MYLER ECOLOGICAL CONSULTING APRIL 2020€¦ · EPA Draper’s Creek PSW and an unmapped portion ECA significant woodland (discussed below). Core Natural Heritage Features – PSW

395 & 401 SOUTH PELHAM ROAD,

WELLAND

CONDOMINIUM REDEVELOPMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY

UPDATE

ROWT INC.

APRIL 2020

MYLER ECOLOGICAL CONSULTING

EIS – 395 & 401 South Pelham Road, Welland April 2020

INTRODUCTION

Myler Ecological Consulting (Myler) was retained by ROWT Inc. to prepare an Environmental Impact

Study (EIS) Update to the Beacon 2016 EIS that was submitted in support of residential condominium

redevelopment of the residential property described as 401 South Pelham Road, Welland, Ontario (the site).

The redevelopment concept at that time included 15 residential condominium units within 401 South

Pelham Road and 3 units within the attached 395 South Pelham Road, for a total of 18 units. The Beacon

EIS recommended a 30-metre setback from the mapped Provincially Significant Wetland that would

simultaneously protect an occurrence of a group of Eastern Flowering Dogwood and its corresponding

regulated habitat. Proposed removal of a small area (0.25 ha) of trees from the edge of the woodland was

not determined to be a significant impact given a lack of sensitive features in that area and the overall size

of the woodland.

In the time since submission of the Beacon EIS, the site changed ownership and an incident of trespass and

illegal logging by unidentified individuals resulted in the felling and removal of many large trees from the

woodland edge before it was halted. A few scattered smaller trees were left standing, now isolated from the

woodland, and the eastern limit of the woodland was altered.

Myler’s EIS Update investigates the resulting shift in woodland extent on the site, describes the resulting

current extent of environmental constraints at the site, and identifies how they and Beacon’s EIS and

supplementary bat maternity roost investigation results were considered in development of a revised

redevelopment design concept to ensure compliance with applicable policies and conservation objectives.

PRECONSULTATION AND EIS UPDATE SCOPING

A pre-consultation was held 03 May 2018 during which the need for an EIS Update was identified. Upper

Canada Consultants (UCC) planner Craig Rohe subsequently engaged staff of Niagara Region and Niagara

Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) on scoping of the EIS Update. Staff had reviewed the Beacon

EIS and on that basis provided EIS Update scoping comments (see attached) that may be summarized as

follows:

• Depiction of the updated development plan.

• NPCA indicated preference for a 30 metre wetland setback, otherwise unspecified additional study could be required.

• Regional staff do not require additional surveys but indicated that the EIS Update should comment on the continued adequacy and appropriateness of Beacon’s surveys.

• Assessment and update of Beacon’s recommended mitigation measures and confirmation in the EIS Update conclusions of no negative impact on the NPCA Regulated Area.

• A water balance demonstrating no negative hydrological impact on the wetland.

• An edge management plan.

• MNRF (now MECP) contact to confirm the need for an Overall Benefit Permit for tree removal, and possible need for a bat roost habitat survey.

Myler Ecological Consulting 1


• Confirmation regarding Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance regarding the occurrence of salamanders in the genus Ambystoma.

• Cite the updated EIS Guidelines (January 2018) that include the recent administrative updates regarding the Region’s role in EIS scoping, review and approval.

Accordingly, to address the Update scope, this EIS Update was prepared in accordance with the Niagara

Region EIS Guidelines (Version 2, January 2018) to cite Beacon’s recent EIS and bat maternity roost

investigation findings and to include updated woodland delineation and Species at Risk screening,

occurrence and compliance information. The EIS update presents the revised development concept and

revised buffers/setbacks along with an updated impact assessment and recommended mitigation and edge

management measures.

PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT

The redevelopment concept is depicted in Figure 1, attached, which shows the following key elements of

the residential condominium redevelopment:

• No new lot lines will be created within natural features or their buffers. The site will be divided by a new lot line established along the proposed development limit, and the natural features and buffer

will be conveyed to the City of Welland.

• No building demolition is required. A small existing building is shown in the background survey, but it no longer exists. The former residence was removed long ago.

• A condominium road will provide access to the nine condominium blocks from South Pelham Road and Fitch Street intersection.

• The condominium blocks will be arranged around an internal park-like amenity area containing a dry stormwater management pond and oil-grit separator.

• The development limit will respect a wetland setback of 30 metres (solid blue line on the drawing) in the southern two-thirds of the site and 15 metres (dashed blue line on the drawing) from a small

swale/watercourse portion of the wetland in the northern one-third of the site.

• The development limit is outside of the significant woodland dripline (green line on the drawing) in the southern two-thirds of the site. Minor intrusion into the irregular and disturbed dripline within

the northern one-third of the site will be compensated through on-site restoration of woodland in

currently disturbed areas (shaded orange on the drawing).

• The development limit avoids the clump of five Eastern Flowering Dogwood trees (red points on the drawing) and both the regulated habitat of 20 metres radius from each tree (magenta circles on

the drawing) and the area of woodland within which the Dogwood trees occur.

Site preparation and grading will require removal of scattered isolated non-woodland trees and a few

individual woodland edge trees in the northern one-third of the site. Grading will be minor as the site was



formerly a flat residential property with evidence of minor historical filling and grades must be matched at

neighbouring properties to the north and south of the site. The Functional Servicing Report (UCC, April

2020) confirmed that existing conditions of drainage towards the woodland and wetland will be maintained.

NATURAL FEATURES, CONSTRAINTS, IMPACTS AND POLICY REQUIREMENTS

Existing mapping and the Beacon EIS and supplementary bat maternity roost investigation were reviewed

to identify the extent of natural features that could represent constraints to development. Sources included

the online Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) Watershed Explorer and the Natural Heritage

Information Centre (NHIC) Land Information Ontario wetland mapping, and Official Plan (OP) schedules

of the City of Welland and Niagara Region.

The City of Welland OP (Revised November 4, 2019), the existing 2014 Consolidated Regional OP and

the current NPCA Policy Document (June 2019 Office Consolidation) were reviewed to confirm

compliance with policies that guide the definition, delineation and conservation objectives related to the

identified natural heritage constraints. Determination of natural heritage policy compliance was consistent

with the current Provincial Policy Statement (2014) and with the soon to be in force 2020 Provincial Policy

Statement. Ontario Regulation 242/08 was reviewed in relation to Endangered Species Act (ESA)

compliance.

Myler conducted site visits on 20 February 2019 (reconnaissance), 08 March 2019 (mapped woodland limit,

Eastern Flowering Dogwood observations, and additional reconnaissance of site conditions) and 28 October

2019 (observations of ground cover vegetation).

Site Setting

The site is located within the urban limit of the City of Welland, immediately west of the intersection of

South Pelham Road and Fitch Street. 401 South Pelham Road was a large residential property with a single

home and accessory buildings, none which currently remain. 395 South Pelham Road occupies the

southeast corner of the site and, while there is no evidence of it having contained a home, it appears to have

been maintained essentially as a manicured part of the 401 South Pelham Road residential lot.

The eastern portion of the site fronting on South Pelham Road is an open manicured area of lawn and

amenity trees. The western portion of the site is part of a woodland area contained within the northern

central portion of the block bounded by South Pelham Round, Murdoch Street, Chantler Road and Webber

Road.

The site is flat and the single mapped watercourse on site is a small low-gradient ephemeral headwater

swale within the wooded western portion of the site. The Beacon EIS did not report the occurrence of

natural hazards. On-line NPCA regulation mapping shows no natural hazards such as floodplain or slopes.

Accordingly, there appear to be no natural hazard constraints on the site.

Welland OP Schedules C and C1 and the Regional OP Schedule C depict Environmental Protection Area

(EPA) corresponding with on-site portions of the mapped extent of Draper’s Creek Provincially Significant

Wetland (PSW). The wooded portion of the site is neither mapped nor designated on schedules of the



Welland and Regional OPs. Both Welland and Regional OP schedules show a Natural Heritage Corridor

centred on the west branch of Draper’s Creek near the southwest corner of the site, but it does not include

the PSW or woodland on-site and is separated from the redevelopment footprint by the PSW and woodland.

Designated environmental constraints relevant to the redevelopment are limited to a mapped portion of the

EPA Draper’s Creek PSW and an unmapped portion ECA significant woodland (discussed below).

Core Natural Heritage Features – PSW and Significant Woodland

Beacon identified three distinct vegetation communities on site as follows:

• CUM1 – Mineral Cultural Meadow: representing the open manicured and formerly manicured open former residential yard fronting on South Pelham Road and including scattered individual tree

specimens. Site observations confirmed that historical fill placement occurred within the cultural

footprint to create the residential portion of the property.

• FOD2 – Dry-Fresh Oak-Maple-Hickory Deciduous Forest: occurs in the western part of the site, as part of a larger wooded area in the centre of a large block defined by local roads and bounded by

residential properties. The eastern limit of the Forest was re-mapped by Myler on 08 March 2019

to depict its current extent after the theft of timber.

• SWD1-3 – Pin Oak Mineral Deciduous Swamp: occurs as an inclusion within the forest, comprising small ephemerally wetted depressions and an ephemeral swale. Beacon noted that the MNRF

wetland mapping for the on-site portion of the Draper’s Creek PSW had incorrectly included a

small area of upland forest near the southern site boundary, in the vicinity of Eastern Flowering

Dogwood specimens.

Beacon’s vegetation inventory identified 170 species of which all were common except for the endangered

Eastern Flowering Dogwood. Beacon found a group of three Eastern Flowering Dogwood specimens in

2015 and Myler’s 2019 observations of the on-site forest discovered two more specimens near the group.

Myler mapped all five Eastern Flowering Dogwood specimens found on the site. ESA compliance regarding

Eastern Flowering Dogwood is discussed below.

Beacon’s amphibian breeding surveys identified four common frog species in the wetland pools, with

Western Chorus Frog and Wood Frog exhibiting the most calls, accompanied by a few calling individuals

of American Toad and Leopard Frog. A single Ambystoma salamander egg mass was observed and can be

attributed to the common Spotted Salamander as the site is within the range of that species and is well

outside of the range of the endangered Jefferson Salamander, discussed below. The site also occurs within

the range of the related Blue-spotted Salamander, but it lays eggs singly.

Beacon’s incidental observations of reptiles included only a single observed Eastern Gartersnake.

Additionally, Beacon accurately concluded that the ephemeral pool aquatic habitat within the wetland was

insufficient to support any of Ontario’s turtle species.

Beacon’s breeding bird survey recorded a total of 28 common bird species on and adjacent to the site,

comprising species tolerant of suburban settings. At the time of Beacon’s survey, a small residential garage



remained on site and it was checked for Barn Swallow nests, with none discovered. The garage has since

been demolished.

Beacon’s incidental observations of mammalian wildlife identified 8 common mammals. Beacon’s

subsequent bat maternal roost investigation within the woodland on site identified 4 common bat species

and the endangered Little Brown Myotis, with most bat activity recorded away from the proposed

redevelopment and west of the wetland at the westernmost extent of the site.

Draper’s Creek Provincially Significant Wetland

The Beacon EIS addressed the on-site portions of the Draper’s Creek PSW and proposed a minor revision

of the eastern wetland limit near the southern property boundary. The wetland boundary revision was not

pursued, and provincial wetland mapping has not been revised. Given the occurrence of Eastern Flowering

Dogwood regulated habitat and significant woodland in that area, the wetland boundary revision would be

of little consequence to the extent of natural heritage features and constraints and the resulting area available

for redevelopment. The provincial wetland mapping is depicted on the attached redevelopment concept

plan and the wetland buffer is measured from the provincially mapped wetland limit.

Beacon described the wetland on site as occupying a shallow linear depression on clay soils and supported

by snowmelt and sheet flow runoff within the woodland. Beacon found the areas of shallow standing water

within the wetland to be ephemeral seasonal features that support amphibian species that breed in such

vernal pools, but that do not provide habitat for fish or turtles. The PSW vegetation community is dominated

by the hardy species Pin Oak, Bur Oak and Buttonbush.

Policy compliance in relation to the PSW includes complete avoidance of development within the

provincially mapped extent of the wetland (consistent with the PPS, NPCA, Region and City policies for

PSW and EPA natural heritage features). The development concept includes a protective 30 metre buffer

in the southern two-thirds of the site and a 15 metre buffer in the northern one-third of the site. The wetland

is well buffered by natural vegetation from the site’s open cultural area due to its location at the core of the

woodland.

In the southern portion of the site the wetland is broader and contains amphibian breeding pools. The

woodland extends generally >20 metres eastward from the PSW limit in that area and also includes the 20

metre regulated habitat radius around the Eastern Flowering Dogwoods, so a 30 metre buffer will capture

and retain those features.

In the northern portion of the site, the woodland limit is very irregular, and the woodland’s transitional edge

is more disturbed. In this area, the adjacent wetland area is a narrow connecting swale, which is much less

sensitive in form and function than the breeding pools. A proposed 15 metre buffer will retain a continuous

protective band of woodland adjacent to the wetland connecting swale while removing a few woodland

edge trees to establish a straight development limit. Managed passive restoration of woodland within the

wetland buffer nearer the amphibian breeding pools will more than offset the small area of tree removal to

the north.

NPCA policy 8.2.3.4 generally prohibits lot creation within 30 metres of a wetland but allows for

consideration of a reduction of the setback to 15 metres. The only new lot lines proposed within the site is



intended to facilitate conveyance of the natural area and buffer to the City of Welland. Policy 8.2.3.4

identifies 15 metres as a reasonable alternative width of separation from wetlands to be considered in light

of site-specific conditions.

NPCA policy 8.2.3.5c generally prohibits new development within 30 metres of PSW where no

development currently exists. Policy 8.2.3.5c also allows consideration of a reduction below 30 metres

based on factors of which the nature of proposed development, proximity to the wetland, adjacent land use,

condition of the 30 metre regulation area, extent of natural buffer, restoration of buffer functions, presence

of sensitive ecological features and ecological and hydrological function are relevant to the site and its

conditions. It is worth noting that redevelopment of the site is not entirely new development, as it is

proposed for the open, previously disturbed residential yard. The young age of most of the woodland trees

and the lack of typical forest floor ground cover indicates that the wetland and its function have persisted

despite historical clearing and cutting of woodland, and probably benefited from the juxtaposition of

remnant forest with open cultural areas, at least in terms of amphibian diversity. Western Chorus Frog,

observed in chorus quantity, and Northern Leopard Frog are species that benefit from open areas, while the

Wood Frog and Spotted Salamander are forest species. Where the reduction of wetland buffer is proposed,

the 15 metre buffer to be retained is comprised of intact young woodland, but the area between 15 and 30

metres is highly disturbed and would not provide much buffer function. Additionally, the 15 metre buffer

is proposed adjacent to a narrow swale portion of the PSW and away from the potentially sensitive

amphibian breeding pools in the southern portion of the site. Forest restoration is proposed for the 30 metre

buffer adjacent to the breeding pools. Hydrological function of the wetland is simple, characterized by

ephemeral standing water derived from snowmelt and runoff collecting in low areas over relatively

impermeable clay soils. Upper Canada Consultants’ April 2020 Functional Servicing Report confirmed that

existing conditions of runoff westerly towards the wetland would be maintained by the redevelopment.

Accordingly, a 15 metre forested buffer adjacent to the swale portion of PSW is considered sufficient width

to accept overland runoff and contribute to hydrologic function. Erosion is not a concern given the flat

grades and vegetation cover throughout the site and adjacent properties.

Significant Woodland

The Beacon EIS identified significant woodland in the western portion of the site and extending onto

neighbouring properties based on defining criteria including overall area of the woodland’s extent within

the neighbourhood, the PSW inclusion and the occurrence of SAR.

Beacon’s EIS included ELC mapping that depicted the eastern woodland limit adjacent to open cultural

area on the site. Beacon described the on-site portion of woodland as disturbed, transitional and dominated

by young trees with very widely scattered mature specimens. Beacon found no spring ephemeral plant

species in the on-site portion of woodland, which is indicative of past disturbance and subsequent

recolonization of cultural meadow by trees and shrubs, none of which are particularly sensitive species.

Myler’s observations conducted during a site reconnaissance on 20 February 2019 led to re-mapping of the

eastern limit of the significant woodland on 08 March 2019 using a mapping grade DGPS unit. The revised

woodland limit is depicted on the attached redevelopment concept plan to reflect the localized loss of some

woodland edge trees to timber theft and a consequential slight increase in the extent of open, disturbed

cultural meadow.



The woodland is neither mapped nor designated on City and Regional OP schedules. As explained in

Beacon’s EIS, the portion of the woodland that is regulated habitat of Eastern Flowering Dogwood would

satisfy the EPA definition criterion of “significant habitat of threatened and endangered species”. The

remainder of the woodland satisfies City and Regional definitions of significant woodland and is therefore

classified as ECA.

City and Regional policies do not stipulate a VPZ for development adjacent to EPA and ECA areas.

Regional OP policy 7.B.1.11 permits development and site alteration adjacent to EPA lands if supported

by conclusions of an EIS. Compliance with applicable natural heritage policies of the City and Region

could be accomplished by simple avoidance of intrusion within the EPA portion of the significant

woodland, but a buffer area for woodland restoration has also been identified between the existing dripline

and the development limit.

Development is generally prohibited within significant woodland per PPS, Region and City policies, unless

it can be demonstrated that the woodland feature and its ecological function will not be adversely impacted.

The portion of the woodland that contains the regulated habitat of the single group of Eastern Flowering

Dogwood satisfies the EPA criterion of “significant habitat of threatened and endangered species” and will

be completely avoided by the redevelopment and afforded additional protection and area for woodland

restoration and expansion within the 30 metre portion of the PSW buffer.

The redevelopment concept includes a small area of tree removal in the northern third of the site, away

from the EPA designation and within the disturbed and irregular edge of ECA significant woodland. The

removal of a few trees in a small area will be more than offset by restoration of woodland in existing open

cultural meadow areas of the 30 metre PSW buffer in the southern two-thirds of the site. Intrusion within

the disturbed irregular transitional edge of the less sensitive ECA significant woodland will involve a total

of approximately 594 m2, but will be more than offset on site by woodland restoration adjacent to the more

sensitive southern extent of woodland in an area totalling approximately 806 m2.

The area of woodland restoration will provide additional buffering and supporting habitat adjacent to the

PSW’s amphibian breeding ponds and within and adjacent to the regulated habitat radii of the Eastern

Flowering Dogwoods.

Species at Risk Screening

The Beacon EIS reported the results of SAR screening, identifying the occurrence of Eastern Flowering

Dogwood, a small tree species that is endangered by the dogwood anthracnose disease. Beacon’s

supplementary bat maternal roost investigation discovered the occurrence of the endangered Little Brown

Myotis, a bat species that is endangered by the white nose syndrome caused by an introduced fungus that

attacks hibernating bats in damp underground hibernacula.

The observation of a single egg mass of an unidentified Ambystoma salamander triggered questions about

the possible occurrence of the endangered Jefferson Salamander, but screening described below indicates

absence of that SAR and identifies the occurrence of the common Spotted Salamander.

Measures are described below to maintain compliance with the Endangered Species Act that include

measures to avoid harm to individuals of the identified SAR and to ensure that SAR habitat will not be



adversely affected.

Eastern Flowering Dogwood

Beacon found and mapped a group of three Eastern Flowering Dogwood specimens in 2015. Myler’s 2019

observations of the on-site forest discovered two more specimens very close by, making a group of 5

specimens. The Dogwood specimens appeared to be healthy and producing fruit. However, no other Eastern

Flowering Dogwood were observed on site. Myler mapped all five Eastern Flowering Dogwood specimens

found on the site.

ESA compliance will be achieved for Eastern Flowering Dogwood as the redevelopment limit completely

avoids each specimen, its 20 metre radius regulated habitat and that portion of the woodland in which the

sole group of Eastern Flowering Dogwood was found. Application of a 30 metre PSW buffer near the

Flowering Dogwood will provide additional buffer and an area of restored extent of forest edge habitat

suitable for the colonization by additional specimens that may arise through natural seed dispersal from the

on-site specimens.

Endangered Bat Maternal Roost Habitat

Beacon investigated the presence of roosting bats in 2018, with a leaf-off snag survey conducted in April

and an acoustic survey conducted during June. Beacon’s September 2018 report is attached.

Most snag trees were found west of the wetland and in more mature, less disturbed forest. Only one snag

tree was identified by Beacon near the eastern woodland edge.

Acoustic monitoring results confirmed 7,232 bat calls, most of which were recorded deeper into the

woodland at the two monitoring stations west of the wetland. Only 82 calls were determined to be

endangered Little Brown Myotis, of which only 5 calls were recorded east of the wetland. West of the PSW,

77 Myotis calls were recorded in an area deeper within the woods where the greatest concentration of

candidate snag trees occurs.

These results indicate minor occurrence of endangered bats within the woodland, and only incidental

occurrence around candidate snag trees east of the wetland within the eastern edge of the woodland. While

endangered bat roosts were not identified in the woodland close to the proposed redevelopment limit, the

occurrence of endangered bats confers regulated habitat status on the woodland.

MECP was contacted (Michelle Karam, personal communication) to discuss ESA compliance relating to

limited removal of small numbers of trees at the edge of woodland identified as regulated bat habitat. It was

confirmed that ESA compliance would be maintained without the need for an Overall Benefit Permit if tree

removal avoided bat roosting season and if the extent of woodland would not be substantially affected.

Such a strategy would not adversely affect the availability of bat maternal roost habitat and, being done

outside of the maternal roost season when bats are absent, has no potential to harm individual bats that

could incidentally occur on the trees.



Accordingly, the proposed removal of a few woodland edge trees where acoustic monitoring identified only

incidental endangered bat occurrence and where there is no evidence of maternal roosting, balanced by

woodland restoration in currently disturbed areas, will comply with the ESA.

Ambystoma Salamander

Beacon’s amphibian breeding surveys identified a single Ambystoma salamander egg mass, which

triggered questions about the potential occurrence of the endangered Jefferson Salamander. The site is well

outside of the range of the endangered Jefferson Salamander, which extends only into the far western limit

of Niagara Region in the vicinity of Grimsby. The observed egg mass can be attributed to the common

Spotted Salamander as the site is within the range of that species. The site also occurs within the range of

the common Blue-spotted Salamander, but it does not produce egg masses and only lays eggs singly. As a

result, ESA compliance in relation to salamanders is not required for the redevelopment, but the occurrence

of salamanders within the woodland and the PSW’s breeding pools was considered in the context of

candidate Significant Wildlife Habitat and in the derivation of recommended buffers.

Significant Wildlife Habitat Screening

Beacon’s EIS reported candidate Significant Wildlife Habitat for breeding amphibians associated with the

PSW’s ephemeral pools. Beacon’s subsequent bat maternal roost investigation, while focused on the

occurrence of endangered bat species, simultaneously collected data on common bat species that supports

consideration of candidate SWH for maternal roost colonies of non-SAR bats.

Amphibian Breeding Habitat (Woodland)

Beacon’s 2015 amphibian surveys on the site discovered one Ambystoma salamander egg mass and an

abundance of breeding Western Chorus Frog and Wood Frog. The range of the endangered Jefferson

Salamander does not extend to Welland, so the salamander egg mass was not that of a SAR. The SWH

abundance criteria of breeding salamanders and frogs was confirmed on site only for Western Chorus Frog

but not definitively for any other species and was therefore not satisfied. However, it is possible that

sufficient numbers of breeding individuals could occur locally given the greater off-site extent of suitable

breeding pool habitat within the broader woodland. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider it possible that

the woodland may be Amphibian Breeding Habitat SWH and to consider it candidate SWH worthy of

conservation and protection.

The candidate amphibian breeding SWH will be completely avoided by redevelopment and will be afforded

the protection of a 30 metre PSW buffer.

Bat Maternity Colonies

Beacon’s 2018 snag survey identified 15 candidate snag trees in a little over 1 hectare of on-site woodland,

satisfying the SWH criterion of >10 snags/hectare. Beacon’s acoustic monitoring recorded 6393 Big Brown



Bat calls and 460 Silver-haired Bat calls, along with smaller numbers of Hoary Bat (280 calls) and a fleeting

occurrence of Eastern Red Bat (17 calls). It is not possible using this data to determine the number of

roosting females of each species, but the large number of Big Brown Bat calls could be indicative of the

SWH criterion of >10 individuals of this species in a maternal roost. Accordingly, the woodland could be

considered candidate Bat Maternity Colony SWH and worthy of conservation and protection.

Most of the bat calls were recorded west of PSW and also near the Eastern Flowering Dogwoods. No

intrusion into these areas is proposed. Limited tree removal from the woodland edge in the northern third

of the site is in an area where very few bat calls were recorded, and only incidental bat presence is indicated.

Tree removal will nevertheless be completed outside of maternal roost season to avoid incidental

occurrence of common bats on removed trees.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Subject to the updated significant woodland limit and additional specimens of Eastern Flowering Dogwood

mapped by Myler, the EIS studies and the supplementary bat maternity roost investigation conducted by

Beacon appeared to be current and adequate to describe ecological conditions at the site.

As natural heritage policy compliance and conservation objectives have been addressed for EPA and ECA

features at the site, the proposed redevelopment is recommended for approval, subject to a few key

mitigation measures. Recommended mitigation measures include establishment of permanent buffers,

avoidance timing and physical measures during construction, as described below

• Provide a 30 metre PSW buffer in the southern two-thirds of the site and a 15 metre PSW buffer in the northern third, as indicated on the attached Figure 1 redevelopment concept plan. These buffers

will simultaneously protect SAR and SAR habitat, candidate SWH and conserve the wetland and

wooded EPA and ECA features.

• Temporarily define the limit of construction with a combined tree protection fence and silt fence placed at the redevelopment limit, to be replaced post-construction with a permanent fence (1.5

metre chain link standard).

• Time removal of amenity trees and shrubs during September – March, outside of bird nesting season (defined on Canadian Wildlife Service nesting calendar for Zone C1 as late March to late

August) to maintain Migratory Birds Convention Act compliance and to simultaneously comply

with the ESA by avoiding potential incidental occurrences of bat maternal roosting which peaks

during the month of June.

• Woodland restoration in disturbed buffer areas through managed passive regeneration of native woodland species naturally dispersed into the cultural meadow from the existing forest community.

Monitoring and focused suppression/removal of invasive species will be required.

Implementation of these mitigation measures is intended to maintain compliance with applicable policies,

to avoid impacts on identified natural heritage features and breeding birds, and as a precautionary approach

to the unlikely presence of SAR Bats within trees to be removed.



CONCLUSION

The proposed redevelopment has been designed to comply with the PPS (2014 and 2020), ESA, and policies

of the City of Welland, Niagara Region and NPCA as follows:

• EPA features of PSW and significant SAR habitat to be completely avoided and afforded protective buffers that will be restored to woodland through managed passive regeneration of native woodland

species.

• ECA features of significant woodland and candidate significant wildlife habitat to be avoided, excepting minor intrusion into a disturbed portion of the woodland that is not associated with SWH

employing seasonal avoidance of SAR and other sensitive wildlife and habitat offsets through on-

site restoration.

Accordingly, the redevelopment is recommended for approval by the City of Welland, Niagara Region and

NPCA.


REPRESENTATIVE SITE

PHOTOGRAPHS:

395 & 401 South Pelham Road

Photo 1: Cultural former residential portion of site facing west towards woodland. Note the pile of logs

resulting from interrupted timber theft.

Photo 2: Facing northwest across former residential yard, with northern site boundary to the right and

neighbour’s rear yard shed in background. Note rubble from garage demolition in right foreground.

Photo 3: Facing eastward out former driveway to Fitch Street and the South Pelham Road frontage.

Photo 4: Representative view of on-site woodland, with mostly very young trees and widely scattered

larger trees.

Photo 5: Facing southward through a diffuse group of trees, some of which will be retained within the

buffer. Southern neighbour’s home is visible in the background, set far back from South Pelham Road.

Photo 6: Facing eastward along the south property boundary showing elevated area of historical

residential fill on the site to the left, and lower grade of the southern neighbour on the right.

PRE-CONSULTATION

CORRESPONDENCE:


mylerb rry793@gm il.com

From: Whittard, Jennifer Sent: March 19, 2019 11:34 AM To: Craig Rohe; Barry Myler Cc: Cara Lampman Subject: RE: Scoping of EIS - 401 South Pelham Road

Hi Craig/Barry,

As requested, I offer the following additional comments regarding the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) prepared by Beacon Environmental (January 2016) for the proposed development at 401 South Pelham Road:

• As recommended in the EIS (pg.23-24), we agree that the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) should be contacted to determine if an Overall Benefit Permit may be required. As a starting point, please contact [email protected]. As part of this process, it is anticipated that the MNRF may require additional Species At Risk (SAR) survey(s), for example, surveys for bat habitat according to MNRF’s bat survey protocol (April 2017 or as provided by the MNRF). If suitable bat habitat is identified, acoustic surveys may then be requested, which the MNRF typically specifies must be completed between June 1st and June 30th in any given year.

Further to Section 4.3.4 (pg.19), please note that several Ambystoma salamanders are considered by the MNRF to be SAR. MNRF correspondence and any species-specific setbacks or other mitigation measures required by MNRF, including confirmation that conformity with the Endangered Species Act has been achieved, must be included in the updated EIS.

• Regional staff do not require additional surveys, but the updated EIS should comment on the appropriateness of the previously conducted inventories/surveys and assessments and rectify any concerns, if appropriate.

• In addition to the Edge Management Plan requested by the NPCA, it is expected all other mitigation measures identified in the EIS will be reviewed, confirmed and updated as applicable.

• Although recent updates to Niagara Region’s EIS Guidelines were only administrative in nature, the updated EIS Guidelines (January 2018) should nonetheless be referenced in the updated EIS.

My apologies for the delay. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or require clarification.

Thanks, Jen

Jennifer Whittard, B.E.S., PMP Manager, Environmental Planning Planning and Development Services, Niagara Region Phone: 905-980-6000 ext. 3430 Toll-free: 1-800-263-7215

1

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Cell: 289-668-4812 www.niagararegion.ca

From: Cara Lampman

Sent: Friday, March 15, 2019 10:42 AM

To: Craig Rohe ; Whittard, Jennifer ; Barry Myler

Subject: RE: Scoping of EIS - 401 South Pelham Road

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the Niagara Region email system. Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Craig,

The NPCA has reviewed the attached Environmental Impact Study (Beacon Environmental, January 2016). Based on that

review, the following comments are offered:

- Provided all development and site alteration (including grading and storm water management controls) is

located outside the 30 metre wetland setback, the NPCA would entertain the proposed development without

an update to the inventories completed within the 2016 EIS

- The NPCA will require that the EIS is updated to include:

o The updated development plan illustrating the total extent of development and site alteration associated with construction

• Confirmation in the EIS conclusions that the proposed development and site alteration will have

no negative impact on the NPCA Regulated Area (i.e. wetland and buffer)

o A water balance which illustrates that the wetland feature will have not be negatively impacted hydrologically

o An edge management plan as described in the EIS • This plan should illustrate how the 30 metre buffer will be protected through the construction

process and enhanced if necessary

o Any mitigation measures required in order to ensure no negative impact to the wetland and adjacent lands

Please note that any development or site alteration within the 30 metre setback may require additional field surveys

and a more comprehensive review of the completed study.

You should also note that these are the requirements of the NPCA only, and additional updates to the study may be

required by the Region of Niagara or the City of Welland.

I trust this information to be satisfactory, do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns.

Cara Lampman Watershed Planner Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority (NPCA) 250 Thorold Road West, 3rd Floor | Welland, ON L3C 3W2 Tel: 905-788-3135 | extension 272 [email protected] www.npca.ca

2
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:CaraLampman

From: Craig Rohe

Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 3:24 PM

To: Whittard, Jennifer ; Barry Myler

Cc: Cara Lampman


Hi Jennifer and Cara,

Just a gentle reminder about the scoping for 401 South Pelham Road. Our environmental consultant would like to get

out into the field as soon as possible.

Thanks, C.

Craig A. Rohe, M.Pl., MCIP, RPP

Senior Planner

Upper Canada Consultants

3-30 Hannover Drive

St. Catharines, ON. L2W 1A3

Tel: (905) 688-9400 ext. 506

Mobile: (289) 969-3556

Fax: (905) 688-5274

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.ucc.com

From: Whittard, Jennifer [mailto:[email protected]] S nt: Friday, March 1, 2019 7:44 AM To: Craig Rohe; Barry Myler Cc: Cara Lampman Subj ct: RE: Scoping of EIS - 401 South Pelham Road

Hi Craig/Barry,

So sorry, thanks for the reminder. I will look into this today, if not, first thing Monday.

Thanks, Jen

From: Craig Rohe

Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2019 2:50 PM

To: Whittard, Jennifer ; Cara Lampman

Cc: Barry Myler


Hi Jennifer/Cara,

Following up on this. Can you please advise if a new scope is required?

Thanks, C.

3
mailto:BarryMyler


Senior Planner


3-30 Hannover Drive


Tel: (905) 688-9400 ext. 506

Mobile: (289) 969-3556

Fax: (905) 688-5274


Web: www.ucc.com

From: Craig Rohe S nt: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 12:09 PM To: '[email protected]'; Cara Lampman Cc: 'Barry Myler' Subj ct: Scoping of EIS - 401 South Pelham Road

Hi Jennifer and Cara,

Upper Canada is currently working on a project at 401 South Pelham Road in Welland. In 2016, Beacon did a

preliminary EIS for the site, and followed up in 2018 with a Bat Survey. Since the competition of those works (which

were never submitted with applications for development), the lands were sold to the current applicant, who is moving

forward with plans for a 38 unit vacant land condominium project (concept attached, please treat as confidential for

now.)

A pre-consultation was held in May 2018 which indicated that an update to the initial study done by Beacon was

required prior to a development submission. There was no indication if updated scoping would be required.

Due to current workload volumes, Beacon has passed this job and the study findings and data onto Barry Myler of Myler

Ecological Consulting.

Can you please confirm if re-scoping of the EIS will be required by the Region and/ or NPCA? If so, Barry will be in touch

to initiate this process.

Thank you, C.


Senior Planner


3-30 Hannover Drive


Tel: (905) 688-9400 ext. 506

Mobile: (289) 969-3556

Fax: (905) 688-5274


Web: www.ucc.com

4

https://Web:www.ucc.commailto:Email:[email protected]:[email protected]://Web:www.ucc.commailto:Email:[email protected]

The Regional Municipality of Niagara Confidentiality Notice The information contained in this communication

including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above,

and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby

notified that any dissemination, distribution, disclosure, or copying of this communication, or any of its

contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please re-send this

communication to the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy of it from your computer

system. Thank you. The information contained in this communication, including any attachment(s), may be CONFIDENTIAL, is intended only

for the use of the recipient(s) named above, and may be legally PRIVILEGED. If the reader of this message is not the

intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, disclosure or copying of this

communication, or any of its contents, is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this communication in error, please

notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy from your computer system. Thank-you. Niagara

Peninsula Conservation Authority.

5

BAT ROOST ASSESSMENT

(Beacon, 2018):


GUIDING SOLUTIONS IN THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

September 17, 2018 BEL 218208

ROWT Inc. 3859 McDowell Drive via email: [email protected]

Mississauga, ON L5M 6P1

Re: Assessment for Endangered Species of Bat 401 South Pelham Road, City of Welland, Niagara Region.

Beacon Environmental Limited (Beacon) has completed the assessment for Endangered Species of Bats at the property located at 401 South Pelham Road in the City of Welland. A leaf off snag tree survey was undertaken in April 2018 following the following Phase II Identification of Suitable Maternity Roost Trees of the MNRF Guelph District most current bat habitat survey protocol for Species at Risk Bats within Treed Habitats (MNRF 2017). All trees with a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 10 cm or greater were assessed with respect to presenting potential roosting/maternity habitat. A total of 15 snag trees were identified, their location is provided on the attached Figure 2.

Based on this assessment the hardwood forest was assessed to have potential maternity/roost habitat for four Endangered Species of Bats. Following the MNRF protocol an acoustic survey was undertaken form June 1st to 15th, 2018 following the MNRF (2017) protocol to determine if SARs bats were present. Four (4) acoustic detectors were deployed, see attached Figure 2. Monitoring locations were based on

the results of the snag tree survey and to achieve adequate coverage of the woodlot. At each station an SM4BAT passive monitor, equipped with a SMM-U1 ultrasonic, omni-directional, microphone was installed. Microphones were deployed at least 2.5 m above the ground and were oriented to optimize echolocation detections. Each monitor was programmed to record during triggered events each night for a period of five hours beginning at sunset. A 12dB gain setting was used based on the SMM-U1 microphone, the surrounding habitat and proximity to potential roost trees. The unit was programmed to record in full spectrum with a 256 kHz sample rate. The high pass filter was set to 16 kHz to eliminate low frequency noise but to still capture the lowest frequency bat calls (i.e. Hoary Bat for the study area). The trigger level was set to +18SNR with a 0.5 second minimum call duration trigger. All files were recorded as full spectrum in .WAV format. Following the deployment of the monitors’ recordings on the data chips were analyzed using Kaleidoscope software. A combination of auto-identification and manual analysis was applied to call files to make species determinations. All unclassified files (No ID Files) were manually reviewed for call frequency to determine if unclassified calls fell within the 40 kHz Myotis species and Tri-coloured Bat echolocation range. If the call did not fall within the approximate 40 kHz range, it was not analyzed further as it is likely not a species at risk. Furthermore, a random selection of noise files were reviewed to ensure that the batch filters functioned correctly.

MARKHAM BRACEBRIDGE GUELPH PETERBOROUGH 80 Main St. North 126 Kimberley Avenue 373 Woolwich Street 305 Reid Street Markham, ON L3P 1X5 Bracebridge, ON P1L 1Z9 Guelph, ON N1H 3W4 Peterborough, ON K9J 3R2 T)905.201.7622 F)905.201.0639 T)705.645.1050 F)705.645.6639 T)519.826.0419 F)519.826.9306 T) 705.243.7251

mailto:[email protected]

September 17, 2018

The results of the acoustic monitoring are provide in the Table 1 below. The full data set is provided in

an attached excel file. A total of five species of bat were recorded. One these, the Little Brown Myotis (Myotis lucifugus), is listed as Endangered by the Province of Ontario, and it’s habitat is afforded protection pursuant to Sections 9 and 10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA 2007, as amended). A total of 82 calls of the Little Brown Myotis were recorded, with most calls occurring regularly at monitors 82 and 88 in the location of the highest density of snag trees. Combined this data indicates summer used of the woodlot by the Little Brown Myotis.

Table 1. Summary of Bat Acoustic Monitoring Data June 1st to 15th 2018

Detector Bat Species

BIG BROWN EASTERN HOARY LITTLE SILVER- Grand

BAT RED BAT BAT BROWN HAIRED BAT Total

MYOTIS

82\Data 2469 3 90 36 205 2803

83\Data 263 85 4 69 421

84\Data 2135 11 65 1 117 2329

88\Data 1526 3 40 41 69 1679

Grand Total 6393 17 280 82 460 7232

As a result of the assessment, as per Sections 9 and 10 of the ESA, the entire woodlot that is identified in the Beacon January 2016 EIS as Dry-Fresh Oak-Maple Deciduous Forest (FOD2) is considered to be regulated habitat for Little Brown Myotis. Any proposed removal or alteration of the forest stand on the property as mapped by Beacon in 2016 will require review by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Removal with respect to compliance with the ESA.

I trust this above meets your present needs. Should you have any questions please contact the undersigned.

Yours truly, Beacon Environmental

Ron Huizer, B. Sc. (Honours) Principal

Page 2

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT:


!(!(!(

!(!(

Fitch Street

So

uth

Pe

lha

m R

oa

d

Figure: Project No:

Date:

Scale:

401 South Pelham Road

Pelham, ON

Site Plan

140

April 2020

1 : 1,000

LEGEND

Property Boundary

1

Flagged Dripline

Wetland (LIO)

Flowering Dogwood Location !(

0 10 20 30 40 5 Meters

±

20 m Flowering Dogwood Setback

Myler Ecological Consulting 7 Olive Crescent Stoney Creek ON

L8G 2T2

15 m Wetland Setback

30 m Wetland Setback

Limit of Development

Woodland Restoration Area

Structure Bookmarks

Documents

MYLER ECOLOGICAL CONSULTING APRIL 2020€¦ · EPA Draper’s Creek PSW and an unmapped portion ECA significant woodland (discussed below). Core Natural Heritage Features – PSW