| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 67.01 |
| Liaison | Connie Norton |
| Submission Date | Oct. 29, 2014 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
Simon Fraser University
OP-11: Biodiversity
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
2.00 / 2.00 |
Elizabeth
Starr Campus Planner Facilities Development |
Does the institution own or manage land that includes or is adjacent to legally protected areas, internationally recognized areas, priority sites for biodiversity, and/or regions of conservation importance?:
A brief description of any legally protected areas, internationally recognized areas, priority sites for biodiversity, and/or regions of conservation importance on institution owned or managed land:
Burnaby Mountain Conservation Area is a 700+ acre conservation area adjacent to Simon Fraser University. This park was originally established in 1930 and dominates the northeast quadrant of Burnaby. Simon Fraser University opened its doors in the mid-1960s; the university transferred the 820 acres of land that make up the Conservation Area in 1995.
Burnaby Mountain forms the City's most prominent geological feature and landmark with its beautifully forested slopes rising to an elevation of 370 metres (1,214 feet ) above sea level. The mountain also forms the headwaters to several watersheds, draining to both the environmentally sensitive Burrard Inlet and the Central Valley watersheds. The UniverCity development adjacent to Simon Fraser University provided the opportunity to protect additional environmentally significant lands associated with Naheeno Park and conservation lands related the escarpment and local streams. The Conservation Area also includes defined development restrictions for the two industrial sites designated for petroleum storage and distribution uses. Continued civic acquisition of the few remaining private and government holdings will complete the assembly program.
Has the institution conducted an assessment or assessments to identify endangered and vulnerable species with habitats on institution-owned or –managed land?:
Has the institution conducted an assessment or assessments to identify environmentally sensitive areas on institution-owned or –managed land?:
The methodology(-ies) used to identify endangered and vulnerable species and/or environmentally sensitive areas and any ongoing assessment and monitoring mechanisms:
In 2011, the external environmental consultancy Hemmera completed a major review of the south part of campus. To allow for mitigation of development impacts in the South Neighbourhood lands, studies were undertaken (Hemmera Environmental Consultancy, 2011) to ground truth the important vegetation communities and identify rare / uncommon ecosystem types. Although all vegetation association habitats are considered
important, by identifying and protecting at-risk ecosystems, valued ecosystem components (VECs) and specialized habitats, there is a greater chance that local biodiversity can be conserved post-development.
A brief description of identified species, habitats and/or environmentally sensitive areas:
Provincially blue-listed plant communities:
• western red cedar / sword fern Dry Maritime
• western hemlock / three-leaved foamflower Dry Maritime
Important Habitat types/Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs):
Riparian Habitats
Wet
Mature Coniferous Stands
Significant Wildlife Trees.
A brief description of plans or programs in place to protect or positively affect identified species, habitats and/or environmentally sensitive areas:
Based on the identification of important vegetation communities and identify rare / uncommon ecosystem types, the Mountain was classified by development considerations. These considerations are used to influence decision making.
The terrestrial ecosystem and wildlife habitat considerations ratings are based on guidance provided by Federal, Provincial and Municipal legislation along with recognized development Best Management Practices.
Three categories of development considerations are deemed applicable to terrestrial ecosystems and wildlife habitats:
Moderate Consideration Areas (Orange)
In the South Neighbourhood, the moderate rating is recommended for two Provincially bluelisted plant communities:
• western red cedar / sword fern Dry Maritime
• western hemlock / three-leaved foamflower Dry Maritime
Although there are no specific Federal, Provincial or Municipal approval requirements that
constrain development in these areas, BMPs suggest that development in these areas
should largely be avoided when planning for development.
Low Consideration Areas (Yellow)
These are terrestrial ecosystem and wildlife habitat areas that provide additional
opportunities for BMPs within the South Neighbourhood. These Low Consideration Areas
include: significant trees; conifer dominated forest patches; vegetation buffers around
sensitive ecosystem types (10 meters around blue-listed species); and, cross elevation
forest patch connectivity corridors. In these areas, lower intensity development types can
be accommodated; however, consideration should be provided to enhancing integrity and functionality of non development and higher consideration areas.
The website URL where information about the institution’s biodiversity policies and programs(s) is available:
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.