGHIHFWVDQGFKDUDFWHULVWLFV([FDYDWLRQRIWKHURRW]RQHDQGRWKHULQWHQVLYHDQDO\VHV KDYHQRWEHHQFRPSOHWHGXQOHVVVWDWHG

,WPXVWEHXQGHUVWRRGWKDWWUHHVPD\QRWPDQLIHVWVLJQVRUV\PSWRPV HJGLHEDFN RIVRPH LPSDFWV HJURRWFRPSDFWLRQ LPPHGLDWHO\DQGVRUHFHQWFKDQJHVWRWKHWUHHRULWVJURZLQJ FRQGLWLRQVSULRUWRWKHDVVHVVPHQWPD\QRWEHDSSDUHQWWRWKHDVVHVVRU$OVRFKDQJHVWRWKH WUHHFRQGLWLRQUHVXOWLQJIURPGDPDJHZHDWKHULQIHVWDWLRQVGHIHFWVVRLOGHFD\OLJKWPRLVWXUH H[SRVXUHHWFPD\RFFXUDIWHUWKHDVVHVVPHQW

1RWUHHLVZLWKRXWVRPHOHYHORIULVNZKHUHDWUHHPD\IDLODQGVWULNHDWDUJHW0LWLJDWLRQ RSWLRQVLISURYLGHGZLOOQRWHOLPLQDWHULVNEXWDUHSUHVFULEHGWUHDWPHQWVWRUHGXFHULVNEDVHGRQ Appendix C WKHPHDVXUHGDQGDVVHVVHGIDFWRUVDWWKHWLPHRIDVVHVVPHQWVXEMHFWWRVLWHDQGDVVHVVPHQW FRQVWUDLQWV

,GHQWLILFDWLRQRIWKHRZQHUVKLSRIDVVHVVHGWUHHV LHRQVLWHRURIIVLWH PDGHLQWKHUHSRUWLV EDVHGRQWKHOHJDOVXUYH\7KHDVVHVVRURIWUHHVXVHVWKHSRLQWORFDWLRQRIWKHWUHHSURYLGHGRQ WKHVXUYH\DQGWKHOLPLWVRISURSHUW\WRDVVLJQRZQHUVKLSLQWKHUHSRUWDQGDVVRFLDWHGPDWHULDOV