Preliminary Servicing & Stormwater Management Report

Transcription

1 Prepared By: Hart Subdivision, City of Guelph Preliminary Servicing & Stormwater Management Report GMBP File: May 22, 2015 GUELPH OW EN SOUND LISTOW EL KITCHENER EXETER HAMILTON GTA 650 W OODLAW N RD. W., BLOCK C, UNIT 2, GUELPH ON N1K 1B8 P:

2 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION LOCATION EXISTING CONDITIONS Land Use Topography Soils Groundwater PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Grading Streets Harts Lane Water Supply Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Foundation Drainage Stormwater Management STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CRITERIA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN Pre-Development Conditions Post-Development Conditions Stormwater Management Overview Lot Level Controls Conveyance Controls Site Plan Controls Stormwater Management Facility Preliminary Overall Grading Water Budget SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN CONCLUSIONS I

3 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 APPENDICES APPENDIX A: HARTS LANE DESIGN OPTIONS APPENDIX B: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS APPENDIX C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS APPENDIX D: OIL/GRIT SEPARATOR DESIGN SUMMARY APPENDIX E: PERMEAMETER TEST AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT V.A. WOOD APPENDIX F: MOE INTREPRETATION BULLETIN FEBRUARY Preliminary Grading Plan 1 LIST OF DRAWINGS 2. Preliminary Grading Plan 2 3. Preliminary Servicing Plan 3 4. Preliminary Servicing Plan 4 LIST OF FIGURES Page 1. Key Map Draft Plan of Subdivision Pre-Development Drainage Area Plan Post-Development Drainage Area Plan Enhanced Infiltration Structure Details Stormwater Management Facility Typical Section x 1800 Outlet Structure Details x 2400 Outlet Structure Details Pre Development Watershed Plan Post Development Watershed Plan Post Development Model Schematic... Appendix C 12. Oil/Grit Separator Drainage Areas... Appendix D II

4 PEOPLE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTS HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT MAY, 2015 GMBP FILE: INTRODUCTION In response to the engineering comments provided by the GRCA on July 31, 2014 and the City of Guelph on December 5, 2014 this report has been revised to support the Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zone Change Application on Part of Lot 4 Concession 7, City of Guelph herein after referred to as the Hart Subdivision, GM BluePlan Engineering Limited has prepared this report to address the servicing and stormwater management requirements for the development. 2.0 LOCATION The proposed subdivision development is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Kortright Road and Rickson Avenue in the City of Guelph. The site boundaries include existing residential development (fronting onto Kortright Road West, Darnell Road and Rickson Avenue) to the north, south and west, and a wetland area to the east. Figure 1 shows the location of the proposed development and the surrounding area. PAGE 1 OF 26

5

6 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 Land Use The subject property, outside of the wetland, is currently used for residential and ongoing agricultural activities. Ground cover consists of actively cropped fields with some trees, shrubs and lawns around the existing house. The eastern portion of the property is adjacent to a GRCA regulated wetland. 3.2 Topography The site currently slopes towards the existing wetland located at the easterly boundary of the site with gradients ranging from 3.5 to 10% with an average of 4.3%. Runoff drains overland towards the wetland area adjacent to the eastern site boundary. 3.3 Soils The predominant surface soil type throughout the site is a Guelph Loam with areas of Much and Gilford Loam (Ontario Soil Surveys, Report No. 35, Wellington County). A BC hydrologic soil classification is used for the site. A geotechnical investigation was prepared by V.A. Wood Inc. in March The subsurface soils consist of compact to very dense silty sand, sand and silt and clayey sandy silt till with poor drainage characteristics. A copy of the geotechnical investigation is attached in Appendix D. 3.4 Groundwater A Hydrogeological Study is being completed concurrently with this Servicing Study in support of the Draft Plan application. The Hydrogeological Study is submitted under separate cover. Please see the Hydrological Study for details regarding the installation of piezometers and monitoring wells for the site. PAGE 2 OF 26

7 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The Draft Plan of Subdivision (Figure 2) illustrates the proposed lot fabric, stormwater management area, park block and internal roads. The proposed subdivision consists of single family homes, semi-detached homes, a townhouse block, and an apartment block. Access to the subdivision will be with street connections to Carrington Drive and Rodgers Road. The draft plan includes a block to provide the City with the opportunity of providing servicing, a walkway and/or a road connection to Harts Lane. A conceptual servicing figure (Drawings 3 and 4) shows how the municipal services can be extended to service the proposed development. 4.1 Site Grading The site layout for the stormwater management area and the internal roads are shown on the Preliminary Grading Plans (Drawings 1 and 2). The grade and elevation of the internal streets are determined by the elevation of the proposed stormwater management facility and the existing farmhouse building. The major overland flow for the townhouse block and the single family lots will be conveyed through the municipal right of ways to the proposed stormwater management facility located at the southeast corner of the property, eventually discharging into the southerly portion of the wetland. The major overland flow from the park and apartment blocks will be conveyed to the northerly portion of the wetland. The proposed residential units have be graded as split drainage, walk-outs and back to front draining lots to work with the existing topography. 4.2 Streets All streets will be constructed to City of Guelph standards as follows: With an urban road cross-section having a 17 metre right-of-way width. With concrete curb and gutter and asphalt on the 8.8 metre wide travelled portion of the road. With minimum slopes of 0.5% and maximum slopes of 8.0%. With a 1.5 metre wide concrete municipal sidewalk on one side of each street, approximately 2.3 metres behind the curb. The development includes connections to Rodgers Road and Carrington Drive. To conform to the intent of the Community Trail Network, the combination of sidewalk and trails within the proposed development will provide the opportunity for north-south pedestrian and bicycle access between Edinburgh Road along Carrington Drive to Kortright Road and west-east pedestrian and bicycle access along Harts Lane to Gordon Street. PAGE 3 OF 26

8

9 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Harts Lane Harts Lane is an existing 20 metre wide municipal road allowance that terminates the easterly boundary of the subject property. An existing 5.2 m wide farm lane extends from the easterly boundary of the subject property across the wetland on the municipal road allowance to the portion of Harts Lane built as a rural municipal road on the easterly side of the wetland. The Hart Farm Property Traffic Impact Study by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited concludes that the Harts Lane connection is not required to improve the operation of the study area intersections. Four options were considered in the re-development of Harts Lane. The options are summarized in Appendix A of this report. From consultation with the City of Guelph, Option 1 is preferred; retain Harts Lane as a multi-use trail connecting the proposed subdivision to the developed portion of Hart s Lane. A cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed on the easterly side of the wetland at the terminus of the existing Harts Lane municipal road. This option following existing topography, does not require grading into the wetland and allows the City to install sanitary and water mains under the wetland by trenchless methods. 4.4 Water Supply The proposed development will be serviced via a 200 mm diameter watermain with connections to the existing 250 mm diameter watermain on Carrington Drive and the existing 150 mm diameter watermain on Rodgers Road to create a looped system. Hydrants located throughout the subdivision as per the City of Guelph Specifications will provide fire protection. 4.5 Sanitary Sewer It is the City s intent to connect an existing 300 mm diameter sanitary sewer stub located on Harts Lane, to the east of the wetland, to the existing 375 mm sanitary trunk sewer located on Carrington Drive near the southerly edge of the proposed subdivision. A future extension of the 375 mm diameter sanitary trunk sewer will be constructed within the Harts Lane right of way. Due to the depth required for the installation of the 375 mm diameter trunk sewer (between 6 and 8 metres) within the subdivision lands, the subdivision will be serviced by a proposed local 200 mm diameter sanitary sewer installed at standard depths in parallel with the 375 mm diameter trunk sewer. The development of the Hart Subdivision will extend the 375 mm diameter trunk sewer to Harts Lane on the westerly side of the wetland for future extension to the east. 4.6 Storm Sewer The local storm sewer system within the proposed development will be sized to convey the runoff from a 5-year design storm to the stormwater management facility. PAGE 4 OF 26

10 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 Major storm runoff will be conveyed through the street right-of-ways, ultimately discharging to the proposed stormwater management facility and the existing wetland. 4.7 Foundation Drainage The foundation drainage will be provided through sump pits and pumped to grade towards rear yard areas. This will increase the travel path, promoting on site infiltration/recharge. 4.8 Stormwater Management A description of the stormwater management system appears in Section 6.0 of this report. PAGE 5 OF 26

11 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CRITERIA The studies, policies and guidelines used to develop the stormwater management plan are as follows: 1) The Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual, ) Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual, ) CVC, TRCA Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide, ) The Interim Stormwater Quality Control Guidelines, ) The Stormwater Quality Best Management Practices Manual, ) The MTO Drainage Management Technical Guidelines, ) The Ontario Urban Drainage Design Guidelines, 1987 The objectives of the stormwater management plan are as follows: a) Provide quantity control to attenuate the rate of post-development stormwater runoff to the pre-development flow rates for the 5 and 100 year design storms. b) Provide enhanced (80% TSS removal) water quality control prior to discharge from the site. c) Attenuate rainfall runoff from the 4 hour 25mm storm event and release it over a minimum period of 24 hours. d) Maintain, as much as feasible, the recharge and runoff patterns of the pre-development site. The parameters used to evaluate and design the stormwater management plan is as follows: City of Guelph rainfall parameters were used to generate the mass rainfall data required to model the 25 mm, 5 year and 100 year design storms. The Chicago storm parameters and the total depth of rainfall for each storm are as follows: 25 mm 2 Year 5 Year 100 Year a = b = c = r = t d = Rainfall depth (mm) The SCS (Soil Conservation Service) infiltration method was used in the runoff calculations. From the Ontario Soil Surveys, Report No. 35, Wellington County, the majority of the soils on site are Guelph Loam with a hydrologic classification of BC, and parts of Muck and Gilford Loam with a hydrologic classification of B. The overall hydrologic soil classification for the site is BC. PAGE 6 OF 26

12 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 SCS infiltration parameters for a hydrologic type BC soil have been used in the analysis of the stormwater management system. The infiltration parameters used are as follows: Land Use Curve Number Parkland 74 Agricultural 78 Residential Lawns 74 Impervious/roofs 98 The hydrologic modeling software, MIDUSS, was used to create the runoff hydrographs and to route the flows through the storage and channel structures. PAGE 7 OF 26

13 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN 6.1 Pre-Development Conditions Under existing conditions, there are no defined conveyance systems within the development site directing flows to specific outlets. In the event of a rainfall significant enough to generate flows leaving the site, runoff flows overland towards the existing wetland located at the easterly property boundary. Under existing conditions, the overall site was analyzed as three (3) drainage catchments. The catchment numbers and their respective drainage areas are illustrated in Figure 3. The pre-development flow rates and runoff volumes from the site are summarized in Table No. 1. The existing conditions hydrologic modelling is included in Appendix B. Table 1: Pre-Development Peak Flow Rates and Runoff Volumes from Site 2 Year Catchment 100 Catchment 200 Catchment 300 Total Wetland Total Site Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) Year Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) Year Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) 369 1,678 2,787 4,465 4,834 PAGE 8 OF 26

14

15 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Post-Development Conditions Under post-development conditions, the overall development has been divided into four (4) drainage catchments. The catchment numbers and their respective drainage areas are illustrated in Figure 4. The post development percent impervious for each catchment is calculated based on the City of Guelph Runoff Coefficient to Percent Impervious Conversion Table (Table 2) and the equation below. I = (. ). Where: I = % Impervious C = Runoff Coefficient Table 2: Runoff Coefficient C to Percent Impervious Conversion Land Use Runoff Coefficient Percent Impervious Parks (> 4-ha) Parks (< 4-ha) Single Family Residential (> 18m Frontage) Single Family Residential (12-18m Frontage) Single Family Residential (< 12m Frontage) Semi-detached Maisonettes, townhouses, etc Apartments Schools Churches Industrial Commercial, Highway Commercial Heavily Developed Areas PAGE 9 OF 26

16

17 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 The percent impervious for each catchment under post-development conditions is calculated in Table 3. Table 3: Percent Impervious Calculation Type Area (ha) Runoff Coefficient "C" % Impervious Catchment 100 Wetland Buffer % Catchment 101 Apartment Block % Catchment 102 Park Block % Catchment 200 Townhomes % Semi-Detached % Ex-House % Single Family 13.7 m wide lots % m wide lots % 11.2 m wide lots % 9 m wide lots % Roads % City Block % SWM Facility % Total % PAGE 10 OF 26

18 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Stormwater Management Overview A treatment train approach, consisting of lot level, conveyance and end-of-pipe management practices, is proposed to filter and remove sediments from the storm runoff prior to discharging it to the existing wetland. Lot level controls will include directing roof leaders to grassed rear yard areas and rear yard swales. The runoff from the roof and rear yard areas will be filtered through the grassed yards and swales prior to discharging to rear lot catch basins and conveyance by the storm sewer system to the stormwater management facility. Conveyance controls will include regular maintenance of the storm sewer system including cleaning of manholes, catch basins and oil/grit structures to remove sediments. Quality control will be provided by installing a series of oil/grit separators prior to discharging to the proposed stormwater management facility and the wetland. The end-of-pipe component for the single family and townhome blocks consists of a stormwater management wetland facility designed to provide water quality and quantity controls. The facility will be designed to provide a 24 hour attenuation period for the 25mm design storm event. The outlet structure will provide quantity controls to limit post-development flow rates to less than or equal to the existing flow rates. The apartment block will have its own stormwater management system which will be design at the site plan approval stage. The stormwater management system may consist of rooftop attenuation, rain gardens or parking lot storage complete with an oil/grit separator for quality control. The stormwater management pond and apartment block stormwater management system will discharge to individual energy dissipation structures to cool and spread the storm discharge over a broad area along the wetland interface avoiding a point source discharge. Enhanced LID Infiltration structures are proposed throughout the site to maintain or exceed predevelopment infiltration rates. These structures will be explained in greater detail in Sections 6.4 and Lot Level Controls Stormwater management practices recommended for providing lot level controls on this site are as follows: a) Roof Drainage to Ground Surface The driveways and the front yards will drain to the street. The roof and rear yard will generally drain to the rear of the lot. The roof runoff will be filtered across the grassed surface. The runoff for any event large enough to generate flow to the swale system will be adequately filtered by the grass. PAGE 11 OF 26

19 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 b) Rear Yard Swales The grading of the lots will be to current City of Guelph standards with minimum slopes of 2%. Where practical, the length of the rear lot swales between catch basins will be increased to extend the contact time with the grassed surfaces. To promote water retention on the lots and in the swales, it is recommended that the average depth of graded topsoil be 300 mm. c) Low Impact Development Techniques Low Impact Development techniques are proposed to function in accordance with the CVC/TRCA Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide, MOECC Interpretation Bulletin 2015 and the MOE Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual The MOECC Interpretation Bulletin outlines the suitability of LID infiltration facilities for quantity control purposes in native soils with percolation rates less than 15 mm/hr as long as the facilities can be sized so that they empty between events. Please see Appendix F for a copy of the MOECC Interpretation Bulletin. A typical storm event occurs every 24 to 72 hours. Therefore the required draindown time for an infiltration structure to comply with MOECC guidelines for stormwater management purposes is 24 to 48 hours. Draindown Time Calculations: A Guelph Permeameter Test was completed by V.A. Wood Inc. in September Please see Appendix D. Based on the test results, the sand and silt, some clay, trace gravel soil layer has a hydraulic conductivity of 3.04 x 10-6 cm/s. From Figure C1 of the Low Impact Development Planning and Design Guide, the percolation rate is 12 mm/hr. From Table C2, the safety factor can range from 2.5 to 3.5 depending on the depth of the underlying soil. We will assume a best case scenario of 2.5. Therefore the design percolation rate is 4.8 mm/hr. Infiltration parameters for a typical lot are examined. Given the lot dimensions of 11.2 m x 32 m and approximate house dimensions of 9.2 m x 18.5 m, the runoff volume generated under the 25 mm design storm is as follows: V = m x 9.2 m x 18.5 m = 4.3 m 3 Providing a drywell that is 1.2 m deep by 1.2 m wide by 9 m long (1/3 void ratio) of 19 mm clear stone, the storage volume is 4.3 m 3 and the effective contact area is 32.4 m 2. PAGE 12 OF 26

20 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 Using MOE SWM Planning and Design Manual Equation 4.3, =, t = Where A = contact area of trench (32.4 m 2 ) V = runoff volume to be infiltrated (4.3 m 3 ) P = percolation rate of surrounding native soil (4.8 mm/hr.) n = porosity of the storage media (1/3 for 19 mm clear stone) t = retention time (24 to 48 hours MOE requirement) t = (. ) (. )(. )(. ) t = 92 hours (3.86 days) The drain down time for the infiltration structure would be approximately 92 hours exceeding the drain down of 24 to 48 hours required by the MOECC for stormwater management purposes. Enhanced Infiltration and Ground Water Recharge: Given that a typical lot level LID infiltration structure cannot meet the draindown time requirements for stormwater management purposes, we are proposing the use of LID infiltration structures strictly for groundwater recharge enhancement to maintain the natural hydrologic cycle of the site. The volume infiltrated through the enhanced LID infiltration structures between storm events is not used in the stormwater management calculations for the site. The proposed enhanced LID infiltration structures are to be installed in front and back yard areas of the single family homes located within Catchment 200. The apartment Block, Catchment 101 will have its own enhanced LID infiltration structure that will collect and infiltrate the roof water. Figure 5 illustrates the location of the infiltration structures for the site. Each enhanced LID infiltration structure will have an overflow connection to the storm sewer in case the water level reached the top of the structure. Catchment Enhanced LID Infiltration Structure Recharge Potential: A total of m 3 of enhanced recharge volume potential on an event basis is available from the enhanced LID infiltration structures in Catchment 200. Based on approximately 94.6 discharge events per year (365/3.86) and multiplying by the infiltration volume of m 3, the potential maximum annual enhanced recharge volume is approximately 32,697 m 3 if the structures are always full (Table 18, Section 6.9). Given the current monthly variation for precipitation in the City of Guelph, Table 18 in Section 6.9 calculates the maximum recharge potential of the enhanced infiltration structures on a monthly basis and the available enhanced recharge volume based on the City s monthly PAGE 13 OF 26

21 ³

22 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 average precipitation values. The annual infiltration volume available from the enhanced LID infiltration structures is 11,150 m 3. Section 6.9 of this report combines the infiltration volume from the enhanced LID infiltration structures with the natural recharge infiltration volume of the site to calculate the water balance of the site on a monthly and yearly basis. Catchment Enhanced LID Infiltration Structure Recharge Potential: A total of 51.3 m 3 of enhanced recharge volume potential on an event basis is available from the enhanced LID infiltration structure in Catchment 101. Based on approximately 59.4 discharge events per year (365/6.14) and multiplying by the infiltration volume of 51.3 m 3, the potential maximum annual enhanced infiltration volume is approximately 3,053 m 3 if the structures are always full (Table 15, Section 6.9). Given the current monthly variation for precipitation in the City of Guelph, Table 15 in Section 6.9 calculates the maximum recharge potential of the enhanced infiltration structure on a monthly basis and the available enhanced recharge volume based on the City s monthly average precipitation values. The infiltration volume available from the enhanced LID infiltration structures is 1,349 m 3. Section 6.9 of this report combines the infiltration volume from the enhanced LID infiltration structures with the natural recharge infiltration volume of the site to calculate the water balance of the site on a monthly and yearly basis. 6.5 Conveyance Controls Conveyance controls will be achieved mainly through municipal maintenance of the storm sewer system. The regular cleanout of the manholes, catch basins and oil/grit structures will remove the heavier sediments deposited from the runoff during storm events. PAGE 14 OF 26

23 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Site Plan Controls The apartment block will require its own stormwater management system complete with quality controls which will be designed at the site plan approval stage. Preliminary analysis estimates that approximately 315 m 3 of storage is required to attenuate post development flows. The apartment block stormwater management system may consist of rooftop attenuation, bioretention facilities, rain gardens or parking lot storage, all of which will be designed at the site plan approval stage in accordance to the guidelines, policies and procedures in place at the time of design. The apartment block will require an enhanced infiltration structure that has a storage volume of 51 m 3 and a contact area of 242 m 2 in order to meet the enhanced infiltration volume outlines in Sections 6.4 and 6.9 of this report. Table 4 illustrates the preliminary design of a storage system for the apartment block. Table 4: Apartment Block Stage/Storage/Discharge Catchment 101 CONTROL Peak Flow m³/s Available Capacity Storage Volume m³ Storage Elevation m Invert Peak Flow m³/s Actual Capacity Used Storage Volume m³ Storage Elevation m 2 year Obvert year Top of Grate Weir year Overflow Quality control for the apartment block can be achieved through an oil/grit separator such as a Stormceptor STC 2000 unit removing 80% of the total suspended solids while treating 93% of the runoff volume. Flows discharged from the proposed Apartment Block stormwater management facility will be routed over a 40 m long energy dissipation structure which will cool the runoff and will provide a continuous linear discharge area versus a point discharge. PAGE 15 OF 26

24 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Stormwater Management Facility The end-of-pipe component consists of a stormwater management pond, located at the southeast corner of the site. The proposed stormwater management facility is designed to accept and control flows from the townhouse and single family blocks (Catchment 200). Further details of the water quality and quantity controls for the proposed stormwater management pond are discussed in the following sections. a) Water Quality Pre-treatment of stormwater runoff discharging to the stormwater management facility will be provided by two (2) oil/grit separator structures. Please refer to Figure 12, Appendix D for the oil/grit structure catchments areas. Stormwater pre-treatment for Catchments A and B (from Figure 12), the single family and townhome blocks, is provided by two oil/grit separators such as Stormceptor STC 9000, removing 81 % of total suspended solids while treating 94% of the runoff volume. This pre-treatment of the stormwater runoff from the development will reduce the frequency that the stormwater management pond will require remediation from sediment buildup. Pretreatment will remove larger sediments before they are deposited within the stormwater management pond facility. Oil/grit separator sizing is included in Appendix D. The stormwater management facility has been designed to function as a wetland. From Interpolating Table 3.2 of the Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual 2003 for 73% imperviousness, a wetland facility requires 124 m³/ha of storage volume to provide an enhanced level of protection. 40 m³/ha of the required storage volume is extended detention volume, while the remaining 84 m³/ha is permanent pool. The required permanent pool volume for the contributing lands, (8.45 hectares) is 710 m³. The water quality cell has been designed with shallow, 0.30 meters deep, permanent pool. The permanent pool creates approximately 770 m³ of storage. The forebay and outlet structure stilling basin contribute approximately 192 m³ and 54 m 3 of storage for a total of 1,016 m³. The forebay represents 10% of the total permanent pool area which is acceptable by MOE requiring a maximum of 20%. The forebay and outlet structure stilling basin surface area represent about 15% of the total permanent pool area which is less than the MOE maximum of 25%. Runoff will be discharged from the proposed facility at a controlled rate. A flow splitting structure will direct a portion of the runoff to the north part of the wetland via a 300 mm diameter sewer, while the remaining runoff will discharge to the south part of the wetland via a 450 mm diameter sewer. Both north and south discharge locations have an energy dissipation structure designed to cool and spread the runoff over a wide area, eliminating a point source discharge. The energy dissipation structures will also provide a final polishing mechanism, filtering out any fine suspended solids from the runoff prior to it being discharged to the respective buffer area for conveyance to the wetland. PAGE 16 OF 26

25 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 b) Extended Detention Extended detention volume is calculated based on the runoff volume (1099 m 3 ) generated by the 4 hour 25 mm design storm event. The outlet structure has been designed to provide a 24 -hour draindown time for the 4 hour 25 mm design storm event corresponding to a peak flow rate of m³/s. From the design of the stormwater management pond, a storage volume of 1099 m³ corresponds to a ponding depth of approximately 0.36 metres. The outlet structure has been designed with a 130 mm diameter orifice, which will control the extended detention volume to the required release rate. c) Pond Routing In addition to the water quality controls, the outlet structure will provide quantity controls to limit post-development flows to less than or equal to the pre-development flow rates. The outlet structure is designed with a 130 mm diameter orifice at an elevation of m and a lip elevation of m. Please see Figures 6 and 7 for a detail of the outlet structure. A 10 m long weir is proposed at an elevation of m to allow storms greater than the 100 year design storm event to flow to the wetland at a controlled rate. Table 5 compares the routing results through the stormwater management pond with the available stage/storage/discharge capacities. Table 5: Stormwater Management Pond Stage/Storage/Discharge Capacity - Catchment 200 Control Point Available Capacities Actual Capacity Used Drain Down Peak Storage Storage Peak Storage Storage Time Flow Volume Elevation Flow Volume Elevation (hrs.) m³/s m³ m m³/s m³ m Pond Bottom mm , Year , CB Lip , Year , Year , Overflow Weir , Top of Pond , A freeboard of 0.29 m has been provided in the facility under the 100 year design storm event. PAGE 17 OF 26

26

27

28

29 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 d) Sediment Forebay Design The stormwater management facility has been designed with a 1.0 m deep sediment forebay. The sediment forebay has been designed as recommended within the MOE guidelines. Table 6 summarizes the required and provided parameters within the sediment forebay design. Table 6: Sediment Forebay Design Details Forebay Dispersion Length (m) 26.0 Settling Length (m) 13.2 Flow Velocity (m/s) 0.50 Required Length to Width Ratio 2:1 Settling Velocity (m/s) Forebay Area/P.P. Area Deep Water Area/P.P Area 20% max 25% max Forebay Length (m) 27.4 Flow Velocity (m/s) 0.11 Provided Length to Width Ratio 2.7:1 Forebay Area/P.P. Area 10% Deep Water Area/P.P Area 15% The sediment forebay has been designed to provide the required dispersion and settling lengths in order to settle particulates in the forebay prior to discharge to the wetland. PAGE 18 OF 26

30 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 e) Sediment Loading and Cleanout Frequency From Table 6.3, Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual, the annual sediment loading for a Catchment having an imperviousness value of 73% would be approximately 3.0 m³/ha. Table 7 illustrates the adjusted sediment loading due to the oil/grit separators located upstream of the pond. The sediment contribution is calculated as follows: ( ) (3.0 /h ) [1 ( %)( %)] = ( ) Table 7: Sediment Loading Analysis Catchment Area 3.0 m 3 /ha TSS Removal Volume Treated Sediment Contribution A 3.55 ha m 3 81% 94% 2.54 m 3 B 3.63 ha m 3 81% 94% 2.60 m 3 Total 5.14 m 3 The annual sediment loading to the stormwater management pond, adjusted for the oil/grit separators, is 5.14 m³. The forebay portion of the permanent pool is where most of the sediment accumulation will occur. Based on half of the 192 m 3 of storage volume being used for sediment storage, a cleanout frequency of 18 years is expected. The oil/grit separators need to be cleaned a minimum of once per year as required. f) Post Development Conditions Table 8 summarizes the post-development flow rates and volumes from all catchments Table 8: Controlled Flow Rate and Runoff Volumes All Design Storms Design Storms Total 2 Year Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) ,885 2,181 5 Year Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) ,507 2, Year Flow Rate (m 3 /s) Runoff Volume (m 3 ) ,972 7,253 PAGE 19 OF 26

31 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 g) Flow Diverted from Catchment 200 Flow Splitting Structure Table 9 summarized the flow volume being diverted to north and south portions of the wetland buffers by the flow splitting structure. Table 9: Flow Diverted from Catchment 200 to North and South Wetland Buffer Outlets Design Storm Runoff Volume to North Wetland (m 3 ) Runoff Volume to South Wetland (m 3 ) Total (m 3 ) 2 Year Year Year Average % 31% 69% 100% h) Comparison of Existing Conditions and Post-Development Tables 10 and 11 summarize the pre and post development flows and runoff volumes to the north and south wetland outlets. Table 10: Pre and Post-Development Flows Comparison Wetland to the north of Harts Lane Wetland to the south of Harts Lane Pre- Development 2 Year (m 3 /s) 5 Year (m 3 /s) 100 Year (m 3 /s) Post- Development Pre- Development Post- Development Pre- Development Post- Development Total PAGE 20 OF 26

32 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 Table 11: Pre and Post-Development Runoff Volume Comparison Wetland to the north of Harts Lane Wetland to the south of Harts Lane Pre- Development 2 Year (m 3 ) 5 Year (m 3 ) 100 Year (m 3 ) Post- Development Pre- Development Post- Development Pre- Development Post- Development 294 1, ,325 1,678 2, , ,620 2,787 4,329 Total 775 2,181 1,241 2,945 4,465 7,253 The 2, 5 and 100 year design storm post development flows to the north and south portion of the wetland are less than the pre development flows. Table 12 summarizes the depth of flow being released from the energy dissipation structures into the respective wetland outlets. Table 12: Flow Depth Released from the Energy Dissipation Structures into the Receiving Wetland Outlets Discharge Location Apartment Block (Catchment 101) to North portion of Wetland via Energy Dissipation Structure Catchment 200 to North portion of Wetland via Energy Dissipation Structure Catchment 200 to South portion of Wetland via Energy Dissipation Structure 2 Year Flow Depth (m) 5 Year Flow Depth (m) 100 Year Flow Depth (m) Preliminary Overall Grading Drawings 1 and 2 show the preliminary grading for the development. PAGE 21 OF 26

33 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, Water Budget The average annual precipitation for the area in which the study site is located is estimated to be about 923 mm. This amount is based on precipitation data recorded at the Guelph Arboretum meteorological station for the period from 1971 to The water balance is calculated on a monthly basis based on the strategy provided in Instructions and Tables for Computing Potential Evapotranspiration and the Water Balance (Thornthwaite and Mather, 1957). Site Specific: Tables 13 to 19 summarize the water balance calculations for the site. Enhanced LID infiltration structures as described in Section 6.4 are proposed to be installed throughout the proposed development to enhance ground water recharge. The total annual enhanced recharge volume available from the infiltration structures is 12,499 m 3 and is calculated by adding up the enhanced recharge volumes from Tables 13 and 16 (1,349 m ,150 m 2 = 12,499 m 3 ). The total annual natural recharge volume achieved from pervious surfaces is 7,437 m 3 and is calculated by adding up the recharge through pervious surface volumes from Tables 13 and 16 (3,113 m 3 + 4,325 m 3 = 7,437 m 3 ). Combining the enhanced recharge volume of 12,499 m 3 plus the natural recharge volume of 7,437 m 3 provides a total post-development on site annual infiltration volume of 19,937 m 3, which is 4.7% more than pre-development annual infiltration volume of 19,048 m 3 (see Table 19). The total post-development runoff volume from the site is 47,116 m 3. The pre-development runoff volume is 20,692 m 3. PAGE 22 OF 26

34 EXISTING CONDITION Contributing Catchments: 200 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.53 Contributing Area = 3.77 ha Vegetation: Shallow-rooted crops Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 2.70% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Factor for Impervious Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Surfaces = 0.34 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 13 : Monthly Water Balance Wetland North of Harts Lane Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET Actual Evapotranspiration Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Actual Runoff ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr , May ,599 2,348 Jun ,317 1,191 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total ,842 7,087 POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION Contributing Catchments: 100, 101, 102 and Part of 200 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.75 Contributing Area = 2.48 ha Vegetation: Urban lawns Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 35.0% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Factor for Impervious Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Surfaces = 0.34 Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr ,017 1, May ,375 2,798 5, ,119 Jun ,297 1,847 3, Jul ,463 2, Aug ,234 1, Sep , Oct Nov ,042 1, Dec Total ,654 1,349 8,192 12,014 20,206 3,113 4,462 Actual Evapotranspiration Notes: Precipitation and Temperature data from Environment Canada Climate Normals for the Guelph Arboretum Monthly water balance strategy as outlined in the document Instructions and Tables for Computing Potential Evapotranspiration and the Water Balance (Thornthwaite and Mather, 1957) Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Runoff Volume Total Enhanced Recharge (Table 15) Recharge Volume Runoff Volume Runoff Volume from South Total Runoff Volume North Recharge Through Pervious Surfaces Total Recharge Volume

35 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 14: Enhanced Infiltration Structure Data Sheet Catchment 101 Drainage Area (ha) Length (m) Width (m) Depth (m) Volume (m 3 ) Storage Volume Contact Area (m 2 ) Percolation Rate Draindown (hr) (m 3 ) (mm/hr) Draindown is calculated using MOE Equation 4.3 Where: A = contact area of the trench (m²) V = runoff volume to be infiltrated (m 3 ) P = percolation rate of surrounding native soil (mm/h) n = porosity of the storage media (0.3 for clear stone) t = retention time hours)

36 Hart Subdivision Area of Enhanced Recharge ha (Part of Catchment 100) City of Guelph Recharge Time hours / 6.14 days Table 15 : Enhanced Recharge Calculation Recharge Volume Potential m 3 Infiltration Structures Wetland North of Harts Lane Month Total Recharge & Runoff (Table 13) No. of days Max Potential Recharge Available Recharge Total Enhanced Recharge (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total ,053 1,505 1,349

37 EXISTING CONDITION Contributing Catchments: 300 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.52 Contributing Area = 6.31 ha Vegetation: Shallow-rooted crops Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 1.90% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Factor for Impervious Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Surfaces = 0.34 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 16 : Monthly Water Balance Wetland South of Harts Lane Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET Actual Evapotranspiration Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Actual Runoff ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr ,671 1,555 May ,281 3,984 Jun ,161 2,012 Jul ,103 1,027 Aug Sep Oct Nov ,346 1,253 Dec Total ,850 11,960 POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION Contributing Catchments:Part of 200 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.92 Diversion to North = 31% Contributing Area = 8.45 ha Vegetation: Urban lawns Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 73.0% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Factor for Impervious Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Surfaces = 0.34 Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan Feb Mar Apr ,294 1,017 2, ,625 May ,067 2,798 6,268 1,023 3,800 Jun ,985 1,847 4, ,545 Jul ,742 1,463 3, ,732 Aug ,997 1,234 2, ,294 Sep , , Oct , , Nov ,377 1,042 2, ,495 Dec , , Total ,399 11,150 38,924 12,014 26,910 4,325 15,475 Actual Evapotranspiration Notes: Precipitation and Temperature data from Environment Canada Climate Normals for the Guelph Arboretum Monthly water balance strategy as outlined in the document Instructions and Tables for Computing Potential Evapotranspiration and the Water Balance (Thornthwaite and Mather, 1957) Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Runoff Volume Total Enhanced Recharge (Table 18) Recharge Volume Total Runoff Volume Runoff Volume Diverted to North Total Runoff Volume South Recharge Through Pervious Surfaces Total Recharge Volume

38 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 17: Enhanced Infiltration Structure Data Sheet Catchment 200 Drainage Area (ha) Number of Structures Length (m) Width (m) Depth (m) Volume (m 3 ) Storage Volume (m 3 ) Total Storage Volume (m3) Contact Area (m 2 ) Percolation Rate (mm/hr) Draindown (hr) Total Draindown is calculated using MOE Equation 4.3 Where: A = contact area of the trench (m²) V = runoff volume to be infiltrated (m 3 ) P = percolation rate of surrounding native soil (mm/h) n = porosity of the storage media (0.3 for clear stone) t = retention time hours)

39 Hart Subdivision Area of Enhanced Recharge ha (Part of Catchment 100) City of Guelph Recharge Time 93 hours / 3.86 days Table 18 : Enhanced Recharge Calculation Recharge Volume Potential m 3 Infiltration Structures Wetland South of Harts Lane Month Total Recharge & Runoff (Table 13) No. of days Max Potential Recharge Available Recharge Total Enhanced Recharge (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan , Feb , Mar , Apr ,687 1,234 1,234 May ,777 3,194 2,777 Jun ,687 1,867 1,867 Jul ,777 1,217 1,217 Aug , Sep , Oct , Nov ,687 1,107 1,107 Dec , Total ,697 11,567 11,150

40 Month Existing Runoff Volume Wetland North of Harts Lane Proposed Runoff Volume Percent Change Runoff Volume Existing Runoff Volume Wetland South of Harts Lane Proposed Runoff Volume Percent Change Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 19 : Monthly Water Balance Summary Subject Property Existing Runoff Volume Total From Site Proposed Runoff (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) Jan % % % Feb % % % Mar % % % Apr 1,014 1, % 1,671 2, % 2,685 4, % May 2,599 5, % 4,281 6, % 6,879 11, % Jun 1,317 3, % 2,161 4, % 3,479 7, % Jul 678 2, % 1,103 3, % 1,781 5, % Aug 357 1, % 572 2, % 929 4, % Sep 192 1, % 303 2, % 496 3, % Oct % 180 1, % 295 2, % Nov 819 1, % 1,346 2, % 2,165 4, % Dec % 675 1, % 1,085 2, % Percent Change Total 7,842 20, % 12,850 26, % 20,692 47, % Month Recharge Volume Entire Site Existing Proposed Recharge Volume Recharge Volume Percent Change (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) Jan % Feb % Mar % Apr 2,471 2, % May 6,333 4, % Jun 3,203 3, % Jul 1,639 2, % Aug 855 1, % Sep 456 1, % Oct % Nov 1,993 1, % Dec % Total 19,048 19, %

41 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, 2015 Hanlon Creek Watershed Tributary D: The area surrounding the upper reaches of Tributary D, i.e., the area above Edinburgh Road was analyzed in determining the cumulative effect of the proposed development on the existing wetland. The Hanlon Creek Watershed Study by MMM Group dated April 1993 was used to determine the lands draining to the existing wetland above Edinburgh Road. Figures 9 and 10 illustrate the pre and post development watershed drainage areas. The pre and post development runoff and recharge volumes from the drainage area that drains to the existing wetland are analyzed in Tables 20 and 21. Under existing conditions, the area draining into the wetland is ha and is approximately 34% impervious. The existing annual average recharge volume for wetland is 96,990 m 3. The existing average annual runoff volume to the wetland is 289,176 m³. Under post-development conditions, the area draining into the wetland is ha and is approximately 43% impervious. Following the development of the site, the average annual recharge volume is 97,218 m 3 and the average annual runoff volume to the wetland is 317,860 m³. Based on the analysis from Table 21, a 9.9% increase in runoff volume and a 0.2% increase in recharge volume are calculated for the existing wetland. PAGE 23 OF 26

42

43

44 EXISTING CONDITION Contributing Catchments: 400 to 413, 200 and 300 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.75 Contributing Area = ha Vegetation: Shallow-rooted crops Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 34.00% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Factor for Impervious Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Surfaces = 0.34 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 20 : Monthly Water Balance Entire Wetland Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET Actual Evapotranspiration Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Actual Runoff Runoff Volume Recharge Volume ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan ,641 2,227 Feb ,320 1,114 Mar , Apr ,018 10,403 May ,277 26,925 Jun ,737 15,676 Jul ,320 10,169 Aug ,624 7,253 Sep ,450 5,182 Oct ,456 3,507 Nov ,762 9,312 Dec ,910 4,665 Total ,176 96,990 POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION Contributing Catchments: 400 to 413, 100, and 200 Soil Type: Clayey Sandy Silt Till Runoff Factor = 0.80 Contributing Area = ha Vegetation: Urban lawns Evapotranspiration Percent Impervious = 43.0% Root Zone Depth = 0.5m Soil Moisture Retention Capacity = 75mm Factor for Impervious Surfaces = 0.34 Month Daily Average Temperature Monthly Heat Index Unadjusted Daily Potential Evapotranspiration Correction Factors Adjusted Potential Evapotranspiration Average Precipitation P-PE Accum. Pot. Water Loss Storage S Pervious ET Actual Evapotranspiration Moisture Surplus Water Runoff Snow Melt Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Total Recharge & Runoff Total Enhanced Recharge (Tables 15/18) Runoff Volume Recharge Through Pervious Surfaces Total Recharge Volume ( C) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Jan ,157 1,912 2,212 Feb , ,106 Mar , Apr ,491 8,690 10,084 May ,891 22,548 25,585 Jun ,823 13,574 15,684 Jul ,538 9,210 10,586 Aug ,756 6,858 7,845 Sep ,957 5,043 5,750 Oct ,962 3,447 3,926 Nov ,864 7,979 9,231 Dec ,961 3,998 4,625 Total ,078 12, ,860 84,719 97,218 Notes: Precipitation and Temperature data from Environment Canada Climate Normals for the Guelph Arboretum Monthly water balance strategy as outlined in the document Instructions and Tables for Computing Potential Evapotranspiration and the Water Balance (Thornthwaite and Mather, 1957)

45 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph Table 21 : Monthly Water Balance Summary Entire Wetland Month Existing Runoff Volume Proposed Runoff Volume Percent Change Existing Wetland Existing Recharge Volume Proposed Recharge Volume Percent Change (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (%) Jan 6,641 7, % 2,227 2, % Feb 3,320 3, % 1,114 1, % Mar 1,660 1, % % Apr 31,018 32, % 10,403 10, % May 80,277 84, % 26,925 25, % Jun 46,737 50, % 15,676 15, % Jul 30,320 34, % 10,169 10, % Aug 21,624 25, % 7,253 7, % Sep 15,450 18, % 5,182 5, % Oct 10,456 12, % 3,507 3, % Nov 27,762 29, % 9,312 9, % Dec 13,910 14, % 4,665 4, % Total 289, , % 96,990 97, %

46 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN Primary sediment control will be achieved with the installation of Type 1 and 2 sediment fence around the property boundary, specifically surrounding existing residential lots and Core Greenland areas. The silt fence will eliminate the opportunity for water borne sediments to be transported from the site. Temporary rock check dams will be installed in rear and side yard swales after the initial grading has been completed to slow the flow rates and promote the settlement of water borne sediments before they reach the silt fences and ponds. Upon completion of the grading, any area not subject to active construction within 30 days will be topsoiled and seeded as per OPSS 572. The stormwater management facility will be graded and shaped at the start of any construction or pre-grading activity. A silt fence will be placed around the outlet structures to restrict the movement of sediment. The discharge structure will restrict the release rate and provide extended detention for a minimum 24-hour period. Once catch basins have been installed, the grates will be wrapped in filter cloth. This will be maintained until all building and landscaping has been completed. Inspection and maintenance of all silt fencing and the sediment pond will start after installation is complete. These features will be inspected on a weekly basis or after a rainfall event of 13 mm or greater. Maintenance will be carried out, within 48 hours, on any part of the facility found to need repair. Monthly reports on the condition of the sediment and erosion control measures will be submitted to the City of Guelph and the Grand River Conservation Authority. Once construction has been substantially completed, the silt fence will be removed from within the pond, any accumulated sediment will be removed and the landscaping and planting of the pond will be completed. After construction of the complete development, erosion will not occur and sediment transport will be minimal. The swale drainage in the rear lot areas will be as flat as feasible in order to minimize flow velocities. The stormwater management pond will provide all sediment removal PAGE 24 OF 26

47 HART SUBDIVISION, CITY OF GUELPH PRELIMINARY SERVICING & STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT REPORT GMBP FILE: MAY 22, CONCLUSIONS The stormwater management system for the Hart Subdivision has been designed to collect, clean, filter and attenuate runoff from all storms up to and including the 100-year design storm. From the analysis, the following conclusions are drawn: 1. The stormwater management system has been designed to provide enhanced water quality treatment, incorporating the use of oil/grit separators, a shallow permanent pool and extended detention of the required water quality storage volume. 2. The stormwater management system has been designed with water quantity controls to control post-development flows to less than the existing conditions. 3. The stormwater management pond has been located at the lowest point of the site to minimize the grading impacts within the site and to minimize the changes in elevation from the energy dissipation structures to the receiving outlet which will limit or eliminate the potential for erosion following the development of the subdivision. 4. Three energy dissipation structures are proposed to cool and disperse the post-development flows from the site to the wetland in sheetflow manner. 5. The stormwater management facility for the apartment block will be designed at the site plan approval stage and will incorporate the methods recommended in this report. 6. The stormwater management systems meet the current MOE, GRCA and City guidelines. 7. The principles of Stormwater Best Management Practices have been used in the selection of the stormwater management systems. 8. During the construction phase, the stormwater management facility will be used as part of the erosion and sediment control plan. This in conjunction, with the other erosion control measures, will retain any sediment on-site during the construction period. 9. The local storm sewer system will be designed to convey the 5-year flows to the stormwater management system. 10. A 200 mm diameter trunk watermain will extend through the municipal right of way to service the proposed development complete with connections at Rodgers Road and Carrington Drive to provide a looped system. 11. A local 200 mm diameter sanitary sewer will service the proposed development ultimately discharging to the existing sanitary sewer on Carrington Drive. 12. The existing 375 mm diameter trunk sanitary sewer will be extended within the subdivision to Harts Lane near the westerly edge of the wetland for future extension by the City to connect to the existing 300 mm trunk sewer dead-ended on Harts Lane on the easterly side of the wetland. PAGE 25 OF 26

48

49 APPENDIX A: HARTS LANE DESIGN OPTIONS

50 Option 1 The Hart farm lane is retained as a multi-use trail connecting the proposed subdivision to the developed portion of Hart s Lane. A cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed on the easterly side of the wetland at the terminus of the existing Harts Lane municipal road. This option following existing topography, does not require grading into the wetland and allows the installation of sanitary and water mains under the wetland by trenchless methods. Option 2 Harts Lane across the wetland could be reconstructed as a two lane asphalt road with two 3.75 m asphalt lanes, curb and gutter on both side, a curb faced sidewalk on one side and two 0.5 m rounding boulevards for a total width of 11.0 metres. With the incorporation of graded slopes, the total width of grading within the wetland will be approximately 22 m wide across the wetland narrowing to 11.0 m at the ends. This option requires the removal of approximately 3713 m 3 of wetland materials to be replaced with a similar volume of imported fill material suitable for the construction of a stable road base. This option will also require a significant temporary dewatering plan with a Permit to Take Water to complete the road construction while maintaining the adjacent wetland areas. Sanitary and water mains will be installed by trenchless methods under the wetland. Option 3 Harts Lane across the wetland could be reconstructed to the City s 20 m wide urban cross section with two 3.75 m asphalt lanes, curb and gutter on both side, a 1.5 m wide sidewalk on one side and a full boulevard for a total width of 13.3 metres. With the incorporation of graded slopes, the total width of grading within the wetland will be approximately 24 m wide across the wetland narrowing to 13.3 m at the ends. This option requires the removal of approximately 4,332 m 3 of wetland materials to be replaced with a similar volume of imported fill material suitable for the construction of a stable road base. This option will also require a significant temporary dewatering plan with a Permit to Take Water to complete the road construction while maintaining the adjacent wetland areas. Sanitary and water mains will be installed by trenchless methods under the wetland. Option 4 The existing footprint of the farm lane across the wetland is 5.2 m wide. The minimum width of a functional road across the wetland as noted in Option 2 is 11.0 metres. It is not feasible to construct a stable functional road within the available 5.2 m wide footprint of the existing farm lane. Please see Drawings PP1, PP2 and PP3 for the preliminary grading of Harts Lane for each of the three options.

51 APPENDIX B: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS

52 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph G&M: year pre-development flows " MIDUSS Output >" " MIDUSS version Version 2.25 rev. 473" " MIDUSS created Sunday, February 07, 2010" " 10 Units used: ie METRIC" " Job folder: C:\Miduss Projects\112155" " Output filename: pre-2-year_ out" " Licensee name: gamsby" " Company " " Date & Time last used: 3/19/2014 at 5:52:04 PM" " 31 TIME PARAMETERS" " Time Step" " Max. Storm length" " Max. Hydrograph" " 32 STORM Chicago storm" " 1 Chicago storm" " Coefficient A" " Constant B" " Exponent C" " Fraction R" " Duration" " Time step multiplier" " Maximum intensity mm/hr" " Total depth mm" " 6 002hyd Hydrograph extension used in this file" " 33 CATCHMENT 100" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 100 north-west corner " " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 100 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow to Kortright ROad "

53 " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " Total flow off site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 33 CATCHMENT 200" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 200 Northerly portion of the site " " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 200 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow to north portion of wetland " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total to Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 33 CATCHMENT 300" " 1 Triangular SCS"

54 " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 300 Souther portion of the site " " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 300 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow to south portion of wetland " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total to Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 2000" " 7 Confluence " " 2000 Node #" " Total to Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " Total flow off site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 1000" " 7 Confluence " " 1000 Node #"

55 " Total flow off site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 38 START/RE-START TOTALS 1000" " 3 Runoff Totals on EXIT" " Total Catchment area hectare" " Total Impervious area hectare" " Total % impervious 2.028" " 19 EXIT"

64 APPENDIX C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS

65 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Apartment Block (preliminary analysis) Storage Volume Calculations Elevation Depth Surface Increase Accum. Area Storage Storage Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Pipe Invert Springline Pipe Obvert Top of Grate Overflow Weir Top of Pond Orifice Calculations Weir Calculations Q = m 3 /s d1 = 2.70 m Cd = 0.60 h = 2.60 m H = 0.39 m H = 0.10 m 2g = g = A = m 2 L = m D = m Q = 0.65 m 3 /s

66 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Discharge (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) Pipe Invert Pipe Obvert Top of Grate Overflow Weir Top of Pond

67 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Storage Volume Calculations Surface Perm. Pool Accum. P.P. Surface Active Accum. Active Elevation Depth Area Volume Volume Area Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) , Pond Bottom , , , , , Permanent Pool , , , , , CB control , , , , , , , , Weir , , Top of Pond 900 x 1800 Structure Controls Orifice Outlet (Extended Detention) 900 x 1800 Orifice Outlet Orifice Control INV m Lip m INV m Q = m 3 /s Q = m 3 /s Q = m 3 /s Cd = Cd = Cd = H = m H = m H = m 2g = g = g = A = m 2 A = m 2 A = m 2 D = m D = 0.9*1.8 m D = m

68 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Storage Volume Calculations Inclined Mass Outlet Weir Flow Calculations (900 mm x 1800 mm structure) Lip = m Area = 1.62 m 2 2g = Elev d1 h H 2g L Q front Q sides Qtotal m m m m m m 3 /s m 3 /s m 3 /s Overflow Weir to South Wetland Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m m 3 /s Stage-Storage-Discharge Table 130 mm Orifice 900x mm Orifice Actual Elevation Stage Storage Control Control Control Discharge (m) (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) Permanent Pool , , CB control , , , , , , , , Weir , , Top of Pond

69 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph G&M File: Hour Drain-down Calculations 4, , , , , , , y = x mm Drain Down Calculations Top of ponding from 25 mm storm t = 0.66C 2 h C 3 h Modelled extended detention volume : 1099 Required extended detention volume ponding depth: Given: d = m Solve for t A o = m t = 0.66C 2 h C 3 h 0.5 C 2 = A o C 3 = 2746 t = seconds h = (0.120/2) t = 1445 minutes = m t = 24.1 hours

70 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment x 2400 Flow Splitting Structure Surface Active Total Elevation Depth Area Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Inv South Weir North Weir T/G Internal Structure - Orifice 1 Internal Structure - Orifice 2 Orifice (to North Wetland Outlet) Orifice (to South Wetland Outlet) INV m INV m Cd = Cd = g = g = A = m 2 A = m 2 D = m D = m = 2 h = 2 h Internal Structure Weir to North Wetland Outlet - Weir 1 Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m m 3 /s Internal Structure Weir to South Wetland Outlet - Weir 2 Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m m 3 /s

71 Outlet 1 - to North Wetland Manning Calculations Orifice Calculation INV m INV m n = D = m Cd = slope = % 2g = length = m A = m 2 = A / / D = = 2 h m Water elev. Slope (S) D q A P R Q pipe Q orifice Q max m % m rad m 2 m A/P m 3 /s m 3 /s m 3 /s

72 Outlet 2 - to South Wetland Manning Calculations Orifice Calculation INV m INV m n = D = m Cd = slope = 2.50 % 2g = length = 4.0 m A = m 2 = A / / D = m = 2 h Water elev. Slope (S) D q A P R Q pipe Q orifice Q max m % m rad m 2 m A/P m 3 /s m 3 /s m 3 /s

73 Stage-Storage-Discharge Table Orifice 1 Orifice 2 Weir 1 Weir 2 Outlet 1 Outlet 2 Total North Total South Total Elevation Stage Storage Control Control Control Control Control Control Discharge Discharge Discharge (m) (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) (m 3 /s) Inv South Weir North Weir T/G Interpolate for North and South Wetland Outlets 100 Year Design Storm Flow Elevation (m): South Outlet (m 3 /s): North Outlet (m 3 /s): 5 Year Design Storm Flow Elevation (m): South Outlet (m 3 /s): North Outlet (m 3 /s): Year Design Storm Flow Elevation (m): South Outlet (m 3 /s): North Outlet (m 3 /s):

74 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure - South of Harts Lane Length (m): 100 Width (m): 1 Storage Volume Calculations Elevation Depth Surface Increase Increase Accum. Area Stone Storage Storage Volume Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Bottom of Stone Weir Top of Stone Overflow Weir Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m/s 2 m m 3 /s

75 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure - South of Harts Lane Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Discharge (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) Bottom of Stone Weir Overflow

76 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure - North of Harts Lane Length (m): 30 Width (m): 1.5 Storage Volume Calculations Elevation Depth Surface Increase Increase Accum. Area Stone Storage Storage Volume Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Bottom of Stone Weir Top of Stone Overflow Weir Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m/s 2 m m 3 /s

77 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure - North of Harts Lane Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Discharge (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) Bottom of Stone Weir Overflow

78 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure Length (m): 40 Width (m): 1.5 Storage Volume Calculations Elevation Depth Surface Increase Increase Accum. Area Stone Storage Storage Volume Volume Volume (m) (m) (m 2 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) (m 3 ) Bottom of Stone Weir Top of Stone Overflow Weir Elev d1 h H 2g L Q m m m m m/s 2 m m 3 /s

79 Heart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Catchment Energy Dissipation Structure Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Discharge (m) (m 3 ) (m 3 /s) Bottom of Stone Weir Overflow

80 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph GMBP File: Stormwater Management Facility - Catchment 200 Forebay Length = 27.4 m (Dist) Forebay Top Width = 10.0 m Active Forebay Depth = 1.0 m (d) Active Forebay Bottom Width = 4.0 m Approximate Permanent Forebay Pool Volume = m 3 Length Width Ratio = 2.7 :1 (r) 25 mm Storm Peak Flowrate = m 3 /s (Q25mm) 5 Year Storm Inflow Rate = m 3 /s (Q5) Desired Forebay Velocity = m/s (Vf) Desired Settling Velocity (recommended) = m/s (Vs) Settling Length Dist = ((r x Q25mm)/Vs)^.5 = 13.2 m 25mm Forebay length (27.4 m) exceeds the settling length (13.2 m). Dispersion Length Dist = (8 x Q5)/(d x Vf) = 26.0 m 5 Year Forebay length (27.4 m) exceeds dispersion length (26.0 m). Flow Velocity in Forebay Cross-sectional Area = 7 m 2 Cross-sectional Area (With Permanent Pool) = 14.2 m 2 A Q5 = m 3 /s Velocity = Q5/A = 0.11 m/s 5 Year The average flow velocity through the forebay meets the allowable velocity of 0.15 m/s.

81 101 80% % % % LEGEND: 101 CATCHMENT # POND "PROPOSED SWM FACILITY" POND "MAIN SWM FACILITY" 80% % PERVIOUS SES CURVE No. FLOW LENGTH POND "ENERGY DISSIPATION STRUCTURE" (APARTMENT BLOCK) POND "FLOW SPLITTING STRUCTURE" CATCHMENT SLOPE AREA (ha) % IMPERVIOUS POND POND FUNCTION 10% % C H A N N E L "OVERLAND FLOW" TO NORTH PORTION OF WETLAND POND DIV001 "NORTH ENERGY DISSIPATION STRUCTURE" "DIVERSION TO NORTH/SOUTH OUTLET" POND "SOUTH ENERGY DISSIPATION STRUCTURE" C H A N N E L DIV001 CHANNEL/OVERLAND FLOW POND FUNCTION 100 0% % SITE JUNCTION NODE 1000 NORTH OUTLET C H A N N E L "OVERLAND FLOW" TO NORTH PORTION OF WETLAND C H A N N E L "OVERLAND FLOW" TO SOUTH PORTION OF WETLAND (TOTAL TO SOUTH OUTLET) 2000 SITE TOTAL

82 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph G&M: mm storm post-development flows " MIDUSS Output >" " MIDUSS version Version 2.25 rev. 473" " MIDUSS created Sunday, February 07, 2010" " 10 Units used: ie METRIC" " Job folder: C:\Miduss Projects\112155" " Output filename: post-25 mm 4h.out" " Licensee name: gamsby" " Company " " Date & Time last used: 5/15/2015 at 10:44:14 AM" " 31 TIME PARAMETERS" " Time Step" " Max. Storm length" " Max. Hydrograph" " 32 STORM Chicago storm" " 1 Chicago storm" " Coefficient A" " Constant B" " Exponent C" " Fraction R" " Duration" " Time step multiplier" " Maximum intensity mm/hr" " Total depth mm" " 6 001hyd Hydrograph extension used in this file" " 33 CATCHMENT 102" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 102 Park Block" " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 102 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 33 CATCHMENT 100" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length"

83 " 1 SCS method" " 100 Grassed Area at Wetland Buffer" " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 100 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Park Block and Wetland Buffer uncontrolled to North " " Wetland " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 33 CATCHMENT 101" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 101 ApartmentBlock" " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No."

84 " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 101 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 15. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Apartment Block SWM Facility" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " "

85 " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Apartment Block Energy Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 20" " Channel Route 20 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into North Wetland " " from Apartment Block" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 33 CATCHMENT 200" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 200 Remainder of Site." " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope"

86 " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 200 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from main SWM Facility (Catchment 200)" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 15. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Flow-Splitting Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link "

87 " 5 Next link " " " " 56 DIVERSION" " 100 Node number" " Overflow threshold" " Required diverted fraction" " 0 Conduit type; 1=Pipe;2=Channel" " Peak of diverted flow c.m/sec" " Volume of diverted flow c.m" " DIV hyd" " Major flow at 100" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from North Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor"

88 " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into North Wetland " " from main SWM Facility" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 1000" " 7 Confluence " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 47 FILEI_O Read/Open DIV hyd" " 1 1=read/open; 2=write/save" " 2 1=rainfall; 2=hydrograph" " 1 1=runoff; 2=inflow; 3=outflow; 4=junction" " DIV hyd" " Major flow at 100" " Total volume c.m" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " "

89 " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Total flow from South Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into South Wetland " " from main SWM Facility" " 64 SHOW TABLE" " 2 Flow hydrograph" " 5 Outflow Hydrograph" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 2000" " 7 Confluence " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 38 START/RE-START TOTALS 2000" " 3 Runoff Totals on EXIT" " Total Catchment area hectare" " Total Impervious area hectare" " Total % impervious " " 19 EXIT"

90 Hart Subdivision City of Guelph G&M: year post-development flows " MIDUSS Output >" " MIDUSS version Version 2.25 rev. 473" " MIDUSS created Sunday, February 07, 2010" " 10 Units used: ie METRIC" " Job folder: C:\Miduss Projects\112155" " Output filename: post-2 year.out" " Licensee name: gamsby" " Company " " Date & Time last used: 5/15/2015 at 10:41:18 AM" " 31 TIME PARAMETERS" " Time Step" " Max. Storm length" " Max. Hydrograph" " 32 STORM Chicago storm" " 1 Chicago storm" " Coefficient A" " Constant B" " Exponent C" " Fraction R" " Duration" " Time step multiplier" " Maximum intensity mm/hr" " Total depth mm" " 6 002hyd Hydrograph extension used in this file" " 33 CATCHMENT 102" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length" " 1 SCS method" " 102 Park Block" " % Impervious" " Total Area" " Flow length" " Overland Slope" " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 102 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 33 CATCHMENT 100" " 1 Triangular SCS" " 1 Equal length"

94 " Pervious Area" " Pervious length" " Pervious slope" " Impervious Area" " Impervious length" " Impervious slope" " Pervious Manning 'n'" " Pervious SCS Curve No." " Pervious Runoff coefficient" " Pervious Ia/S coefficient" " Pervious Initial abstraction" " Impervious Manning 'n'" " Impervious SCS Curve No." " Impervious Runoff coefficient" " Impervious Ia/S coefficient" " Impervious Initial abstraction" " c.m/sec" " Catchment 200 Pervious Impervious Total Area " " Surface Area hectare" " Time of concentration minutes" " Time to Centroid minutes" " Rainfall depth mm" " Rainfall volume c.m" " Rainfall losses mm" " Runoff depth mm" " Runoff volume c.m" " Runoff coefficient " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 16. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from main SWM Facility (Catchment 200)" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec"

95 " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 15. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Flow-Splitting Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 56 DIVERSION" " 100 Node number" " Overflow threshold" " Required diverted fraction" " 0 Conduit type; 1=Pipe;2=Channel" " Peak of diverted flow c.m/sec" " Volume of diverted flow c.m" " DIV hyd" " Major flow at 100" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec"

96 " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from North Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into North Wetland " " from main SWM Facility" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 1000" " 6 Combine " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 1000" " 7 Confluence " " 1000 Node #" " North Wetland " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Copy to Outflow" " 8 Copy to Outflow" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Start - New Tributary" " 2 Start - New Tributary" " " " 47 FILEI_O Read/Open DIV hyd" " 1 1=read/open; 2=write/save" " 2 1=rainfall; 2=hydrograph" " 1 1=runoff; 2=inflow; 3=outflow; 4=junction" " DIV hyd"

97 " Major flow at 100" " Total volume c.m" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Total flow from South Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into South Wetland " " from main SWM Facility"

98 " 64 SHOW TABLE" " 2 Flow hydrograph" " 5 Outflow Hydrograph" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Combine 2000" " 6 Combine " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 40 HYDROGRAPH Confluence 2000" " 7 Confluence " " 2000 Node #" " Total From Site " " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " " " 38 START/RE-START TOTALS 2000" " 3 Runoff Totals on EXIT" " Total Catchment area hectare" " Total Impervious area hectare" " Total % impervious " " 19 EXIT"

104 " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 15. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Flow-Splitting Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 56 DIVERSION" " 100 Node number" " Overflow threshold" " Required diverted fraction" " 0 Conduit type; 1=Pipe;2=Channel" " Peak of diverted flow c.m/sec" " Volume of diverted flow c.m" " DIV hyd" " Major flow at 100" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec"

106 " Major flow at 100" " Total volume c.m" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Total flow from South Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into South Wetland " " from main SWM Facility"

113 " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 15. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Flow from Flow-Splitting Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 56 DIVERSION" " 100 Node number" " Overflow threshold" " Required diverted fraction" " 0 Conduit type; 1=Pipe;2=Channel" " Peak of diverted flow c.m/sec" " Volume of diverted flow c.m" " DIV hyd" " To south Wetland " " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec"

115 " To south Wetland " " Total volume c.m" " Maximum flow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Add Runoff " " 4 Add Runoff " " " " 54 POND DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Target outflow c.m/sec" " Hydrograph volume c.m" " 14. Number of stages" " Minimum water level metre" " Maximum water level metre" " Starting water level metre" " 0 Keep Design Data: 1 = True; 0 = False" " Level Discharge Volume" " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " E " " " " " " " " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " Maximum level metre" " Maximum storage c.m" " Centroidal lag hours" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 1 Lines of comment" " Total flow from South Wetland Dissipation Structure" " 40 HYDROGRAPH Next link " " 5 Next link " " " " 52 CHANNEL DESIGN" " Current peak flow c.m/sec" " Manning 'n'" " 0. Cross-section type: 0=trapezoidal; 1=general" " Basewidth metre" " Left bank slope" " Right bank slope" " Channel depth metre" " Gradient %" " Depth of flow metre" " Velocity m/sec" " Channel capacity c.m/sec" " Critical depth metre" " 53 ROUTE Channel Route 10" " Channel Route 10 Reach length ( metre)" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Default(0) or user spec.(1) values used" " X-factor <= 0.5" " K-lag ( seconds)" " Beta weighting factor" " Routing time step ( seconds)" " 1 No. of sub-reaches" " Peak outflow c.m/sec" " c.m/sec" " 81 ADD COMMENT==================================================" " 2 Lines of comment" " Total overland flow and depth released into South Wetland " " from main SWM Facility"

117 APPENDIX D: OIL/GRIT SEPARATOR DESIGN SUMMARY

118

119 Stormceptor Design Summary PCSWMM for Stormceptor Project Information Date 4/17/2015 Project Name Hart Subdivision Project Number Location Designer Information Company Contact Notes N/A Drainage Area City of Guelph GM BluePlan Engineering Limited Sergio Zaga, EIT Total Area (ha) 3.55 Imperviousness (%) 73 The Stormceptor System model STC 9000 achieves the water quality objective removing 81% TSS for a Fine (organics, silts and sand) particle size distribution and 94% runoff volume. Rainfall Name TORONTO CENTRAL State ON ID 100 Years of Records 1982 to 1999 Latitude 45 30'N Longitude 90 30'W Water Quality Objective TSS Removal (%) 80 Runoff Volume (%) 80 Upstream Storage Storage Discharge (ha-m) (L/s) 0 0 Stormceptor Sizing Summary Stormceptor Model TSS Removal Runoff Volume % % STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC Stormceptor Design Summary - 1/2

120 Particle Size Distribution Removing silt particles from runoff ensures that the majority of the pollutants, such as hydrocarbons and heavy metals that adhere to fine particles, are not discharged into our natural water courses. The table below lists the particle size distribution used to define the annual TSS removal. Fine (organics, silts and sand) Particle Size Distribution Specific Settling Specific Settling Particle Size Distribution Gravity Velocity Gravity Velocity µm % m/s µm % m/s Stormceptor Design Notes Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor version 1.0 Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended solids (TSS) removal. Only the STC 300 is adaptable to function with a catch basin inlet and/or inline pipes. Only the Stormceptor models STC 750 to STC 6000 may accommodate multiple inlet pipes. Inlet and outlet invert elevation differences are as follows: Inlet and Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Differences Inlet Pipe Configuration STC 300 STC 750 to STC STC 9000 to 6000 STC Single inlet pipe 75 mm 25 mm 75 mm Multiple inlet pipes 75 mm 75 mm Only one inlet pipe. Design estimates are based on stable site conditions only, after construction is completed. Design estimates assume that the storm drain is not submerged during zero flows. For submerged applications, please contact your local Stormceptor representative. Design estimates may be modified for specific spills controls. Please contact your local Stormceptor representative for further assistance. For pricing inquiries or assistance, please contact Imbrium Systems Inc., Stormceptor Design Summary - 2/2

125 APPENDIX E: PERMEAMETER TEST AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT V.A. WOOD

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161 APPENDIX F: MOE INTREPRETATION BULLETIN FEBRUARY 2015

162 Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Standards Development Branch 40 St. Clair Ave. West 7 th Floor Toronto ON M4V 1M2 Tel.: Fax: Ministère de l'environnement et de l Action en matière de changement climatique Direction de l=élaboration des normes 40, avenue St. Clair ouest 7 e étage Toronto ON M4V 1M2 Tél.: Téléc.: February 2015 Dear Stakeholder; The ministry recently prepared an Interpretation Bulletin: Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Expectations Re: Stormwater Management (attached). This Bulletin clarifies that the ministry s existing guidance emphasizes an approach to stormwater management that mimics a site s natural hydrology by controlling precipitation as close as possible to where it falls so water quality remains satisfactory for aquatic life and recreation and water quantity is managed to ensure a fair sharing among users, water conservation, and sustainability of the resource. The intent of the Interpretation Bulletin is to convey to municipalities, developers and review/approval bodies that the MOECC s current guidelines and policies support locally derived site-specific performance criteria based on watershed/subwatershed studies and source control measures such as low impact development (LID). This Bulletin is also intended to encourage stormwater management applications that emphasize low impact development techniques while the ministry undertakes the development of a low impact development stormwater management guidance document, targeted for completion in The ministry will work with municipalities, conservation authorities and other stakeholders in developing this guidance document. The Bulletin also lists resource materials to assist the development community, municipalities, and others to implement low impact development measures including LID planning, design and construction manuals, and websites informing on low impact development. The Interpretation Bulletin was prepared with input from the stormwater management practitioners at Ontario s Conservation Authorities, members of various branches of the MOECC, and other Provincial Ministries.

163 I trust that this Interpretation Bulletin will assist in source control stormwater management activities and the improvement of outcomes. Sincerely, Tim Fletcher Manager (A) Water Standards Section

164 Final for Approval Version INTERPRETATION BULLETIN ONTARIO MINISTRY OF ENVIROMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE EXPECTATIONS RE: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT February 2015 INTRODUCTION The environmental health of many watersheds continues to decline as urbanization increases. Conventional (pipe and pond) stormwater management practices that focus on controlling peak flow rate and removal of total suspended solids are not fully achieving the desired protection of the watershed ecosystem. This is due to increased volume of stormwater and resultant sustained flows from end-of-pipe stormwater management facilities and may be exacerbated by more intense storms resulting from climate change. Conventional management practices are not always effective at mitigating in-stream erosion or fully protecting water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, and other aquatic resources from stormwater runoff and contaminants that are not removed by settling. The purpose of this interpretation bulletin is to clarify the ministry s expectations regarding stormwater management. Specifically, the bulletin clarifies that the ministry s existing policies and guidance emphasize an approach to stormwater management that mimics a site's natural hydrology as the landscape is developed. The main tenet of this approach is to control precipitation as close as possible to where it falls by employing lot level and conveyance controls otherwise known as Low The natural hydrologic cycle should be maintained to the greatest extent possible. The ministry s existing acts, regulations, policies and guidelines emphasize the need for this approach to stormwater management. Impact Development (LID), often as part of a treatment train approach. Also, existing policies and guidance emphasize the need to use watershed/subwatershed plans to guide site-specific stormwater management performance criteria. Currently, preservation of the natural hydrology is not Too often, preservation of the sufficiently reflected in the Environmental Compliance natural hydrologic cycle is not Approval (ECA) applications submitted to the ministry sufficiently addressed in for stormwater management systems. To improve on stormwater management plans this, and to facilitate the uptake of LID stormwater submitted to the ministry for an management practices, the ministry is taking a two-step ECA. approach. The first step is this interpretation bulletin, which clarifies the ministry s existing requirements and guidance on stormwater management. 1

165 Final for Approval Version The second step is to produce a LID stormwater management guidance document. This document will further support low impact stormwater management by, among other things, specifying the ministry s expectations on water balance, acceptable tools to assess and validate water balance and other calculations, monitoring and maintenance of stormwater facilities (including on private property given the decentralized nature of LID), and the role of low impact development within a treatment train approach. This guidance document will be developed in consultation with stakeholders and will be posted on the Environmental Registry for broader consultation. The guidance document is expected to be released in late Low impact development stormwater management is relevant to all forms of development, including new development, redevelopment, infill, and retrofit development. Compact urban development and urban intensification helps to prevent sprawl and thus protect farmland, wetlands, and green spaces, and also provides Low impact development stormwater management is relevant to all forms of development, including urban intensification and retrofit. for efficient use of land, water and energy resources and existing infrastructure. Employing LID facilities to the greatest extent possible, when undertaking intensifying urban development, will add to these benefits. Urban stormwater runoff management systems are usually designed to meet performance standards based on historical climate data. As a result of climate change, stormwater management facilities constructed today will be expected to perform under climatic conditions that may be significantly different than the recent past. Projected Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF) curves have been made publicly available at Ontario Climate Change Data Portal (Ontario CCDP, see below). LID systems can mitigate impacts from increased precipitation by increasing infiltration; reducing runoff volumes; and, delaying the runoff peak. WHAT ARE THE MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDANCE FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT? Maintaining natural hydrology and controlling precipitation as close as possible to where it falls is not a new requirement of the ministry. These principles are outlined in acts, regulations, policies and guidelines, along with protecting water quality. For example: Ontario Environmental Protection Act: Provides for the protection and conservation of the natural environment. Ontario Water Resources Act: Provides for the conservation, protection and management of Ontario s waters and for their efficient and sustainable use to promote Ontario s long-term environmental, social and economic well-being. Under section 53, 2

166 Final for Approval Version the act specifies that no person shall use, operate, establish, alter, extend or replace new or existing sewage works except under and in accordance with an ECA. The Act includes stormwater in the definition of sewage. (Note: some stormwater facilities are exempted from the ECA requirement by Ontario Regulation 525/98.) Water Management Policies, Guidelines, Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (also referred to as the Blue Book ): Gives direction on how to manage the quality and quantity of both surface and ground waters. With respect to surface water quality, the goal stated in this document is to ensure water quality satisfactory for aquatic life and recreation. Direction is provided on how to deal with situations where water quality of the receiving body is not meeting the PWQO. For example, water quality not meeting the PWQO shall not be degraded further and all reasonable and practical measures shall be taken to upgrade the water quality to meet the objectives. The Blue Book also requires the preservation of ground water quality to a quality protective of the greatest number of beneficial uses, and that surface and ground-water quantity is managed to ensure a fair sharing among users, water conservation, and sustainability of the resource. Guidance Documents: Specifically, the Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual, March 2003: The ministry s March 2003 Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual (2003 Manual) states that performance criteria for stormwater works should reflect watershed, subwatershed, and environmental management plans developed in consultation with the local conservation authority and municipality. This Manual conveys that meeting the set of criteria addressing all water resource concerns typically requires a combination of stormwater management practices as part of a treatment train approach. Lot level and conveyance controls, specifically infiltration-based controls, are required to maintain the natural hydrologic cycle to the greatest extent possible. Infiltration of stormwater is needed to maintain ground water sources of drinking water, and to maintain stream base flows. At the same time, ground water quality must be protected from contamination, requiring the appropriate selection of LID measures, which would be determined by the hydrogeology of an area. Assessment reports under the Clean Water Act can provide local and watershed based hydrogeological information, including the delineation of vulnerable areas, to support this analysis. 3

167 Final for Approval Version In addition to ministry guidance on stormwater management, practitioners of stormwater management need to consider other stormwater management requirements of other entities most notably the Ministries of Natural Resources, Transportation, Municipal Affairs and Housing, and Agriculture and Food; conservation authorities; municipalities; and the Federal Departments of Environment Canada and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. WHAT AREAS OF THE MINISTRY S GUIDANCE ON LID CAN BE IMPROVED? There are gaps in ministry support for implementing LID that the ministry plans to address through the forthcoming LID stormwater management guidance document. Gaps include inconsistencies in the 2003 Stormwater Manual. For example, Section 4.9 of the 2003 Stormwater Manual presupposes that lot level and conveyance controls cannot, on their own, satisfy all of the stormwater management criteria (flooding, erosion, water balance, and water quality), and that in all cases end-of-pipe facilities will be required. However, it has been demonstrated that LID installations, when properly sited, designed and maintained, can meet all of the requirements and no end-of-pipe controls are required. Another example is the minimum infiltration rates currently specified in the manual. The 2003 Stormwater Manual contains guidance for a number of lot level and conveyance controls but specifies that the application of a number of management practices may not be suitable if the native soil has a percolation rate less than 15 mm/hr (see for example Pg. 4-6: Table 4.1: Physical Constraints for SWMP Types - infiltration trenches, reduced lot grading, soakaway pits, rear yard ponding, and pervious pipes). This has contributed to the limited application of these measures as many of the soils within Ontario do not meet this criterion. The infiltration rate has an obvious effect on the speed with which a facility will be emptied between rainfall events. Thus, LID facilities should be sized for optimum control of water quantity. Area-wide quantity criteria may be achieved through the use of multiple smaller LID facilities distributed over a large area. For example, stormwater management practices such as bioretention and biofiltration use multiple treatment mechanisms including retention, filtration, evaporation and transpiration as well as infiltration. If the lot level and conveyance facilities can be sized such that they empty between events, or will be installed in areas where quantity control is not a primary concern (areas draining directly to a large surface water body like Lake Ontario, for example), LID facilities can be used where the infiltration rate is less than 15 mm/hr to achieve water balance and water quality (including thermal impacts) through retention, filtration, evaporation and transpiration. Thus, the soil infiltration capacity guidance in the manual should not be interpreted as a prohibition. Rather, it should be interpreted as a caution that controls relying primarily on infiltration may not be as effective on soils with low infiltration rates as they would be on soils with higher rates of infiltration. 4

168 Final for Approval Version SUPPORT FOR LID IN ONTARIO Property owners, stormwater practitioners, and approving authorities are beginning to gain confidence in making more use of LID. In part as a result of the number of useful guidance documents on selecting and designing LID facilities (see for example Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning And Design Guide, TRCA and CVCA, 2010; Minnesota Stormwater Manual, 2008; and, Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, SEMCOG 2008) and because of the support of some conservation authorities in Ontario. Ontario s Great Lakes Strategy commits the government to actions in support of reducing stormwater impacts including developing guidance for source control measures, enhancing the province s approach to stormwater approvals, and seeking environmental considerations such as LID early in municipal planning decisions. Planning authorities are encouraged to promote low impact development. LID facilities, like end-of-pipe facilities, require periodic maintenance. The Credit Valley Conservation Authority identified maintenance solutions for LID facilities reflective of their decentralized character, and in some cases location on private property (Survey of Municipal Policies and Administrative Approaches for Overcoming Institutional Barriers to Low Impact Development, CVCA, 2010). CONCLUSION WHAT ECA APPLICANTS CAN EXPECT FROM THE ECA REVIEW PROCESS LID can be less costly than conventional stormwater management practices. A 2007 US EPA report summarizes 17 case studies of developments that include LID practices and concludes that applying LID techniques can reduce project costs and improve environmental performance (USEPA, 2007). LID techniques can be applied to reduce the volume of runoff from urban areas and help maintain the hydrologic cycle. It is expected that low impact development and other source control practices that better mimic the hydrologic cycle, will be reflected in the ministry s ECA process. The ministry encourages ECA applicants to arrange a pre-consultation meeting with the ministry and other various relevant parties such as the approving municipality or other planning approval authority, and the local conservation authority. It is critical that options and opportunities for the Going forward, the Ministry expects that stormwater management plans will reflect the findings of watershed, subwatershed, and environmental management plans, and will employ LID in order to maintain the natural hydrologic cycle to the greatest extent possible. incorporation of LID practices be considered during the watershed and subwatershed planning process, and early in the development planning process and not left to the preparation of the detailed stormwater management plan submission. 5

169 Final for Approval Version References and Sources: Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual, MOE, March 2003 Understanding Stormwater Management: An Introduction to Stormwater Management Planning and Design, MOE, 2003 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Handbook, MOE, 2001 Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual, MOE, June 1994 Interim Stormwater Quality Control Guidelines for New Development, MOE, May 1991 Minnesota Stormwater Manual, 2008 Low Impact Development Manual for Michigan, SEMCOG 2008 Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning And Design Guide, TRCA and CVCA, 2010 Survey of Municipal Policies and Administrative Approaches for Overcoming Institutional Barriers to Low Impact Development, CVCA, 2010 Reducing Stormwater Costs through Low Impact Development (LID) Strategies and Practices, United States Environmental Protection Agency, December 2007 Integrated Surface and Groundwater Model Review and Technical Guide, 2011, Prepared by AquaResource Inc. for the Ministry of Natural Resources Water Budget Reference Manual, 2013, Prepared by Aqua Resource for the Ministry of Natural Resources Integrated Watershed Management,, Navigating Ontario s Future; A Water Budget Overview, Conservation Ontario Helpful websites with LID Resources for Ontario: Ministry of Natural Resources at

170 Final for Approval Version MOECC Contact Information For comments or questions concerning this Interpretation Bulletin, please contact your local office of the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change at For information about an ECA application package, or to apply for an ECA amendment, please see list below, or contact the Environmental Approvals Access and Service Integration Branch General Inquiry: Toll Free: Environmental Compliance Approvals and energy/guide applying environmental compliance approval 7