Servicing and Stormwater Management Brief 4450 Limebank Road Residential Development

Transcription

1 Servicing and Stormwater Management Brief 4450 Limebank Road Residential Development Project # Prepared for: Urbandale Corporation Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Submission 3: Oct. 20, 2016 Submission 2: August 12, 2016 Submission 1: May 17, 2016 October 20, 2016

2

3 Sign-off Sheet This document entitled Servicing and Stormwater Management Brief Limebank Road Residential Development was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. ("Stantec") for the account of Urbandale Construction Ltd. (the "Client"). Any reliance on this document by any third party is strictly prohibited. The material in it reflects Stantec's professional judgment in light of the scope, schedule and other limitations stated in the document and in the contract between Stantec and the Client. The opinions in the document are based on conditions and information existing at the time the document was published and do not take into account any subsequent changes. In preparing the document, Stantec did not verify information supplied to it by others. Any use which a third party makes of this document is the responsibility of such third party. Such third party agrees that Stantec shall not be responsible for costs or damages of any kind, if any, suffered by it or any other third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this document. Prepared by (signature) Sheridan Gillis U Re (signaturej """. _ Neal Cody, P.Eng. Stantec

4

5 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION SUBMISSION REVISIONS BACKGROUND WATER SUPPLY SERVICING BACKGROUND WATER DEMANDS HYDRAULIC MODEL RESULTS SUMMARY OF FINDINGS WASTEWATER SERVICING DESIGN CRITERIA PROPOSED SERVICING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES SWM CRITERIA AND CONSTRAINTS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN Design Methodology Modeling Rationale Input Parameters Model Results Water Quality Control SUMMARY OF FINDINGS GRADING AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES APPROVALS EROSION CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CONCLUSIONS cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx i

6 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT LIST OF TABLES Table 1: General Subcatchment Parameters Table 2: Subcatchment Parameters Pre-Development Table 3: Subcatchment Parameters Post-Development Table 4: Storage Node Parameters Table 5: Outlet/Orifice Parameters Table 6: Peak Pre-Development Runoff Rates Table 7: Pre & Post Development Events, Peak Discharge Rates Table 8: Modeled Hydraulic Grade Line Results Table 9: Maximum Surface Water Depths Table 10: ICD Schedule and 100 Year, 3 Hour Chicago Storm Results Table 11: Pavement Structure Car Only Parking Areas Table 12: Pavement Structure Local and Collector Roadways LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location Plan Figure 2: Schematic Representing Model Object Roles Figure 3: Outflow Hydrographs for All Modelled Events at Mosquito Creek Headwall LIST OF APPENDICES WATER SUPPLY SERVICING... A.1 A.1 Domestic Water Demand Estimate... A.1 A.2 Fire Flow Requirements Per FUS... A.2 A.3 Hydraulic Analysis Results... A.3 WASTEWATER SERVICING... B.1 B.1 Sanitary Sewer Design Sheet... B.1 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT... C.1 C.1 Storm Sewer Design Sheet... C.1 C.2 PCSWMM Model Input & Results... C.2 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION... D.1 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS... E.1 CORRESPONDENCE... F.1 cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx ii

7 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Introduction October 20, INTRODUCTION Stantec Consulting Ltd. has been commissioned by Urbandale Corporation to prepare the following servicing study in support of a residential site plan application for 4450 Limebank Road. The subject property is located south of Sprat Road on the west side of Limebank Road in the City of Ottawa and is indicated in Figure 1. The proposed site development plan includes four, four-storey residential buildings, complete with underground parking and a single utility/garbage building. The 3.8 ha (9.35 acre) site was previously vacant land and zoned in R4Z and O1. The intent of this report is to provide a servicing scenario for the site that is free of conflicts, provides on-site servicing in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines, and utilizes the existing local infrastructure in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the overall Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, and as per consultation with City of Ottawa. Figure 1: Location Plan cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 1.1

8 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Introduction October 20, SUBMISSION REVISIONS Submission 2 Revisions Submission 1 of this document was submitted to the City of Ottawa on May 17, Comments from the City reviewer were received in a letter (under File Number: D ) on July 20, Two main comments were described: 1. Watermain looping. The reviewer wished to see a second watermain connection for the proposed development in order to create looping of the watermain and increase redundancy in the system. This has been addressed in this submission by adding a second watermain connection south Building D to Limebank Road. 2. Placement of Infrastructure within the Hazard Lands. The previous submission contained catchbasins and subdrain within the hazard lands, however the reviewer commented that this is not permitted according to the Slope Stability Guidelines. This comment has been addressed in this submission by removing the infrastructure from the hazard lands and moving it closer to the parking area. A retaining wall was also added (within the site boundary and not within the hazard lands) along the edge of the parking lot in order to allow more area for the infrastructure and proposed bioswales. Only grading work is now proposed within the hazard lands. The above items were addressed in Submission 2 of this report. Submission 3 Revisions The current submission of this document (Submission 3) includes slight changes to the site plan which have not had major effects on the design submitted in submission 2. Recent revisions to the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines were also incorporated into the analysis for the storm system (see TECHNICAL BULLETIN PIEDTB , dated September 6, 2016 from John L. Moser, Acting General Manager, City of Ottawa). The storm sewer design sheet was analyzed using a 2 year IDF curve instead of a 5-year curve, as per revised section in the revised Sewer Design Guidelines. It was found that the IDF curve change did not affect any storm sewer sizes on this site as most sewers on-site were already near the minimum permitted size. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 1.2

9 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Background October 20, BACKGROUND Documents referenced in preparing the site design for the 4450 Limebank Road Residential Development include: Riverside South Community Infrastructure Servicing Study Update, Stantec Consulting Ltd., September 30, Riverside South Community Master Drainage Plan Update, Stantec Consulting Ltd. September 30, 2008 Riverside South Functional Design Geomorphic Assessment, Parish Geomorphic, September 2008 Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road, Ottawa, Ontario, Paterson Group, August 17, City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, City of Ottawa, October City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines - Technical Bulletin PIEDTB , City of Ottawa, September City of Ottawa Design Guidelines Water Distribution, City of Ottawa, July cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 2.1

10 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Water Supply Servicing October 20, WATER SUPPLY SERVICING 3.1 BACKGROUND The proposed development comprises a total of 64 residential units within four, four storey buildings. The site is located south of Spratt Road, west of Limebank Road, in the Riverside South Community within Zone 2W2C of the City of Ottawa water distribution system. The servicing plan for the site proposes to connect the internal water distribution system to the existing 250mm dia. stub within the Limebank Road ROW. Boundary conditions provided by the City of Ottawa indicate a maximum hydraulic grade line of 134.7m at the stub location. On site fire protection will be provided via two proposed private hydrants, to be located within 45m of the building Siamese connections. 3.2 WATER DEMANDS Water demands for the development were estimated using the Ministry of Environment s Design Guidelines for Drinking Water Systems (2008). A daily rate demand of 350 L/cap/day has been applied for the population of the proposed site. Population densities have been assumed as 2.7 persons/unit based on a typical townhouse population. The average day demand (AVDY) for the entire site was determined to be 0.70 L/s. The maximum daily demand (MXDY) is 2.5 times the AVDY (commercial property) which equals 1.75 L/s. The peak hour demand (PKHR) is 2.2 times the MXDY, totaling 3.85 L/s. See Appendix A.1 for detailed domestic water demand estimates. Wood frame construction (structure entirely combustible) was considered in the assessment for fire flow requirements according to the FUS Guidelines. The FUS Guidelines indicate that low hazard occupancies include apartments, dwellings, dormitories, hotels, and schools, and as such, a low hazard occupancy / limited combustible building contents credit was applied. Based on calculations per the FUS Guidelines (Appendix A.2), the maximum required fire flows for this development are 167 L/s for Building A, and 200 L/s for Buildings B, C and D. 3.3 HYDRAULIC MODEL RESULTS A hydraulic model of the water supply system was created by Stantec based on current boundary conditions to assess the proposed watermain layout under the above demands and during fire flow scenarios. Results of the hydraulic modeling demonstrate that adequate flows are available for the subject site, with on-site pressures ranging from 45 psi to 62 psi under normal operating conditions. These values are within the normal operating pressure range as defined by MOECC and City of Ottawa design guidelines (desired 50 to 70 psi and not less than 40 psi). Results of the hydraulic model analysis can be found in Appendix A.3. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 3.1

11 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Water Supply Servicing October 20, 2016 A fire flow analysis was carried out using the hydraulic model to determine the anticipated amount of flow that could be provided for the proposed development under maximum day demands and fire flow requirements per the FUS methodology. Results of the modeling analysis indicate that flows in excess of the required fire flow rate can be delivered while still maintaining a residual pressure of 140 kpa (20 psi). Results of the hydraulic modeling are included for reference in Appendix A SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based on the results of the hydraulic analysis the proposed water servicing will provide sufficient capacity to sustain required domestic demands such that normal operating pressures remain within the City of Ottawa limits. Fire flows requirements were calculated using Fire Underwriters Survey to be 10,000L/min (167L/sec) for Building A, and 13,200L/min (200l/sec) for Buildings B, C and D. The model indicates that this rate can be achieved at the required locations while still maintaining the minimum required pressure of 20 psi (140kpa). cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 3.2

12 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Wastewater Servicing October 20, WASTEWATER SERVICING 4.1 DESIGN CRITERIA As outlined in the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines and the MOECC s Design Guidelines for Sewage Works, the following criteria were used to calculate estimated wastewater flow rates and to size the sanitary sewers: Minimum Velocity 0.6 m/s (0.8 m/s for upstream sections) Maximum Velocity 3.0 m/s Manning roughness coefficient for all smooth wall pipes Minimum size 200 mm dia. Average Wastewater Generation 350 L/capita/day Peak Factor Harmon Equation Extraneous Flow Allowance 0.28 l/s/ha (conservative value) Manhole Spacing 120 m Minimum Cover 2.5 m 4.2 PROPOSED SERVICING The proposed site will be serviced by an internal gravity sewer which will direct the wastewater flows to the existing 300mm diameter stub connecting to the 300mm municipal sanitary sewer within the Limebank Road ROW. Peak wastewater generation from the proposed development was based on an estimated building population of 172 residents using the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines (64 condo units with 2.7ppu based on townhouse population); see Drawing SA-1 for outline of sanitary drainage area and population count. A backflow preventer will be required for the on-site buildings in the event of surcharge of the sanitary sewer, and will be coordinated with building mechanical engineers. It is estimated that the proposed development will produce a peak wastewater flow rate of approximately 3.13L/s including an extraneous flow rate of 0.33L/s. The sanitary sewer design sheet is included in Appendix B. The population density for this site is 45.5 p/ha which falls within the population density outlined for the adjacent Limebank sewer in the Riverside South Community Infrastructure Servicing Study Update (RSCISSU 2008). cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 4.1

13 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 5.1 OBJECTIVES The objective of this stormwater management plan is to determine the measures necessary to control the quantity of stormwater released from the proposed development to established criteria, and to provide sufficient detail for approval and construction. During pre-design, it was determined that quality control measures would have to be provided on-site using an oil/grit separator unit. 5.2 SWM CRITERIA AND CONSTRAINTS Criteria were established by consulting with the City of Ottawa and Rideau Valley Conservation Authority staff. The site is located adjacent to Mosquito Creek to the south and adjacent to a tributary to Mosquito Creek to the northwest. A new outfall to Mosquito Creek is proposed to service only the subject site, and was sited on a preliminary basis during a field visit with Stantec and RVCA staff. A Master Drainage Plan (MDP) for the Riverside South area is currently being prepared however was not ready for review at the time of submission of this report. In the absence of guidance from this document, it was proposed that post-development peak flows be reduced to lower than pre-development peak flows. Correspondence with the RVCA indicated that there are also concerns about ensuring that excessive erosion does not occur in the creek, while still maintaining baseflows to the creek and tributary. It was therefore decided to attempt to use bioswales to store flows on site and to use infiltration and evapotranspiration in combination with overcontrolled release rates during a 48 hour drawdown time. This guidance will be used in conjunction with current design practices outlined by the City of Ottawa Design Guidelines (2012). The following summarizes the criteria, with the source of each criterion indicated in italics: General Use of the dual drainage principle (City of Ottawa) Wherever feasible and practical, site-level measures should be used to reduce and control the volume and rate of runoff (City of Ottawa) Assess impact of 100 year event outlined in the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, and climate change scenarios with a 20% increase of rainfall intensity, on major & minor drainage system (City of Ottawa) Provide Quality Control to 80% TSS removal (MOECC) cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.1

14 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 Site Specific Attempt to maintain baseflow areas to both the tributary and the creek. Over control peak flows to avoid excessive erosive velocities. Use bioswales to promote vegetative uptake of water through evapotranspiration and to promote infiltration. Maintain bioswale depths to less than 0.50m. Minor flow to be conveyed to new outfall on Mosquito Creek. Major flows up to 100 year event to be contained on-site in bioswales. Flows beyond the 100 year to be routed to tributary or to Mosquito Creek, via bioswales where grading permits. Storm Sewer & Inlet Controls Size storm sewers to convey 2 year storm event under free-flow conditions using City of Ottawa I-D-F parameters (City of Ottawa). Site discharge rates for each storm event to be restricted to pre-development for the following events: 100 & 5 year 3 hour Chicago storms, 100, 25, 5 & 2 year 12 hour SCS storms. Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL) analysis to be conducted using the 100 year 3 hour Chicago storm distribution (City of Ottawa), using a high water level in Mosquito Creek of 84.0 m. 100-year Storm HGL to be a minimum of 0.30 m below building foundation footing (City of Ottawa) Maximum climate change HGL to be lower than proposed basement elevations (City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines (2012)) Surface Storage & Overland Flow Building openings to be a minimum of 0.15m above the 100-year surface water level (City of Ottawa) Maximum depth of flow in the roads under either static or dynamic conditions shall be less than 0.35m (City of Ottawa) Subdrains required in swales where longitudinal gradient is less than 1.5% (City of Ottawa) Provide adequate emergency overflow conveyance off-site (City of Ottawa) 5.3 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN Design Methodology The intent of the stormwater management plan presented herein is to mitigate any negative impact that the proposed development will have on the existing storm sewer infrastructure and creeks, while providing adequate capacity to service the proposed building, parking and access areas. The proposed stormwater management plan is designed to detain runoff on the cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.2

15 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 parking surface and in the bioswales to ensure that peak flows after construction will not exceed pre-development discharge rates. A portion of the site (consisting mostly of grassed areas) is being allowed to sheet flow to both Mosquito Creek and to the tributary in order to provide baseflows. Runoff for the remainder of the site is restricted by ICDs at selected locations before entering the storm sewers on-site. Flows are then directed to a 450mm dia. outfall pipe that discharges via a new outfall structure into Mosquito Creek. There is also a small portion of the site that remains uncontrolled along the boulevard fronting on Limebank Road which could not be captured due to site grading Modeling Rationale A comprehensive hydrologic modeling exercise was completed with PCSWMM, accounting for the estimated major and minor systems to evaluate the storm sewer infrastructure. The use of PCSWMM for modeling of the site hydrology and hydraulics allowed for an analysis of the systems response during various storm events. Surface storage estimates were based on the final grading plan design (see Drawing GP-1). The following assumptions were applied to the detailed model: Hydrologic parameters as per Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, including Horton infiltration, Manning s n, and depression storage values 3-hour Chicago Storm distribution for the 100-year & 5-year analysis with static boundary condition at the site outlet to model worst-case scenario in regards to on-site HGLs. 12hr SCS distributions (2, 5, 25, and 100-year events) with static boundary condition To stress test the system a climate change scenario was created by adding 20% of the individual intensity values of the 100-year Chicago storm event at their specified time step. Percent imperviousness calculated based on actual soft and hard surfaces on each subcatchment, converted to equivalent Runoff Coefficient using the relationship C = (Imp. x 0.7) Subcatchment areas are defined from high-point to high-point where sags occur. Subcatchment width (average length of overland sheet flow) determined by dividing subcatchment area by subcatchment length (length of overland flow path measured from high-point to high-point). Number of catchbasins based on servicing plan (Drawing SP-1) Catchbasin inflow restricted with inlet-control devices (ICDs) as necessary to maintain inflow target rate and maximize use of surface storage. Surface ponding in sag storage calculated based on grading plans (Drawing GP-1) SWMM Dual Drainage Methodology The proposed subdivision is modeled in one modeling program as a dual conduit system (see Figure 2), with: 1) circular conduits representing the sewers & junction nodes representing manholes; 2) storage nodes representing catchbasins and bioswales, with weirs representing the depressed curbs where parking lot flows spill over into the bioswales (major system). The dual cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.3

16 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 drainage systems are connected via outlet link objects from storage node (i.e. CB) to junction (i.e. MH or connection point), and represent inlet control devices (ICDs). Subcatchments are linked to the storage node on the surface so that generated hydrographs are directed there firstly. Figure 2: Schematic Representing Model Object Roles Storage nodes are used in the model to represent catchbasins as well as major system junctions. For storage nodes representing catchbasins (CBs), the invert of the storage node represents the invert of the CB and the rim of the storage node is the top of the CB plus the maximum above ground storage depth. Additional depth has been added to rim elevations to allow routing and dynamic flow depth over the weirs. Ponding is represented via storage area-depth curves for each individual storage node to match ponding volumes demonstrated on the grading plan Drawing GP-1. Storage volumes exceeding the sag storage available in the node will route through the connected weirs to the next storage node and continue routing through the system until, ultimately, flows either re-enter the minor system or reach the outfall of the major system. Inlet control devices, as represented by outflow links, use a user-specified depth-discharge curve taken from manufacturer s specifications for the chosen ICD model. Subcatchment imperviousness was calculated via impervious area measured from Drawing SSP Boundary Conditions The detailed PCSWMM hydrology and the proposed storm sewers were used to assess the peak inflows and hydraulic grade line (HGL) for the site. A high water level in Mosquito Creek of 84.0 m was used as a boundary condition. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.4

17 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, Input Parameters Drawing SD-1 summarizes the discretized subcatchments used in the analysis of the proposed site, and outlines the major overland flow paths. The grading plans are also enclosed for review. Appendix C contains a summary of the modeling input parameters and results for the subject area; an example input and output file are provided for the 100-year 3hr Chicago storm. For all other input files and results of storm scenarios, please examine the electronic model files located on the CD provided with this report. This analysis was performed using PCSWMM, which is a front-end GUI to the EPA-SWMM engine. Model files can be examined in any program which can read EPA-SWMM files version Hydrologic Parameters Table 1 presents the general subcatchment parameters used: Table 1: General Subcatchment Parameters Parameter Infiltration Method Horton Max. Infil. Rate (mm/hr) 76.2 Min. Infil. Rate (mm/hr) 13.2 Decay Constant (1/hr) 4.14 N Impervious N Pervious 0.25 Dstore Imperv. (mm) 1.57 Dstore perv. (mm) 4.67 Zero Imperv. (%) 0 Value Table 2 presents the individual parameters that vary for each of the pre-development subcatchments, which can be seen on Figure 1.0 in Appendix C. Table 2: Subcatchment Parameters Pre-Development Name Outlet Area (ha) Width (m) Slope (%) Imperv. (%) CREEK OF TRIB OF TOTAL* cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.5

18 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 Table 3 presents the individual parameters that vary for each of the post-development subcatchments, which can be seen in Drawing SD-1. Table 3: Subcatchment Parameters Post-Development Name Outlet Area (ha) Width (m) Slope (%) Imperv. (%) BIO-1 SU-Pond BIO-2 SU-Pond BLDG-A 141_(C-STRM) BLDG-B 25_(C-STRM) BLDG-C 21_(C-STRM) BLDG-D 23_(C-STRM) CB-1 SU-CB CB-2 SU-CB CREEK OF CREEK-2 OF EXT-1 OF-ext TRIB OF-trib TOTAL* Table 4 summarizes the storage node parameters used in the model. Storage curves for each node have been created based on volumes presented for each individual ponding area within Drawing GP-1. Rim elevations for each node correspond to the rim elevation of the associated area s catchbasin plus a depth of storage plus a freeboard to allow for overland flow (especially in the climate change event scenarios). Table 4: Storage Node Parameters Name Invert Rim Depth Storage Curve Coeff. Exponent Curve Name Constant SU-CB TABULAR - - CB-1 - SU-CB TABULAR - - CB-2 - SU-Pond TABULAR - - Pond-1 - SU-Pond TABULAR - - Pond-2 - cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.6

19 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, Hydraulic Parameters As per the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines (OSDG 2012), Manning s roughness values of were used for sewer modeling and overland flow corridors representing roadways. Storm sewers were modeled to confirm flow capacities and hydraulic grade lines (HGLs) in the ultimate condition with consideration of the ultimate backwater acting on the sewers from Mosquito Creek. The detailed storm sewer design sheet is included in Appendix C. Table 5 below presents the parameters for the outlet link objects in the model, which represent ICDs. Table 5: Outlet/Orifice Parameters Name Inlet Node Outlet Node Inlet Elev. (m) Curve Name Rating Curve OR1 SU-CB1 1_(C-STRM) IPEX_LMF-45 TABULAR/HEAD Pipe_19_(C-STRM) SU-Pond-1 cnxn IPEX_LMF-45 TABULAR/HEAD Pipe_20_(C-STRM) SU-Pond-2 STC750_(C- STRM) IPEX_LMF-45 TABULAR/HEAD Model Results The following section summarizes the key hydrologic and hydraulic model results. For detailed model results or inputs please refer to the example input file in Appendix C and the electronic model files on the enclosed CD Hydrologic Results The following tables demonstrate the peak outflow from each modeled outfall during the design storm events. Pre-development results are presented firstly in Table 6 and are used to establish the criteria for post-development allowable outflows. Table 6: Peak Pre-Development Runoff Rates CREEK - Peak Runoff ( m³/s) TRIB - Peak Runoff ( m³/s) Chic 100 Year Chic 5 Year SCS 100 Year SCS 25 Year SCS 5 Year SCS 2 Year cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.7

20 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 Total Outflow (m 3 /s) Chic 100 Year Chic 5 Year SCS 100 Year SCS 25 Year SCS 5 Year SCS 2 Year There are two primary discharge locations in the post-development model to the tributary and to the Creek, each of which exists in the pre-development model and can therefore be compared directly. There is a small amount of uncontrolled flow from the perimeter of the site that, due to grading restrictions, are captured by the existing Limebank Road right-of-way at the north boundary of the site. These flows will have a minimal contribution to the infrastructure within Limebank Road, however they are modeled and are outletting to the model outfall Road. As can be seen in Table 7, all other release rate targets have been met and have been overcontrolled from the pre-development peak. Table 7: Pre & Post Development Events, Peak Discharge Rates Discharge Location Creek Tributary Road Pre / Post Pre Development Post Development Pre Development Post Development Pre Development Post Development Chicago 100 Year Chicago 5 Year SCS 100 Year Scenario SCS 25 Year SCS 5 Year SCS 2 Year N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A All Locations Pre Development Post Development Post / Pre ratio 49% 87% 45% 48% 58% 74% cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.8

21 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, Hydraulic Results Table 8 summarizes the HGL results within the site for the 100 year, 3 hour Chicago storm event and the climate change scenario storm required by the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines (2012), where intensities are increased by 20%. For each event, a fixed stage water elevation of 84.0m was applied at the headwall downstream of the site to simulate a worst case scenario with respect to site HGLs, however the site is much higher than the Creek and there were no substantial backwater effects. The City of Ottawa requires that during major storm events, the maximum hydraulic grade line be kept at least 0.30 m below the underside-of-footing (USF) of any adjacent units connected to the storm sewer during design storm events. The deepest footing for the proposed buildings is for an elevator pit, therefore this is the USF that is shown. Table 8: Modeled Hydraulic Grade Line Results Building BLDG-A Cnxn BLDG-B Cnxn BLDG-C Cnxn BLDG-D Cnxn Elev Pit USF (m) 100 Year 3 Hour Chicago HGL (m) USF-HGL Clearance (m) 100 Year 3 Hour Chicago + 20% HGL (m) USF-HGL Clearance (m) As is demonstrated in the table above, the worst-case scenario results in HGL elevations remain at least 0.30 m below the proposed underside of footings. HGL elevations also remain at least 0.30 m below the proposed underside of footings during the 20% increased intensity climate change scenario. Table 9 presents the maximum total surface water depths (static ponding depth + dynamic flow) above the top-of-grate of catchbasins for the 100-year design storm and climate change storm. Based on the model results, the total ponding depth (static + dynamic) does not exceed the required 0.35m maximum during the 100-year event for the two parking lot catchbasins, and does not exceed the 0.50m criterion established for the bioswales. Total ponding depths during the climate change scenario are below adjacent building openings and should not impact the proposed buildings. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.9

22 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 Table 9: Maximum Surface Water Depths 100 Year, 3 Hour Chicago 100 Year, 3 Hour Chicago+20% Storage Node ID Structure ID Rim Elevation (m) Max Surface HGL (m) Total Surface Water Depth (m) Max. Volume (cu.m) Max Surface HGL (m) Total Surface Water Depth (m) Max. Volume (cu.m) SU-CB1 CB SU-CB2 CB SU-Pond-1 CB Bioswale SU-Pond-2 CB Bioswale Table 10 presents the proposed inlet control device (ICD) schedule and the resulting flow and head through the devices during the modelled 100 Year, 3 hour Chicago Storm event. Table 10: ICD Schedule and 100 Year, 3 Hour Chicago Storm Results ICD Location Type 100 Year Head (m) 100 Year Flow (L/s) CB-1 IPEX TEMPEST LMF CB Bioswale 1 IPEX TEMPEST LMF CB Bioswale 2 IPEX TEMPEST LMF Water Quality Control Quality control will be accomplished via an oil/grit separator unit noted on the drawings as STC750, just upstream of MH 10. The unit is a Stormceptor model STC750, sized accounting for site storage and the restricted ICD flow rates. The Stormceptor unit will be privately maintained. The unit provides a minimum of 80% TSS removal for the site using a Fine particle size distribution in the PCSWMM for Stormceptor software analysis, meeting water quality objectives. A copy of the sizing report is available in Appendix C. Figure 3 below presents the outflow hydrographs for all modelled storm events from the site, at the Mosquito Creek headwall. Note the longer drawdown due to the overcontrol of on-site flow helps provide baseflow to the creek over a longer period in conjunction with the buffer areas left undeveloped around the fringe of the site. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.10

23 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 Figure 3: Outflow Hydrographs for All Modelled Events at Mosquito Creek Headwall. 5.4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Based on the preceding, the following conclusions can be drawn: The proposed stormwater management plan is in compliance with the goals specified in pre-design and in the 2012 City of Ottawa Sewer Guidelines. Inlet control devices are proposed to limit inflow from the site area into the minor system to maximize the use of surface storage. Post-development peak flows are lower than pre-development peak flows (see Error! Reference source not found. below). Post-development flows have been overcontrolled to reduce erosive impacts on Mosquito Creek. Landscaped drainage area to the tributary has been maintained to provide baseflow. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.11

24 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 The storm sewer hydraulic grade line is maintained at least 0.30 m below the underside of footing of the proposed building during design storm events. All dynamic surface water depths in road/parking lot catchbasins are less than 0.35 m during all design storm events, and all catchbasins in the bioswale areas are less than 0.50m. Quality control is provided by a Stormceptor model STC750 to obtain 80% TSS removal. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 5.12

25 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Grading and Drainage October 20, GRADING AND DRAINAGE The proposed development site measures approximately 3.79 ha in area. The site has significant grade change from the easterly property limit adjacent Limebank Road (93.5m MSL) to the westerly limit adjacent to Mosquito creek (89.0m MSL). The proposed site grading has been designed to minimize grading at the property limits and retain existing vegetation where possible. The proposed grading plan also takes into account required overland flow conveyance, cover over the sewers, hydraulic grade line requirements and grade raise limits identified in the site Geotechnical report prepared by PatersonGroup Ltd. 7.0 UTILITIES Utility infrastructure exists within the Limebank Road ROW at the east property boundaries of the proposed site. It is anticipated that existing infrastructure will be sufficient to provide a means of distribution for the proposed site. Exact size, location, and routing of utilities will be finalized through consultation with utility agencies after design circulation. 8.0 APPROVALS Pre-consultation with Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change(MOECC) staff concerning Environmental Compliance Approvals under the Ontario Water Resources Act has been initiated and is expected to confirm that an ECA will be required for the site due to the new storm sewer outlet proposed to Mosquito Creek. Rideau Valley Conservation Authority approval will also be required in accordance with Ontario Regulation 174/06 Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. Pre-consultation correspondence with RVCA staff has been included for reference in Appendix F. 9.0 EROSION CONTROL DURING CONSTRUCTION Erosion and sediment controls must be in place during construction. The following recommendations to the contractor will be included in contract documents. 1. Implement best management practices to provide appropriate protection of the existing and proposed drainage system and the receiving water course(s). 2. Limit extent of exposed soils at any given time. 3. Re-vegetate exposed areas as soon as possible. 4. Minimize the area to be cleared and grubbed. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 9.1

26 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Erosion Control During Construction October 20, Protect exposed slopes with plastic or synthetic mulches. 6. Provide sediment traps and basins during dewatering. 7. Install sediment traps (such as SiltSack by Terrafix) between catch basins and frames. 8. Plan construction at proper time to avoid flooding. The contractor will, at every rainfall, complete inspections and guarantee proper performance. The inspection is to include: 9. Verification that water is not flowing under silt barriers. 10. Clean and change silt traps at catch basins. Refer to Drawing EC-1 for the proposed location of silt fences, straw bales and other erosion control structures. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 9.2

27 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Geotechnical Investigation October 20, GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION A geotechnical investigation was completed by Paterson Group Ltd. in August of The report summarizes the existing soil conditions within the subject area and construction recommendations. For details which are not summarized below, please see the original Paterson report. Subsurface soil conditions within the subject area were determined from 3 boreholes distributed across the proposed site. In general soil stratigraphy consisted of topsoil underlain by 5m of very stiff brown silty crust over a grey firm to stiff silty clay layer. Groundwater Levels were measured on June 2, 2005 and on October 5, 2012 and vary in elevation from 2.03 to 5.8m below the original ground surface. A permissible grade raise restriction of 1.5m has been recommended within the Paterson Group report where silty clay is encountered in the vicinity of the proposed buildings. The grade raise restrictions were accounted for in the grading design of the property. The required pavement structure for the local roadways is outlined in Table 11 and Table 12 below: Table 11: Pavement Structure Car Only Parking Areas Thickness (mm) Material Description 50 Wear Course HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete 150 Base OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone 300 Subbase - OPSS Granular B Type II - Subgrade Either fill, in situ soil, select subgrade material or OPSS Granular B Type I or II material placed over in situ soil or fill. Table 12: Pavement Structure Local and Collector Roadways Thickness (mm) Material Description 40 Wear Course HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete 50 Binder Course HL-8 or Superpave 19.0 Asphaltic Concrete 150 Base OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone 400 Subbase - OPSS Granular B Type II cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 10.1

28 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Geotechnical Investigation October 20, 2016 Thickness (mm) Material Description - Subgrade Either fill, in situ soil, select subgrade material or OPSS Granular B Type I or II material placed over in situ soil or fill. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 10.2

29 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Conclusions October 20, CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of the hydraulic analysis the proposed water servicing will provide sufficient capacity to sustain required domestic demands such that normal operating pressures remain within the City of Ottawa limits. Fire flows requirements were calculated using Fire Underwriters Survey to be 10,000L/min (167L/sec) for Building A, and 13,200L/min (200l/sec) for Buildings B, C and D. The model indicates that this rate can be achieved at the required locations while still maintaining the minimum pressure of 20 psi (140kpa). The proposed sanitary sewer network is sufficiently sized to provide gravity drainage of the site. The proposed site will be serviced by a gravity sewer which will direct the wastewater flows (approx L/s) to the existing 300 mm stub at the site entrance. Based on a site population density of 45.5 ppl/ha, wastewater flows have been sufficiently accounted for in the Riverside South Community ISSU. The proposed stormwater management plan is in compliance with the goals specified through consultation with the City of Ottawa and the RVCA. Some area has been directed to sheet drain to the nearby tributary to maintain baseflows as per direction from RVCA. A new outfall onto Mosquito Creek is proposed to drain the subject property, and was preliminarily sited in conjunction with RVCA staff. Post-development flows are controlled via ICDs to less than predevelopment peaks for all storm events. Peak flows are in fact overcontrolled to much less than pre-development flows so that excessive erosive flows and velocities into Mosquito Creek do not result. An oil/grit separator has been specified to provide water quality treatment to 80% TSS removal. Parking areas surface water depths are less than 0.35 m and bioswale depths are less than 0.50m during the 100-year storm event. Site HGLs are all more than 0.30m below buildings USFs, including under climate change conditions assuming 20% increase in intensity. Under climate change storm conditions none of the bioswales overtop their major system spill elevations. Major system spill elevations are also more than 0.15m below the nearest building openings. MOECC Environmental Compliance Approvals are expected to be required for the subject site due to the new storm sewer outlet proposed to discharge to Mosquito Creek. The Rideau Valley Conservation Authority will need to be consulted in order to obtain municipal approval for site development. No other approval requirements from other regulatory agencies are anticipated. cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 11.1

30 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Conclusions October 20, 2016 All of which is respectfully submitted; STANTEC CONSULTING LTD. Neal Cody, P, Eng, Project Engineer Stantec en\ \cd1218-f02\0l-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\deoign\report\s i te ser v icing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx 11.2

31 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix A Water Supply Servicing October 20, 2016 WATER SUPPLY SERVICING A.1 DOMESTIC WATER DEMAND ESTIMATE cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx A.1

32

33 Estimated Water Demands Node ID L/cap*d Units People AVDY (L/s) MXDY (L/s) PKHR (L/s) Total

34

35 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix A Water Supply Servicing October 20, 2016 A.2 FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS PER FUS cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx A.2

36

37 Notes: FUS Fire Flow Calculation Calculations based on: "Water Supply for Public Fire Protection " by Fire Underwriters' Survey, 1999 Stantec Project #: Project Name: 4450 Limebank Road Fire Flow Calculation #: 1 Date: May 16, 2016 Building Type/Description/Name: BLDG A Data input by: Dustin Thiffault Table A: Fire Underwriters Survey Determination of Required Fire Flow - Long Method Step Task Term Options 1 2 Multiplier Associated with Option Wood Frame 1.5 Ordinary construction 1 Non-combustible construction 0.8 Fire resistive construction (> 3 hrs) 0.6 Single Family 1 Townhouse - indicate # of units 8 Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) 1 Number of Floors/Storeys in the Unit (do not include basement): Choose: Value Used 2.2 # of Storeys 4 4 Storeys Choose Frame Used for Construction of Coefficient related to Unit type of construction (C) Choose Type of Housing (if TH, Enter Number of Units Per TH Block) Enter Ground Floor Area of One Unit Obtain Required Fire Flow without Reductions Apply Factors Affecting Burning Choose Combustibility of Building Contents Choose Reduction Due to Presence of Sprinklers Choose Separation Distance Between Units Obtain Required Fire Flow, Duration & Volume Type of Housing Occupancy content hazard reduction or surcharge Sprinkler reduction Water Supply Credit Sprinkler Supervision Credit Exposure Distance Between Units Framing Material Floor Space Area Average Floor Area (A) based on fire resistive building design when vertical openings are inadequately protected: Non-combustible Limited combustible Combustible 0 Free burning 0.15 Rapid burning 0.25 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA None 0 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line -0.1 Water supply is not standard or N/A 0 Sprinkler system is fully supervised Square Metres (m2) Required Fire Flow (without reductions or increases per FUS) (F = 220 * C * A) Round to nearest 1000L/min Reductions/Increases Due to Factors Affecting Burning Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA13 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A 0 North Side 45.1m or greater 0 East Side 20.1 to 30.1m 0.1 South Side 45.1m or greater 0 West Side 45.1m or greater 0 Unit Wood Frame 1.5 m Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) 1 Units Area in Square Meters (m 2 ) -0.3 N/A 0 N/A Total Required Fire Flow, rounded to nearest 1000 L/min, with max/min limits applied: Total Required Fire Flow (above) in L/s: Required Duration of Fire Flow (hrs) Required Volume of Fire Flow (m 3 ) 2,400 Total Fire Flow (L/min) 16,000 Limited combustible N/A 13,600-4, N/A -1, m 1, , ,200 Date: 5/16/2016 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 1 W:\active\ _4450 Limebank Road\design\analysis\Water\ FUS Calculation Sheet.xlsm

38 Notes: FUS Fire Flow Calculation Calculations based on: "Water Supply for Public Fire Protection " by Fire Underwriters' Survey, 1999 Stantec Project #: Project Name: 4450 Limebank Road Fire Flow Calculation #: 2 Date: May 16, 2016 Building Type/Description/Name: BLDG B Data input by: Dustin Thiffault Table A: Fire Underwriters Survey Determination of Required Fire Flow - Long Method Step Task Term Options 1 2 Multiplier Associated with Option Wood Frame 1.5 Ordinary construction 1 Non-combustible construction 0.8 Fire resistive construction (> 3 hrs) 0.6 Single Family 1 Townhouse - indicate # of units 8 Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) 1 Number of Floors/Storeys in the Unit (do not include basement): Choose: Value Used 2.2 # of Storeys 4 4 Storeys Choose Frame Used for Construction of Coefficient related to Unit type of construction (C) Choose Type of Housing (if TH, Enter Number of Units Per TH Block) Enter Ground Floor Area of One Unit Obtain Required Fire Flow without Reductions Apply Factors Affecting Burning Choose Combustibility of Building Contents Choose Reduction Due to Presence of Sprinklers Choose Separation Distance Between Units Obtain Required Fire Flow, Duration & Volume Type of Housing Framing Material Floor Space Area Average Floor Area (A) based on fire resistive building design when vertical openings are inadequately protected: Occupancy content hazard reduction or surcharge Sprinkler reduction Water Supply Credit Sprinkler Supervision Credit Exposure Distance Between Units Non-combustible Limited combustible Combustible 0 Free burning 0.15 Rapid burning 0.25 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA None 0 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line -0.1 Water supply is not standard or N/A 0 Sprinkler system is fully supervised Square Metres (m2) Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A 0 North Side 45.1m or greater 0 East Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15 South Side 45.1m or greater 0 West Side 20.1 to 30.1m 0.1 Unit Wood Frame 1.5 m Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) Required Fire Flow (without reductions or increases per FUS) (F = 220 * C * A) Round to nearest 1000L/min Reductions/Increases Due to Factors Affecting Burning 1 Units 2,400 Area in Square Meters (m 2 ) Total Fire Flow (L/min) 16,000 Limited combustible N/A 13,600 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA13 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A -0.3 N/A -0.1 N/A -1,360 0 N/A -4, m 3,400 Total Required Fire Flow, rounded to nearest 1000 L/min, with max/min limits applied: Total Required Fire Flow (above) in L/s: Required Duration of Fire Flow (hrs) Required Volume of Fire Flow (m 3 ) 0 12, ,800 Date: 5/16/2016 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 2 W:\active\ _4450 Limebank Road\design\analysis\Water\ FUS Calculation Sheet.xlsm

39 Notes: FUS Fire Flow Calculation Calculations based on: "Water Supply for Public Fire Protection " by Fire Underwriters' Survey, 1999 Stantec Project #: Project Name: 4450 Limebank Road Fire Flow Calculation #: 3 Date: May 16, 2016 Building Type/Description/Name: BLDG C Data input by: Dustin Thiffault Table A: Fire Underwriters Survey Determination of Required Fire Flow - Long Method Step Task Term Options 1 2 Multiplier Associated with Option Wood Frame 1.5 Ordinary construction 1 Non-combustible construction 0.8 Fire resistive construction (> 3 hrs) 0.6 Single Family 1 Townhouse - indicate # of units 8 Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) 1 Number of Floors/Storeys in the Unit (do not include basement): Choose: Value Used 2.2 # of Storeys 4 4 Storeys Choose Frame Used for Construction of Coefficient related to Unit type of construction (C) Choose Type of Housing (if TH, Enter Number of Units Per TH Block) Enter Ground Floor Area of One Unit Obtain Required Fire Flow without Reductions Apply Factors Affecting Burning Choose Combustibility of Building Contents Choose Reduction Due to Presence of Sprinklers Choose Separation Distance Between Units Obtain Required Fire Flow, Duration & Volume Type of Housing Framing Material Floor Space Area Average Floor Area (A) based on fire resistive building design when vertical openings are inadequately protected: Occupancy content hazard reduction or surcharge Sprinkler reduction Water Supply Credit Sprinkler Supervision Credit Exposure Distance Between Units Non-combustible Limited combustible Combustible 0 Free burning 0.15 Rapid burning 0.25 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA None 0 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line -0.1 Water supply is not standard or N/A 0 Sprinkler system is fully supervised Square Metres (m2) Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A 0 North Side 45.1m or greater 0 East Side 45.1m or greater 0 South Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15 West Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15 Unit Wood Frame 1.5 m Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) Required Fire Flow (without reductions or increases per FUS) (F = 220 * C * A) Round to nearest 1000L/min Reductions/Increases Due to Factors Affecting Burning 1 Units 2,400 Area in Square Meters (m 2 ) Total Fire Flow (L/min) 16,000 Limited combustible N/A 13,600 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA13 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A -0.3 N/A -0.1 N/A -1,360 0 N/A -4, m 4,080 Total Required Fire Flow, rounded to nearest 1000 L/min, with max/min limits applied: Total Required Fire Flow (above) in L/s: Required Duration of Fire Flow (hrs) Required Volume of Fire Flow (m 3 ) 0 12, ,800 Date: 5/16/2016 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 3 W:\active\ _4450 Limebank Road\design\analysis\Water\ FUS Calculation Sheet.xlsm

40 Notes: FUS Fire Flow Calculation Calculations based on: "Water Supply for Public Fire Protection " by Fire Underwriters' Survey, 1999 Stantec Project #: Project Name: 4450 Limebank Road Fire Flow Calculation #: 4 Date: May 16, 2016 Building Type/Description/Name: BLDG D Data input by: Dustin Thiffault Table A: Fire Underwriters Survey Determination of Required Fire Flow - Long Method Step Task Term Options 1 2 Multiplier Associated with Option Wood Frame 1.5 Ordinary construction 1 Non-combustible construction 0.8 Fire resistive construction (> 3 hrs) 0.6 Single Family 1 Townhouse - indicate # of units 8 Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) 1 Number of Floors/Storeys in the Unit (do not include basement): Choose: Value Used 2.2 # of Storeys 4 4 Storeys Choose Frame Used for Construction of Coefficient related to Unit type of construction (C) Choose Type of Housing (if TH, Enter Number of Units Per TH Block) Enter Ground Floor Area of One Unit Obtain Required Fire Flow without Reductions Apply Factors Affecting Burning Choose Combustibility of Building Contents Choose Reduction Due to Presence of Sprinklers Choose Separation Distance Between Units Obtain Required Fire Flow, Duration & Volume Type of Housing Framing Material Floor Space Area Average Floor Area (A) based on fire resistive building design when vertical openings are inadequately protected: Occupancy content hazard reduction or surcharge Sprinkler reduction Water Supply Credit Sprinkler Supervision Credit Exposure Distance Between Units Non-combustible Limited combustible Combustible 0 Free burning 0.15 Rapid burning 0.25 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA None 0 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line -0.1 Water supply is not standard or N/A 0 Sprinkler system is fully supervised Square Metres (m2) Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A 0 North Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15 East Side 45.1m or greater 0 South Side 45.1m or greater 0 West Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15 Unit Wood Frame 1.5 m Other (Comm, Ind, Apt etc.) Required Fire Flow (without reductions or increases per FUS) (F = 220 * C * A) Round to nearest 1000L/min Reductions/Increases Due to Factors Affecting Burning 1 Units 2,400 Area in Square Meters (m 2 ) Total Fire Flow (L/min) 16,000 Limited combustible N/A 13,600 Adequate Sprinkler conforms to NFPA13 Water supply is standard for sprinkler and fire dept. hose line Sprinkler not fully supervised or N/A -0.3 N/A -0.1 N/A -1,360 0 N/A -4, m 4,080 Total Required Fire Flow, rounded to nearest 1000 L/min, with max/min limits applied: Total Required Fire Flow (above) in L/s: Required Duration of Fire Flow (hrs) Required Volume of Fire Flow (m 3 ) 0 12, ,800 Date: 5/16/2016 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 4 W:\active\ _4450 Limebank Road\design\analysis\Water\ FUS Calculation Sheet.xlsm

41 FUS Fire Flow Calculations Summary Stantec Project #: Project Name: 4450 Limebank Road Date: 16/05/16 Data input by: Dustin Thiffault Building Construction Type Floor Space FF FF Duration Volume Reference m2 (L/min) (L/s) (hrs) (m3) 1 BLDG A 2,400 10, ,200 2 BLDG B 2,400 12, ,800 3 BLDG C 2,400 12, ,800 4 BLDG D 2,400 12, ,800

42

43 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix A Water Supply Servicing October 20, 2016 A.3 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS RESULTS cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx A.3

44

45 Hydraulic Model Results - Average Day Analysis Junction Results ID Demand Elevation Head Pressure (L/s) (m) (m) (psi) (Kpa) Pipe Results ID From Length Diameter Flow Velocity To Node Roughness Node (m) (mm) (L/s) (m/s) Hydraulic Model Results -Peak Hour Analysis Junction Results ID Demand Elevation Head Pressure (L/s) (m) (m) (psi) (Kpa) Pipe Results ID From Length Diameter Flow Velocity To Node Roughness Node (m) (mm) (L/s) (m/s)

46 Hydraulic Model Results -Fire Flow Analysis (167 L/s) ID Static Demand Static Pressure Static Head Fire-Flow Demand Residual Pressure Available Flow at Hydrant Available Flow Pressure (L/s) (psi) (Kpa) (m) (L/s) (psi) (Kpa) (L/s) (psi) (Kpa) Hydraulic Model Results -Fire Flow Analysis (200 L/s) ID Static Demand Static Pressure Static Head Fire-Flow Demand Residual Pressure Available Flow at Hydrant Available Flow Pressure (L/s) (psi) (Kpa) (m) (L/s) (psi) (Kpa) (L/s) (psi) (Kpa)

47 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix B Wastewater Servicing October 20, 2016 WASTEWATER SERVICING B.1 SANITARY SEWER DESIGN SHEET cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx B.1

48

49 SUBDIVISION: SANITARY SEWER 4450 Limebank Road DESIGN SHEET (City of Ottawa) MAX PEAK FACTOR (RES.)= 4.0 AVG. DAILY FLOW / PERSON 350 L/p/day MINIMUM VELOCITY 0.60 m/s DATE: 5/16/2016 MIN PEAK FACTOR (RES.)= 2.0 COMMERCIAL 50,000 L/ha/day MAXIMUM VELOCITY 3.00 m/s REVISION: 0 PEAKING FACTOR (INDUSTRIAL): 2.4 INDUSTRIAL (HEAVY) 55,000 L/ha/day MANNINGS n DESIGNED BY: WAJ FILE NUMBER: PEAKING FACTOR (COMM., INST.): 1.5 INDUSTRIAL (LIGHT) 35,000 L/ha/day BEDDING CLASS B CHECKED BY: SGG PERSONS / SINGLE UNIT 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL 50,000 L/ha/day MINIMUM COVER 2.50 m PERSONS / TOWNHOME 2.7 INFILTRATION 0.28 L/s/ha PERSONS / APARTMENT 2.3 LOCATION RESIDENTIAL AREA AND POPULATION COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL (L) INDUSTRIAL (H) INSTITUTIONAL GREEN / UNUSED C+I+I INFILTRATION TOTAL PIPE AREA ID FROM TO AREA UNITS POP. CUMULATIVE PEAK PEAK AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. PEAK TOTAL ACCU. INFILT. FLOW LENGTH DIA MATERIAL CLASS SLOPE CAP. CAP. V VEL. VEL. NUMBER M.H. M.H. SINGLE TOWN APT. AREA POP. FACT. FLOW AREA AREA AREA AREA AREA FLOW AREA AREA FLOW (FULL) PEAK FLOW (FULL) (ACT.) (ha) (ha) (L/s) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (L/s) (ha) (ha) (L/s) (L/s) (m) (mm) (%) (l/s) (%) (m/s) (m/s) SA4A PVC SDR % SA3A PVC SDR % SA2A PVC SDR % EX STUB 1 EX PVC SDR % DESIGN PARAMETERS 1 of SAN _waj.xlsx

50

51 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix C Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT C.1 STORM SEWER DESIGN SHEET cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx C.1

52

53 4450 Limebank Road STORM SEWER DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN SHEET I = a / (t+b) c (As per City of Ottawa Guidelines, 2012 & 2016) DATE: 20-Oct-2016 (City of Ottawa) 1:2 yr 1:100 yr REVISION: 1 a = MANNING'S n = BEDDING CLASS = B DESIGNED BY: WAJ FILE NUMBER: b = MINIMUM COVER: 2.00 m CHECKED BY: NPC c = TIME OF ENTRY 10 min LOCATION DRAINAGE AREA PIPE SELECTION AREA ID FROM TO AREA AREA AREA C ACCUM. A x C ACCUM. ACCUM. A x C ACCUM. T of C I 2-YEAR I 100-YEAR Q CONTROL ACCUM. Q ACT LENGTH PIPE WIDTH PIPE PIPE MATERIAL CLASS SLOPE Q CAP % FULL VEL. TIME OF NUMBER M.H. M.H. (2-YEAR) (100-YEAR) (ROOF) AREA (2YR) (2-YEAR) AxC (2YR) AREA (100YR (100-YEAR) AxC (100YR) (NOTE 1) Q CONTROL (CIA/360) OR DIAMETER HEIGHT SHAPE (FULL) (FULL) FLOW (ha) (ha) (ha) (-) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (min) (mm/h) (mm/h) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m) (mm) (mm) (-) (-) (-) % (L/s) (-) (m/s) (min) BLDG-A, CB CIRCULAR PVC SDR % BLDG-B CIRCULAR PVC SDR % BLDG-C, BLDG-D CIRCULAR PVC SDR % BIO-1 12 STC CIRCULAR PVC SDR % CB-2 CB 2 CB BIOSWALE CIRCULAR PVC SDR % BIO-2 CB BIOSWALE 2 STC CIRCULAR PVC SDR % STC CIRCULAR CONCRETE 100-D % HEADWALL CIRCULAR CONCRETE 100-D % Sum:

54

55 ST105A

56

57 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix C Stormwater Management October 20, 2016 C.2 PCSWMM MODEL INPUT & RESULTS cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx C.2

58

59

60

61

62 Outfall_attributes Attributes Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6 Scenario7 Scenario8 Scenario9 Scenario10 Scenario11 Scenario12 Post Chic Chic5yr_3h SCS2y_12h SCS5y_12h SCS25y_12 SCS100yr_1 Post Chic 100 yr 100 yr Climate _10m_Clim ate Chic5yr_3h _10m _5m_Clima te SCS2y_12h _5m _5m_Clima te SCS5y_12h _5m h_5m_clim ate SCS25y_12 h_5m 2h_5m_Cli mate SCS100yr_1 2h_5m Outfall attributes OF-ext1 - Max. Total Inflow ( L/s) HEADWALL_(C-STRM) - Max. Total Inflow ( L/s) OF3 - Max. Total Inflow ( L/s) OF-trib - Max. Total Inflow ( L/s)

63 Outlet_attributes Attributes Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6 Scenario7 Scenario8 Scenario9 Scenario10 Scenario11 Scenario12 Post Chic Chic5yr_3h SCS25y_12h SCS100yr_1 Post Chic 100 yr _10m_Clim Chic5yr_3h SCS2y_12h_ SCS2y_12h_ SCS5y_12h_ SCS5y_12h 5m_Climat SCS25y_12h 2h_5m_Cli SCS100yr_1 100 yr Climate ate _10m 5m_Climate 5m 5m_Climate 5m e _5m mate 2h_5m Outlet attributes OR1 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_19_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_20_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s)

64 Storage_attributes Attributes Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6 Scenario7 Scenario8 Scenario9 Scenario10 Scenario11 Scenario12 Post Chic Chic5yr_3h SCS2y_12h SCS5y_12h SCS25y_12 SCS100yr_1 Post Chic 100 yr _10m_Clim Chic5yr_3h _5m_Climat SCS2y_12h _5m_Climat SCS5y_12h h_5m_clim SCS25y_12 2h_5m_Cli SCS100yr_1 100 yr Climate ate _10m e _5m e _5m ate h_5m mate 2h_5m Storage attributes SU-Pond-2 - Max. Depth (m) SU-Pond-1 - Max. Depth (m) SU-CB2 - Max. Depth (m) SU-CB1 - Max. Depth (m) SU-CB2 - Max. HGL (m) SU-CB1 - Max. HGL (m) SU-Pond-2 - Max. HGL (m) SU-Pond-1 - Max. HGL (m) SU-CB2 - Max. Volume (1000 m³) SU-CB1 - Max. Volume (1000 m³) SU-Pond-2 - Max. Volume (1000 m³) SU-Pond-1 - Max. Volume (1000 m³)

65 Junction_attributes Attributes Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6 Scenario7 Scenario8 Scenario9 Scenario10 Scenario11 Scenario12 Post Chic Chic5yr_3h_ SCS25y_12h SCS100yr_1 Post Chic 100 yr 10m_Climat Chic5yr_3h_ SCS2y_12h_ SCS2y_12h_ SCS5y_12h_ SCS5y_12h 5m_Climat SCS25y_12h 2h_5m_Cli SCS100yr_1 100 yr Climate e 10m 5m_Climate 5m 5m_Climate 5m e _5m mate 2h_5m Junction attributes 13_(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) STC750_(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m) _(C-STRM) - Max. HGL (m)

66 Conduit_attributes Attributes Scenario1 Scenario2 Scenario3 Scenario4 Scenario5 Scenario6 Scenario7 Scenario8 Scenario9 Scenario10 Scenario11 Scenario12 Post Chic Chic5yr_3h SCS2y_12h SCS5y_12h SCS25y_12 SCS100yr_ Post Chic 100 yr _10m_Clim Chic5yr_3h _5m_Clima SCS2y_12h _5m_Clima SCS5y_12h h_5m_cli SCS25y_12 12h_5m_Cl SCS100yr_ 100 yr Climate ate _10m te _5m te _5m mate h_5m imate 12h_5m Conduit attributes Pipe_4_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_6_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_8_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_4_(1)_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_9_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_14_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_15_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_16_(C-STRM) - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_7_1 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_7_2 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_1 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_2 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_17_1 - Max. Flow ( L/s) Pipe_17_2 - Max. Flow ( L/s) C1 - Max. Flow ( L/s)

67 Table7 Table 7: Pre & Post Development Events, Peak Discharge Rates Discharge Location Creek Tributary Road Pre / Post Chicago 100 Year Scenario Chicago SCS SCS SCS SCS 5 Year 100 Year 25 Year 5 Year 2 Year Pre Development Post Development Pre Development Post Development Pre Development N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Post Development All Locations Pre Development Post Development Post / Pre ratio 49% 87% 45% 48% 58% 74%

68 Brief Stormceptor Sizing Report - Limebank Project Information & Location Project Name Limebank Project Number City Ottawa State/ Province Ontario Country Canada Date 5/16/2016 Designer Information EOR Information (optional) Name Neal Cody Name Company Stantec Consulting Ltd. Company Phone # Phone # neal.cody@stantec.com Stormwater Treatment Recommendation The recommended Stormceptor Model(s) which achieve or exceed the user defined water quality objective for each site within the project are listed in the below Sizing Summary table. Site Name Target TSS Removal (%) 80 TSS Removal (%) Provided 80 Recommended Stormceptor Model STC 750 The recommended Stormceptor Model achieves the water quality objectives based on the selected inputs, historical rainfall records and selected particle size distribution. Stormceptor Sizing Summary Stormceptor Model % TSS Removal Provided STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC STC Stormceptor MAX Custom Stormceptor Brief Sizing Report Page 1 of 2

69 Sizing Details Drainage Area Total Area (ha) 0.86 Imperviousness % 68.0 Station Name State/Province Rainfall OTTAWA MACDONALD- CARTIER INT'L A Ontario Station ID # 6000 Years of Records 37 Latitude Longitude 45 19'N 75 40'W Water Quality Objective TSS Removal (%) 80.0 Runoff Volume Capture (%) Oil Spill Capture Volume (L) Peak Conveyed Flow Rate (L/s) Water Quality Flow Rate (L/s) Up Stream Storage Storage (ha-m) Discharge (cms) Particle Diameter (microns) Particle Size Distribution (PSD) The selected PSD defines TSS removal Fine Distribution Distribution % Notes Specific Gravity Up Stream Flow Diversion Max. Flow to Stormceptor (cms) Stormceptor performance estimates are based on simulations using PCSWMM for Stormceptor, which uses the EPA Rainfall and Runoff modules. Design estimates listed are only representative of specific project requirements based on total suspended solids (TSS) removal defined by the selected PSD, and based on stable site conditions only, after construction is completed. For submerged applications or sites specific to spill control, please contact your local Stormceptor representative for further design assistance. For Stormceptor Specifications and Drawings Please Visit: Stormceptor Brief Sizing Report Page 2 of 2

70 [TITLE] Pre Chic 100 yr.inp [OPTIONS] ;;Options Value ;; FLOW_UNITS CMS INFILTRATION HORTON FLOW_ROUTING DYNWAVE START_DATE 03/31/2016 START_TIME 00:00:00 REPORT_START_DATE 03/31/2016 REPORT_START_TIME 00:00:00 END_DATE 04/07/2016 END_TIME 18:00:00 SWEEP_START 01/01 SWEEP_END 12/31 DRY_DAYS 0 REPORT_STEP 00:05:00 WET_STEP 00:01:00 DRY_STEP 00:01:00 ROUTING_STEP 5 ALLOW_PONDING NO INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL VARIABLE_STEP 0.75 LENGTHENING_STEP 0 MIN_SURFAREA 0 NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION D-W LINK_OFFSETS ELEVATION MIN_SLOPE 0 MAX_TRIALS 8 HEAD_TOLERANCE SYS_FLOW_TOL 5 LAT_FLOW_TOL 5 MINIMUM_STEP 0.5 THREADS 4 [EVAPORATION] ;;Type Parameters ;; CONSTANT 6 DRY_ONLY NO [RAINGAGES] ;; Rain Time Snow Data ;;Name Type Intrvl Catch Source ;; RG1 INTENSITY 0: TIMESERIES Chicago100y_3h_10m_City [SUBCATCHMENTS] ;; Total Pcnt. Pcnt. Curb Snow ;;Name Raingage Outlet Area Imperv Width Slope Length Pack ;; CREEK RG1 OF TRIB RG1 OF [SUBAREAS] Page 1 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp ;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ;; CREEK OUTLET TRIB OUTLET [INFILTRATION] ;;Subcatchment MaxRate MinRate Decay DryTime MaxInfil ;; CREEK TRIB [OUTFALLS] ;; Invert Outfall Stage/Table Tide ;;Name Elev. Type Time Series Gate Route To ;; OF1 0 FREE NO OF2 0 FREE NO [CURVES] ;;Name Type X-Value Y-Value ;; CB-1 Storage 0 0 CB CB CB CB-2 Storage 0 0 CB CB CB Pond-1 Storage 0 0 Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond-2 Storage 0 0 Pond Pond Pond Pond [TIMESERIES] ;;Name Date Time Value ;; ;Ch25mm_4h_20m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: ;Chicago100y_3h_10m_City: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Page 2

71 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: ;Chicago5y_3h_10m_City: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: ;SCS100y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: Page 3 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: Page 4

72 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: ;SCS25y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: Page 5 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: Page 6

73 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: Page 7 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: ;SCS2y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: Page 8

74 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: Page 9 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: ;SCS5y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: Page 10

75 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: Page 11 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: [REPORT] INPUT YES CONTROLS NO SUBCATCHMENTS ALL NODES ALL LINKS ALL Page 12

76 [TAGS] Pre Chic 100 yr.inp [MAP] DIMENSIONS UNITS Meters [COORDINATES] ;;Node X-Coord Y-Coord ;; OF OF [VERTICES] ;;Link X-Coord Y-Coord ;; [POLYGONS] ;;Subcatchment X-Coord Y-Coord ;; CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK Page 13 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK CREEK TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB Page 14

77 Pre Chic 100 yr.inp TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB TRIB [SYMBOLS] ;;Gage X-Coord Y-Coord ;; Page 15

78 [TITLE] Post Chic 100 yr.inp [OPTIONS] ;;Options Value ;; FLOW_UNITS LPS INFILTRATION HORTON FLOW_ROUTING DYNWAVE START_DATE 03/31/2016 START_TIME 00:00:00 REPORT_START_DATE 03/31/2016 REPORT_START_TIME 00:00:00 END_DATE 04/01/2016 END_TIME 18:00:00 SWEEP_START 01/01 SWEEP_END 12/31 DRY_DAYS 0 REPORT_STEP 00:05:00 WET_STEP 00:01:00 DRY_STEP 00:01:00 ROUTING_STEP 5 ALLOW_PONDING NO INERTIAL_DAMPING PARTIAL VARIABLE_STEP 0.75 LENGTHENING_STEP 0 MIN_SURFAREA 0 NORMAL_FLOW_LIMITED BOTH SKIP_STEADY_STATE NO FORCE_MAIN_EQUATION D-W LINK_OFFSETS ELEVATION MIN_SLOPE 0 MAX_TRIALS 8 HEAD_TOLERANCE SYS_FLOW_TOL 5 LAT_FLOW_TOL 5 MINIMUM_STEP 0.5 THREADS 4 [EVAPORATION] ;;Type Parameters ;; CONSTANT 6 DRY_ONLY NO [RAINGAGES] ;; Rain Time Snow Data ;;Name Type Intrvl Catch Source ;; RG1 INTENSITY 0: TIMESERIES Chicago100y_3h_10m_City [SUBCATCHMENTS] ;; Total Pcnt. Pcnt. Curb Snow ;;Name Raingage Outlet Area Imperv Width Slope Length Pack ;; BIO-1 RG1 SU-Pond BIO-2 RG1 SU-Pond BLDG-A RG1 141_(C-STRM) Page 1 Post Chic 100 yr.inp BLDG-B RG1 25_(C-STRM) BLDG-C RG1 21_(C-STRM) BLDG-D RG1 23_(C-STRM) CB-1 RG1 SU-CB CB-2 RG1 SU-CB CREEK RG1 OF CREEK-2 RG1 OF EXT-1 RG1 OF-ext TRIB RG1 OF-trib [SUBAREAS] ;;Subcatchment N-Imperv N-Perv S-Imperv S-Perv PctZero RouteTo PctRouted ;; BIO OUTLET BIO OUTLET BLDG-A OUTLET BLDG-B OUTLET BLDG-C OUTLET BLDG-D OUTLET CB OUTLET CB OUTLET CREEK OUTLET CREEK OUTLET EXT OUTLET TRIB OUTLET [INFILTRATION] ;;Subcatchment MaxRate MinRate Decay DryTime MaxInfil ;; BIO BIO BLDG-A BLDG-B BLDG-C BLDG-D CB CB CREEK CREEK EXT TRIB [JUNCTIONS] ;; Invert Max. Init. Surcharge Ponded ;;Name Elev. Depth Depth Depth Area ;; _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) Page 2

79 Post Chic 100 yr.inp 15_(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) _(C-STRM) cnxn STC750_(C-STRM) [OUTFALLS] ;; Invert Outfall Stage/Table Tide ;;Name Elev. Type Time Series Gate Route To ;; HEADWALL_(C-STRM) FIXED 84 NO OF3 0 FREE NO OF-ext1 0 FREE NO OF-trib 0 FREE NO [STORAGE] ;; Invert Max. Init. Storage Curve Ponded Evap. ;;Name Elev. Depth Depth Curve Params Area Frac. Infiltration parameters ;; SU-CB TABULAR CB SU-CB TABULAR CB SU-Pond TABULAR Pond SU-Pond TABULAR Pond [CONDUITS] ;; Inlet Outlet Manning Inlet Outlet Init. Max. ;;Name Node Node Length N Offset Offset Flow Flow ;; C1 SU-CB2 SU-Pond Pipe_14_(C-STRM) 21_(C-STRM) 13_(C-STRM) Pipe_15_(C-STRM) 23_(C-STRM) 22_(C-STRM) Pipe_16_(C-STRM) 25_(C-STRM) 24_(C-STRM) Pipe_17_1 15_(C-STRM) 27_(C-STRM) Pipe_17_2 27_(C-STRM) 14_(C-STRM) Pipe_4_(1)_(C-STRM) STC750_(C-STRM) 10_(C-STRM) Pipe_4_(C-STRM) 10_(C-STRM) HEADWALL_(C-STRM) Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_1 13_(C-STRM) 22_(C-STRM) Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_2 22_(C-STRM) 12_(C-STRM) Pipe_5_(C-STRM) cnxn STC750_(C-STRM) Page 3 Post Chic 100 yr.inp Pipe_6_(C-STRM) 12_(C-STRM) cnxn Pipe_7_1 14_(C-STRM) 24_(C-STRM) Pipe_7_2 24_(C-STRM) 12_(C-STRM) Pipe_8_(C-STRM) 1_(C-STRM) 27_(C-STRM) Pipe_9_(C-STRM) 141_(C-STRM) 15_(C-STRM) [WEIRS] ;; Inlet Outlet Weir Crest Disch. Flap End End ;;Name Node Node Type Height Coeff. Gate Con. Coeff. Surcharge RoadWidth RoadSurf ;; W3 SU-CB1 SU-Pond-1 TRAPEZOIDAL NO 0 0 YES W4 SU-CB2 SU-Pond-2 TRAPEZOIDAL NO 0 0 YES [OUTLETS] ;; Inlet Outlet Outflow Outlet Qcoeff/ Flap ;;Name Node Node Height Type QTable Qexpon Gate ;; OR1 SU-CB1 1_(C-STRM) 89.2 TABULAR/HEAD IPEX_LMF-45 NO Pipe_19_(C-STRM) SU-Pond-1 cnxn 88.7 TABULAR/HEAD IPEX_LMF-45 NO Pipe_20_(C-STRM) SU-Pond-2 STC750_(C-STRM) 89.1 TABULAR/HEAD IPEX_LMF-45 NO [XSECTIONS] ;;Link Shape Geom1 Geom2 Geom3 Geom4 Barrels ;; C1 CIRCULAR Pipe_14_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_15_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_16_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_17_1 CIRCULAR Pipe_17_2 CIRCULAR Pipe_4_(1)_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_4_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_1 CIRCULAR Pipe_5_(1)_(1)_2 CIRCULAR Page 4

80 Post Chic 100 yr.inp Pipe_5_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_6_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_7_1 CIRCULAR Pipe_7_2 CIRCULAR Pipe_8_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR Pipe_9_(C-STRM) CIRCULAR W3 TRAPEZOIDAL W4 TRAPEZOIDAL [LOSSES] ;;Link Inlet Outlet Average Flap Gate SeepageRate ;; [CURVES] ;;Name Type X-Value Y-Value ;; IPEX_LMF-45 Rating 0 0 IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF IPEX_LMF CB-1 Storage 0 0 CB CB CB CB-2 Storage 0 0 CB CB CB Pond-1 Storage 0 0 Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Page 5 Post Chic 100 yr.inp Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond-2 Storage 0 0 Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Page 6

81 Post Chic 100 yr.inp Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond Pond [TIMESERIES] ;;Name Date Time Value ;; ;Ch25mm_4h_20m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 00: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 01: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 02: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: Ch25mm_4h_20m 03: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic100yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Page 7 Post Chic 100 yr.inp Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 0: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 1: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: Chic5yr_3h_10m_Climate 2: ;Chicago100y_3h_10m_City: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 00: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 01: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: Chicago100y_3h_10m_City 02: ;Chicago5y_3h_10m_City: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 0: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 1: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: Chicago5y_3h_10m_City 2: ;SCS100y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: Page 8

82 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 00: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 01: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 02: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 03: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 04: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: Page 9 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 05: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 06: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 07: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 08: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 09: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: SCS100y_12h_5m 10: Page 10

83 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100y_12h_5m 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: Page 11 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: Page 12

84 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS100yr_12h_5m_Climate 11: ;SCS25y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 00: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 01: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: Page 13 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 02: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 03: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 04: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 05: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 06: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: Page 14

85 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 07: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 08: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 09: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 10: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: Page 15 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: Page 16

86 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: Page 17 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS25y_12h_5m_Climate 11: ;SCS2y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 00: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 01: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 02: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 03: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: Page 18

87 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 04: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 05: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 06: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 07: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 08: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: Page 19 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 09: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 10: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: Page 20

88 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: Page 21 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS2y_12h_5m_Climate 11: ;SCS5y_12h_5m: Time Step(hh:mm), Intensity(mm/hr) SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 00: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: Page 22

89 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 01: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 02: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 03: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 04: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 05: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: Page 23 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 06: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 07: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 08: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 09: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 10: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: Page 24

90 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 0: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 1: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 2: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 3: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: Page 25 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 4: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 5: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 6: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 7: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 8: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 9: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: Page 26

91 Post Chic 100 yr.inp SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 10: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: SCS5y_12h_5m_Climate 11: [REPORT] INPUT YES CONTROLS NO SUBCATCHMENTS ALL NODES ALL LINKS ALL [TAGS] [MAP] DIMENSIONS UNITS Meters Page 27

92

93 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix D Geotechnical Investigation October 20, 2016 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx D.1

94

95 Geotechnical Engineering patersongroup Environmental Engineering Hydrogeology Geological Engineering Materials Testing Building Science Archaeological Services Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road Ottawa, Ontario Prepared For Urbandale Corporation Paterson Group Inc. Consulting Engineers 154 Colonnade Road South Ottawa, Ontario Canada K2E 7J5 Tel: (613) Fax: (613) August 17, 2016 Report: PG Revision 7

96 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 3.1 Field Investigation Field Survey Laboratory Testing Analytical Testing OBSERVATIONS 4.1 Surface Conditions Subsurface Profile Groundwater DISCUSSION 5.1 Geotechnical Assessment Site Grading and Preparation Foundation Design Design for Earthquakes Basement Slab Pavement Design DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRECAUTIONS 6.1 Foundation Drainage and Backfill Protection of Footings Excavation Side Slopes Pipe Bedding and Backfill Groundwater Control Winter Construction Landscaping Considerations Corrosion Potential and Sulphate Slope Stability Analysis RECOMMENDATIONS STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page i

97 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa APPENDICES Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Soil Profile and Test Data Sheet Symbols and Terms Analytical Testing Results Figure 1 - Key Plan Figures 2 to 11 - Slope Stability Sections Site Photographs Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page ii

98 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 1.0 INTRODUCTION Paterson Group (Paterson) was commissioned by Urbandale Corporation to conduct a geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential development to be located at 4450 Limebank Road in the City of Ottawa (refer to Figure 1 - Key Plan in Appendix 2). The objective of the current investigation was to: Determine the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions by means of boreholes. Provide geotechnical recommendations pertaining to design of the proposed development including construction considerations which may affect the design. The following report has been prepared specifically and solely for the aforementioned project which is described herein. It contains our findings and includes geotechnical recommendations pertaining to the design and construction of the subject development as they are understood at the time of writing this report. Investigating the presence or potential presence of contamination on the subject property was part of the scope of work of this present investigation. 2.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The parcel of land considered herein is bordered to the north, south and west by Mosquito Creek and bordered to the east by Limebank Road. It is understood that the proposed development consists of townhouse style housing blocks with paved parking areas and local roadways. It is further anticipated that the site will be serviced by municipal services. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 1

99 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 3.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION 3.1 Field Investigation The field program for the geotechnical investigation was carried out on June 2, 2005 and on December 6, On June 2, 2005, one (1) borehole (BH 10) was advanced to 6.1 m below existing ground surface. To provide additional information on the subsurface profile, two (2) additional boreholes (BH 1 and BH 2) were advanced to 9 m on December 6, All borehole locations are shown on Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands included in Appendix 2. The boreholes were put down using a track-mounted power auger drill rig operated by a two person crew. All fieldwork was conducted under the full-time supervision of our personnel under the direction of a senior engineer from our geotechnical division. The drilling procedure consisted of augering to the required depths at the selected location, and regularly sampling the overburden. Sampling and In Situ Testing Soil samples were recovered from a 50 mm diameter split-spoon and were initially classified on site. The split-spoon samples were placed in sealed plastic bags were transported to our laboratory for review. The depths at which the split-spoon samples were recovered from the boreholes are shown as SS on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheet presented in Appendix 1. The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted in conjunction with the recovery of the split spoon samples. The SPT results are recorded as N values on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets. The N value is the number of blows required to drive the split-spoon sampler 300 mm into the soil after a 150 mm initial penetration using a 63.5 kg hammer falling from a height of 760 mm. Undrained shear strength testing, using a vane apparatus, was carried out in cohesive soils. The subsurface conditions observed in the boreholes was recorded in detail in the field. The soil profile is presented on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets in Appendix 1 of this report. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 2

100 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Groundwater Flexible standpipes were installed in the boreholes completed as part of the current investigation to monitor the groundwater levels subsequent to the completion of the sampling program. Sample Storage All samples will be stored in the laboratory for a period of one month after issuance of this report. They will then be discarded unless we are otherwise directed. 3.2 Field Survey Test hole locations were laid out and surveyed by Paterson. Test hole locations and ground surface elevations at the test hole locations are presented in Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands in Appendix Laboratory Testing All soil samples were recovered from the subject site and visually examined in our laboratory to review the results of the field logging. 3.4 Analytical Testing One (1) soil sample was submitted for analytical testing to assess the corrosion potential for exposed ferrous metals and the potential of sulphate attacks against subsurface concrete structures. The sample was submitted to determine the concentration of sulphate and chloride, the resistivity and the ph of the soil. The analytical test results are presented in Appendix 1 and discussed in Subsection 6.8 of this report. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 3

101 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 4.0 OBSERVATIONS 4.1 Surface Conditions A recent site visit was completed by Paterson in May 2012 to confirm the current site conditions. Relevant photographs from our site visit are presented in Appendix 2. The majority of the subject slopes were noted to be treed and in stable condition. In areas where the watercourse has meandered in close proximity to the valley corridor wall, active erosion was observed at the slope toe. In several areas, significant slope slips and sloughing were observed. The recent re-alignment of Limebank Road has altered the location of the tributary watercourse and slope face adjacent to the new roadway embankment. The first 35 m of the watercourse immediately west of the embankment face has been re-aligned with a 2 to 3 m wide watercourse, which is rip-rap lined with 0.5 m high banks covered with an erosion control blanket over both bank faces, as part of the road work program. The majority of the subject slope face was noted to be densely treed and in a stable condition with no signs of active erosion. 4.2 Subsurface Profile Generally, the subsurface profile encountered at the borehole locations consists of topsoil over a very stiff to stiff brown silty clay crust to a depth of approximately 5 m underlain by a grey firm to stiff silty clay layer. Practical refusal to DCPT completed at BH 2 extended to a 11.3 m depth. Specific details of the soil profiles encountered at the test hole locations are presented on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets in Appendix 1. Based on available geological mapping the bedrock surface in this area is encountered at depths varying between 10 and 25 m and consists of sandstone and dolomite of the March formation. 4.3 Groundwater Flexible standpipe was installed in the open boreholes upon completion of the sampling program on June 2, 2005 and December 5 and 6, The measured groundwater level observed in BH 10 on June 6, 2012 was at a 5.8 m depth. The measured groundwater levels observed on December 18, 2012, in BH 1 and BH 2, were at 2.80 and 2.03 m depth, respectively. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 4

102 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa It is important to note that groundwater level readings could be influenced by surface water infiltrating the backfilled borehole, which can lead to higher water levels than noted during the investigation. The long-term groundwater level can also be estimated based on moisture levels and colour of the recovered soil samples. Based on these observations at the borehole locations, the long-term groundwater level is expected at a 5 m depth. Groundwater levels are subject to seasonal fluctuations and therefore levels could differ at the time of construction. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 5

103 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 5.0 DISCUSSION 5.1 Geotechnical Assessment From a geotechnical perspective, the subject site is adequate for the proposed development. It is expected that the proposed residential development will be founded on conventional style footings placed on an undisturbed, very stiff to stiff brown silty clay bearing surface. A 1.5 m permissible grade raise restriction is recommended for housing due to the presence of the silty clay deposit. The geotechnical limit of hazard lands setback line is presented in Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands in Appendix 2. The results of our slope stability analysis and discussion on the limit of hazard lands setback line are presented in Subsection 6.9. The above and other considerations are discussed in the following paragraphs. 5.2 Site Grading and Preparation Stripping Depth Topsoil, and any deleterious fill, such as those containing organic materials, should be stripped from under any proposed buildings and other settlement sensitive structures. Fill Placement Fill used for grading purposes beneath the proposed buildings, unless otherwise specified, should consist of clean imported granular fill, such as Ontario Provincial Standard Specifications (OPSS) Granular A or Granular B Type II. The fill should be tested and approved prior to delivery to the site. It should be placed in lifts no greater than 300 mm in thickness and compacted using suitable compaction equipment for the specified lift thickness. Fill placed beneath the building areas should be compacted to at least 98% of the standard Proctor maximum dry density (SPMDD). Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 6

104 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Non-specified existing fill along with site-excavated soil can be used as general landscaping fill where settlement of the ground surface is of minor concern. These materials should be spread in thin lifts and be compacted at minimum by the tracks of the spreading equipment to minimize voids. If these materials are to be used to build up the subgrade level for areas to be paved, they should be compacted in thin lifts to a minimum density of 95% of the SPMDD. Non-specified existing fill and site-excavated soils are not suitable for use as backfill against foundation walls, unless used in conjunction with a composite drainage system. 5.3 Foundation Design Strip footings, up to 3 m wide, and pad footings, up to 5 m wide, placed in an undisturbed, stiff silty clay bearing surface can be designed using a bearing resistance value at SLS of 100 kpa and a factored bearing resistance value at ULS of 175 kpa. An undisturbed soil bearing surface consists of one from which all topsoil and deleterious materials, such as loose, frozen or disturbed soil, have been removed prior to the placement of concrete for footings. The bearing resistance value given for footings at SLS will be subjected to potential post construction total and differential settlements of 25 and 20 mm, respectively. Lateral Support The bearing medium under footing-supported structures is required to be provided with adequate lateral support with respect to excavations and different foundation levels. Above the groundwater level, adequate lateral support is provided to a stiff silty clay, or engineered fill when a plane extending down and out from the bottom edge of the footing at a minimum of 1.5H:1V passes only through in situ soil or engineered fill. Permissible Grade Raise Recommendations Consideration must be given to potential settlements which could occur due to the presence of the silty clay deposit and the combined loads from the proposed footings, any groundwater lowering effects, and grade raise fill. The foundation loads to be considered for the settlement case are the continuously applied loads which consist of the unfactored dead loads and the portion of the unfactored live load that is considered to be continuously applied. A minimum value of 50% of the live load is often recommended by Paterson. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 7

105 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa A permissible grade raise restriction of 1.5 m is recommended for the subject site based on the results of the undrained shear strength testing completed within the underlying cohesive soils. A post-development groundwater lowering of 0.5 m was considered in our permissible grade raise restriction calculations. 5.4 Design for Earthquakes The site class for seismic site response can be taken as Class D for the foundations considered at this site. The soils underlying the proposed shallow foundations are not susceptible to liquefaction. Reference should be made to the latest revision of the 2006 Ontario Building Code for a full discussion of the earthquake design requirements. 5.5 Basement Slab With the removal of all topsoil and deleterious fill, if any, within the footprint of the proposed buildings, the native soil surface will be considered to be an acceptable subgrade on which to commence backfilling for floor slab construction. Any soft areas should be removed and backfilled with appropriate backfill material prior to placing any fill. OPSS Granular B Type II, with a maximum particle size of 50 mm, are recommended for backfilling below the floor slab. It is recommended that the upper 200 mm of sub-floor fill consists of 19 mm clear crushed stone. All backfill material within the footprint of the proposed buildings should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick loose layers and compacted to at least 98% of its SPMDD. 5.6 Pavement Design Car only parking and local roadways are anticipated at this site. The proposed pavement structures are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 - Recommended Pavement Structure - Car Only Parking Areas/Driveways Thickness (mm) Material Description 50 Wear Course - HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete 150 BASE - OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone 300 SUBBASE - OPSS Granular B Type II SUBGRADE - Either fill, in situ soil, or OPSS Granular B Type I or II material placed over in situ soil or fill Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 8

106 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Table 2 - Recommended Pavement Structure - Local Roadways Thickness (mm) Material Description 40 Wear Course - HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete 50 Binder Course - HL-8 or Superpave 19.0 Asphaltic Concrete 150 BASE - OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone 400 SUBBASE - OPSS Granular B Type II SUBGRADE - Either fill, in situ soil, or OPSS Granular B Type I or II material placed over in situ soil or fill Minimum Performance Graded (PG) asphalt cement should be used for this project. If soft spots develop in the subgrade during compaction or due to construction traffic, the affected areas should be excavated and replaced with OPSS Granular B Type I or II material. Weak subgrade conditions may be experienced over service trench fill materials. This may require the use of a woven geotextile, such as a Terratrack 200 or Thrace LINQ GTF250, thicker subbase or other measures that can be recommended at the time of construction as part of the field observation program. The pavement granular base and subbase should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick lifts and compacted to a minimum of 100% of the material s SPMDD using suitable vibratory equipment. Pavement Structure Drainage Satisfactory performance of the pavement structure is largely dependent on the contact zone between the subgrade material and the base stone in a dry condition. Failure to provide adequate drainage under conditions of heavy wheel loading can result in the fine subgrade soil being pumped into the voids in the stone subbase, thereby reducing load carrying capacity. Consideration should be given to installing subdrains at each catch basin. These drains should be at least 3 m long and should extend in four orthogonal directions or longitudinally when placed along a curb. The subdrain inverts should be approximately 300 mm below subgrade level. The subgrade surface should be crowned to promote water flow to the drainage lines. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 9

107 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 6.0 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRECAUTIONS 6.1 Foundation Drainage and Backfill It is recommended that a perimeter foundation drainage system be provided for the proposed structures. The system should consist of a 100 to 150 mm diameter perforated corrugated plastic pipe, surrounded on all sides by 150 mm of 10 mm clear crushed stone, placed at the footing level around the exterior perimeter of the structure. The pipe should have a positive outlet, such as a gravity connection to the storm sewer. Backfill against the exterior sides of the foundation walls should consist of free-draining non frost susceptible granular materials. The greater part of the site excavated materials will be frost susceptible and, as such, are not recommended for re-use as backfill against the foundation walls, unless used in conjunction with a composite drainage system. Imported granular materials, such as clean sand or OPSS Granular B Type I granular material, should be used for this purpose. 6.2 Protection of Footings Against Frost Action Perimeter footings of heated structures are required to be insulated against the deleterious effect of frost action. A minimum of 1.5 m thick soil cover (or equivalent) should be provided in this regard. A minimum of 2.1 m thick soil cover (or equivalent) should be provided for other exterior unheated footings. 6.3 Excavation Side Slopes The side slopes of excavations in the soil and fill overburden materials should be either cut back to acceptable slopes or should be retained by shoring systems from the start of the excavation until the structure is backfilled. It is assumed that sufficient room will be available for the greater part of the excavation to be undertaken by open-cut methods (i.e. unsupported excavations). The excavation side slopes above the groundwater level extending to a maximum depth of 3 m should be cut back at 1H:1V or flatter. The flatter slope is required for excavation below groundwater level. The subsurface soil is considered to be mainly a Type 2 and 3 soil according to the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations for Construction Projects. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 10

108 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Excavated soil should not be stockpiled directly at the top of excavations and heavy equipment should be kept away from the excavation sides. Slopes in excess of 3 m in height should be periodically inspected by the geotechnical consultant in order to detect if the slopes are exhibiting signs of distress. It is recommended that a trench box be used at all times to protect personnel working in trenches with steep or vertical sides. It is expected that services will be installed by cut and cover methods and excavations will not be left open for extended periods of time. 6.4 Pipe Bedding and Backfill At least 150 mm of OPSS Granular A should be used for pipe bedding for sewer and water pipes. The bedding should extend to the spring line of the pipe. Cover material, from the spring line to at least 300 mm above the obvert of the pipe should consist of OPSS Granular A. The bedding and cover materials should be placed in maximum 225 mm thick lifts compacted to a minimum of 98% of the material s SPMDD. Generally, it should be possible to re-use the moist (not wet) silty clay above the cover material if the excavation and filling operations are carried out in dry weather conditions. Wet silty clay should be given a sufficient drying period to decrease its moisture content to an acceptable level to make compaction possible prior to being reused. The silty clay, when wet, will be difficult to reuse due to its high fines content which makes compacting this material without an extensive drying period impractical. Trench backfill material within the frost zone (approximately 1.8 m below finished grade) should match the soils exposed at the trench walls to reduce differential frost heaving. The trench backfill should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95% of the SPMDD. 6.5 Groundwater Control The contractor should be prepared to direct water away from all bearing surfaces and subgrades, regardless of the source, to prevent disturbance to the founding medium. The rate of flow of groundwater into the excavation through the overburden should be low. It is anticipated that pumping from open sumps will be sufficient to control the groundwater influx through the sides of the excavations. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 11

109 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa A temporary MOE permit to take water (PTTW) will be required for this project if more than 50,000 L/day are to be pumped during the construction phase. At least 5 to 6 months should be allowed for completion of the application and issuance of the permit by the MOE. 6.6 Winter Construction Precautions must be taken if winter construction is considered for this project. The subsurface soil conditions consist of frost susceptible materials. In the presence of water and freezing conditions, ice could form within the soil mass. Heaving and settlement upon thawing could occur. In the event of construction during below zero temperatures, the founding stratum should be protected from freezing temperatures by the use of straw, propane heaters and tarpaulins or other suitable means. In this regard, the base of the excavations should be insulated from sub-zero temperatures immediately upon exposure and until such time as heat is adequately supplied to the building and the footings are protected with sufficient soil cover to prevent freezing at founding level. Trench excavations and pavement construction are also difficult activities to complete during freezing conditions without introducing frost in the subgrade or in the excavation walls and bottoms. Precautions should be taken if such activities are to be conducted during freezing conditions. Additional information could be provided, if required. 6.7 Landscaping Considerations Tree Planting Restrictions The proposed residential dwellings are located in a low sensitivity area with respect to tree plantings over a silty clay deposit. It is recommended that trees placed within 5 m of the foundation wall consist of low water demanding trees with shallow roots systems that extend less than 1.5 m below ground surface. Trees placed greater than 5 m from the foundation wall may consist of typical street trees, which are typically moderate water demand species with roots extending to a maximum depth of 2 m below ground surface. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 12

110 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa It is well documented in the literature, and is our experience, that fast-growing trees located near buildings founded on cohesive soils that shrink on drying can result in long-term differential settlements of the structures. Tree varieties that have the most pronounced effect on foundations are seen to consist of poplars, willows and some maples (i.e. Manitoba Maples) and, as such, they should not be considered in the landscaping design. Exterior Structures The in-situ soils are considered to be acceptable for in-ground swimming pools. Above ground swimming pools must be placed at least 3 m away from the residence foundation and neighbouring foundations. Otherwise, pool construction is considered routine, and can be constructed in accordance with the manufacturer`s requirements. Exterior structures, such as hot tubs and deck additions, are acceptable for construction from a geotechnical perspective. 6.8 Corrosion Potential and Sulphate The results of analytical testing show that the sulphate content is less than 0.1%. This result is indicative that Type 10 Portland cement (normal cement) would be appropriate for this site. The chloride content and the ph of the sample indicate that they are not significant factors in creating a corrosive environment for exposed ferrous metals at this site, whereas the resistivity is indicative of an non-aggressive to slightly aggressive corrosive environment. 6.9 Slope Stability Analysis Five (5) slope cross-sections were studied as the worst case scenario for the subject slopes. The cross section locations are presented on Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands presented in Appendix 2. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 13

111 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa The analysis of the stability of the upper slope was carried out using SLIDE, a computer program which permits a two-dimensional slope stability analysis using several methods including the Bishop s method, which is a widely used and accepted analysis method. The program calculates a factor of safety, which represents the ratio of the forces resisting failure to those favoring failure. Theoretically, a factor of safety of 1.0 represents a condition where the slope is stable. However, due to intrinsic limitations of the calculation methods and the variability of the subsoil and groundwater conditions, a factor of safety greater than one is usually required to ascertain than the risks of failure are acceptable. A minimum factor of safety of 1.5 is generally recommended for conditions where the failure of the slope would endanger permanent structures. An analysis considering seismic loading was also completed. A horizontal acceleration of 0.21G was considered for the sections for the seismic loading condition. A factor of safety of 1.1 is considered to be satisfactory for stability analyses including seismic loading. Subsoil conditions at the cross-section were inferred based on the nearby boreholes and general knowledge of the area s geology. The strength parameters used for the analysis are provided in the attached Figures 2 to 11. Stable Slope Allowance The static analysis results for Sections A, B, C, D and E are presented in Figures 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 presented in Appendix 2. The factor of safety for the slopes was greater than 1.5 for Sections B and D. However, Sections A, C and E require a stable slope allowance due the slope stability factor of safety being less than 1.5. Based on our analysis, the slopes are stable under static conditions. The results of the analyses including seismic loading are shown in Figures 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11 for the slope sections. The results indicate that the factor of safety for the sections are greater than 1.1. Based on these results, the slopes are considered to be stable under seismic loading. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 14

112 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Toe Erosion and Erosion Access Allowance The toe erosion allowance for the valley corridor wall slopes was based on the cohesive nature of the soils, the observed current erosional activities and the width and location of the current watercourse. Signs of erosion were noted along the existing tributary watercourse and subject section of Mosquito Creek especially as the watercourses have meandered in close proximity to the toe of the corridor wall. It is considered that a toe erosion allowance of 8 m is appropriate for areas where the watercourse has meandered within close proximity (less than 2 m) from the slope toe. Otherwise, a toe erosion allowance of 2 m is recommended where the watercourse has meandered away from the slope toe. A 6 m erosion access allowance is recommended to be applied from the top of stable slope for the subject slopes. Limit of Hazard Lands The limit of hazard lands setback line for the proposed development is presented in Drawing PG Limit of Hazard Lands in Appendix 2. The limit of hazard lands line includes a 6 m erosion access allowance taken from the top of slope, as well as the applicable toe erosion allowance and stable slope allowance, where required. It is understood that consideration is being given to constructing two dry ponds within the limit of hazard lands line. Paterson reviewed the following plans prepared by Stantec as part of our investigation: Project No , Drawing No. GP-1, Grading Plan, Revision 1 dated August 12, Project No , Drawing No. SSP-1, Site Servicing Plan, Revision 1 dated August 12, Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 15

113 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa Based on our review of the abovenoted plans, the bio-swale structure grading and armour stone retaining wall segments will not prevent construction equipment from accessing the slope face to complete slope repairs, if required. It should be noted that the presence of the ponds and bio-swale structures during a 100 year storm event will not negatively impact the overall slope stability and adjacent building foundations. Both pond locations require the removal of existing soil, which will increase the overall slope stability and under the 100 year storm event when the ponds are full of water, the area should still be considered a pressure relief zone, since the unit weight of water is less than the unit weight of soil. It should be noted that the ponds are located adjacent to slopes, which are considered to be very stable with profiles varying between 2.6H:1V to 3H:1V and slope stability factors of safety of greater than 1.5 for fully saturated static conditions and slope stability factors of safety of greater than 1.1 for seismic loading conditions. Based on our review of the details, the proposed pond locations and bio-swale structures are considered acceptable from a geotechnical perspective. It is recommended that the existing vegetation and mature trees not be removed from the slope face as the presence of the vegetation reduces surficial erosion activities. If the existing vegetation needs to be removed along the slope face, it is recommended that a 100 to 150 mm of topsoil mixed with a hardy seed or an erosional control blanket be placed across the exposed slope face. Minimum Setback Requirements of the Official Plan Minimum setbacks have been established by Council for the Official Plan for rivers, lakes, streams and other surface water features. It should be noted that where a council-approved watershed, sub-watershed or environmental management plan does not exist, the minimum setback will be the greater of the following: Development limits as established by the regulatory flood line Development limits as established by the geotechnical limit of the hazard lands 30 m from normal high water mark of rivers, lakes and streams as determined in consultation with the conservation authority, or 15 m from existing top of bank, where there is a defined bank. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 16

114 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS It is a requirement for the foundation design data provided herein to be applicable that the following material testing and observation program be performed by the geotechnical consultant. Observation of all bearing surfaces prior to the placement of concrete. Sampling and testing of the concrete and fill materials used. Periodic observation of the condition of unsupported excavation side slopes in excess of 3 m in height, if applicable. Observation of all subgrade prior to backfilling Field density tests to determine the level of compaction achieved. Sampling and testing of the bituminous concrete including mix design reviews. A report confirming that these works have been conducted in general accordance with our recommendations could be issued upon the completion of a satisfactory inspection program by the geotechnical consultant. Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 17

115 patersongroup Ottawa Kingston North Bay Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road - Ottawa 8.0 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS The recommendations made in this report are in accordance with our present understanding of the project. We request that we be permitted to review the grading plan once available. Also, our recommendations should be reviewed when the project drawings and specifications are complete. A soils investigation is a limited sampling of a site. Should any conditions at the site be encountered which differ from those at the test hole location, we request that we be notified immediately in order to permit reassessment of our recommendations. The present report applies only to the project described in this document. Use of this report for purposes other than those described herein or by person(s) other than Urbandale Corporation or their agent(s) is not authorized without review by this firm for the applicability of our recommendations to the altered use of the report. Paterson Group Inc. Richard Groniger, C. Tech. Aug. 15, 2016 David J. Gilbert, P.Eng. Report Distribution: Urbandale Corporation (3 copies) Paterson Group (1 copy) Report: PG Revision 7 August 15, 2016 Page 18

116 APPENDIX 1 SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA SHEET SYMBOLS AND TERMS ANALYTICAL TEST RESULTS

117 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Consulting Engineers Geotechnical Investigation 4450 Limebank Road Ottawa, Ontario Ground surface elevations at borehole locations interpolated based on topographic mapping. Geo Probe DATE SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA December 6, 2012 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG2692 BH 1 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL Brown SILTY CLAY with rootlets STRATA PLOT TYPE SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH (m) 0 ELEV. (m) Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction SS Very stiff to stiff, brown SILTY CLAY - with sand seams by 1.8m depth SS SS SS firm and grey by 4.8m depth stiff by 6.7m depth End of Borehole Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

118 patersongroup 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5 DATUM REMARKS BORINGS BY Consulting Engineers DATE Geotechnical Investigation 4450 Limebank Road Ottawa, Ontario Ground surface elevations at borehole locations interpolated based on topographic mapping. Geo Probe SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA December 6, 2012 FILE NO. HOLE NO. PG2692 BH 2 SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUND SURFACE TOPSOIL Brown SILTY CLAY with rootlets STRATA PLOT TYPE SS SAMPLE NUMBER % RECOVERY N VALUE or RQD DEPTH (m) 0 ELEV. (m) Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m 50 mm Dia. Cone Water Content % Piezometer Construction SS SS Very stiff, brown SILTY CLAY with sand seams SS SS SS Stiff, brown SILTY CLAY firm to stiff and grey by 5.2m depth Dynamic Cone Penetration Test commenced at 8.53m depth End of Borehole Practical DCPT refusal at 11.25m depth Shear Strength (kpa) Undisturbed Remoulded

119

120 SYMBOLS AND TERMS SOIL DESCRIPTION Behavioural properties, such as structure and strength, take precedence over particle gradation in describing soils. Terminology describing soil structure are as follows: Desiccated - having visible signs of weathering by oxidation of clay minerals, shrinkage cracks, etc. Fissured - having cracks, and hence a blocky structure. Varved - composed of regular alternating layers of silt and clay. Stratified - composed of alternating layers of different soil types, e.g. silt and sand or silt and clay. Well-Graded - Having wide range in grain sizes and substantial amounts of all intermediate particle sizes (see Grain Size Distribution). Uniformly-Graded - Predominantly of one grain size (see Grain Size Distribution). The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesionless soils is the relative density, usually inferred from the results of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N value. The SPT N value is the number of blows of a 63.5 kg hammer, falling 760 mm, required to drive a 51 mm O.D. split spoon sampler 300 mm into the soil after an initial penetration of 150 mm. Relative Density N Value Relative Density % Very Loose <4 <15 Loose Compact Dense Very Dense >50 >85 The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesive soils is the consistency, which is based on the undisturbed undrained shear strength as measured by the in situ or laboratory vane tests, penetrometer tests, unconfined compression tests, or occasionally by Standard Penetration Tests. Consistency Undrained Shear Strength (kpa) N Value Very Soft <12 <2 Soft Firm Stiff Very Stiff Hard >200 >30

121 SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued) SOIL DESCRIPTION (continued) Cohesive soils can also be classified according to their sensitivity. The sensitivity is the ratio between the undisturbed undrained shear strength and the remoulded undrained shear strength of the soil. Terminology used for describing soil strata based upon texture, or the proportion of individual particle sizes present is provided on the Textural Soil Classification Chart at the end of this information package. ROCK DESCRIPTION The structural description of the bedrock mass is based on the Rock Quality Designation (RQD). The RQD classification is based on a modified core recovery percentage in which all pieces of sound core over 100 mm long are counted as recovery. The smaller pieces are considered to be a result of closelyspaced discontinuities (resulting from shearing, jointing, faulting, or weathering) in the rock mass and are not counted. RQD is ideally determined from NXL size core. However, it can be used on smaller core sizes, such as BX, if the bulk of the fractures caused by drilling stresses (called mechanical breaks ) are easily distinguishable from the normal in situ fractures. RQD % ROCK QUALITY Excellent, intact, very sound Good, massive, moderately jointed or sound Fair, blocky and seamy, fractured Poor, shattered and very seamy or blocky, severely fractured 0-25 Very poor, crushed, very severely fractured SAMPLE TYPES SS - Split spoon sample (obtained in conjunction with the performing of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT)) TW - Thin wall tube or Shelby tube PS - Piston sample AU - Auger sample or bulk sample WS - Wash sample RC - Rock core sample (Core bit size AXT, BXL, etc.). Rock core samples are obtained with the use of standard diamond drilling bits.

122 SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION MC% - Natural moisture content or water content of sample, % LL - Liquid Limit, % (water content above which soil behaves as a liquid) PL - Plastic limit, % (water content above which soil behaves plastically) PI - Plasticity index, % (difference between LL and PL) Dxx - Grain size which xx% of the soil, by weight, is of finer grain sizes These grain size descriptions are not used below mm grain size D10 - Grain size at which 10% of the soil is finer (effective grain size) D60 - Grain size at which 60% of the soil is finer Cc - Concavity coefficient = (D30) 2 / (D10 x D60) Cu - Uniformity coefficient = D60 / D10 Cc and Cu are used to assess the grading of sands and gravels: Well-graded gravels have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 4 Well-graded sands have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 6 Sands and gravels not meeting the above requirements are poorly-graded or uniformly-graded. Cc and Cu are not applicable for the description of soils with more than 10% silt and clay (more than 10% finer than mm or the #200 sieve) CONSOLIDATION TEST p o - Present effective overburden pressure at sample depth p c - Preconsolidation pressure of (maximum past pressure on) sample Ccr - Recompression index (in effect at pressures below p c ) Cc - Compression index (in effect at pressures above p c ) OC Ratio Overconsolidaton ratio = p c / p o Void Ratio Initial sample void ratio = volume of voids / volume of solids Wo - Initial water content (at start of consolidation test) PERMEABILITY TEST k - Coefficient of permeability or hydraulic conductivity is a measure of the ability of water to flow through the sample. The value of k is measured at a specified unit weight for (remoulded) cohesionless soil samples, because its value will vary with the unit weight or density of the sample during the test.

123

124 Cer ficate of Analysis Order #: Report Date: 14 Dec 2012 Client: Paterson Group Consul ng Engineers Order Date:12 Dec 2012 Client PO: Project Descrip on: PG2692 Client ID: PG2692 BH2-SS Sample Date: 06-Dec Sample ID: MDL/Units Soil Physical Characteristics % Solids 0.1 % by Wt General Inorganics ph 0.05 ph Units Resistivity 0.10 Ohm.m Anions Chloride 5 ug/g dry < Sulphate 5 ug/g dry Page 3 of 7

125 APPENDIX 2 FIGURE 1 - KEY PLAN FIGURES 2 TO 11 - SLOPE STABILITY SECTIONS SITE PHOTOGRAPHS DRAWING PG LIMIT OF HAZARD LANDS

126 FIGURE 1 KEY PLAN SITE

127 Erosion Access Allowance 6.0 m 15.1 m W Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 6 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Figure 2 - Section A - Static Conditions Limit of Hazard Lands Toe Erosion Allowance 8.0 m Stable Slope Allowance 1.1 m Top of Slope Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 11 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Tributary Watercourse to Mosquito Creek Safety Factor Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees 75 Bedrock Unit Weight: 22 kn/m

128 Safety Factor W Silty clay crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 120 kpa Figure 3 - Section A - Seismic Loading Top of Slope Grey silty clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Tributary Watercourse to Mosquito Creek Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees Bedrock Unit Weight: 22 kn/m

129 Safety Factor Figure 4 - Section B - Static Conditions Limit of Hazard Lands 8.0 m Erosion Access Allowance Toe Erosion 6.0 m Allowance 2.0 m Top of Slope W Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 6 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 11 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Tributary Watercourse to Mosquito Creek Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

130 Safety Factor Figure 5 - Section B - Seismic Loading Top of Slope W Silty clay crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 120 kpa Grey silty clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Tributary Watercourse to Mosquito Creek W Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

131 Safety Factor Erosion Access Allowance 6.0 m W Limit of Hazard Lands 19.1 m Toe Erosion Allowance 8.0 m Figure 6 - Section C - Static Conditions Stable Slope Allowance 5.1 m Top of Slope Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 6 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Mosquito Creek Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 11 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees 75 Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

132 Safety Factor Figure 7 - Section C - Seismic Loading Top of Slope 0.21 W 90 Silty clay crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 120 kpa Mosquito Creek W Grey silty clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa 75 Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

133 Safety Factor W Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 6 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Figure 8 - Section D - Static Conditions Top of Slope Mosquito Creek Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 11 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

134 Safety Factor Figure 9 - Section D - Seismic Loading 0.21 Top of Slope 90 W Silty clay crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 120 kpa Mosquito Creek W 80 Grey silty clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

135 Safety Factor m Limit of Hazard Lands 16.5 m Erosion Access Allowance 8.0 m Figure 10 - Section E - Static Conditions Toe Erosion Allowance Stable Slope Allowance 2.5 m Top of Slope W Brown Silty Clay Crust Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 6 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Grey Silty Clay Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion: 11 kpa Friction Angle: 33 degrees Mosquito Creek 75 Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

136 Safety Factor Figure 11 - Section E - Seismic Loading 0.21 Top of Slope W Silty clay crust Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 120 kpa Grey silty clay Strength Type: Undrained Unit Weight: 17 kn/m3 Cohesion Type: Constant Cohesion: 50 kpa Mosquito Creek W Glacial Till Unit Weight: 20 kn/m3 Cohesion: 1 kpa Friction Angle: 38 degrees

137 B E F G H I A J K L A G M N K P G G A Q R Q I G E K A I G H O K I Q F H G K S A O F R T A I O U V I A K O T O P K F G O K H T G S X Y C Z K A I F G F G H V I Q Q P A O T L A T O K O D F [ K R I G E I S O K I Q F H G [ K G A I G S O K I Q F H G K S A O F R T A I O U V I A K O T O P K X!! " # $ % " # & ' ( ) * + ( ( ", " * +! ( " -. * / : ; < 8 : = 4

138 \ E F G H I A A O F R T A I O U V I A K O T O P K I A W J K L A G ^ X _ E F G H I A J K L A G ` I G H P b T F ` O K K E X!! " # $ % " # & ' ( ) * + ( ( ", " * +! ( " -. * / : ; < 8 : = 4

139 c E F G H I A J K L A G d X e ] J T H? F G W P f K I A J K L A G g X!! " # $ % " # & ' ( ) * + ( ( ", " * +! ( " -. * / : ; < 8 : = 4

140

141 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix E Product Specifications October 20, 2016 PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx E.1

142

143 Technical Manual Table of Content 1. About Stormceptor Distribution Network Patent Information Contact Imbrium Systems Stormceptor Design Overview Design Philosophy Benefits Environmental Benefit Key Operation Features Scour Prevention Operational Hydraulic Loading Rate Double Wall Containment Stormceptor Product Line Stormceptor Models Inline Stormceptor Inlet Stormceptor Series Stormceptor Sizing the Stormceptor System PCSWMM for Stormceptor Sediment Loading Characteristics Spill Controls Oil Level Alarm Increased Volume Storage Capacity Stormceptor Options Installation Depth / Minimum Cover Maximum Inlet and Outlet Pipe Diameters Bends Multiple Inlet Pipes Inlet/Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Shallow Stormceptor Customized Live Load Pre-treatment Head loss Submerged Comparing Technologies Particle Size Distribution (PSD) Scour Prevention Hydraulics Hydrology Testing Installation Excavation Backfilling Stormceptor Construction Sequence Maintenance Health and Safety Maintenance Procedures Submerged Stormceptor Hydrocarbon Spills Disposal Oil Sheens i

144 Technical Manual 1. About Stormceptor The Stormceptor (Standard Treatment Cell) was developed by Imbrium Systems to address the growing need to remove and isolate pollution from the storm drain system before it enters the environment. The Stormceptor STC targets hydrocarbons and total suspended solids (TSS) in stormwater runoff. It improves water quality by removing contaminants through the gravitational settling of fine sediments and floatation of hydrocarbons while preventing the re-suspension or scour of previously captured pollutants. The development of the Stormceptor STC revolutionized stormwater treatment, and created an entirely new category of environmental technology. Protecting thousands of waterways around the world, the Stormceptor System has set the standard for effective stormwater treatment Distribution Network Imbrium Systems has partnered with a global network of affiliates who manufacture and distribute the Stormceptor System. Canada Ontario Québec New Brunswick / Prince Edward Island Newfoundland / Nova Scotia Western Canada British Columbia Hanson Pipe & Precast Ltd Lécuyer et Fils Ltée Strescon Limited Strescon Limited Lafarge Canada Inc. Langley Concrete Group (800) (506) (902) (888) (604)

145 Technical Manual 1.2. Patent Information The Stormceptor technology is protected by the following patents: Australia Patent No. 693, , , Austrian Patent No Canadian Patent No 2,009,208 2,137,942 2,175,277 2,180,305 2,180,383 2,206,338 2,327,768 (Pending) China Patent No Denmark DK German DE Indonesian Patent No Japan Patent No (Pending) Korea (Pending) Malaysia Patent No PI (Pending) New Zealand Patent No United States Patent No 4,985,148 5,498,331 5,725,760 5,753,115 5,849,181 6,068,765 6,371,690 Stormceptor OSR Patent Pending Stormceptor LCS Patent Pending 1.3. Contact Imbrium Systems Contact us today if you require more information on other products: Imbrium Systems Inc. 2 St. Clair Ave. West Suite 2100 Toronto, On M4V 1L5 T info@imbriumsystems.com 2. Stormceptor Design Overview 2.1. Design Philosophy The patented Stormceptor System has been designed focus on the environmental objective of providing long-term pollution control. The unique and innovative Stormceptor design allows for continuous positive treatment of runoff during all rainfall events, while ensuring that all captured pollutants are retained within the system, even during intense storm events. An integral part of the Stormceptor design is PCSWMM for Stormceptor - sizing software developed in conjunction with Computational Hydraulics Inc. (CHI) and internationally acclaimed expert, Dr. Bill James. Using local historical rainfall data and continuous simulation modeling, this software allows a Stormceptor unit to be designed for each individual site and the corresponding water quality objectives. 2

146 Technical Manual By using PCSWMM for Stormceptor, the Stormceptor System can be designed to remove a wide range of particles (typically from 20 to 2,000 microns), and can also be customized to remove a specific particle size distribution (PSD). The specified PSD should accurately reflect what is in the stormwater runoff to ensure the device is achieving the desired water quality objective. Since stormwater runoff contains small particles (less than 75 microns), it is important to design a treatment system to remove smaller particles in addition to coarse particles Benefits The Stormceptor System removes free oil and suspended solids from stormwater, preventing spills and non-point source pollution from entering downstream lakes and rivers. The key benefits, capabilities and applications of the Stormceptor System are as follows: Provides continuous positive treatment during all rainfall events Can be designed to remove over 80% of the annual sediment load Removes a wide range of particles Can be designed to remove a specific particle size distribution (PSD) Captures free oil from stormwater Prevents scouring or re-suspension of trapped pollutants Pre-treatment to reduce maintenance costs for downstream treatment measures (ponds, swales, detention basins, filters) Groundwater recharge protection Spills capture and mitigation Simple to design and specify Designed to your local watershed conditions Small footprint to allow for easy retrofit installations Easy to maintain (vacuum truck) Multiple inlets can connect to a single unit Suitable as a bend structure Pre-engineered for traffic loading (minimum CHBDC) Minimal elevation drop between inlet and outlet pipes Small head loss Additional protection provided by an 18 (457 mm) fiberglass skirt below the top of the insert, for the containment of hydrocarbons in the event of a spill Environmental Benefit Freshwater resources are vital to the health and welfare of their surrounding communities. There is increasing public awareness, government regulations and corporate commitment to reducing the pollution entering our waterways. A major source of this pollution originates from stormwater runoff from urban areas. Rainfall runoff carries oils, sediment and other contaminants from roads and parking lots discharging directly into our streams, lakes and coastal waterways. The Stormceptor System is designed to isolate contaminants from getting into the natural environment. The Stormceptor technology provides protection for the environment from spills that occur at service stations and vehicle accident sites, while also removing contaminated sediment in runoff that washes from roads and parking lots. 3

147 Technical Manual 3. Key Operation Features 3.1. Scour Prevention A key feature of the Stormceptor System is its patented scour prevention technology. This innovation ensures pollutants are captured and retained during all rainfall events, even extreme storms. The Stormceptor System provides continuous positive treatment for all rainfall events, including intense storms. Stormceptor slows incoming runoff, controlling and reducing velocities in the lower chamber to create a non-turbulent environment that promotes free oils and floatable debris to rise and sediment to settle. The patented scour prevention technology, the fiberglass insert, regulates flows into the lower chamber through a combination of a weir and orifice while diverting high energy flows away through the upper chamber to prevent scouring. Laboratory testing demonstrated no scouring when tested up to 125% of the unit s operating rate, with the unit loaded to 100% sediment capacity (NJDEP, 2005). Second, the depth of the lower chamber ensures the sediment storage zone is adequately separated from the path of flow in the lower chamber to prevent scouring Operational Hydraulic Loading Rate Designers and regulators need to evaluate the treatment capacity and performance of manufactured stormwater treatment systems. A commonly used parameter is the operational hydraulic loading rate which originated as a design methodology for wastewater treatment devices. Operational hydraulic loading rate may be calculated by dividing the flow rate into a device by its settling area. This represents the critical settling velocity that is the prime determinant to quantify the influent particle size and density captured by the device. PCSWMM for Stormceptor uses a similar parameter that is calculated by dividing the hydraulic detention time in the device by the fall distance of the sediment. H v SC = = θ H Q A S Where: v SC = critical settling velocity, ft/s (m/s) H = tank depth, ft (m) θ H = hydraulic detention time, ft/s (m/s) Q = volumetric flow rate, ft 3 /s (m 3 /s) A S = surface area, ft 2 (m 2 ) (Tchobanoglous, G. and Schroeder, E.D Water Quality. Addison Wesley.) Unlike designing typical wastewater devices, stormwater systems are designed for highly variable flow rates including intense peak flows. PCSWMM for Stormceptor incorporates all of the flows into its calculations, ensuring that the operational hydraulic loading rate is considered not only for one flow rate, but for all flows including extreme events. 4

148 Technical Manual 3.3. Double Wall Containment The Stormceptor System was conceived as a pollution identifier to assist with identifying illicit discharges. The fiberglass insert has a continuous skirt that lines the concrete barrel wall for a depth of 18 inches (406 mm) that provides double wall containment for hydrocarbons storage. This protective barrier ensures that toxic floatables do not migrate through the concrete wall and the surrounding soils. 4. Stormceptor Product Line 4.1. Stormceptor Models A summary of Stormceptor models and capacities are listed in Table 1. Table 1. Canadian Stormceptor Models Stormceptor Model Total Storage Volume Imp. Gal (L) Hydrocarbon Storage Capacity Imp. Gal (L) Maximum Sediment Capacity Imp. Gal (L) STC 300i 470 (1 775) 66 (300) 319 (1 450) STC (4 070) 46 (915) 660 (3 000) STC ,070 (4 871) 46 (915) 836 (3 800) STC ,600 (7 270) 46 (915) 1,365 (6 205) STC ,420 (6 205) 636 (2 890) 1,300 (7 700) STC ,355 (15 270) 636 (2 890) 1,694 (11 965) STC ,450 (20 255) 739 (3 360) 3,627 (16 490) STC ,435 (24 710) 739 (3 360) 4,606 (20 940) STC ,883 (31 285) 864 (3 930) 5,927 (26 945) STC ,758 (44 355) 2,322 (10 555) 7,255 (32 980) STC ,734 (48 791) 2,322 (10 555) 8,230 (37 415) STC ,610 (66 410) 2,574 (11 700) 11,854 (53 890) NOTE: Storage volumes may vary slightly from region to region. For detailed information, contact your local Stormceptor representative Inline Stormceptor The Inline Stormceptor, Figure 1, is the standard design for most stormwater treatment applications. The patented Stormceptor design allows the Inline unit to maintain continuous positive treatment of total suspended solids (TSS) year-round, regardless of flow rate. The Inline Stormceptor is composed of a precast concrete tank with a fiberglass insert situated at the invert of the storm sewer pipe, creating an upper chamber above the insert and a lower chamber below the insert. 5

149 Technical Manual Figure 1. Inline Stormceptor Operation As water flows into the Stormceptor unit, it is slowed and directed to the lower chamber by a weir and drop tee. The stormwater enters the lower chamber, a non-turbulent environment, allowing free oils to rise and sediment to settle. The oil is captured underneath the fiberglass insert and shielded from exposure to the concrete walls by a fiberglass skirt. After the pollutants separate, treated water continues up a riser pipe, and exits the lower chamber on the downstream side of the weir before leaving the unit. During high flow events, the Stormceptor System s patented scour prevention technology ensures continuous pollutant removal and prevents re-suspension of previously captured pollutants Inlet Stormceptor The Inlet Stormceptor System, Figure 2, was designed to provide protection for parking lots, loading bays, gas stations and other spill-prone areas. The Inlet Stormceptor is designed to remove sediment from stormwater introduced through a grated inlet, a storm sewer pipe, or both. 6

150 Technical Manual Figure 2. Inlet Stormceptor The Inlet Stormceptor design operates in the same manner as the Inline unit, providing continuous positive treatment, and ensuring that captured material is not re-suspended Series Stormceptor Designed to treat larger drainage areas, the Series Stormceptor System, Figure 3, consists of two adjacent Stormceptor models that function in parallel. This design eliminates the need for additional structures and piping to reduce installation costs. 7

151 Technical Manual Figure 3. Series System The Series Stormceptor design operates in the same manner as the Inline unit, providing continuous positive treatment, and ensuring that captured material is not re-suspended. 5. Sizing the Stormceptor System The Stormceptor System is a versatile product that can be used for many different aspects of water quality improvement. While addressing these needs, there are conditions that the designer needs to be aware of in order to size the Stormceptor model to meet the demands of each individual site in an efficient and cost-effective manner. PCSWMM for Stormceptor is the support tool used for identifying the appropriate Stormceptor model. In order to size a unit, it is recommended the user follow the seven design steps in the program. The steps are as follows: STEP 1 Project Details The first step prior to sizing the Stormceptor System is to clearly identify the water quality objective for the development. It is recommended that a level of annual sediment (TSS) removal be identified and defined by a particle size distribution. 8

152 Technical Manual STEP 2 Site Details Identify the site development by the drainage area and the level of imperviousness. It is recommended that imperviousness be calculated based on the actual area of imperviousness based on paved surfaces, sidewalks and rooftops. STEP 3 Upstream Attenuation The Stormceptor System is designed as a water quality device and is sometimes used in conjunction with onsite water quantity control devices such as ponds or underground detention systems. When possible, a greater benefit is typically achieved when installing a Stormceptor unit upstream of a detention facility. By placing the Stormceptor unit upstream of a detention structure, a benefit of less maintenance of the detention facility is realized. STEP 4 Particle Size Distribution It is critical that the PSD be defined as part of the water quality objective. PSD is critical for the design of treatment system for a unit process of gravity settling and governs the size of a treatment system. A range of particle sizes has been provided and it is recommended that clays and silt-sized particles be considered in addition to sand and gravel-sized particles. Options and sample PSDs are provided in PCSWMM for Stormceptor. The default particle size distribution is the Fine Distribution, Table 2, option. Table 2. Fine Distribution Particle Size Distribution Specific Gravity 20 20% % % % % 2.65 If the objective is the long-term removal of 80% of the total suspended solids on a given site, the PSD should be representative of the expected sediment on the site. For example, a system designed to remove 80% of coarse particles (greater than 75 microns) would provide relatively poor removal efficiency of finer particles that may be naturally prevalent in runoff from the site. Since the small particle fraction contributes a disproportionately large amount of the total available particle surface area for pollutant adsorption, a system designed primarily for coarse particle capture will compromise water quality objectives. STEP 5 Rainfall Records Local historical rainfall has been acquired from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environment Canada and regulatory agencies across North America. The rainfall data provided with PCSMM for Stormceptor provides an accurate estimation of small storm hydrology by modeling actual historical storm events including duration, intensities and peaks. 9

153 Technical Manual STEP 6 Summary At this point, the program may be executed to predict the level of TSS removal from the site. Once the simulation has completed, a table shall be generated identifying the TSS removal of each Stormceptor unit. STEP 7 Sizing Summary Performance estimates of all Stormceptor units for the given site parameters will be displayed in a tabular format. The unit that meets the water quality objective, identified in Step 1, will be highlighted PCSWMM for Stormceptor The Stormceptor System has been developed in conjunction with PCSWMM for Stormceptor as a technological solution to achieve water quality goals. Together, these two innovations model, simulate, predict and calculate the water quality objectives desired by a design engineer for TSS removal. PCSWMM for Stormceptor is a proprietary sizing program which uses site specific inputs to a computer model to simulate sediment accumulation, hydrology and long-term total suspended solids removal. The model has been calibrated to field monitoring results from Stormceptor units that have been monitored in North America. The sizing methodology can be described by three processes: 1. Determination of real time hydrology 2. Buildup and wash off of TSS from impervious land areas 3. TSS transport through the Stormceptor (settling and discharge) The use of a calibrated model is the preferred method for sizing stormwater quality structures for the following reasons: a. The hydrology of the local area is properly and accurately incorporated in the sizing (distribution of flows, flow rate ranges and peaks, back-to-back storms, inter-event times) b. The distribution of TSS with the hydrology is properly and accurately considered in the sizing c. Particle size distribution is properly considered in the sizing d. The sizing can be optimized for TSS removal e. The cost benefit of alternate TSS removal criteria can be easily assessed f. The program assesses the performance of all Stormceptor models. Sizing may be selected based on a specific water quality outcome or based on the Maximum Extent Practicable For more information regarding PCSWMM for Stormceptor, contact your local Stormceptor representative, or visit to download a free copy of the program Sediment Loading Characteristics The way in which sediment is transferred to stormwater can have a considerable effect on which type of system is implemented. On typical impervious surfaces (e.g. parking lots) sediment will build over time and wash off with the next rainfall. When rainfall patterns are 10

154 Technical Manual examined, a short intense storm will have a higher concentration of sediment than a long slow drizzle. Together with rainfall data representing the site s typical rainfall patterns, sediment loading characteristics play a part in the correct sizing of a stormwater quality device. Typical Sites For standard site design of the Stormceptor System, PCSWMM for Stormceptor is utilized to accurately assess the unit s performance. As an integral part of the product s design, the program can be used to meet local requirements for total suspended solid removal. Typical installations of manufactured stormwater treatment devices would occur on areas such as paved parking lots or paved roads. These are considered stable surfaces which have non erodible surfaces. Unstable Sites While standard sites consist of stable concrete or asphalt surfaces, sites such as gravel parking lots, or maintenance yards with stockpiles of sediment would be classified as unstable. These types of sites do not exhibit first flush characteristics, are highly erodible and exhibit atypical sediment loading characteristics and must therefore be sized more carefully. Contact your local Stormceptor representative for assistance in selecting proper unit size for such unstable sites. 6. Spill Controls When considering the removal of total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) from a storm sewer system there are two functions of the system: oil removal, and spill capture. 'Oil Removal' describes the capture of the minute volumes of free oil mobilized from impervious surfaces. In this instance relatively low concentrations, volumes and flow rates are considered. While the Stormceptor unit will still provide an appreciable oil removal function during higher flow events and/or with higher TPH concentrations, desired effluent limits may be exceeded under these conditions. 'Spill Capture' describes a manner of TPH removal more appropriate to recovery of a relatively high volume of a single phase deleterious liquid that is introduced to the storm sewer system over a relatively short duration. The two design criteria involved when considering this manner of introduction are overall volume and the specific gravity of the material. A standard Stormceptor unit will be able to capture and retain a maximum spill volume and a minimum specific gravity. For spill characteristics that fall outside these limits, unit modifications are required. Contact your local Stormceptor Representative for more information. One of the key features of the Stormceptor technology is its ability to capture and retain spills. While the standard Stormceptor System provides excellent protection for spill control, there are additional options to enhance spill protection if desired Oil Level Alarm The oil level alarm is an electronic monitoring system designed to trigger a visual and audible alarm when a pre-set level of oil is reached within the lower chamber. As a standard, the oil 11

155 Technical Manual level alarm is designed to trigger at approximately 85% of the unit s available depth level for oil capture. The feature acts as a safeguard against spills caused by exceeding the oil storage capacity of the separator and eliminates the need for manual oil level inspection. The oil level alarm installed on the Stormceptor insert is illustrated in Figure 4. Figure 4. Oil level alarm 6.2. Increased Volume Storage Capacity The Stormceptor unit may be modified to store a greater spill volume than is typically available. Under such a scenario, instead of installing a larger than required unit, modifications can be made to the recommended Stormceptor model to accommodate larger volumes. Contact your local Stormceptor representative for additional information and assistance for modifications. 7. Stormceptor Options The Stormceptor System allows flexibility to incorporate to existing and new storm drainage infrastructure. The following section identifies considerations that should be reviewed when installing the system into a drainage network. For conditions that fall outside of the recommendations in this section, please contact your local Stormceptor representative for further guidance Installation Depth / Minimum Cover The minimum distance from the top of grade to the crown of the inlet pipe is 24 inches (600 mm). For situations that have a lower minimum distance, contact your local Stormceptor representative Maximum Inlet and Outlet Pipe Diameters Maximum inlet and outlet pipe diameters are illustrated in Figure 5. Contact your local Stormceptor representative for larger pipe diameters. 12

156 Technical Manual Figure 5. Maximum pipe diameters for straight through and bend applications. *The bend should only be incorporated into the second structure (downstream structure) of the Series Stormceptor System 7.3. Bends The Stormceptor System can be used to change horizontal alignment in the storm drain network up to a maximum of 90 degrees. Figure 6 illustrates the typical bend situations for the Stormceptor System. Bends should only be applied to the second structure (downstream structure) of the Series Stormceptor System. 13

157 Technical Manual Figure 6. Maximum bend angles Multiple Inlet Pipes The Inlet and Inline Stormceptor System can accommodate two or more inlet pipes. The maximum number of inlet pipes that can be accommodated into a Stormceptor unit is a function of the number, alignment and diameter of the pipes and its effects on the structural integrity of the precast concrete. When multiple inlet pipes are used for new developments, each inlet pipe shall have an invert elevation 3 inches (75 mm) higher than the outlet pipe invert elevation Inlet/Outlet Pipe Invert Elevations Recommended inlet and outlet pipe invert differences are listed in Table 3. Table 3. Recommended drops between inlet and outlet pipe inverts. Number of Inlet Pipes Inlet System Inline System Series System 1 3 inches (75 mm) 1 inch (25 mm) 3 inches (75 mm) >1 3 inches (75 mm) 3 inches (75 mm) Not Applicable 14

158 Technical Manual 7.6. Shallow Stormceptor In cases where there may be restrictions to the depth of burial of storm sewer systems. In this situation, for selected Stormceptor models, the lower chamber components may be increased in diameter to reduce the overall depth of excavation required Customized Live Load The Stormceptor system is typically designed for local highway truck loading (HS-20 in the US and CHBDC in Canada). In instances of other loads, the Stormceptor System may be customized structurally for a pre-specified live load. Contact your local Stormceptor representative for customized loading conditions Pre-treatment The Stormceptor System may be sized to remove sediment and for spills control in conjunction with other stormwater BMPs to meet the water quality objective. For pretreatment applications, the Stormceptor System should be the first unit in a treatment train. The benefits of pre-treatment include the extension of the operational life (extension of maintenance frequency) of large stormwater management facilities, prevention of spills and lower total lifecycle maintenance cost Head loss The head loss through the Stormceptor System is similar to a 60 degree bend at a maintenance hole. The K value for calculating minor losses is approximately 1.3 (minor loss = k*1.3v 2 /2g). However, when a Submerged modification is applied to a Stormceptor unit, the corresponding K value is Submerged The Submerged modification, Figure 7, allows the Stormceptor System to operate in submerged or partially submerged storm sewers. This configuration can be installed on all models of the Stormceptor System by modifying the fiberglass insert. A customized weir height and a secondary drop tee are added. Submerged instances are defined as standing water in the storm drain system during zero flow conditions. In these instances, the following information is necessary for the proper design and application of submerged modifications: Stormceptor top of grade elevation Stormceptor outlet pipe invert elevation Standing water elevation 15

159 Technical Manual Figure 7. Submerged Stormceptor 8. Comparing Technologies Designers have many choices available to achieve water quality goals in the treatment of stormwater runoff. Since many alternatives are available for use in stormwater quality treatment it is important to consider how to make an appropriate comparison between approved alternatives. The following is a guide to assist with the accurate comparison of differing technologies and performance claims Particle Size Distribution (PSD) The most sensitive parameter to the design of a stormwater quality device is the selection of the design particle size. While it is recommended that the actual particle size distribution (PSD) for sites be measured prior to sizing, alternative values for particle size should be selected to represent what is likely to occur naturally on the site. A reasonable estimate of a particle size distribution likely to be found on parking lots or other impervious surfaces should consist of a wide range of particles such as 20 microns to 2,000 microns (Ontario MOE, 1994). There is no absolute right particle size distribution or specific gravity and the user is cautioned to review the site location, characteristics, material handling practices and regulatory requirements when selecting a particle size distribution. When comparing technologies, designs using different PSDs will result in incomparable TSS removal 16

160 Technical Manual efficiencies. The PSD of the TSS removed needs to be standard between two products to allow for an accurate comparison Scour Prevention In order to accurately predict the performance of a manufactured treatment device, there must be confidence that it will perform under all conditions. Since rainfall patterns cannot be predicted, stormwater quality devices placed in storm sewer systems must be able to withstand extreme events, and ensure that all pollutants previously captured are retained in the system. In order to have confidence in a system s performance under extreme conditions, independent validation of scour prevention is essential when examining different technologies. Lack of independent verification of scour prevention should make a designer wary of accepting any product s performance claims Hydraulics Full scale laboratory testing has been used to confirm the hydraulics of the Stormceptor System. Results of lab testing have been used to physically design the Stormceptor System and the sewer pipes entering and leaving the unit. Key benefits of Stormceptor are: Low head loss (typical k value of 1.3) Minimal inlet/outlet invert elevation drop across the structure Use as a bend structure Accommodates multiple inlets The adaptability of the treatment device to the storm sewer design infrastructure can affect the overall performance and cost of the site Hydrology Stormwater quality treatment technologies need to perform under varying climatic conditions. These can vary from long low intensity rainfall to short duration, high intensity storms. Since a treatment device is expected to perform under all these conditions, it makes sense that any system s design should accommodate those conditions as well. Long-term continuous simulation evaluates the performance of a technology under the varying conditions expected in the climate of the subject site. Single, peak event design does not provide this information and is not equivalent to long-term simulation. Designers should request long-term simulation performance to ensure the technology can meet the long-term water quality objective. 17

161 Technical Manual 9. Testing The Stormceptor System has been the most widely monitored stormwater treatment technology in the world. Performance verification and monitoring programs are completed to the strictest standards and integrity. Since its introduction in 1990, numerous independent field tests and studies detailing the effectiveness of the Stormceptor System have been completed. Coventry University, UK 97% removal of oil, 83% removal of sand and 73% removal of peat National Water Research Institute, Canada, - scaled testing for the development of the Stormceptor System identifying both TSS removal and scour prevention. New Jersey TARP Program full scale testing of an STC 750/900 demonstrating 75% TSS removal of particles from 1 to 1000 microns. Scour testing completed demonstrated that the system does not scour. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection laboratory testing protocol was followed. City of Indianapolis full scale testing of an STC 750/900 demonstrating over 80% TSS removal of particles from 50 microns to 300 microns at 130% of the unit s operating rate. Scour testing completed demonstrated that the system does not scour. Westwood Massachusetts (1997), demonstrated >80% TSS removal Como Park (1997), demonstrated 76% TSS removal Ontario MOE SWAMP Program 57% removal of 1 to 25 micron particles Laval Quebec 50% removal of 1 to 25 micron particles 10. Installation The installation of the concrete Stormceptor should conform in general to state highway, provincial or local specifications for the installation of maintenance holes. Selected sections of a general specification that are applicable are summarized in the following sections Excavation Excavation for the installation of the Stormceptor should conform to state highway, provincial or local specifications. Topsoil removed during the excavation for the Stormceptor should be stockpiled in designated areas and should not be mixed with subsoil or other materials. Topsoil stockpiles and the general site preparation for the installation of the Stormceptor should conform to state highway, provincial or local specifications. The Stormceptor should not be installed on frozen ground. Excavation should extend a minimum of 12 inches (300mm) from the precast concrete surfaces plus an allowance for shoring and bracing where required. If the bottom of the excavation provides an unsuitable foundation additional excavation may be required. In areas with a high water table, continuous dewatering may be required to ensure that the excavation is stable and free of water. 18

162 Technical Manual Backfilling Backfill material should conform to state highway, provincial or local specifications. Backfill material should be placed in uniform layers not exceeding 12 inches (300mm) in depth and compacted to state highway, provincial or local specifications. 11. Stormceptor Construction Sequence The concrete Stormceptor is installed in sections in the following sequence: 1. Aggregate base 2. Base slab 3. Lower chamber sections 4. Upper chamber section with fiberglass insert 5. Connect inlet and outlet pipes 6. Assembly of fiberglass insert components (drop tee, riser pipe, oil cleanout port and orifice plate 7. Remainder of upper chamber 8. Frame and access cover The precast base should be placed level at the specified grade. The entire base should be in contact with the underlying compacted granular material. Subsequent sections, complete with joint seals, should be installed in accordance with the precast concrete manufacturer s recommendations. Adjustment of the Stormceptor can be performed by lifting the upper sections free of the excavated area, re-leveling the base and re-installing the sections. Damaged sections and gaskets should be repaired or replaced as necessary. Once the Stormceptor has been constructed, any lift holes must be plugged with mortar. 12. Maintenance Health and Safety The Stormceptor System has been designed considering safety first. It is recommended that confined space entry protocols be followed if entry to the unit is required. In addition, the fiberglass insert has the following health and safety features: Designed to withstand the weight of personnel A safety grate is located over the 24 inch (600 mm) riser pipe opening Ladder rungs are provided for entry into the unit, if required Maintenance Procedures Maintenance of the Stormceptor system is performed using vacuum trucks. No entry into the unit is required for maintenance (in most cases). The vacuum service industry is a wellestablished sector of the service industry that cleans underground tanks, sewers and catch basins. Costs to clean a Stormceptor will vary based on the size of unit and transportation distances. The need for maintenance can be determined easily by inspecting the unit from the surface. The depth of oil in the unit can be determined by inserting a dipstick in the oil inspection/cleanout port. 19

163 Technical Manual Similarly, the depth of sediment can be measured from the surface without entry into the Stormceptor via a dipstick tube equipped with a ball valve. This tube would be inserted through the riser pipe. Maintenance should be performed once the sediment depth exceeds the guideline values provided in the table 4. Table 4. Sediment Depths indicating required servicing. Sediment Depths Indicating Required Servicing * Model (CAN) Sediment Depth inches (mm) 300i 9 (225) (230) (275) (400) (350) (475) (400) (500) (425) (400) (500) (425) * based on 15% of the Stormceptor unit s total storage Although annual servicing is recommended, the frequency of maintenance may need to be increased or reduced based on local conditions (i.e. if the unit is filling up with sediment more quickly than projected, maintenance may be required semi-annually; conversely once the site has stabilized maintenance may only be required every two or three years). Oil is removed through the oil inspection/cleanout port and sediment is removed through the riser pipe. Alternatively oil could be removed from the 24 inches (600 mm) opening if water is removed from the lower chamber to lower the oil level below the drop pipes. The following procedures should be taken when cleaning out Stormceptor: 1. Check for oil through the oil cleanout port 2. Remove any oil separately using a small portable pump 3. Decant the water from the unit to the sanitary sewer, if permitted by the local regulating authority, or into a separate containment tank 4. Remove the sludge from the bottom of the unit using the vacuum truck 5. Re-fill Stormceptor with water where required by the local jurisdiction 20

164 Technical Manual Submerged Stormceptor Careful attention should be paid to maintenance of the Submerged Stormceptor System. In cases where the storm drain system is submerged, there is a requirement to plug both the inlet and outlet pipes to economically clean out the unit Hydrocarbon Spills The Stormceptor is often installed in areas where the potential for spills is great. The Stormceptor System should be cleaned immediately after a spill occurs by a licensed liquid waste hauler Disposal Requirements for the disposal of material from the Stormceptor System are similar to that of any other stormwater Best Management Practice (BMP) where permitted. Disposal options for the sediment may range from disposal in a sanitary trunk sewer upstream of a sewage treatment plant, to disposal in a sanitary landfill site. Petroleum waste products collected in the Stormceptor (free oil/chemical/fuel spills) should be removed by a licensed waste management company Oil Sheens With a steady influx of water with high concentrations of oil, a sheen may be noticeable at the Stormceptor outlet. This may occur because a rainbow or sheen can be seen at very small oil concentrations (<10 ppm). Stormceptor will remove over 98% of all free oil spills from storm sewer systems for dry weather or frequently occurring runoff events. The appearance of a sheen at the outlet with high influent oil concentrations does not mean the unit is not working to this level of removal. In addition, if the influent oil is emulsified the Stormceptor will not be able to remove it. The Stormceptor is designed for free oil removal and not emulsified conditions. 21

165 Appendix 1 Stormceptor Drawings

166

167

168 Volume III: TEMPEST TM INLET CONTROL DEVICES Municipal Technical Manual Series S E C O N D E D I T I O N LMF (Low to Medium Flow) ICD HF (High Flow) ICD MHF (Medium to High Flow) ICD

169 IPEX Tempest TM Inlet Control Devices Municipal Technical Manual Series Vol. I, 2nd Edition 2012 by IPEX. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without prior written permission. For information contact: IPEX, Marketing, 2441 Royal Windsor Drive, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, L5J 4C7. The information contained here within is based on current information and product design at the time of publication and is subject to change without notification. IPEX does not guarantee or warranty the accuracy, suitability for particular applications, or results to be obtained therefrom.

170 ABOUT IPEX At IPEX, we have been manufacturing non-metallic pipe and fittings since We formulate our own compounds and maintain strict quality control during production. Our products are made available for customers thanks to a network of regional stocking locations throughout North America. We offer a wide variety of systems including complete lines of piping, fittings, valves and custom-fabricated items. More importantly, we are committed to meeting our customers needs. As a leader in the plastic piping industry, IPEX continually develops new products, modernizes manufacturing facilities and acquires innovative process technology. In addition, our staff take pride in their work, making available to customers their extensive thermoplastic knowledge and field experience. IPEX personnel are committed to improving the safety, reliability and performance of thermoplastic materials. We are involved in several standards committees and are members of and/or comply with the organizations listed on this page. For specific details about any IPEX product, contact our customer service department.

171 CONTENTS TEMPEST INLET CONTROL DEVICES Technical Manual About IPEX Section One: Product Information: TEMPEST Low, Medium Flow (LMF) ICD Purpose Product Description Product Function Product Construction Product Applications Chart 1: LMF 14 Preset Flow Curves Chart 2: LMF Flow Vs. ICD Alternatives Product Installation Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST LMF ICD into a square catch basin: Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST LMF ICD into a round catch basin: Product Technical Specification General Materials Dimensioning Installation Section Two: Product Information: TEMPEST High Flow (HF) & Medium, High Flow (MHF) ICD Product Description Product Function Product Construction Product Applications Chart 3: HF & MHF Preset Flow Curves Product Installation Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF or MHF ICD into a square catch basin: Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF or MHF ICD into a round catch basin: Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF Sump into a square or round catch basin: Product Technical Specification General Materials Dimensioning Installation IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters 3

172 PRODUCT INFORMATION: TEMPEST LOW, MEDIUM FLOW (LMF) ICD Purpose TEMPEST LMF ICD To control the amount of storm water runoff entering a sewer system by allowing a specified flow volume out of a catch basin or manhole at a specified head. This approach conserves pipe capacity so that catch basins downstream do not become uncontrollably surcharged, which can lead to basement floods, flash floods and combined sewer overflows. Product Description Our LMF ICD is designed to accommodate catch basins or manholes with sewer outlet pipes 6" in diameter and larger. Any storm sewer larger than 12" may require custom modification. However, IPEX can custom build a TEMPEST device to accommodate virtually any storm sewer size. Square Application Round Application Available in 14 preset flow curves, the LMF ICD has the ability to provide flow rates: 2lps 17lps (31gpm 270gpm) Product Function The LMF ICD vortex flow action allows the LMF ICD to provide a narrower flow curve using a larger orifice than a conventional orifice plate ICD, making it less likely to clog. When comparing flows at the same head level, the LMF ICD has the ability to restrict more flow than a conventional ICD during a rain event, preserving greater sewer capacity. Universal Mounting Plate + Spigot CB Wall Plate Product Construction Constructed from durable PVC, the LMF ICD is light weight 8.9 Kg (19.7 lbs). = Product Applications Will accommodate both square and round applications: Universal Mounting Plate Hub Adapter 4 IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

173 Chart 1: LMF 14 Preset Flow Curves TEMPEST LMF ICD 3.5 Chart 2: LMF Flow vs. ICD Alternatives Water Head (m) Tempest Vortex Competitor 1 Competitor 2 4" Orifice Water Flow Rate (Lps) IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD 5 NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

174 PRODUCT INSTALLATION Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST LMF ICD into a Square Catch Basin: Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST LMF ICD into a Round Catch Basin: TEMPEST LMF ICD STEPS: 1. Materials and tooling verification: Tooling: impact drill, 3/8" concrete bit, torque wrench for 9/16" nut, hand hammer, level, and marker. Material: (4) concrete anchor 3/8 x 3-1/2, (4) washers, (4) nuts, universal mounting plate, ICD device. 2. Use the mounting wall plate to locate and mark the hole (4) pattern on the catch basin wall. You should use a level to ensure that the plate is at the horizontal. 3. Use an impact drill with a 3/8" concrete bit to make the four holes at a minimum of 1-1/2" depth up to 2-1/2". Clean the concrete dust from the holes. 4. Install the anchors (4) in the holes by using a hammer. Thread the nuts on the top of the anchors to protect the threads when you hit the anchors with the hammer. Remove the nuts from the ends of the anchors. 5. Install the universal mounting plate on the anchors and screw the 4 nuts in place with a maximum torque of 40 N.m (30 lbf-ft). There should be no gap between the wall mounting plate and the catch basin wall. 6. From the ground above using a reach bar, lower the ICD device by hooking the end of the reach bar to the handle of the ICD device. Align the triangular plate portion into the mounting wall plate. Push down the device to be sure it has centered in to the universal mounting plate and has created a seal. STEPS: 1. Materials and tooling verification. Tooling: impact drill, 3/8" concrete bit, torque wrench for 9/16" nut, hand hammer, level and marker. Material: (4) concrete anchor 3/8 x 3-1/2, (4) washers and (4) nuts, spigot CB wall plate, universal mounting plate hub adapter, ICD device. 2. Use the spigot catch basin wall plate to locate and mark the hole (4) pattern on the catch basin wall. You should use a level to ensure that the plate is at the horizontal. 3. Use an impact drill with a 3/8" concrete bit to make the four holes at a depth between 1-1/2" to 2-1/2". Clean the concrete dust from the holes. 4. Install the anchors (4) in the holes by using a hammer. Thread the nuts on the top of the anchors to protect the threads when you hit the anchors with the hammer. Remove the nuts from the ends of the anchors. 5. Install the CB spigot wall plate on the anchors and screw the 4 nuts in place with a maximum torque of 40 N.m (30 lbf-ft). There should be no gap between the spigot wall plate and the catch basin wall. 6. Apply solvent cement on the hub of the universal mounting plate, hub adapter and the spigot of the CB wall plate, then slide the hub over the spigot. Make sure the universal mounting plate is at the horizontal and its hub is completely inserted onto the spigot. Normally, the corners of the universal mounting plate hub adapter should touch the catch basin wall. WARNING Verify that the outlet pipe doesn t protrude into the catch basin. If it does, cut down the pipe flush to the catch basin wall. Call your IPEX representative for more information or if you have any questions about our products. 7. From ground above using a reach bar, lower the ICD device by hooking the end of the reach bar to the handle of the ICD device. Align the triangular plate portion into the mounting wall plate. Push down the device to be sure it has centered in to the mounting plate and has created a seal. WARNING Verify that the outlet pipe doesn t protrude into the catch basin. If it does, cut back the pipe flush to the catch basin wall. The solvent cement which is used in this installation is to be approved for PVC. The solvent cement should not be used below 0 C (32 F) or in a high humidity environment. Refer to the IPEX solvent cement guide to confirm the required curing time or visit the IPEX Online Solvent Cement Training Course available at Call your IPEX representative for more information or if you have any questions about our products. 6 IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

175 PRODUCT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION General Inlet control devices (ICD s) are designed to provide flow control at a specified rate for a given water head level and also provide odour and floatable control. All ICD s will be IPEX Tempest or approved equal. All devices shall be removable from a universal mounting plate. An operator from street level using only a T-bar with a hook will be able to retrieve the device while leaving the universal mounting plate secured to the catch basin wall face. The removal of the TEMPEST devices listed above must not require any unbolting or special manipulation or any special tools. TEMPEST LMF ICD High Flow (HF) Sump devices will consist of a removable threaded cap which can be accessible from street level with out entry into the catchbasin (CB). The removal of the threaded cap shall not require any special tools other than the operator s hand. ICD s shall have no moving parts. Materials ICD s are to be manufactured from Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or Polyurethane material, designed to be durable enough to withstand multiple freeze-thaw cycles and exposure to harsh elements. The inner ring seal will be manufactured using a Buna or Nitrile material with hardness between Duro 50 and Duro 70. The wall seal is to be comprised of a 3/8" thick Neoprene Closed Cell Sponge gasket which is attached to the back of the wall plate. All hardware will be made from 304 stainless steel. Dimensioning The Low Medium Flow (LMF), High Flow (HF) and the High Flow (HF) Sump shall allow for a minimum outlet pipe diameter of 200mm with a 600mm deep Catch Basin sump. Installation Contractor shall be responsible for securing, supporting and connecting the ICD s to the existing influent pipe and catchbasin/manhole structure as specified and designed by the Engineer. IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD 7 NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

176 PRODUCT INFORMATION: TEMPEST HF & MHF ICD Product Description Our HF, HF Sump and MHF ICD s are designed to accommodate catch basins or manholes with sewer outlet pipes 6" in diameter or larger. Any storm sewer larger than 12" may require custom modification. However, IPEX can custom build a TEMPEST device to accommodate virtually any storm sewer size. Product Applications The HF and MHF ICD s are available to accommodate both square and round applications: Available in 5 preset flow curves, these ICDs have the ability to provide constant flow rates: 9lps (143 gpm) and greater TEMPEST HF & MHF ICD Product Function TEMPEST HF (High Flow): designed to manage moderate to higher flows 15 L/s (240 gpm) or greater and prevent the propagation of odour and floatables. With this device, the cross-sectional area of the device is larger than the orifice diameter and has been designed to limit head losses. The HF ICD can also be ordered without flow control when only odour and floatable control is required. TEMPEST HF (High Flow) Sump: The height of a sewer outlet pipe in a catch basin is not always conveniently located. At times it may be located very close to the catch basin floor, not providing enough sump for one of the other TEMPEST ICDs with universal back plate to be installed. In these applications, the HF Sump is offered. The HF Sump offers the same features and benefits as the HF ICD; however, is designed to raise the outlet in a square or round catch basin structure. When installed, the HF sump is fixed in place and not easily removed. Any required service to the device is performed through a clean-out located in the top of the device which can be often accessed from ground level. TEMPEST MHF (Medium to High Flow): The MHF plate or plug is designed to control flow rates 9 L/s (143 gpm) or greater. It is not designed to prevent the propagation of odour and floatables. Square Application Universal Mounting Plate HF ICD MHF ICD Round Application Spigot CB Wall Plate The HF Sump is available to accommodate low to no sump applications in both square and round catch basins: + = Universal Mounting Plate Hub Adapter Product Construction The HF, HF Sump and MHF ICDs are built to be light weight at a maximum weight of 6.8 Kg (14.6 lbs). Square Catch Basin Round Catch Basin 8 IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

177 Chart 3: HF & MHF Preset Flow Curves Head (m) A B C TEMPEST HF & MHF ICD 2.0 D E Flow Q (Lps) IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD 9 NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

178 PRODUCT INSTALLATION Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF or MHF ICD into a Square Catch Basin: Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF or MHF ICD into a Round Catch Basin: TEMPEST HF & MHF ICD 1. Materials and tooling verification: Tooling: impact drill, 3/8" concrete bit, torque wrench for 9/16" nut, hand hammer, level, and marker. Material: (4) concrete anchor 3/8 x 3-1/2, (4) washers, (4) nuts, universal mounting plate, ICD device 2. Use the mounting wall plate to locate and mark the hole (4) pattern on the catch basin wall. You should use a level to ensure that the plate is at the horizontal. 3. Use an impact drill with a 3/8" concrete bit to make the four holes at a minimum of 1-1/2" depth up to 2-1/2". Clean the concrete dust from the holes. 4. Install the anchors (4) in the holes by using a hammer. Thread the nuts on the top of the anchors to protect the threads when you hit the anchors with the hammer. Remove the nuts from the ends of the anchors. 5. Install the universal wall mounting plate on the anchors and screw the 4 nuts in place with a maximum torque of 40 N.m (30 lbf-ft). There should be no gap between the wall mounting plate and the catch basin wall. 6. From the ground above using a reach bar, lower the device by hooking the end of the reach bar to the handle of the ICD device. Align the triangular plate portion into the mounting wall plate. Push down the device to be sure it has centered in to the universal wall mounting plate and has created a seal. WARNING Verify that the outlet pipe doesn t protrude into the catch basin. If it does, cut down the pipe flush to the catch basin wall. Call your IPEX representative for more information or if you have any questions about our products. STEPS: 1. Materials and tooling verification. Tooling: impact drill, 3/8" concrete bit, torque wrench for 9/16" nut, hand hammer, level and marker. Material: (4) concrete anchor 3/8 x 3-1/2, (4) washers and (4) nuts, spigot CB wall plate, universal mounting plate hub adapter, ICD device. 2. Use the round catch basin spigot adaptor to locate and mark the hole (4) pattern on the catch basin wall. You should use a level to ensure that the plate is at the horizontal. 3. Use an impact drill with a 3/8" concrete bit to make the four holes at a depth between 1-1/2" to 2-1/2". Clean the concrete dust from the holes. 4. Install the anchors (4) in the holes by using a hammer. Thread the nuts on the top of the anchors to protect the threads when you hit the anchors with the hammer. Remove the nuts from the ends of the anchors. 5. Install the spigot CB wall plate on the anchors and screw the 4 nuts in place with a maximum torque of 40 N.m (30 lbf-ft). There should be no gap between the spigot CB wall plate and the catch basin wall. 6. Put solvent cement on the hub of the universal mounting plate, hub adapter and the spigot of the CB wall plate, then slide the hub over the spigot. Make sure the universal mounting plate is at the horizontal and its hub is completely inserted onto the spigot. Normally, the corners of the hub adapter should touch the catch basin wall. 7. From ground above using a reach bar, lower the device by hooking the end of the reach bar to the handle of the ICD device. Align the triangular plate portion into the mounting wall plate. Push down the device to be sure it has centered in to the wall mounting plate and has created a seal. 10 IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD WARNING Verify that the outlet pipe doesn t protrude into the catch basin. If it does, cut down the pipe flush to the catch basin wall. The solvent cement which is used in this installation is to be approved for PVC. The solvent cement should not be used below 0 C (32 F) or in a high humidity environment. Refer to the IPEX solvent cement guide to confirm the required curing time or visit the IPEX Online Solvent Cement Training Course available at Call your IPEX representative for more information or if you have any questions about our products. NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

179 PRODUCT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION Instructions to assemble a TEMPEST HF Sump into a Square or Round Catch Basin: STEPS: 1. Materials and tooling verification: General Inlet control devices (ICD s) are designed to provide flow control at a specified rate for a given water head level and also provide odour and floatable control where specified. All ICD s will be IPEX Tempest or approved equal. Tooling: impact drill, 3/8" concrete bit, torque wrench for 9/16" nut, hand hammer, level, mastic tape and metal strapping Material: (2) concrete anchor 3/8 x 3-1/2, (2) washers, (2) nuts, HF Sump pieces (2). 2. Apply solvent cement to the spigot end of the top half of the sump. Apply solvent cement to the hub of the bottom half of the sump. Insert the spigot of the top half of the sump into the hub of the bottom half of the sump. 3. Install the 8" spigot of the device into the outlet pipe. Use the mastic tape to seal the device spigot into the outlet pipe. You should use a level to be sure that the fitting is standing at the vertical. 4. Use an impact drill with a 3/8" concrete bit to make a series of 2 holes along each side of the body throat. The depth of the hole should be between 1-1/2" to 2-1/2". Clean the concrete dust from the 2 holes. 5. Install the anchors (2) in the holes by using a hammer. Put the nuts on the top of the anchors to protect the threads when you hit the anchors. Remove the nuts from the ends of the anchors. 6. Cut the metal strapping to length and connect each end of the strapping to the anchors. Screw the nuts in place with a maximum torque of 40 N.m (30 lbf-ft). The device should be completely flush with the catch basin wall. All devices shall be removable from a universal mounting plate. An operator from street level using only a T-bar with a hook shall be able to retrieve the device while leaving the universal mounting plate secured to the catch basin wall face. The removal of the TEMPEST devices listed above shall not require any unbolting or special manipulation or any special tools. High Flow (HF) Sump devices shall consist of a removable threaded cap which can be accessible from street level with out entry into the catchbasin (CB). The removal of the threaded cap shall not require any special tools other than the operator s hand. ICD s shall have no moving parts. Materials ICD s are to be manufactured from Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or Polyurethane material, designed to be durable enough to withstand multiple freeze-thaw cycles and exposure to harsh elements. The inner ring seal will be manufactured using a Buna or Nitrile material with hardness between Duro 50 and Duro 70. The wall seal is to be comprised of a 3/8 thick Neoprene Closed Cell Sponge gasket which is attached to the back of the wall plate. All hardware will be made from 304 stainless steel. TEMPEST HF & MHF ICD WARNING Verify that the outlet pipe doesn t protrude into the catch basin. If it does, cut down the pipe flush to the catch basin wall. The solvent cement which is used in this installation is to be approved for PVC. The solvent cement should not be used below 0 C (32 F) or in a high humidity environment. Refer to the IPEX solvent cement guide to confirm the required curing time or visit the IPEX Online Solvent Cement Training Course available at Call your IPEX representative for more information or if you have any questions about our products. Dimensioning The Low Medium Flow (LMF), High Flow (HF) and the High Flow (HF) Sump shall allow for a minimum outlet pipe diameter of 200mm with a 600mm deep Catch Basin sump. Installation Contractor shall be responsible for securing, supporting and connecting the ICD s to the existing influent pipe and catchbasin/manhole structure as specified and designed by the Engineer. IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD 11 NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

180 12 IPEX Tempest TM LMF ICD NOTE: Do not use or test the products in this manual with compressed air or other gases including air-over-water-boosters

181 SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BRIEF 4450 LIMEBANK ROAD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Appendix F Correspondence October 20, 2016 CORRESPONDENCE cn \\cd1218-f02\01-604\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\report\site servicing and swm\rpt_ _servicing.docx F.1

182

183 Stantec Consulting Ltd Clyde Avenue, Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 August 12, 2016 File: Attention: David Burda, C.E.T., rcsi City of Ottawa 110 Laurier Ave. W., 4 th floor Ottawa, Ontario KlP ljl Dear Mr. Burda, Reference: 1 st Engineering Review Comments, Site Plan Control Proposal, 4450 Limebank Rd/Urbandale Low-Rise 64 Units The following summarizes Stantec s response to comments as received from the City of Ottawa for the 1 st Engineering Review Comments, dated July 20, 2016: 1. Watermain looping and the placement of infrastructure within the Hazard Lands have not been addressed. These two issues were discussed extensively in the pre-consultation meetings; therefore this application should immediately be placed on hold at this time. The Slope Stability Guidelines clearly state that Hazard Lands should not be developed with permanent structures, parking or roadway areas, amenity areas, septic beds, or any other valuable infrastructure. Since the limits of this development have been exceeded, no further review can be reasonably done at this time. R/ Watermain looping has been achieved by a connection to the existing 300mm dia. watermain along Limebank Road south of the proposed site entrance. All structures, pipes, and other valuable infrastructure have been relocated outside of the Hazard Lands. Regards, STANTEC CONSULTING LTD. Peter Moroz, P. Eng., MBA Managing Principal Phone: (613) Fax: (613) Peter.Moroz@stantec.com wj w:\active\ _4450 limebank road\design\correspondence\city of ottawa\ _ eng comments 1 response.docx

184 July 20, 2016 File Number: D Re: 1 st Engineering Review Comments Site Plan Control Proposal 4450 Limebank Rd/Urbandale Low-Rise 64 Units The following comments are provided in response to the submission of engineering drawings and reports for the project located at 4450 Limebank Road with the development application to the City of Ottawa. Listed below are preliminary comments: Comments Watermain looping and the placement of infrastructure within the Hazard Lands have not been addressed. These two issues were discussed extensively in the pre-consultation meetings; therefore this application should immediately be placed on hold at this time. The Slope Stability Guidelines clearly state that Hazard Lands should not be developed with permanent structures, parking or roadway areas, amenity areas, septic beds, or any other valuable infrastructure. Since the limits of this development have been exceeded, no further review can be reasonably done at this time. Once the plans and reports have been revised, please resubmit three copies of each for review. Reports need to be signed, stamped and dated originals. Please provide a cover letter to indicate how each comment has been addressed on the resubmission. Any revisions or addendums to any studies must be accompanied by a pdf copy of the report (either by CD or ). Should you wish to contact me regarding any questions or a follow up meeting you may reach me at ext Sincerely, David Burda, C.E.T., rcsi Project Manager Infrastructure Approvals Development Review - Suburban Services East Unit Planning and Growth Management Dept. Shaping our future together Ensemble, formons notre avenir City of Ottawa Planning, Transit and the Environment 110 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, ON. K1P 1J1 Tel: (613) Fax: (613) Ville d Ottawa Urbanisme, Transport en commun et Environnement 110, avenue Laurier Ouest Ottawa, ON. K1P 1J1 Tél: (613) Téléc: (613)

185 Gillis, Sheridan From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jocelyn Chandler Friday, April 15, :37 PM Moroz, Peter Mary Jarvis; Gillis, Sheridan; Lynch, Amanda; Cody, Neal; Hal Stimson; Burda, Dave; Hayley, Matthew RVCA SWM preconsult comments RE Conceptual SWM design for 4450 Limebank Road Hello Peter, In general the concept of onsite storage in bioswales and the quality controls appear acceptable, with the following considerations: 1) We reviewed the geotechnical slope stability report and had some concerns with the delineation of the hazard setbacks relating to the proposed width of the erosion allowance. This information has been conveyed to Urbandale. I cannot therefore base our agreement on the boundaries as shown I the design sketch, as they are not yet accepted. 2) The dry ponds, may in our opinion be established outside the 30 m from NHWM Outside the hazard land (erosion and stable slope allowance) Within the 6 m erosion access allowance provided the depth of the ponds is minor to the degree that we can be assured they would not limit the ability of heavy machinery to traverse them and gain access to the limit of the stable slope limit and erosion allowance. 3) In addition to above, I believe the city has indicated that they would consider locating the ponds within the 15 m setback from top of slope setback if there is no tree removal and is supported by an EIS. 4) I think I understood from your explanation that quality would be controlled on site between the 2 and 100 year events to predevelopment flows. This is acceptable from the perspective of flood control but I am not clear on how this addresses erosion thresholds due to increased duration of flows. 5) Base flows must be maintained to support existing fish/aquatic habitat. Jocelyn Jocelyn Chandler M.Pl. MCIP, RPP Planner, RVCA t) x1137 f) jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca mail: Box Rideau Valley Dr., Manotick, ON K4M 1A5 courier: 3889 Rideau Valley Dr., Nepean, ON K2C 3H1 This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential and is intended for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient of this , any use, review, revision, retransmission, distribution, dissemination, copying, printing or otherwise use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this , is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the original and any copy of the and any print out thereof, immediately. Your cooperation is appreciated. From: Moroz, Peter [mailto:peter.moroz@stantec.com] Sent: Monday, April 11, :03 PM To: Jocelyn Chandler <jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca> Cc: Mary Jarvis <mjarvis@urbandale.com>; Gillis, Sheridan <Sheridan.Gillis@stantec.com>; Lynch, Amanda <Amanda.Lynch@stantec.com>; Cody, Neal <Neal.Cody@stantec.com>; Hal Stimson <hal.stimson@rvca.ca> Subject: RE: RVCA SWM preconsult comments RE: 4450 Limebank Road 1

186 Jocelyn, We have run through some preliminary stormwater numbers and site grading and have developed a concept plan for our preferred SWM approach for the site. Before proceeding any further with the design and analysis we were hoping we could get feedback from you as to whether the RVCA would support this concept. A concept servicing and grading plan is attached for your reference and the rationale is explained below. Water quality treatment to an enhanced level (80% TSS removal) is required for the site and will be achieved through an oil/grit separator unit as per the Riverside South MDP and ISSU. Water quantity control requirements are not explicitly stated in either the MDP or ISSU documents. The ISSU does note that on-site storage may be required to meet erosion control discharge criteria for these sites. As the updated analysis for the MDP is not yet complete and the potential for the site to contribute to erosion is unknown since final pond discharge rates are not established, it is proposed to design the site to meet predevelopment conditions. Pre-development flow rates and runoff volume from the 2-year event will be used to determine extended detention requirements and release additional runoff volume at a lower flow rate after the event. On-site storage will be provided to meet pre-development peak flows for larger events but volumes may exceed the pre-development rates. Storage for water quantity control will be provided in bioswales around the perimeter of the site (geotechnical investigations have confirmed that this is acceptable for the surrounding slopes) and will discharge at a controlled release rate to the sewer for final treatment through the OGS unit before discharging to the creek. The sewer outlet location to Mosquito Creek was selected based on observations during my site visit with Hal Stimson. Localized bank erosion was observed at this location and so the thought was that construction of the outlet would disturb the slope regardless, therefore at this location the slope could be rebuilt and stabilized during construction of the outlet. No significant trees were observed in the alignment. At this stage we are not proposing any direct outlet to the tributary. It is also noted that the RVCA has requested that measures to encourage infiltration be implemented where possible. The bioswales will be designed to promote infiltration but will only be considered for storage volume in the SWM calculations (no infiltration losses will be included). We hope that this approach and concept will be satisfactory to the RVCA. If you have any questions regarding the above please do not hesitate to contact us. Regards, Peter Peter Moroz Managing Principal, Community Development Stantec Clyde Avenue Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Phone: (613) Cell: (613) peter.moroz@stantec.com Design with community in mind stantec.com The content of this is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. 2

187 Please consider the environment before printing this . From: Jocelyn Chandler Sent: Wednesday, March 16, :37 AM To: Moroz, Peter Subject: RE: RVCA SWM preconsult comments RE: 4450 Limebank Road Super, thanks, j Jocelyn Chandler M.Pl. MCIP, RPP Planner, RVCA t) x1137 f) jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca mail: Box Rideau Valley Dr., Manotick, ON K4M 1A5 courier: 3889 Rideau Valley Dr., Nepean, ON K2C 3H1 This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential and is intended for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient of this , any use, review, revision, retransmission, distribution, dissemination, copying, printing or otherwise use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this , is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the original and any copy of the and any print out thereof, immediately. Your cooperation is appreciated. From: Moroz, Peter [mailto:peter.moroz@stantec.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, :26 AM To: Jocelyn Chandler <jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca> Subject: RE: RVCA SWM preconsult comments RE: 4450 Limebank Road Thank you Jocelyn, we will look at this and see how we can make it work. Probably will vet it with you to make sure it s an acceptable solution going forward. I will set up a site meeting with Hal to figure out best outlet location(s). Peter Peter Moroz Managing Principal, Community Development Stantec Clyde Avenue Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Phone: (613) Cell: (613) peter.moroz@stantec.com Design with community in mind stantec.com The content of this is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this . 3

188 From: Jocelyn Chandler Sent: Wednesday, March 16, :28 AM To: Moroz, Peter Subject: RVCA SWM preconsult comments RE: 4450 Limebank Road Hello Peter, The site is bounded by Mosquito Creek reach MC-4a and Trib T2-R1. This site falls within the CR2 lands swm management lands. There is specific direction provided in the MDPU and ISS for these lands. T2-R1 was considered under the Rapid Geomorphic Assessment to be in adjustment and quite sensitive to flow changes. MC-4a was considered in transition, and no quantity control appears to be required RSS ISSU Stantec Sept. 30, 2008) s.3.2). We provided the following comments on the previous Phase 5 CR2 lands as follows: The detailed stormwater design for the CR2 lands is required to achieve flows to tributaries T2-R1 that maintain the current hydrological regime for the maintenance of fish habitat and to prevent the exacerbation of existing erosive or unstable conditions within these tributaries and Mosquito Creek. This would suggest to me that the runoff from the site needs to be quantified in terms of how much of the water goes to T2-R1 and how much goes to MC-R4a. the swm design should attempt to reflect those contributions and thus the hydrologic regime of the T2-R1 receiver to protect aquatic habitat (in terms of base flows) and the geomorphology. Let me know if you require any clarification. Jocelyn Jocelyn Chandler M.Pl. MCIP, RPP Planner, RVCA t) x1137 f) jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca mail: Box Rideau Valley Dr., Manotick, ON K4M 1A5 courier: 3889 Rideau Valley Dr., Nepean, ON K2C 3H1 This message may contain information that is privileged or confidential and is intended for the use of the individual(s) or entity named above. This material may contain confidential or personal information which may be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient of this , any use, review, revision, retransmission, distribution, dissemination, copying, printing or otherwise use of, or taking any action in reliance upon this , is strictly prohibited. If you have received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the original and any copy of the and any print out thereof, immediately. Your cooperation is appreciated. From: Moroz, Peter [mailto:peter.moroz@stantec.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 15, :24 PM To: Jocelyn Chandler <jocelyn.chandler@rvca.ca> Subject: 4450 Limebank Road Hi Jocelyn, Further to our conversation please find attached the proposed site plan for 4450 Limebank Road for your reference. As per our discussion based on my review of the previously approved MSS, the storm is to provide 80% TSS removal and discharge to Mosquito Creek. With regards to the on-site storage should be provided where possible to minimize impacts to Mosquito Creek although no storage rates were identified. As far as my recollection from the time when the MSS was being finalized, it was determined that it was infeasible to utilize conventional SWM quantity controls i.e. pond on the small isolated pocket size sites such as this one. The notion was that, we were going to over-control discharge from the larger facilities to mitigate the overall impact on the Mosquito creek. My understanding is that the current update will be looking at this in more detail, as well as provide some guidance on the erosion thresholds i.e. max discharge rates for the creek. Anyhow, in consideration of the above, I would like to confirm with you the criteria for the quantity 4

189 control and particularly, whether there are any specific analysis which RVCA would like to see should we deviate from the conventional post to pre requirements. Also, do you have any additional mapping which you can share with us identifying the meandering belt and hazard lands so that we can confirm this with our plans. Looking forward to hear from you, Peter Peter Moroz Managing Principal, Community Development Stantec Clyde Avenue Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Phone: (613) Cell: (613) Design with community in mind stantec.com The content of this is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this . 5

190 Watershed Science and Engineering Services - Technical Review Memorandum April 5, 2016 To: Jocelyn Chandler From: Terry Davidson Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Development 4450 Limebank Road, Ottawa, Ontario As requested, I have reviewed the report entitled Geotechnical Investigation (Report No. PG Revision 3 dated March 111, 2016 by Patersongroup. The report appears to have been completed primarily for the purpose of determining the Limit of Hazard Lands between Limebank road and Mosquito Creek. The analysis and supporting field work have been carried out an appropriate level of detail for that purpose. The report has documented the present geometry of the slope in sufficient detail, and suitable methods have been used to characterize the soil characteristics. There was reference to logs of test pits put down by the consultant, and the sampling and In Situ testing methods that were used to obtain the site and soil characteristics The report from the consultant makes reference to reviewing, the lands along the slope as Hazard Lands, as defined by the MNR Technical Guide for River and Stream Systems: Erosion Hazard Limit as the primary technical reference for delineating hazard lands and addressing the natural hazards provisions of the Provincial Policy Statement under the Planning Act. The report from the consultant indicates that they analyzed the slope at five (5) Sections, A, B, C, D and E. Sections B and D currently has a Factor of Safety greater than 1.5 which is the minimum requirement. For Section B the Limit of Hazard Lands was based on the following: 2. A toe erosion allowance (2 metres) setback was determined based on Table: Minimum Toe Erosion Allowance of the Natural Hazards Technical Guide. 3. A 6 metre access erosion allowance as a minimum. Rideau Valley Conservation Authority Rideau Valley Drive PO Box 559, Manotick, Ontario K4M 1A5

191 RVCA WSES Technical Review Memorandum The consultant has indicated a 12.1 metre setback (Limit of Hazard Lands) for Section A, for Section C a 16.1 metre setback (Limit of Hazard Lands), and for Section E a 13.5 metre setback (Limit of Hazard Lands) from the top of bank based on the following: 1. A stable slope allowance based on stability analysis using SLIDE (software) which uses the Bishop s method. 2. A toe erosion allowance (5 metres) setback was determined based on Table: Minimum Toe Erosion Allowance of the Natural Hazards Technical Guide. 3. A 6 metre access erosion allowance as a minimum. However, the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority has identified active erosion along the water course on this stretch of Mosquito Creek. Therefore, based on this information the Toe Erosion Allowance should be 8 metres based on the soil type and the fact that there will be future development upstream which has the potential to increase flows in storm events, thereby increasing the potential for erosion. If the Limits of Hazards Lands is replotted on Drawing PG dated March 10, 2016 by Patersongroup, it may not change the development envelope, as the 15 metre setback from top of slope for conservation of land may be greater. I trust this is satisfactory for your present purposes. Please call if you have any questions Regards Terry K. Davidson, P.Eng. Director of Regulations Ext terry.davidson@rvca.ca Date: 07/04/2016 page 2/2 Reviewer

192 Thiffault, Dustin From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Sevigny, John Thursday, April 07, :50 PM Thiffault, Dustin Moroz, Peter; Baird, Natasha RE: 4450 Limebank Road - Hydraulic Boundary Conditions FUS Calculation Sheet.xlsm; 4450LimebankRoad_April52016.docx Good afternoon Dustin, Please find attached the boundary conditions. Please note that Natasha Baird is now the project manager on this file. I ve copied her on this . Regards, John Sevigny, C.E.T. Senior Project Manager, Infrastructure Approvals Development Review - Suburban Services - East Unit Gestionnaire de projet, Approbation des demandes d infrastructure Examen des demandes d aménagement (Services suburbains est) City of Ottawa Ville d'ottawa ext./poste ottawa.ca/planning / ottawa.ca/urbanisme From: Thiffault, Dustin [mailto:dustin.thiffault@stantec.com] Sent: April 01, :46 PM To: Sevigny, John Cc: Moroz, Peter Subject: RE: 4450 Limebank Road - Hydraulic Boundary Conditions John, Attached are the FUS calculations for each of the four proposed buildings on-site. The intended land use is residential, with four four-storey stacked townhome buildings comprising 16 units apiece. Thanks, Dustin Thiffault, P.Eng. Urban Development Project Engineer Stantec Clyde Avenue Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Phone: (613) Fax: (613) Dustin.Thiffault@stantec.com The content of this is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this . 1

193 From: Sevigny, John Sent: Friday, April 01, :40 PM To: Thiffault, Dustin Cc: Moroz, Peter Subject: RE: 4450 Limebank Road - Hydraulic Boundary Conditions Importance: High Actually. Dustin, I noticed you didn t provide your FUS calculations. Please send them to me ASAP as we require them for the boundary conditions. We also require what the land use will be. Regards, John Sevigny, C.E.T. Senior Project Manager, Infrastructure Approvals Development Review - Suburban Services - East Unit Gestionnaire de projet, Approbation des demandes d infrastructure Examen des demandes d aménagement (Services suburbains est) City of Ottawa Ville d'ottawa ext./poste ottawa.ca/planning / ottawa.ca/urbanisme From: Thiffault, Dustin [mailto:dustin.thiffault@stantec.com] Sent: April 01, :15 PM To: Sevigny, John Cc: Moroz, Peter Subject: 4450 Limebank Road - Hydraulic Boundary Conditions Hello John, I m looking for watermain hydraulic boundary conditions for the proposed site at 4450 Limebank road Please see attached sketch for proposed connection locations. We anticipate connecting to the existing 300mm watermain on Limebank road via an existing 200mm stub dropped for the site, as well as a potential second connection further south if looping is a requirement. Estimated domestic demands and fire flow requirements for the site are as follows: Average Day Demand 0.70L/s Max Day Demand L/s Peak Hour Demand L/s Fire Flow Requirement per FUS - 200L/s Thanks, Dustin Thiffault, P.Eng. Urban Development Project Engineer Stantec Clyde Avenue Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Phone: (613) Fax: (613) Dustin.Thiffault@stantec.com 2

194 The content of this is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this . This originates from the City of Ottawa system. Any distribution, use or copying of this or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. Thank you. Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville d'ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son destinataire prévu est interdite. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration. This originates from the City of Ottawa system. Any distribution, use or copying of this or the information it contains by other than the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. Thank you. Le présent courriel a été expédié par le système de courriels de la Ville d'ottawa. Toute distribution, utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que son destinataire prévu est interdite. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration. 3

195 Information Provided: Date provided: 01 April 2016 Boundary Conditions at 4450 Limebank Road Criteria Average Demand 0.70 Maximum Daily Demand 1.75 Peak Hourly Demand 3.85 Fire Flow Demand 167, 200 Maximum Daily + Fire Flow Demand , Demand (L/s) Location: Results: