1 Introduction

1.1 Background

Windsor is the one of the most important border crossing between

Canada and the United States. More than 16 million cars, trucks and

buses travel through the city each year, representing approximately 33

per cent of Canada-United States truck trade. In 2001 alone, this two-

way merchandise trade totaled at over $140 billion. Windsor's economy

is intricately linked with the international border crossing. As Canadian

and American trade and tourism increase through the years, projected

traffic volume is also predicted to increase. This has made it apparent to

government and commercial officials that there is a need for an

additional border crossing which will have the capacity to handle the

projected traffic volume. The privately owned Ambassador Bridge

currently spans across the Detroit River and links up Detroit and Windsor

traffic through the international border crossing facilities on each side of

the bridge. One of the main concerns associated to Ambassador Bridge

border crossing is that an urban road system links up with the

Ambassador Bridge as opposed to a Highways System. This means that

before a driver can reach the border crossing they need to cross several

street lights within the city core. This causes large traffic jams and

impede on the overall traffic ease of the city. This is why the new border

crossing is intended to be directly linked to the Canadian and American

 highway systems, such that traffic flow within Detroit and Windsor is

much more feasible.

The Detroit River International Crossing Project (DRIC) is a large scale

interdisciplinary engineering project currently valued at over one billion

dollars. Construction of the New Detroit-Windsor border crossing is

intended to begin in late 2009. This border crossing will be built in

stages such that the traffic flow matches the facility capacity. Once the

preliminary design is complete, the project will be ready for a

construction bid. The border crossing is intended to be built as a

showcase of leading edge innovation in: water resource engineering,

traffic engineering, environmental engineering, energy efficiency,

logistics and security.

1.2 Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to develop the design of a storm water

management system for the projected Windsor Detroit International

Border Crossing Plaza site. This report will contain two parts: Firstly, a

preliminary report developing and selecting alternatives identifying the

hydrological challenges of this project. Secondly, a detailed design

report dealing with the hydrological challenges of the preliminary

report .In addition to that the technical report should follow best

management practices (BMPs) meeting regulated design standards

 outlined in the 2003 Ministry of the Environment storm water

management guideline.

1.3 Preliminary Report Overview

2 Site Description

The western edge of the proposed site runs along the Detroit River. The

most Southern East point is located at the intersection of Ojebway

Parkway and Broadway Street. The site measures 54.3 ha. By looking at

geotechnical samples and grade pictures of surrounding site, the pre-

existing site terrain inclines towards the South Eastern edge of the

proposed site. At the same time, it is fairly flat; the elevation difference

over 1.45km is 3.5 m.

Morrison Hershfield provided design drawings which outlined the

proposed site borders and area. The calculations and design specifications

will be based on those drawings. The map below was obtained from

Google EarthTM.
Figure 2.1 - Plaza Site Outlined

2.1 Existing Land Use and Vegetation

The 54.3 hectare area to be used for the proposed Canadian Plaza is

currently a mixture of surfaces including grass and asphalt however, the

percentage of the paved road/asphalt is very small when compared to

the landscape area/grass; this report has taken a conservative approach

and assumed that the entire existing area is cultivated land. The

resulting runoff coefficients for the existing condition are C = 0.34 and

0.47 for 5 year & 100 year storm event respectively.(see table 2.1)
 Table 2.1 – Runoff Coefficient for Use in the Rational Method

Character of
Return Period (years)
Surface

Undeveloped 5 100

Cultivated land
0.34 0.47
Flat, 0 – 2%

Developed

Asphaltic 0.77 0.95

Concrete/Roof 0.80 0.97

Grass Areas -Poor

condition 0.34 0.47
Flat, 0 – 2%
Source: Water Resources Engineering by Larry Mays 2005

2.2 Existing Soil and Groundwater Condition

The data information was gathered from MNR, DRIC draft environmental

assessment reports and geological map of Toronto-Windsor area from

Geological Survey of Canada

The subsurface conditions in the Windsor area are characterized by flat-lying

soils including:

• Native deposits of sand and silt

 • Extensive deposits of clayey silt to silty clay beneath the sand

• Bedrock is encountered at depths of 20 to 35 metres.

Beneath the existing pavement structures, topsoil and / or surficial fill

materials, granular materials consisting of sand and gravel, sands and silty

sands were identified at a depth of approximately 0.3 metres below existing

ground surface. Groundwater levels are expected to be located about 3

metres below ground surface in the clayey silt and silty clay materials. The

silty clay, clayey silt, sand and gravel and sands are considered to be slightly

erodible and the silty sands are considered to be moderately erodible.

2.3 Topography and Surface Water Drainage

Michael
3 Stormwater Management Design

3.1 Problem Definition

Water Quality:

The Canadian border crossing site is located in an industrial area which

is also connected two major highways. This means that chemical spills

can be expected in addition to that surrounding industrial building are

of a later generation and they are made with toxic chemicals such as

asbestos, lead and PCB’s. During a rainfall, theses chemicals can make

their way into the leachate and contaminate the water system i.e: the

Detroit River. This will ultimately endanger the ecosystem and

drinking water source.

Sediment Control:

Water is a highly abrasive medium and with enough time, water will

shape any material to its movement. Water abrasion of roads and

earth under the roads can compromise the structural integrity of any

driving surface. Earth abrasion can create pot-hole, earth vacancies

and landslides. For the safety of drivers these large driving surfaces

cannot afford to be structurally compromised, secondly it is also

important to mitigate the cost of repairing damaged driving surfaces.

 In addition to this, it is important to note that, storm water from the

North and the East sides of the site may contain large amounts of

sediments during the construction stage. This sediment laden runoff

can cause sewers to be filled with sediment and destroy fish habitat in

the river.

Road Safety:

The border crossing area is intended to be used as a high traffic area

for vehicles of all sizes, it is imperative that storm water be properly

drained such that driving surfaces are un-slippery safe condition to

drive on. In addition to that, we want to make sure that during a heavy

100 year rainfall, water is properly diverted from driving surfaces and

vehicle submersion in water is unlikely.

3.2 Considerations

The Canadian Plaza is approximately 54.3 ha, consisting primarily of

pavement and commercial buildings. Stormwater management for the

Plaza requires quality, quantity and erosion controls for the peak flows

from the Plaza, as the increase in impervious area will increase the

overall peak flows from the site, as well as the overall pollutant

loading. This would lead to erosion issues downstream of the site, as

well as impacts to the ecological condition of the Detroit River.

The Canadian Plaza consists mostly of asphalt pavement and building

rooftops. The principle concern for large sites with a high

imperiousness and vehicular traffic is providing stormwater treatment

for frequent vehicular pollutants (oil, gasoline, coolant, etc), roadside

grit and garbage (gravel, sand, and cigarette butts), infrequent

pollutant spills, and controlling increase of overland runoff to the

receiving watercourses. Enhance Quality treatment will also be

required in accordance to the MOE document “ Stormwater

Management Planning and Design Guidelines”, date 2003, Level 1

protection which states removal of a minimum of 80% total suspended

solids (TSS). It is to be designed based on a 100-year design flow and

be controlled for all storm events up to and including 100-year storm

event.

Based on the results and the site conditions, the solutions retained

were storage SWMP’s and oil/grit separators. The storage SWMP’s will

provide quality treatment, erosion control and quantity control for the

catchment area. Storage SWMP’s will be utilized to match existing

peak flow conditions to the receiving watercourses in an effort to

emulate existing conditions within the watersheds. Oil/grit separators

will provide quality treatment to the upstream catchment areas.

The stormwater management plan consists of creating two ponds in

the green spaces south of the proposed plaza and a linear open
 channel/wetland feature. These green spaces can be converted to

stormwater management facilities utilizing the existing drain to

connect the facilities, discharging to the Detroit River via an outlet

channel. The pond system provides closer outlets for the sewer

system, lowering the overall grading requirements of the Plaza. The

linear feature would be designed such that there would always be an

open portion to ensure that there is no restriction to the conveyance of

flow from one pond to the other. The pond system would control the

release rate to the Detroit River. In the event of a contaminant spill

with the Plaza, a shut off valve or alternative damming procedure will

be required within the pond.

5 Pond and Main Channel Positioning

From the conceptual report, the BMP’s of our storm water management

system would include ponds and a large channel leading up to the pond.

The quality and quantity pond would be located at the most western

edge of proposed site as shown on Figure 3.02 because:

1. Construction contingencies only allow the wet pond to be located at

the western edge of the site

2. Water has a much shorter distance to flow into the Detroit River if

there is a larger than expected storm that occurs.

3. Post development slope will lead water towards pond

The main storm water channel leading up to the pond will be placed

along the southern edge of the site. The channel will be in this

configuration because:

1. The channel will be at the bottom of the site slope in such a way that

excess rainwater is forced to flow towards channel and does not pool

in critical traffic areas

2. It will run along the greatest length of the site, catching a majority of

the excess rainwater.

Water Flow
Detoit River Trend

Wet Pond

Major Pond Channel

Figure 3.02: Channel and pond configuration

Preliminary Site Drainage Area:

According to industry standards and property law; when a new structure

is built on an undeveloped site, it is critical that the new development

does not cause excess rainwater to fall into neighboring properties and

cause them flood damage. The proposed site is built on a relatively

undeveloped site. The construction of the border crossing plaza without a

storm water management system would definitely cause excess storm

water to flow to neighboring sites. There would be an excess of storm

water after construction because the run off coefficient for the soil would

increase. The runoff coefficient of asphalt is 0.90, this means that during

a typical storm 10% of the water on the asphalt would be absorbed by

the ground, 90% of the water would need to be diverted elsewhere.

Therefore, in our case the post development coefficient will be higher

than the pre-development coefficient. More water will need to be routed

properly.

Figure 3.03 is a proper elevation map outlining a rough contour of the

drainage area that is concerned with. This map was obtained from The

National Resources Canada website. To obtain the drainage area outline.

The elevation contour and existing storm water structures of different

sections surrounding the proposed site and determined whether they

would flow into the site. This area is a critical value in determining the

storm water systems design inputs which will be explained in the

following section.
Figure 3.03: Outlined drainage area based on rough contour outline
 Figure 3.04: Outlined existing drainage area based surrounding drainage
structure on area

5.2 Main Channel Design

Pre-development condition:

Based on site elevation provided by the city of Windsor, it is obvious to see

that the site is highly flat. The existing elevation difference between the
highest and lowest part of our channel is 2.72m over a 1110m span. The

MOE 2003 storm water management guideline outlines that grass swales are

ideal storm water management structures for flat terrain. Thus the main

channel leading up to the pond will be a grassed swale.

The length of the swale was determined based on a preliminary drawing

provided by Morrison Hershfield. This length extends from the swale

entrance to the projected pond entrance along the southern edge of the site.

The elevation data was obtained from the city of Windsor corporation

website.

Figure 3.05: Existing main channel elevation profile

Design Constraints:
The design constraints of the proposed site are mainly the flatness and

ground water table elevation. The storm water management structures

cannot have floors lower than the water tables otherwise they will

experience ground water intrusion.

The ground water table level is 3m below the surface. Figure 3.06

Demonstrates the major elevation considerations related to the design of

the pond and main drainage channel of the site.

Figure 3.06: Ground water table is at 173.00m. The MOE 2003 guideline
specifies that a 0.50m clearance is required between the ground water table
and the pond floor. The pond floor is thus at an elevation of 173.50m. The
175.00m elevation was determined as the lowest channel floor elevation since
the pond water surface must be lower than the swale floor. The predevelopment
ground elevations the pond is 176.00m.The current ground conditions at the
swale entrance is 178.72m

Manning’s equation:

Manning’s equation is industry recognized and will be used to determine

the water level of our channel for a 100 year storm. The water elevation

is a key parameter of determining the main swale cross-sectional

dimensions. The equation is as follows:

V=kn*R23*S0.5

By multiplying both sides by the area of the channel the modified

Manning’s equation is:

Q=1.49n*AR23S0.5

Where n is the roughness coefficient, A is the cross sectional area of the

channel, R is the Hydraulic radius and S is the slope.

Q: 100 year Post Development flow m3/s. For our site area it is

9.3305m3/s

n: Mays Water Resources Engineering defines n = 0.03 for grass

channels
A: MOE 2003 STMWTR Guideline specifies that the swale will need a

trapezoidal form thus area is defined as:

A=(B+Zy)y

B is defined as the Base of the swale. MOE 2003 STMWTR Guideline

specifies 6m

Z is defined as the horizontal distance per meter of the side slope MOE

2003 STMWTR Guideline specifies 2.5m

y is the height and water level of the trapezoid for a 100 year storm it is

the unknown we are solving for

Unknown: Y 2.5:1m Side

Slope

6m Base (MOE
2003)

Figure 3.07 swale

R:Hydraulic radius for a trapezoid defined as:

R=(B+Zyy/(B+2*y1+Z20.5)^(23)
S: Channel Slope, after optimization the best slope to use given the site

constraints is 0.20%. This is a very minor slope however given the water

table depth, site elevation and resulted channel depth this value is the

most optimal.

Now that all values are define we solve for y in the following equation:

0=B+ZyyB+ZyyB+2*y1+Z20.523-Q*n/(1.49*S0.5)

Due to the fact we will be designing many channel in this project we have

created a manning’s equation worksheet on Excel to solve for

Y100mc(main channel)

Y100mc=0.75m

For a 5 year storm we use Q=4.4675m3/s

Y5mc=0.49m

Now we know the drainage depth here are the drainage channel

dimensions:
Figure 3.08: Channel Profile

And if we take a cross section of the channel shown above:

Figure 3.09: Channel Cross section

Secondary Channels:

In this design section we will consider the runoff predicted to enter our

site from neighboring lands. Figure 3.04 and 3.05 demonstrate that there

is a considerable amount of runoff that will find itself onto our site due to

the pre existing drainage pattern. Because we cannot interfere with the

natural drainage pattern this area and so we must let the water pass

through our site. However there are no quality requirements, meaning

that water does not need to be processed to meet provincial quality

standards. So we will simply route the water flow from surrounding sites

directly into the river because we have assumed that

In Figure 3.10 we see that the total drainage area has been split into 3

main areas: Our site are, The Major Secondary Drainage Area and the

Minor Secondary Drainage.

Using rational method we have found that the

 Secondary Drainage Area:
Major and Minor
Major and Minor Drainage
Swale

Minor Drainage
Swale

Major drainage
Culvert (under the
road)

Border Plaza Drainage Major Drainage

Area

4 Stormwater Management Practice

4.1 End of Pipe Extended Detention Facility(Quantity and

Quality Control)

A two-cell facility which separates water quality and erosion control from

quantity control will be discussed in this section. The quality control cell was
designed as an artificial wet pond, and the quantity control cell was designed

as a dry detention area to receive flows only when quality pond filled.

The design criteria for the facility were:

Flood Control

– Post-development peak flows to be controlled to pre-development

levels for the lands draining to the facility for 5 to 100 year design

storm events. In addition, supplementary flood control storage was

incorporated to ensure peak flows further downstream in the Detroit

river remained at pre-development levels

Erosion Control

– 24 hour detention for the runoff from a 40 mm storm was

incorporated.

Water Quality

– Storage was based on the 2003 SWMP Manual requirements for

enhanced protection including 40 m3/ha of active storage. This

active storage was in addition to that provided for flood and erosion

control.

10

20
30

40

4.1

4.2 .1 Water Quantity Control

The following subsections cover flow calculations pertaining to the

design of the systems.

Runoff Computation

Rational method was used in determining for the peak flows of both

pre-development and post-development along with storage volume.

Qpeak = C*i*A /360

Where Q = Peak Flow (m3 /s)

A = Drainage Area (ha)

i = Average rainfall intensity (mm/hr) for a duration equal to the

time of concentration for a particular storm frequency.

C = Runoff coefficient (see table x)

Drainage Area

The drainage area to be used in the design should include all those

areas which will reasonable or naturally drain to the storm system. The

area term in the Rational Method formula represents the total area
tributary under consideration. For this proposed site, the drainage area

is 63.8965 ha (see Figure X).

Runoff Coefficient

As noted in Section 2.1, the runoff coefficients used to determine pre-

developed flows are C = 0.34 for 5 year event, and C = 0.47 for 100

year event. For the post-development conditions, as depicted in

FigureX, approximately 29 ha of proposed site will be covered in

asphalt, with a further 1.7 ha of building area. The remaining 33.2 ha

of the site is proposed to be landscaped area. The proposed site has a

composite runoff coefficient value of 0.5472 for 5 year and 0.7009 for

100 year (please refer to calculation in Appendix X) and has an increase

runoff potential compared to existing conditions. The final drainage

area breakdown for the post-development condition, along with their

coefficients is shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1 – Drainage Areas, Land Covers and Runoff Coefficients for
Post-development

Runoff Coefficient
Description Area (m2) Area (ha)
5 year 100 year

Building 16629 1.6629 0.8 0.97

Paved Area 290083 29.0083 0.77 0.95

Landscape 332244 33.2244 0.34 0.47
Rainfall Intensity

Under the requirement of City of Windsor, 5-year and 100 year storm

events are needed to be taken into account. Time of concentration is

the time required for flow to reach the pond from the most remote part

of the drainage area. Upland method was used for determining the

time of concentration. As stated in the “Water Resources Engineering”

by Larry Mays 2005, upland method is based on defining the time of

concentration as a ratio of the hydraulic flow length to the velocity.

Tc = L / (3600 * V)

where Tc - time of concentration (hrs)

L – hydraulic flow length (ft)

V – velocity (ft/s)

The velocity can be estimated by knowing the land use and the slope

(see Fig. 3.1 ). From the figure, the velocity is estimated to be 2.75 ft/s

for the paved area and 0.5 % slope.

 Figure 3.1 – Velocities for upland method of estimating tc
Source: U.S Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service
1986

The rainfall intensity and time of concentration were determined from

intensity duration-frequency curve (IDF curve). The IDF curve used for

this project was obtained from Atmospheric Environment Service of

Canada. (See figure. 3.2). The time of concentration calculated as 35.3

minutes, the rainfall intensity which corresponding to this time is 46

mm/hr and 75 mm/hr for 5 year and 100 year storm event respectively.
 Figure 3.1 – Intensity Duration-Frequency Curve (IDF Curves) - City
of Windsor
Source: Environment Canada – Atmospheric Environment Services

4.2.1Design Criteria

The Esssex County Conservation Authority requires that post-

development peak flows from the proposed development will not

exceed their pre-development levels for rainfall events up to and

including the 1:100 year return period storm. Detention must

therefore be provided for any increase in post-development run-off.

The rational method was used in the determining pre- and post-

development flows along with storage volumes. Calculations are

enclosed in Appendix x. Table 3.3.1 provides a summary of flows and

storage volumes.

40

4.1

1.1.1Design Details of Proposed Pond

The proposed quantity control pond is indicated on Drawing X.

The tributary area of the pond will be 63.9 hectares of which 33.2

hectares will be undeveloped. Drainage will enter the pond via a

900mm diameter piped splitter storm sewer and via an overland flow
swale. Outlet control will be provided by means of a 650mm orifice

placed within the 875mm outlet pipe. The pond bottom will be graded

at 0.50% to reduce the possibility of ponding during low flow run-off

events. The pond invert (174.7 m) is above the level of the local water

table (173.5 m), and the side slope gradient has been reduced to 4:1 to

ensure slope stability during water level fluctuations.

The proposed pond was calculated into the 5 and 100 year post-

development and the results were compared to pre-development peak

flows. The pre-developed flows are 2.7759 m3/s and 6.2564 m3/s for 5

year and 100 year storm events respectively with an existing runoff

coefficient of 0.34 for 5 year and 0.47 for 100 year storm events and a

time of concentration of 35.3 mins. The post-development flows are

4.4675 m3/s and 9.3305 m3/s for 5 year and 100 year storm events

respectively with calculated post-development composite runoff

coefficient of 0.5472 for 5 year and 0.7009 for 100 year storm events

and a time of concentration of 35.3 mins.

Table 3.3.1 – Summary of Quantity Volume and Peak Flows

 Items Pre-development Post-development

5 yr 100 yr 5 yr 100 yr

Area (ha) 63.8956 63.8956 63.8956 63.8956

Runoff
0.34 0.47 0.5472 0.7009
Coefficient

Design Parameters

The design events used in the analysis were as follows:

• 5 Year City of Windsor Storm
• 100 Year City of Windsor Storm

Time of Concentration: 35.3 mins

 Summary
Peak Flows (m3/s)
Storm
Storage Volume (m3) Pre- Post-
Events
development development

5 yr 4783.6521 2.7759 4.4675

100 yr 8693.129 6.2564 9.3305

The maximum water level during the 1:100 storm event will be

approximately 175.4 m. Maximum water depth will therefore be 2.05

m. The detention storage is 8693.13 m3. Detailed calculation can be

found in Appendix 1. An emergency overland outlet from the pond to

the adjacent Detroit River will be available at the downstream end of

the pond at an invert of 174.3 m. Existing topography at this location

will direct pond overflow to the Detroit River.

4 Water Quality Control

1.1Design Criteria
As indicated on Drawing X, the proposed development will discharge

into Detroit River. The report entitled “Practical Alternatives Evaluation

Working Paper, Natural Heritage” dated July 2007, was conducted to

determine potential impacts on vegetation, wildlife, and fish habitat, as

well as fishery habitat classification. Information on fish habitat for the

receiving watercourses is integrated with the design of stormwater

management facilities, as adequate stormwater quality treatment from

the proposed development will be required for watercourses with

sensitive fishery habitat. From this report, Detroit River is classified as

coldwater fish habitat.

Design criteria for water quality control features are included in

“Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual

2003” from Ministry of Environment. This manual presents a method

for determining the level of water quality. Level 1 protection is the

most stringent and involves the highest degree of stormwater quality

control, while Level 4 is least stringent. Due to the presence of a cold

water fishery, stormwater quality features for this project were

designed using the Level 1 criteria.

Based on the above information, and with reference to Table 3.2 in the

“Stormwater Management Practices Planning and Design Manual

2003”, the following criteria apply:

• 210 m3/ha of permanent storage (dead storage)

 • 40 m3/ha of active storage (live storage)

All storm runoff should be conveyed through an oil/grit separator prior

to discharge into the storm sewer system to remove suspended solids

and oils. (see Appendix X for sizing chart)

Flow Diversion Structures

A flow splitter or flow diversion structure was used to direct the first fraction

of runoff (commonly called the “first flush”) into the quality pond, while

bypassing excess flows from 100 year event around the facility into a bypass

channel. The bypass then enters to a detention/quantity pond.

Runoff water is conveyed to the quality pond via the main open channel.

Once the main open channel reaches its design capacity, water backs up in

the channel and into the flow splitter itself. When the water level reaches

the bypass elevation, stormwater begins to bypass to the quantity pond.

The bypass is created and controlled by a weir in the flow splitter structure.

Bypass Elevation – the elevation of the bypass weir dictates the maximum

elevation of the water in the channel. Therefore, the bypass elevation is set

to equal to the design water elevation (which is 5 yrs storm event). Using

this method, the flow will only start to bypass the weir once the channel has

conveyed the design runoff volume.

Inlet Protection

Inlet areas should be protected to reduce erosion. The outfall from the

channel to the pond shall be modified to prevent erosion by use of large rip-

rap placed over filter cloth.

Pool benches are important for safety reasons and establishment of

emergent vegetation.

Outlet Design

A 8 m wide emergency overflow weir set at an elevation of 176.4 m will

convey flows out of the facility . The weir has been sized to pass a flow

equivalent to the design flow into the facility with a maximum water

elevation in the pond of 176.45m

At the outlet of the flow, a 2m long, 5 m wide rip-rap apron will be

constructed to protect the shoreline from erosion. The rip-rap will have a

median diameter of 200mm and will be placed to a depth of 400mm. The

erosion control mat that will line the flow route will extend underneath the

rip-rap to prevent any native fines from being washed away.

Other considerations
The end-of-pipe facility should be designed with a sediment forebay to

improve pollutant removal by trapping larger particles near the inlet of the

pond. It is important for maintenance and longevity of a stormwater

treatment pond. The sediment forebay sizing must be done in accordance

with MOE’s guideline 2003 and it should be constructed with a maintenance

access route to permit future monitoring and maintenance as well as provide

access in the event of an emergency. The forebay should be 1-2m deep to

minimize the potential for re-suspension and to prevent the conveyance of

re-suspended material to the pond outlet. The forebay dimensions should be

selected to provide maximum dispersion of the inflow to the pond, thereby

reducing velocities in the cell.

Oil/grit Separators (pre-treatment controls) can pre-treat the road runoff

prior to discharge to the channel by removing sediments. This, in turn, will

minimize any long-term deterioration of the pond function.

A landscaping plan for a stormwater pond and its buffer should be prepared

to indicate how aquatic and terrestrial areas will be vegetatively stabilized

and established. Wherever possible, wetland plants should be encourage in

a pond design, either along the aquatic bench, the safety bench and side

slopes or within shallow areas of the pool itself

Appendix

Data Collection

The data information was gathered from MNR, DRIC draft environmental

assessment reports and discussion with Morrison Hershfield engineers.

The subsurface conditions in the Windsor area are characterized by flat-lying soils

including:

• Native deposits of sand and silt

• Extensive deposits of clayey silt to silty clay beneath the sand

• Bedrock is encountered at depths of 20 to 35 metres.

Beneath the existing pavement structures, topsoil and / or surficial fill materials,

granular materials consisting of sand and gravel, sands and silty sands were

identified at a depth of approximately 0.3 metres below existing ground surface.

Groundwater levels are expected to be located about 3 metres below ground

surface in the clayey silt and silty clay materials. The silty clay, clayey silt, sand

and gravel and sands are considered to be slightly erodible and the silty sands are

considered to be moderately erodible.

Qpre = Cpre * I * A

Qpost = Cpost * I * A

S = 0.5(Qpost * Tbase) – 0.5 (Qpre* Tbase)

Flow

Post-
development
Peak Flow, Qpost

Storage
Pre-
Required,
development
S
Peak Flow, Qpre

Time
Tbase = 2tc or 2.67 tc
Pre-development (100 years)

Proposed Site Area: 54.3 ha

External Drainage Area: 9.596 ha
Total Drainage Area: 63.896 ha
Coefficient: 0.47
Tc : 35.3 mins
Intensity: 75 mm/hr
Qpre100 = 1/360 * 63.89 * 0.47 * 75 = 6.2564 m3 /sec

Post-development (100 years)

Area Coefficient
Buildings/Concrete: 1.66 ha 0.97
Paved Area: 29.0 ha 0.95
Landscape Area: 33.22 ha 0.47

Cpost = (1.66 * 0.97) + (29.0 * 0.95) + (33.22 * 0.47)

63.896
= 0.7009
Qpost100 = 1/360 * 63.896 * 0.7009 * 75 = 9.3305 m3/sec

Pre-development (5 year)

Proposed Site Area: 54.3 ha

External Drainage Area: 9.596 ha
Total Drainage Area: 63.896 ha
Coefficient: 0.47
Tc : 35.3 mins
Intensity: 46 mm/hr
Qpre5 = 1/360 * 63.89 * 0.47 * 46 = 2.7759 m3 /sec

Post-development (5 year)
Area Coefficient
Buildings/Concrete: 1.66 ha 0.8
Paved Area: 29.0 ha 0.77
Landscape Area: 33.22 ha 0.34

Cpost = (1.66 * 0.8) + (29.0 * 0.77) + (33.22 * 0.34)

63.896
= 0.5472
Qpost5 = 1/360 * 63.896 * 0.5472 * 46 = 4.4675 m3/sec

Orifice
Qo = c * A * sqrt(2 * g * H)
The smallest diameter orifice to ensure that clogging does not occur in a
stormwater system is 75 mm. The preferred minimum orifice size is 100mm where
the effects of freezing are a concern. 5 year storm was used to control the size of
the orifice. Therefore,
Qo = Qpre5

Pond Design
Water table: 3 m below surface
Length to width ratio: 4 to 1
Permanent Pool Depth: Max. depth 2.5m mean depth: 1 – 2 m
Active Storage Depth: Water Quality and erosion control max 1.0m total
2m