The Owen property and West Side Land bird reports
were based on data gathered from 1997 to 2004, during the construction
of the Columbia Forest, Laurel Creek Village and Clair Hills Subdivisions.
Being area sensitive species, some of the birds may have been driven
away by the construction activities during the bird breeding season
by the noise of construction from the adjacent properties compromising
the EIS studies.
Conflicting bird studies for
ESPA 19
The Bird Breeding data for the West Side Lands
EIS report was published in Feb. 2004 and the Owen Property EIS was
published on Oct. 2004. Both reports were produced by the same company
and both involved ESPA 19. If you view the data below you will see
each report excluded the findings of the other regarding the data
of threatened and endangered bird species in the area. They show different
dates for the Endangered Acadian Flycatcher and one report notes Threatened
Hooded Warblers, the other does not. The Red Headed Woodpeckers is
noted on one report and absent in the other. These are all public
documents.
Region
of Waterloo report P-07-084 Regarding the West Side Lands admits
the birds were confirmed but states the area will be protected for
"species that are relatively tolerant of urban development".
The zone change
application and draft plan for the Owen property stated that "Many
of the urban sensitive birds will have the opportunity to relocate".
Read the statements regarding the encroachment by development on these
known habitats.
During the West Side Lands OMB processes, Yellow Spotted
Salamanders were confirmed by MNR staff in pond W12. The OMB expert
minutes removed development from the capture zones of the pond W-12
in order to comply with Regional Policy 4.3.15. Due to the fact there
is a history of Jeffersons in the area and that mole salamanders can
exist in the pond, it was decided this area would be protected by
way of the OMB concessions.To view the expert minutes visit http://www.waterloomoraineact.com/expertminutes
On February 11th I wrote a letter to the MNR regarding
a PDF report created by Chris Skalski with the Ohio EPA division of
Surface Water. This report verifies that Mole salamanders (Including
Jeffersons) do exist in headwater streams and they serve the roll
of predator in these upper reaches. They can co-exist with fish communities
and it is evident in the following presentation:
http://www.littlemiamiriver.org/Documents/wqs/7-PHWH-Bioassessment_final.pdf
This article confirms the fact that headwaters are often overlooked
habitats for salamander assessments: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080222095730.htm
During the OMB appeal PL071044, benthic studies were identified as
inadequate for the West Side Lands. Please review the expert's
minutes to view comments made by my ichthyologist as he comments
on the quality of testing in Fish section 1. Data regarding Clair
Creek was also deemed insufficient in the expert's minutes - Water,
Item 3. There was a lack of observation of flow and flow rates etc.
February 16th I received notice that there will be another
OMB hearing in regards to the West Side Lands to take place on March
23, 2010. To view details of this view this Waterloo Chronicle article:
http://www.waterloochronicle.ca/news/article/203390
February 19th 2010 I received notice that the City of
Waterloo intends to place an asphalt trail with lighting and servicing
for the proposed Vista Hills Subdivision Area by cutting a trail thorugh
ESPA 19 in an area meters away from the edge of Pond W-12. It will
contain asphalt, lighting and servicing for the Vista Hills subdivision.
The City of Waterloo intends to remove trees and do soil samples in
March 2010. It is unclear if this will take place before or after
the new OMB process for the West Side Lands, OMB case #PL091182.
Some of the problems associated with this trail
In light of the upcoming OMB appeal I made a request
to city and regional officials as well as the Solicitor of the developer
to provide me with data regarding the hydrological studies secured
by way of OMB process. To date no data has been provided so I submitted
a request using Freedom of Information on February 25th 2010. Experts
I've spoken with question if ANY subdivision can be reasonably be
placed in Vista Hills because lost water volumes must be replaced
or they cannot build here. This is why we request to see the hydrological
data. Data which to date, the City of Waterloo, the Region of Waterloo
and the Solicitor of the Developer have yet to provide.
RELEVANT LAWS AND LEGISLATION
Provincial Policy Statement (2005)
2.1.1 Natural features and areas shall be protected
for the long term.
2.1.2 The diversity and connectivity of natural features in an area,
and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity of natural
heritage systems, should be maintained, restored or, where possible,
improved, recognizing linkages between and among natural heritage
features and areas, surface water features and ground water features.
2.1.3 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:
1.significant habitat of endangered species and threatened species;
2.significant wetlands in Ecoregions 5E, 6E and 7E1; and
3.significant coastal wetlands.
2.1.4 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:
1.significant wetlands in the Canadian Shield north of Ecoregions
5E, 6E and 7E1;
2.significant woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield2 ;
3.significant valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield2;
4.significant wildlife habitat; and
5.significant areas of natural and scientific interest
unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts
on the natural features or their ecological functions.
2.2 Water
2.2.1 Planning authorities shall protect, improve or restore the quality
and quantity of water by:
1.using the watershed as the ecologically meaningful scale for planning;
2.minimizing potential negative impacts, including cross-jurisdictional
and cross-watershed impacts;
3.identifying surface water features, ground water features, hydrologic
functions and natural heritage features and areas which are necessary
for the ecological and hydrological integrity of the watershed;
4.implementing necessary restrictions on development and site alteration
to:
1. protect all municipal drinking water supplies and designated vulnerable
areas; and
2. protect, improve or restore vulnerable surface and ground water,
sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features,
and their hydrologic functions;
5.maintaining linkages and related functions among surface water features,
ground water features, hydrologic functions and natural heritage features
and areas;
6.promoting efficient and sustainable use of water resources, including
practices for water conservation and sustaining water quality; and
7.ensuring stormwater management practices minimize stormwater volumes
and contaminant loads, and maintain or increase the extent of vegetative
and pervious surfaces.
2.2.2 Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near
sensitive surface water features and sensitive ground water features
such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will
be protected, improved or restored.
Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may
be required in order to protect, improve or restore sensitive surface
water features, sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic
functions.
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 1997 S.O. 1997, CHAPTER 41
2. If a provision of this Act and a provision of the Endangered Species
Act, 2007 conflict with respect to an animal, invertebrate or fish,
the provision that gives the animal, invertebrate or fish the most
protection prevails. 1997, c. 41, s. 2; 2007, c. 6, s. 60 (1).
Endangered Species Act, 2007 S.O. 2007, CHAPTER 6
Prohibition on killing, etc.
9. (1) No person shall,
(a) kill, harm, harass, capture or take a living member of a species
that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List as an extirpated,
endangered or threatened species;
Prohibition on damage to habitat, etc.
10. (1) No person shall damage or destroy the habitat of,
(a) a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List
as an endangered or threatened species; or
(b) a species that is listed on the Species at Risk in Ontario List
as an extirpated species, if the species is prescribed by the regulations
for the purpose of this clause. 2007, c. 6, s. 10 (1).
Precautionary principle
(3) In preparing a strategy under subsection (1), the persons who
are preparing the strategy shall consider the principle that, where
there is a threat of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity,
lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for
postponing measures to avoid or minimize such a threat. 2007, c. 6,
s. 11 (3).
THE ROPP, CURRENT TO September 30 2006
4.1.2 areas identified as significant portions of the habitat of
Endangered or Threatened Species will be designated Environmental
Preservation Areas subject to the provisions of Section 4.2 of this
plan.
4.2.1 Environmental Preservation Areas include those
lands which may be identified for protection by the Ministry of Natural
Resources or it’s delegate as:a) the significant portion of habitat
of Endangered Species; and/or
b) the significant portions of habitat of Threatened Species
Official Plan of the City of Waterloo Planning Area 1990
The Goal of the Plan
1.7.3.8. To protect, restore, rehabilitate, and enhance water quality
and associated aquatic resources and water supply
1.7.3.9 To provide protection and enhancement of the fishery habitat
through such means as maintaining the connective process between groundwater
and baseflow to streams.
1.7.3.12 To undertake measures to protect, restore and enhance the
local surface discharge aquifer, and to protect the water supply aquifer
system.
2.3.3 It is the policy of this Plan to discourage development in
Environmental Constraint Areas that would detract from the functions
performed by the natural environment such as groundwater recharge,
erosion control, wildlife habitat, or where environmental constraints
exist. Developments may be permitted where it can be demonstrated
to the satisfaction of Council, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
the Grand River Conservation Authority and any other public agency
having jurisdiction, that the proposal will not adversely affect the
Environmental Constraint Area. Such appropriate statements as Environmental
Impact Statement or an Environmental Analysis Report as set out in
the Regional Official Policies Plan or an Environmental Study as set
out in Section 2.3.1.4.3. of this Plan shall be required to support
the development proposal.
