MASTER SERVICING STUDY
FOR
Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
CITY OF OTTAWA
PROJECT NO.: 11-513
JULY 2013 FOURTH SUBMISSION © DSEL
MASTER SERVICING STUDY for Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013 FOURTH SUBMISSION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Master Servicing Study (MSS) investigates the provision of neighbourhood-wide servicing infrastructure to support the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area in the east end of the City of Ottawa.
The Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area is approximately 230 hectares and forms the Study Area for this MSS. The Study Area is generally bound by Cardinal Creek to the west, Ottawa Road 174 and the Ottawa River to the north, and Ted Kelly Lane and Frank Kenny Road to the east. The southern limit of the Study Area generally follows the northern bank of a tributary of Cardinal Creek (referred to as the South Tributary), however a significant rectangular parcel of the study area also extends south of the South Tributary. Old Montreal Road and an existing provincially-owned Hydro One corridor cross the site. As well, another tributary of Cardinal Creek, referred to as the North Tributary, crosses the site north of Old Montreal Road. The site features three natural plateaus rising from the north to the south of the site.
This MSS has been prepared in support of the Cardinal Creek Village Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application for the development of a portion of the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area: specifically, the OPA seeks to re-designate the 208 hectares of land north of the South Tributary from ‘Urban Expansion Study Area’ to ‘Urban Area’. The OPA and associated Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan identify a proposed mix of residential land, mixed use land, parks, schools, and transportation and open space networks to support a projected 67,000 square meters of commercial space and a population ranging from 8,500 to 9,600 people. The proposed development includes an intersection with Ottawa Road 174, a slight re-alignment of Old Montreal Road, and closing and filling the North Tributary upstream of an existing environmental protection zone.
The MSS has been prepared in accordance with the integration provisions of the Municipal Engineers Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (June 2000, as amended in 2011), which combines the requirements of the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act .
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE I © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Geotechnical, hydrogeology, geomorphic and natural environment investigations have been completed, in order to complete an inventory of existing environmental conditions and to identify development opportunities and constraints:
‹ Development limits are identified for the watercourses, based on the following considerations: slope stability, erosion access, floodplain limits, meanderbelt width, 30m setback from normal high water mark, or other defined setback from top of slope (as agreed to by the City and RVCA as part of a field staking exercise). ‹ A site grade raise restriction of 2m is in effect for housing within the northern portion of the site (where existing elevations range from 53 m – 56 m), while a 3m grade raise restriction applies to housing within the remainder of the site. ‹ The natural heritage system is identified based on a detailed assessment of the existing environmental features, and is to be integrated into the development concept plan. ‹ The Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and the North and South Tributaries support fish communities, and stormwater management is to be provided to ensure enhanced quality control of stormwater runoff (long-term average removal of 80% Total Suspended Solids). ‹ Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary are in adjustment, and stormwater management is to be designed to provide erosion protection for these watercourses. ‹ The majority of the site is underlain by low permeability marine clay and till deposits that have a low infiltration potential. However, areas of solution enhanced bedrock of the Gull River Formation and the Bobcaygeon Formation are present within the subject lands and are considered Important Recharge Areas because of their associated high infiltration potential. These Important Recharge Areas are identified in the appended Site Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013). Post-development infiltration is to maintain the form and function of existing natural features and groundwater resources, specifically by implementing design measures to avoid or mitigate against adverse effects to these Important Recharge Areas. ‹ Existing stream flows in the South Tributary and North Tributary are predominantly derived from surface water runoff and existing farm drainage. In addition, the downstream portions of the South Tributary are supported by significant groundwater baseflow. Similarly, stream flow in the downstream portion of the North Tributary (within the existing environmental protection zone) is also supported by small amounts of groundwater baseflow. ‹ No karstic hazards to construction are identified within the development area shown in the OPA Concept Plan. However, there are two karstic features that might be considered as possible development constraints within the broader
PAGE II DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
MSS study area: one potential karstic feature within the existing residential area north of Old Montreal Road and east of Cardinal Creek, and one potential karstic feature south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area. Although there is a low probability that there are subsurface voids at these locations that would be a hazard to construction, it is recommended that either buildings be setback from these locations or excavation to bedrock be undertaken to examine the two potential karstic features for voids. Having regard for these opportunities and constraints, the MSS: ‹ Identifies, assesses, and evaluates alternative solutions that would provide services to the proposed community; ‹ Evaluates the serviceability of alternative land use concepts; ‹ Evaluates design alternatives for water supply, sanitary collection, storm drainage, stormwater management, and grading, leading to the identification of a preferred servicing plan; ‹ Identifies the effects of the preferred servicing plan on the environment; and, ‹ Identifies associated mitigation measures to be implemented and details commitments to future work. The MSS has been developed in consultation with the City of Ottawa, the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA), and utility company representatives, and key principles and outcomes have been presented to the public to solicit ongoing input. Key findings of the MSS are as follows: 1) Expanding the existing municipal wastewater and water infrastructure is the preferred servicing solution for Cardinal Creek Village, as it supports the planned development of a mixed-use community, is consistent with provincial and municipal policies for urban development, and minimizes negative environmental impacts. 2) The municipal water servicing approach for the community is for the northern and western portions of the lands, representing less than one third of the site, to be connected to the 1E Pressure Zone. The remainder of the site is to be fed from the 2E Pressure Zone. The proposed on-site watermain network follows the proposed road network, with the exception of servicing easements across the northernmost ridge, across the North Tributary, within the Hydro One corridor, and through the residential block southwest of the intersection of Old Montreal Road and the major collector road. 3) Water supply is to be provided by: • A 1E feedermain extending from an existing feedermain west of the site, running through City and Hydro One property, and crossing over Cardinal Creek via the existing Hydro One corridor culvert;
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE III © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
• A 2E feedermain extending north on Trim Road from the intersection at Old Montreal Road, then extending east along Dairy Drive, north within City-owned lands (west of 1001 Dairy Drive), and east within City- owned lands (north of 1001 Dairy Drive) before crossing under Cardinal Creek via trenchless watermain construction; and • 1E and 2E feedermains crossing Cardinal Creek at Old Montreal Road, within the road right-of-way. 4) The proposed watermain network meets the City of Ottawa design guidelines for development. 5) The Trim Road Collector sanitary sewer is the identified municipal wastewater outlet for the site, and an analysis of the existing infrastructure indicates that there will be sufficient capacity in the existing municipal sanitary system to support the development of Cardinal Creek Village. 6) The proposed gravity sewer conveyance system follows the proposed road network, with the exception of servicing easements across the northernmost ridge, within the Hydro One corridor, and within adjacent City property. 7) The proposed sanitary sewer network is designed in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines. 8) In terms of stormwater management, a treatment train approach is identified, using best management practices for site controls and a dual drainage system. Three stormwater management facilities are proposed: one stormwater management pond discharging to the Ottawa River (to provide quality control), one stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary (to provide erosion, quality, and quantity control), and one oil and grit separator unit discharging to the North Tributary (to provide quality control). 9) The design of the storm sewer network is in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines and follows the road network, discharging directly to the proposed stormwater management facilities or to conveyance channels destined to the proposed stormwater management facilities. Servicing easements will be required within the Hydro One corridor for the stormwater management pond access road and forebay outlet in the vicinity of Pond 1. Similarly, a servicing easement will be required west of the major collector road, across the Hydro One corridor, for the proposed storm sewer destined to Pond 1. 10) A cut-off swale is proposed along the eastern edge of the Concept Plan area, north of Old Montreal Road, in order to accommodate existing drainage from residential areas east of Ted Kelly Lane. 11) The outlet for Pond 1 consists of an existing 1.5 m wide x 1.15 m high and 37 m long concrete box culvert that will convey the pond outflows and outflows from the proposed cut-off swale underneath OR 174 to the Ottawa River. This culvert is large enough to accommodate outflows for earlier phases of development,
PAGE IV DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
before full build-out of Cardinal Creek Village. However, under ultimate conditions, a second culvert under OR 174, such as a 2.4 m wide x 1.5 m high concrete box culvert, is recommended to be installed. 12) The oil and grit separator unit has been identified to divert treated weeping tile flows and storm flows up to the 2-year storm design flowrate from 10.12 ha of the proposed developed lands to the North Tributary. This is to compensate for reductions in stream flow due to the closing of the portion of the North Tributary upstream of the environmental protection zone and due to drainage catchment diversion and urbanization. 13) Groundwater baseflow in the South Tributary is primarily supported by groundwater discharge linked to Important Recharge Areas external to the subject lands or Important Recharge Areas that are to be maintained as open space within the preferred development concept plan. Therefore, no groundwater baseflow compensation is required for the South Tributary under post- development conditions. The proposed stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary will contribute stormwater runoff to support the natural stream flow regime. 14) A site grading scheme has been developed to minimize earthworks and provide major system conveyance to the receiving watercourses (Cardinal Creek, the South Tributary, the North Tributary and the Ottawa River). Where proposed roadway grades exceed the permissible grade raise recommendations, a settlement surcharge program can be implemented to ensure long-term settlements are minimal (as per the companion July 2013 Geotechnical Report prepared by Paterson Group). 15) An erosion analysis of the proposed stormwater management system shows that it will effectively maintain a level of stream erosion such that the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek can continue to fulfill normal functions. 16) A slope reinstatement program is recommended at one location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, south of the Hydro One corridor, where an existing slope failure has occurred. It is recommended that the lower portion of the slope face be re- shaped to improve overall slope stability of the slope at this location. In addition, slope reshaping is proposed on the eastern bank of the Cardinal Creek ravine where the North Tributary runs adjacent to the Hydro One embankment, in order to support the proposed watermain and sanitary infrastructure. The proposed works will require RVCA review and approval as part of detailed design, and may require design changes to address environmental impacts. 17) The loss of the North Tributary headwater (upstream of the environmental protection zone) is to be mitigated. The required rehabilitation/compensation works will be developed in consultation with the RVCA as part of future subdivision approval processes.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE V © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
18) The Important Recharge Areas identified in the appended Site Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013) have been generally retained as undisturbed open space. However, 0.96 hectares of development is proposed within the Bobcaygeon Formation, and 11.53 hectares of development is proposed within the Gull River Formation. The introduction of impervious surfaces in these Important Recharge Areas and across the remainder of the site is expected to reduce infiltration from pre-development levels. However, it is not essential to maintain pre-development infiltration levels over the site, as groundwater recharge contributes to surface discharge in the Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and the Cardinal Creek tributaries. Of these watercourses, the natural flow regime is to be maintained within the North and South Tributaries via the stormwater management plan for the site, and Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River are supported by large drainage areas and will therefore not suffer adverse effects due to a minor reduction in groundwater baseflow caused by the proposed development. 19) A baseline groundwater geochemistry and history of static water levels is recommended to be undertaken for all existing water wells that are to remain in use both within the study limits and within a proposed groundwater monitoring area identified in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013). Where permanent groundwater interference has been demonstrated to have occurred in the wells included in the monitoring program and where resolution of groundwater interference/degradation is sought by the surrounding landowners under the Ontario Water Resources Act, mitigation of the impacts must be carried out by the developer. Possible measurable impacts would likely be in the form of lowered well yield and impairment of the quality of the raw groundwater. The proposed mitigation measures focus on connecting the affected properties to the municipal drinking water systems at the developer’s expense. 20) Other proposed mitigation and monitoring programs and commitments to future work have been established, based on predicted environmental effects. 21) Sufficient capacity is provided in both the proposed sanitary system and water supply network to service the lands excluded from the OPA (south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area) in the future. Storm water management for the excluded lands would be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary. 22) Utility companies agree that the Study Area is immediately serviceable. 23) Depending on the forthcoming recommendations from the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study , erosion mitigation measures may be required in Cardinal Creek in the future by others.
As documented in the MSS, the following infrastructure projects have been identified and planned in accordance with the integration provisions of the Municipal Engineers
PAGE VI DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (June 2000, as amended in 2011):
Water Supply Projects:
‹ Extend a 1E Pressure Zone feedermain to site within a Hydro One corridor and municipal property, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Extend a 2E Pressure Zone feedermain from Trim Road at Old Montreal Road to site (via Trim Road right-of-way, Dairy Drive right-of-way, and municipal property), including the use of trenchless technology for crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Extend 1E and 2E watermains within the proposed Old Montreal Road right-of- way, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule A+). ‹ Establish an on-site water distribution network and all works necessary to connect the system to the identified feedermains (Schedule B).
Sanitary Servicing Projects:
‹ Establish a sanitary trunk sewer within a Hydro One corridor and municipal property to connect to the existing Trim Road collector sewer, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Establish a sewage collection system on-site and all works necessary to connect to the identified trunk sanitary sewer (Schedule B).
Stormwater Management Projects:
‹ Construct Stormwater Management Pond # 1 and associated storm sewers, culverts, and ditches, including construction of a culvert under OR 174 (Schedule B). ‹ Construct oil and grit separator unit and associated storm sewers (Schedule B). ‹ Construct Stormwater Management Pond # 2 and associated storm sewers (Schedule B). ‹ Construct ditch to convey drainage from external areas (Schedule B).
Slope Stability Works:
‹ Slope reinstatement program at one location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, south of the Hydro One corridor, where an existing slope failure has occurred (Schedule A).
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE VII © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
These listed infrastructure projects and all other servicing infrastructure recommended in this report require infrastructure approvals prior to construction, including secondary land use approvals and servicing easements through the Hydro One corridor.
This MSS will require approval under the Planning Act as supporting information for the Official Plan Amendment application. Project-specific approvals are also expected to be required from the City of Ottawa, Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and Hydro One.
The integration provisions – combining the requirements of the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act – specify that any project which would otherwise be subject to the Municipal Class EA, has fulfilled the requirements outlined in the Class EA (Section A.2.9), and receives approval under the Planning Act, is considered to be a ‘pre-approved’ project and may proceed to construction. As such, these servicing infrastructure projects will not be subject to additional Class EA approval requirements with the submission of subsequent site plan or plan of subdivision applications for Cardinal Creek Village.
PAGE VIII DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
MASTER SERVICING STUDY for Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013 FOURTH SUBMISSION
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Study Area ...... 3 1.2 Report Integration ...... 4 1.3 Study Scope ...... 7
2.0 STUDY PROCESS ...... 9 2.1 Integrated Process with Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act ...... 9 2.1.1 MCEA Project Listing ...... 10 2.1.2 MCEA Process ...... 10 2.2 Consultation...... 11 2.2.1 City of Ottawa ...... 12 2.2.2 RVCA ...... 12 2.2.3 Public Utilities ...... 13 2.2.4 Public Consultation ...... 13 2.3 Report Revisions ...... 15 2.3.1 First Submission ...... 15 2.3.2 Second Submission ...... 15 2.3.3 Third Submission ...... 17 2.3.4 Fourth Submission ...... 18 2.4 Background Studies ...... 18 2.5 Guidelines ...... 20 2.6 Master Servicing Study Process and Approval Requirements ...... 21 2.6.1 City of Ottawa ...... 21 2.6.2 Ministry of the Environment ...... 22 2.6.3 Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA) ...... 22 2.6.4 Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) ...... 23 2.6.5 Hydro One ...... 23 2.6.6 Ministry of Natural Resources ...... 23
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SITE CONSTRAINTS ...... 25
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE IX © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
3.1 Geotechnical Conditions ...... 25 3.2 Drainage ...... 26 3.3 Hydrogeology ...... 27 3.4 Karst Topography ...... 29 3.5 Natural Environment Features ...... 29 3.5.1 Aquatic Environment ...... 30 3.5.2 Terrestrial Environment ...... 30 3.5.3 Species at Risk and Other Species of Interest ...... 31 3.5.4 Natural Heritage System and Headwater Assessment ...... 31 3.6 Fluvial and Geomorphologic Environment ...... 33 3.6.1 Cardinal Creek ...... 33 3.6.2 South Tributary ...... 36 3.7 Existing Land Use and Adjacent Land Uses ...... 37 3.8 Existing Utilities ...... 37 3.9 Existing Municipal Services ...... 38 3.9.1 Water Supply Servicing ...... 38 3.9.2 Wastewater Servicing ...... 41 3.10 Opportunities and Constraints ...... 42 3.10.1 Limit of Development ...... 45
4.0 NEED AND JUSTIFICATION FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICING ...... 50 4.1 Development Plan ...... 50 4.2 Problem Statement ...... 50 4.3 Guiding Principles ...... 50
5.0 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE SERVICING SOLUTIONS ...... 52 5.1 Water Distribution Alternatives ...... 52 5.2 Wastewater Collection Alternatives ...... 53 5.3 Stormwater Management Alternatives ...... 54 5.3.1 Conveyance Alternatives ...... 54 5.3.2 Treatment Alternatives ...... 56 5.4 Preferred Servicing Solution – Extend Municipal Services ...... 57
6.0 MUNICIPAL SERVICING ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCEPT PLANS ...... 58
PAGE X DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
6.1 Preliminary Neighbourhood Concept Plans ...... 58 6.2 Municipal Servicing Assessment of Alternative Neighbourhood Concept Plans . 63 6.2.1 Evaluation Process ...... 63 6.2.2 Evaluation of Neighbourhood Concept Plans ...... 64 6.3 Concept Plan Refinements and Preferred Concept Plan ...... 69
7.0 WATER SERVICING PLAN ...... 75 7.1 Design Criteria ...... 75 7.2 Alternative Water Distribution Designs ...... 77 7.3 Preferred Water Distribution Network ...... 79 7.4 Water Distribution Network Design ...... 79 7.4.1 Pressure Zone Boundary Delineation ...... 80 7.4.2 Cardinal Creek Crossings ...... 80 7.4.3 Multiple Watermains in Proposed Municipal Right-of-Way ...... 81 7.4.4 Local High Points ...... 81 7.4.5 Modeling Results ...... 82 7.5 Redundancy and Failure Testing ...... 83 7.6 Commitments for Detailed Design ...... 84 7.7 Water Supply Conclusion ...... 85
8.0 WASTEWATER SERVICING PLAN ...... 87 8.1 Design Criteria ...... 87 8.2 Alternative Wastewater Conveyance Designs ...... 88 8.2.1 Option A – Conventional Gravity Sewer Outlet ...... 89 8.2.2 Option B – Pumping Station and Forcemain ...... 89 8.2.3 Option C – Gravity Sewer and Siphon Crossing Under Cardinal Creek .. 90 8.3 Preferred Wastewater Conveyance Design ...... 90 8.4 Sanitary Sewer System Design ...... 91 8.5 Commitments for Detailed Design ...... 92 8.6 Wastewater Servicing Conclusion ...... 93
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND STORM CONVEYANCE PLAN ...... 94 9.1 Existing Storm Drainage ...... 94 9.2 Design Criteria ...... 94 9.2.1 Minor and Major System Conveyance Design Criteria ...... 94 9.2.2 Quantity and Quality Control Targets ...... 96
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE XI © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
9.3 Alternative Stormwater Management Designs ...... 97 9.3.1 Option 1 – One Stormwater Management Pond for Cardinal Creek Village ...... 97 9.3.2 Option 2 – Two Stormwater Management Ponds for Cardinal Creek Village ...... 98 9.3.3 Option 3 – Four Stormwater Management Ponds for Cardinal Creek Village ...... 98 9.4 Preferred Stormwater Management Alternative...... 99 9.5 Proposed Stormwater Management System Design ...... 99 9.5.1 Minor and Major System Drainage ...... 101 9.5.2 Analysis of Flow Depths on Streets ...... 104 9.5.3 Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis ...... 105 9.5.4 Stormwater Management Facility Characteristics ...... 106 9.6 Watercourse and Groundwater Impact Assessment of Proposed Stormwater Management Plan ...... 108 9.6.1 Erosion Assessment ...... 108 9.6.2 Water Budget Analysis ...... 109 9.6.3 Stream Flow Analysis for Cardinal Creek and the North and South Tributaries ...... 112 9.7 Commitments for Detailed Design ...... 112 9.8 Stormwater Servicing Conclusion ...... 113
10.0 PHASING STRATEGY ...... 116
11.0 UTILITY COORDINATION ...... 116
12.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES ...... 117 12.1 Built-in Mitigation Measures ...... 118 12.1.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan ...... 118 12.1.2 Construction and Traffic Management Plan ...... 118 12.1.3 Archaeological Findings ...... 118 12.1.4 Emergency Response Plan ...... 119 12.1.5 Environmental Protection Plan ...... 119 12.1.6 Landscape Plan ...... 119 12.1.7 Slope Stability Management Plan ...... 119 12.1.8 Management of Contaminated Materials ...... 120 12.1.9 Well Decommissioning Plan ...... 120 12.2 Assessment and Evaluation Results ...... 120 12.3 Monitoring ...... 133 12.3.1 Fisheries ...... 133
PAGE XII DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
12.3.2 Butternut ...... 133 12.3.3 Groundwater and Surface Water ...... 133
13.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MASTER SERVICING PLAN ...... 135 13.1 Future Development Applications ...... 135 13.2 Property Requirements ...... 135 13.3 Financial Implementation Plan – Development Charges ...... 137 13.4 Process for Amending the Master Servicing Study ...... 137 13.4.1 Minor Changes ...... 137 13.4.2 Major Changes ...... 138
14.0 CONCLUSION ...... 139
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE XIII © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
LIST OF IN-TEXT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT 1: NORTH TRIBUTARY - ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ZONE ...... 32 EXHIBIT 2: PRELIMINARY NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCEPT PLANS (NOVEMBER 2012) ...... 61 EXHIBIT 3: PREFERRED NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCEPT PLAN ...... 71
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE STUDIES/REPORTS ...... 6 TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF EXISTING WATERMAINS ...... 39 TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF PLANNED WATERMAINS ...... 39 TABLE 4: EXISTING WATERMAIN BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ...... 40 TABLE 5: EXISTING SANITARY SEWERS ...... 41 TABLE 6: MEANDERBELT WIDTHS FOR CARDINAL CREEK AND SOUTH TRIBUTARY ...... 48 TABLE 7: EVALUATION OF PRELIMINARY NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCEPT PLANS ...... 65 TABLE 8: CONCEPT PLAN REFINEMENTS ...... 69 TABLE 9: LAND USE SUMMARY ...... 72 TABLE 10: POPULATION ESTIMATES ...... 72 TABLE 11: WATER SUPPLY DESIGN CRITERIA ...... 76 TABLE 12: WASTEWATER SUPPLY DESIGN CRITERIA ...... 87 TABLE 13: STORMWATER CONVEYANCE DESIGN PARAMETERS ...... 95 TABLE 14: EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS DRAINAGE AREAS FOR CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE ...... 100 TABLE 15: ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS EVALUATION ...... 123
PAGE XIV DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
LIST OF MASTER SERVICING STUDY FIGURES / DRAWINGS
(Enclosed after Page 144) 1: Site Location Plan 2: Environmental Features Plan 3: Constraints Plan 4: Proposed Development Concept and Governing Development Setback Line 5: Existing Services 6: Sanitary Analysis 7: Preferred Water Supply Network 8: Sanitary Pumpstation Alternative 9: Sanitary Siphon Alternative 10: Preferred Sanitary Collection System 11: Preferred Sanitary Trunk - Plan & Profiles 12: Hydro One Corridor – Proposed Servicing Easement Plan & Profile 12A: Cross Section of Proposed Infrastructure Within Hydro One Corridor 13: Existing (Pre-Development) Storm Drainage Areas 14: Stormwater Management Alternatives – Option 1 15: Stormwater Management Alternatives - Option 2 (Preferred Grading Plan) 16: Stormwater Management Alternatives - Option 3 17: Conceptual Storm Drainage - Minor System 18: Conceptual Storm Drainage - Major System 19: Proposed Storm Trunk Sewers – Plan & Profiles 20: Concept Pond Facility Layout – Pond 1 21: Concept Pond Facility Layout – Pond 2 22: Pond Sections 23: Potential Phasing Plan
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE XV © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
LIST OF MASTER SERVICING STUDY APPENDICES
Appendix A: Master Servicing Study – Terms of Reference Appendix B: Summary of Agency Comments and Responses (DSEL, July 2013) Appendix C: Correspondence with Hydro One (Hydro One, 2013) Appendix D: Creek Channel Erosion and Slope Instability Features from Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study (AECOM, 2009) Appendix E: Sanitary Design Sheet, Trim Road Collector (DSEL, June 2013) As-Built Drawings, Sanitary Collector Sewer, Ottawa River Sub Trunk (City of Ottawa, 2001) Appendix F: Preliminary Neighbourhood Concept Plans for Comparative Evaluation – Preliminary Grading Plans (DSEL, November 2012) Appendix G: Land Use and Population Projections – Neighbourhood Concept Plan (WND, June 2013) Appendix H: Watermain Network Analysis (Veritec Consulting Inc., June 2013) Appendix I: Sanitary Calculation Sheet – Cardinal Creek Village (DSEL, June 2013) Appendix J: Storm Calculation Sheets & Cross-Section Drawings – Cardinal Creek Village (DSEL, June 2013) Appendix K: Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan and Stormwater Management Facility Design (JFSA, June 2013) Appendix L: 2-yr and 100-yr Water Level Analysis (JFSA, March 2013) Appendix M: Site Specific Water Budget Report – Cardinal Creek Village Development (Palmer Environmental Consulting Group Inc., June 2013) Appendix N: Baseflows to North Tributary (JFSA, July 2013) Water Balance Analysis (JFSA, June 2013) Overlay of Concept Plan on Important Recharge Areas (DSEL, July 2013) Appendix O: Erosion Assessment & Continuous Simulation Modeling (JFSA, June 2013) Appendix P: Geotechnical Investigation of the Hydro One Corridor Culvert and Proposed Watermain Crossing of Cardinal Creek (Paterson Group, March 2013) Appendix Q: Cascading Stream Feature (Coldwater Consulting Ltd, June 2013) Appendix R: Grade Raise Restrictions & Limit of Development (Paterson Group, June 2013)
PAGE XVI DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
REFERENCED DOCUMENTS
1. Under Separate Cover: Cardinal Creek Village - Existing Conditions Report, July 2013 ‹ Geotechnical Investigation (Paterson Group PG1796-2, July 2013) ‹ Cardinal Creek Village - 2012 Surface Water and Rainfall Monitoring Memorandum (JFSA, December 2012) ‹ Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group PH1890-REP.01, June 2013) ‹ Natural Environment Features (Muncaster Environmental Planning Inc., February 2013) ‹ Fish Habitat and Fish Community Existing Conditions (Muncaster Environmental Planning Inc., January 2013) ‹ Fish Habitat and Fish Community Headwater Assessment (Muncaster Environmental Planning Inc., June 2013) ‹ Evaluation of Karst at Cardinal Creek Village (Worthington Groundwater, June 2013) ‹ Official Plan Amendment Application – Planning Rationale (Richard W. Harrison & Associates, November 2012) ‹ Phase I – Environmental Site Assessment: Proposed Cardinal Village Subdivision Lands, Old Montreal Road, Ottawa (Cumberland), Ontario (Paterson Group, 7 November 2012) ‹ Cardinal Creek Village – Meander Belt Width Delineation Memo (Parish Geomorphic Limited, 4 April 2013) ‹ Cardinal Creek Village – Erosion Threshold Assessment of South Tributary (Parish Geomorphic Limited, January 2013) ‹ Cardinal Creek Village – Erosion Threshold Assessment of Cardinal Creek Main Branch (Parish Geomorphic Limited, May 2013) ‹ Cardinal Creek Village – Community Transportation Study (IBI Group, July 2013) 2. Under Separate Cover: Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan (Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited, July 2013)
3. Under Separate Cover: Cardinal Creek Village Public Consultation Report (Delcan Corporation, March 2013)
4. Under Separate Cover: Cardinal Creek Village Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, July 2013)
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE XVII © DSEL
MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
MASTER SERVICING STUDY for Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
City of Ottawa
JULY 2013 FOURTH SUBMISSION
Project No.: 11-513
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Master Servicing Study (MSS) investigates the provision of neighbourhood-wide servicing infrastructure to support the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area in the City of Ottawa.
The Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area is approximately 230 hectares and is located in the east end of the City of Ottawa. The Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area forms the Study Area for this MSS, and is generally bound by Cardinal Creek to the west, Ottawa Road 174 and the Ottawa River to the north, and Ted Kelly Lane and Frank Kenny Road to the east. The southern limit of the Study Area generally follows the northern bank of a tributary of Cardinal Creek (referred to as the South Tributary), however a significant rectangular parcel of the study area also extends south of the South Tributary. The subject lands are depicted in Figure 1.
As part of the City of Ottawa’s growth management strategy and 2008 Official Plan review, Area 11 was identified as one of the best candidate areas for urban expansion in the City. Subsequently, on June 12, 2012, the lands were approved for inclusion in the City’s urban area (designated as an Urban Expansion Study Area). Landowners are proceeding with the development of a Neighbourhood Concept Plan and an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) application to re-designate a portion of the Area 11 lands from ‘Urban Expansion Study Area’ to ‘Urban Area’. The proposed community – Cardinal Creek Village - totals 208 hectares and encompasses all of the Area 11 Urban Expansion lands north of the South Tributary. Cardinal Creek Village is proposed to include a mix of low and medium density housing, schools, mixed-use blocks, and parks, as well as recreation and open space networks.
The development of the proposed community requires approvals under the Planning Act, and components of the development are also subject to the Environmental Assessment Act . Accordingly, an integrated Planning and Environmental Assessment
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 1 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
approach has been adopted, leading to the creation of two concurrent Municipal Class Environmental Assessments - a Master Transportation Plan and a Master Servicing Plan (Master Servicing Study) - to support the proposed Official Plan Amendment for Cardinal Creek Village. This MSS has been prepared in accordance with the integration provisions of the Municipal Engineers Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (June 2000, as amended in 2011), which combine the requirements of the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act .
Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation, on behalf of the Cardinal Creek Village landowners, has retained David Schaeffer Engineering Ltd. to complete this Master Servicing Study, complete with stormwater management analysis provided by J.F. Sabourin and Associates Inc., watermain analysis provided by Veritec Consulting Inc. , geomorphology and erosion analysis provided by Parish Geomorphic Ltd., geotechnical and hydrogeological investigations completed by Paterson Group Inc., natural environment investigations completed by Muncaster Environmental, water budget analysis provided by Palmer Environmental Consulting Group Inc. , karst investigations prepared by Worthington Groundwater, conceptual conveyance ditch design prepared by Coldwater Consulting Ltd ., and environmental assessment led by Delcan Corporation.
The objective of this Master Servicing Study (MSS) report is to provide technical details of the proposed servicing plan for Cardinal Creek Village, specifically describing the proposed water supply, sanitary collection system, storm drainage system, stormwater and groundwater management, grading, and utility network. The MSS also considers the serviceability of the remainder of the Area 11 Urban Expansion lands, south of Cardinal Creek Village and south of the South Tributary, to ensure the lands will be serviceable in the future. The MSS uses environmental assessment planning principles to evaluate alternative means of servicing the proposed community, leading to the identification of a preferred servicing plan complete with mitigation of potential adverse environmental effects.
The MSS is one component of a set of integrated and concurrent reports that have been prepared to support the development of Cardinal Creek Village. The MSS report has been prepared concurrently with the Transportation Master Plan ( IBI Group ) and the Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan ( Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited ). The general intent and scope of the comprehensive reports is discussed in Section 1.2.
Public input is an integral part of the integrated Planning and Environmental Assessment process for the development of Cardinal Creek Village. In addition to ongoing consultation with municipal staff, property owners, Hydro One, and the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, three public meetings were held in June 2012, September 2012, and November 2012 to solicit public feedback on alternative servicing solutions and alternative designs, among other topics such as land use and transportation alternatives. An overview of the study process, including public consultation, is provided in Section 2.0 , while details of the integrated planning process
PAGE 2 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
and consultation program are provided in the Public Consultation Report prepared by Delcan Corporation (March 2013).
1.1 Study Area
As depicted in Figure 1, the proposed Cardinal Creek Village development is located east of Cardinal Creek and south of Ottawa Road 174 (OR 174) in the City of Ottawa. The subject lands are legally described as Part of Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28, Concession 1, in the former Geographic Township of Cumberland (Old Survey).
The subject lands for the MSS total 230 hectares and the limits are defined as follows:
‹ North of Old Montreal Road, the eastern Study Area limit abuts existing rural residential properties fronting on Ted Kelly Lane; ‹ South of Old Montreal Road, the eastern Study Area limit abuts Frank Kenny Road, which runs adjacent to existing rural residential properties; ‹ The southern Study Area limit generally follows the northern bank of the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek, although a significant rectangular parcel of the study area extends south of the South Tributary (abutting existing agricultural lands); ‹ The western Study Area limit generally follows Cardinal Creek; and ‹ The northern Study Area limit follows OR 174/County Road 17.
Figure 1 delineates the subject lands for the MSS, while further information on the planning status of the lands is available in the Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan prepared by Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited and submitted in July 2013 to the City of Ottawa.
The subject lands are currently under private ownership of various landowners. Existing land uses include agricultural fields and associated buildings, rural residential development along Old Montreal Road and Grand-Chêne Court, a church, a nursery and landscape supply centre (known as ‘Laporte Flowers and Nursery’), and vacant lands. Municipal addresses include 1079-1422 Old Montreal Road, 1313-1325 Grand- Chêne Court, and lands with no civic address. An existing Hydro One corridor runs through the northern portion of the site, along the alignment of a former railway line, and Old Montreal Road also runs through the site. Two existing tributaries cross the site, the North Tributary and South Tributary, discharging to Cardinal Creek to the north and south of Old Montreal Road, respectively.
In accordance with environmental assessment principles, the study area for the MSS is broad, and extends beyond the boundaries of the Cardinal Creek Village Official Plan Amendment application. As noted in Section 1.0, the Cardinal Creek Village lands that comprise the OPA consist of approximately 208 hectares all north of the South Tributary, while the overall MSS Study Area lands consist of 230 hectares and includes
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 3 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
the approximately 23 hectare parcel of the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area that is south of the South Tributary. The MSS also considers and documents existing conditions, recommended projects, and impact assessments for the following additional areas outside of the subject lands:
‹ Cardinal Creek valley from the Ottawa River to south of the confluence of the South Tributary; ‹ Trim Road (about 425m south of OR 174 and from Dairy Drive to Old Montreal Road), Dairy Drive (from Trim Road, extending about 300m easterly) and Old Montreal Road (from Trim Road and extending 900m easterly to the subject lands) municipal right-of-ways [for connections to existing municipal water and sanitary infrastructure west of the subject lands]; ‹ Existing Hydro One corridor in the vicinity of the existing Cardinal Creek crossing [for connections to existing municipal water and sanitary infrastructure] ; ‹ Existing Hydro One corridor in the vicinity of the proposed Pond 1 [for access road and proposed outlet associated with the proposed forebay south of the Hydro One corridor]; ‹ Existing City of Ottawa property directly south of the Hydro One corridor, between Cardinal Creek and the Trim Road Park & Ride [for connections to existing municipal water infrastructure] ; ‹ The northern and western edge of the existing City of Ottawa Trim Park & Ride property [for connections to existing municipal sanitary infrastructure] ; ‹ Existing City of Ottawa property directly north and directly west of 1001 Dairy Drive [for connections to existing municipal water infrastructure] ; and, ‹ A selection of existing water supply wells surrounding the subject lands.
The specific location and descriptions of these off-site projects are further described in Section 3.3, Section 7.0, Section 8.0, and Section 9.0 of the MSS report, with local and regional environmental impacts (natural, social, physical, and technical environment) identified in Section 12.0 .
1.2 Report Integration
In support of the Official Plan Amendment application for Cardinal Creek Village, various studies and plans are required to identify: on-site and off-site municipal infrastructure (e.g. roads, water, and sewers); the natural heritage system; recreational pathways; community facility requirements; and land use densities and mixes. In addition to the various plans and studies, the requirements of the Municipal Engineers Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) must also be met (where required).
PAGE 4 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
As noted in Section 1.0, as part of the integrated approach to fulfilling requirements under the Environmental Assessment Act and Planning Act , a Neighbourhood Concept Plan and two concurrent Class Environmental Assessment Studies/Master Plans were initiated:
‹ A Transportation Master Plan to define the road and transit networks for Cardinal Creek Village; and ‹ This Master Servicing Study for water, storm drainage and sanitary services for Cardinal Creek Village.
The reports and planning for Cardinal Creek Village were undertaken in a similar time frame and in an integrated manner, resulting in an iterative planning and decision making process. An inventory of the concurrent and inter-related reports is provided in Table 1, highlighting how the various components influence this Master Servicing Study. These reports are referenced throughout the MSS, and are provided as required for reference in the appendices or as companion documents.
Examples of inter-related aspects of the infrastructure and land use planning process include: ‹ Analysis of existing conditions led to the Environmental Constraints Plan (Drawing 3 and Section 3.10 ), which was used as the starting point for the Land Use/Demonstration Plan; ‹ The establishment of drainage corridors to be preserved and/or enhanced (Section 3.5 ) led to the stormwater drainage plan (Section 9.0 ), which in turn influenced the development of the Land Use/ Demonstration Plan; ‹ The establishment of sanitary collector sewers along proposed roads (Section 8.0 ) informed the orderly and cost effective proposed phasing of Cardinal Creek Village( Section 10.0 ); ‹ The internal water distribution system (Section 7.0 ) was developed to reflect the proposed transportation network; and, ‹ The design of the pathways system was developed to reflect environmental amenities, transportation networks and neighbourhood requirements. These examples of collaboration between various studies are key elements in ensuring that the requirements of all land use and infrastructure components are accommodated in an acceptable manner.
In addition to the reports noted in Table 1, the City of Ottawa is currently undertaking a subwatershed study for Cardinal Creek and its tributaries. The first portion of the study - Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study, Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, August 2009) – has been referenced throughout the MSS. The second and final portion of the study, which includes the development of the final recommendations, is ongoing as of July 2013.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 5 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
During the preparation of the MSS, the study team met with City of Ottawa staff to discuss the implications of the forthcoming Subwatershed Study on the Cardinal Creek Village development. As a result of these discussions, the City shared the hydrologic model that was prepared for the Subwatershed Study. This model formed the foundation for the modeling and water level determination outlined in detail in Section 3.2, Section 3.10, and Section 9.0 .
The potential erosion control works that are identified in the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study, Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, August 2009) and relate to the existing condition of Cardinal Creek are referenced in Section 3.6 of this MSS, but it is important to note that these recommendations have not yet received agency approval, as the Subwatershed Study is ongoing and has no formal planning status.
Table 1: Summary of Cardinal Creek Village Studies/Reports
Report Author Relationship to Master Servicing Study Cardinal Creek Village Concept Walker, Nott, Provides spatial information on land uses, Plan (July 2013) Dragicevic Associates development densities, and projected Limited populations to be serviced. Public Consultation Report Delcan Provides information regarding the (March 2013) integrated Environmental Assessment and Planning Act process and public consultation. Existing Conditions Report on Muncaster Delineates the natural heritage system Natural Environment Features Environmental within Cardinal Creek Village. (February 2013) Planning Existing Conditions Report on Muncaster Defines fish habitat within watercourses in Fish Habitat and Fish Environmental the subject lands and adjacent to the Communities (January 2013) Planning subject lands, which influences stormwater management recommendations for the development. Fish Habitat and Fish Muncaster Provides evaluation, classification and Communities Headwater Environmental management recommendations for existing Assessment (June 2013) Planning watercourses on site, which influences the development concept plan and stormwater management concept for the development. OPA Planning Rationale Richard W. Harrison & Delineates the study area and explains the (April 2013) Associates development context. Geotechnical Study & Slope Paterson Group Determines development setback Stability Analysis (July 2013) requirements, provides grade-raise recommendations, and provides bedrock contours. Hydrogeology Study (June 2013) Paterson Group Assesses groundwater discharge into tributaries of Cardinal Creek, provides recommendations for bedrock excavation, and assesses groundwater recharge.
PAGE 6 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Report Author Relationship to Master Servicing Study Site Specific Water Budget Palmer Environmental Determines the relationship between Report (June 2013) Consulting Group Inc. infiltration and runoff, and characterizes groundwater recharge and discharge as it relates to the protection of natural features and groundwater resources. Evaluation of Karst at Cardinal Worthington Assesses potential for Karst topography Creek Village (June 2013) Groundwater within Cardinal Creek Village. Erosion Threshold Assessment – Parish Geomorphic Determines the erosion threshold for the South Tributary (January 2013) Limited South Tributary of Cardinal Creek and provides recommendations for erosion control for stormwater management system design. Erosion Threshold Assessment – Parish Geomorphic Determines the erosion threshold for the Main Branch (May 2013) Limited main branch of Cardinal Creek and provides recommendations for erosion control for stormwater management system design. Meander Belt Width Delineation Parish Geomorphic Applies the defined meanderbelt width from (April 2013) Limited the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study, Existing Conditions Report to the Cardinal Creek Main Branch, for inclusion in development setback investigations. Also establishes meanderbelt width for the South Tributary based on field work, for inclusion in development setback investigations. Transportation Master Plan (July IBI Group Identifies transportation projects, and 2013) required ROW widths and alignments.
1.3 Study Scope
Generally, this Master Servicing Study (MSS):
‹ Identifies the need for municipal servicing for development within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area; ‹ Provides an inventory of existing environmental conditions and background studies/reports; ‹ Identifies and systematically evaluates alternative servicing solutions, considering environmental effects; ‹ Applies the preferred servicing solution to four (4) potential Neighbourhood Concept Plans, assessing the benefits and challenges in servicing the different land-use and transportation concepts; ‹ Presents detailed estimates of future servicing needs based on the preferred Neighbourhood Concept Plan; ‹ Assesses the existing water, sanitary, and storm sewer infrastructure nearby the study area, with respect to alignment issues and capacity to accommodate future development needs;
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 7 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Systematically evaluates detailed design alternatives with respect to grading, stormwater management, and the provision of trunk water, wastewater, and storm drainage infrastructure; ‹ Identifies the anticipated environmental impacts of the proposed preferred servicing scheme, and identifies required mitigation measures; ‹ Identifies public utility requirements for the neighbourhood; and ‹ Identifies the location and timing of the recommended trunk water, wastewater, and stormwater management infrastructure required to service the neighbourhood.
The Terms of Reference for the MSS, which were developed with input from the City of Ottawa, are appended in Appendix A.
PAGE 8 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
2.0 STUDY PROCESS
The MSS has been prepared in accordance with the integration provisions of the Municipal Engineers Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) (June 2000, as amended in 2011), which combines the requirements of the Planning Act and the Environmental Assessment Act . The following sub-sections are provided to: explain the process followed; summarize the consultation program, input received, and subsequent revisions to the MSS report; provide an inventory of previous studies and guidelines that were referenced in the preparation of the report; and present additional approval requirements.
2.1 Integrated Process with Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act The Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (MCEA) recognizes the benefits of integrating the MCEA process with Planning Act approvals, provided the intent and requirements of both processes are fulfilled. This type of integrated process results in projects identified within Master Planning and Class EA studies being considered ‘pre- approved’ under the MCEA process when the approval of the related planning application under the Planning Act comes into effect.
By completing the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act (via the MCEA) and land use planning processes at the same time, proponents streamline their efforts and can more effectively meet the requirements of both the Planning Act and the MCEA. This streamlined process reduces duplication - leading to faster implementation - and improves certainty for land use decision-making. Opportunities to make the two processes more efficient include combining the following: • Public and government agency consultation; • Documentation including technical / supporting studies; and • Land use planning and infrastructure requirements.
When carrying out an integrated approach, the requirements of the Planning Act and the MCEA must still be met. Integration does not provide an exemption from MCEA requirements.
As such, the MCEA requirements for all projects associated with the Cardinal Creek Village development proposal will be completed through the MCEA Master Plan process (Master Servicing Study and Transportation Master Plan) and integrated with the OPA, so that appeals regarding any of the projects may be directed to the OMB. Once approved, the preferred municipal infrastructure projects will not be subject to additional Class EA approval requirements with the submission of subsequent site plan or plan of subdivision applications. Any proposed amendments or revisions would be made using the addendum procedures in the Class EA, including appropriate public review.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 9 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
In addition to identifying the individual projects to be implemented, the completed Master Plans (Master Servicing Study and Transportation Master Plan) identify the Class EA project schedules for each project. A final Notice issued for the completion of the Class Environmental Assessment process and OPA will include the availability of documentation for review.
2.1.1 MCEA Project Listing
Specific servicing projects within the Cardinal Creek Village development area that are subject to the requirements of the Environmental Assessment Act are as follows: ‹ Establish, extend or enlarge a water distribution system where the facilities are not in an existing road allowance or utility corridor ( Schedule B ); ‹ Establish, extend or enlarge a sewage collection system where the facilities are not in an existing road allowance or utility corridor ( Schedule B ); ‹ Establish new stormwater retention/detention ponds and appurtenances or infiltration systems including outfall to receiving water body ( Schedule B ); and, ‹ Replace traditional materials in an existing watercourse or in slope stability works with material of equal or better properties, at substantially the same location and for the same purpose ( Schedule A, identified in Master Servicing Study). Additional transportation projects are indentified in the concurrent Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, 2008).
The municipal infrastructure projects listed above are developed and described in detail in Section 3.1, Section 3.6 , and Sections 7.0 – 9.0 of this MSS. A complete list of projects and their associated MCEA schedules is provided in Section 14.0. Again, as noted previously, the municipal infrastructure projects are being identified, planned and approved through the development application process under Section 51 of the Planning Act in a manner that fulfills the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Section A.2.9) process. As such, these projects will have satisfied the requirements outlined in Section A.2.9 of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process and will require no additional EA approvals.
2.1.2 MCEA Process
Section A.2.9 of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment requires that the completion of the following steps be incorporated into the planning process to fulfill the EA requirements:
Phase 1 and 2: ‹ Identify the problem or opportunity; ‹ Identify alternative solutions;
PAGE 10 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Inventory existing environmental conditions; ‹ Impact assessment and evaluation of alternative solutions; ‹ Selected preliminary preferred solution; ‹ Consult with the review agencies and the public; and, ‹ Select preferred solution.
If the project is identified in Schedule B of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (June 2000, as amended in 2011), the proponent shall issue a Notice of Completion to allow for public review of the documentation for the work undertaken. If the project is identified in Schedule C (e.g. the transportation projects associated with Cardinal Creek Village), the proponent shall continue to Phase 3 and 4 of the MCEA process, as described in the concurrent Cardinal Creek Village Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, 2013).
Following the review and approval of the Schedule B and C Class EAs, the projects can then proceed to Phase 5:
Phase 5: ‹ Complete design drawings and tender documents; ‹ Construction and operation; and ‹ Monitor for environmental provisions and commitments.
[For Schedule A projects, the proponent may proceed with construction without following the procedures set out in the Class EA.]
Review agencies and the public will have an opportunity to review the Class EA documentation being prepared in support of the OPA and have the ability to appeal to the OMB. Notification of the conditions of planning approvals and the Class EA documents will be advertised through a Notice of Completion.
2.2 Consultation
Consultation is an integral part of both the Planning and Municipal Class Environmental Assessment processes. Consultation and the exchange of information was undertaken throughout the process using a variety of methods including meetings with community associations and the general public, electronic information distribution, and regular meetings with the Study Team, approval agencies, and the Ward Councilor.
Three (3) Public Meetings were held with a total attendance of approximately 160 people. Additional meetings were held with area land owners and community groups as required. Scheduling of consultation opportunities corresponded to key project
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 11 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
milestones throughout the process. Details of the consultation are contained in the companion Cardinal Creek Public Consultation Report (Delcan 2013).
Government agencies, municipal departments and approval authorities were also involved in the consultation process. Input was sought regarding direction and guidance for future approval and permitting requirements and specific technical issues. Input from agencies was solicited through various means including:
‹ Individual and group agency meetings to provide clarification; ‹ Site visits; ‹ Completion of additional technical works; ‹ Design clarifications; and, ‹ Corrections and additions to the reports as appropriate.
The following provides a summary of consultation with stakeholders during the course of the development of the MSS.
2.2.1 City of Ottawa
A pre-consultation meeting was held with City staff regarding the OPA submission. It was determined that a Master Servicing Study must be completed, assessing the adequacy of public services and providing a conceptual servicing plan. The Terms of Reference for the Master Servicing Study (as provided in Appendix A) were discussed with City Staff. The study team also solicited input from City staff to assess the natural environment features and watercourses within Cardinal Creek Village. City staff were also consulted to determine existing conditions (e.g. watermain boundary conditions, sanitary sewer alignment and capacity, etc.) for the servicing network adjacent to the subject lands.
A preliminary version of the Master Servicing Study was submitted to the City of Ottawa in December 2012. The MSS was circulated to various City departments for review and comment, as per the City of Ottawa development approvals process. The MSS report was revised accordingly, meeting with City staff to review comments and resolve issues as necessary. The MSS report was re-submitted in April 2013, in conjunction with a revised Concept Plan.
This July 2013 version of the MSS includes a further modified Concept Plan and seeks to address comments received from the RVCA and City of Ottawa regarding the April 2013 submission. See Section 2.3 for documentation of report revisions.
2.2.2 RVCA
The study team solicited input from RVCA staff in defining environmental features and watercourse requirements within Cardinal Creek Village. Further information is provided
PAGE 12 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
in Muncaster Environmental Planning’s project reporting (January, February, and July 2013).
A preliminary version of the Master Servicing Study was submitted to the RVCA in December 2012 as part of the City of Ottawa development approvals process. The MSS report was revised according to RVCA comments, and re-submitted for review and comment in April 2013.
This July 2013 version of the MSS seeks to address RVCA’s comments and concerns about various specialty reports (e.g. hydrogeology, geotechnical, and karst evaluations). Please see Section 2.3 for documentation of report revisions.
2.2.3 Public Utilities
The study team met with Hydro One, Bell, and Enbridge staff in December 2012 to inform the public utilities about the proposed development, and to solicit feedback on scheduling and/or servicing constraints. Further information is provided in Section 8.0 .
The study team has also consulted with Hydro One to initiate land use agreements for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer infrastructure within the provincially-owned Hydro One corridor. To maintain clearance requirements between pressurized pipes and the hydro poles, hydro pole relocation has been proposed by Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation. A copy of correspondence with Hydro One staff on this issue is provided in Appendix C. Hydro One has offered preliminary comments on the proposed trunk sanitary and watermain design. In addition, consultation with Hydro One is underway to initiate land use agreements for the access road in the vicinity of Pond 1 and for storm pipes crossing the provincially-owned Hydro One corridor.
2.2.4 Public Consultation
The following provides a summary of consultation with public stakeholders during the development of the MSS. Notices published in local newspapers in advance of the consultation events identified that the project was following an integrated approach to fulfill the requirements of the Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act .
The development of the MSS was subject to Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act notice requirements, and the notices explained the right of appeal by any person or public body to the Ontario Municipal Board under the provisions of the Planning Act. A project website – www.plancardinalcreekvillage.ca - was also established to present information to the public. Further details regarding the consultation program are included in the related Public Consultation Report prepared by Delcan Corporation (March 2013).
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 13 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
2.2.4.1 Public Open House # 1 – June 27, 2012
An introductory public open house was held to present information and solicit feedback on: the environmental assessment and planning process; existing conditions and constraints; preliminary transportation and servicing alternatives; guiding principles for land use development; preliminary evaluation criteria for alternatives; and next steps in the study process.
Specific to servicing, the existing watermain and sanitary network west of the subject lands was presented to the public, as well as the following alternative servicing solutions for Cardinal Creek Village:
• Water: o Private wells; o Municipal well; OR o Expand existing municipal system. • Wastewater: o Private septic systems; o Municipal sewer system – New wastewater treatment plan; OR o Municipal sewer system – Expand existing municipal system (Trim Road Collector). • Stormwater: o Rural cross-section – ditches; OR o Major / minor collection system; ° Outlet without controls to Cardinal Creek / Ottawa River; ° Outlet with quantity / quality controls; AND/OR o Implement lot level best management practices.
The preliminary preferred servicing alternative was presented for comment: the preliminary preferred approach included expanding the existing municipal water network and existing municipal wastewater collection system to service Cardinal Creek Village, and providing a major and minor stormwater network that combines lot level best management practices with quality and quantity control treatment via stormwater management ponds.
2.2.4.2 Public Open House # 2 – September 25, 2012
A second public open house was held to obtain input into planning concepts for the development of the area, and to provide an opportunity to discuss the study process with the project team. The servicing plan was not discussed in detail at this stage in the study process.
PAGE 14 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
2.2.4.3 Public Open House # 3 – November 29, 2012
A third public open house was held to present alternative land use concept plans. Technical considerations regarding the servicing of the alternative concepts were presented, among other criteria, to compare the four concept land use plans. The proposed servicing alignment for the preferred concept plan – Concept D – was presented for review and comment.
2.2.4.4 Planning Committee Meeting – June 25, 2013
The MSS formed part of the supporting documentation for the Official Plan Amendment application that was carried (as amended) by Planning Committee on June 25, 2013. The Planning Committee meeting is considered a public hearing, as public delegations were received regarding matters affecting land use planning.
2.2.4.5 Posting of Preliminary Master Servicing Study
A preliminary version of the Master Servicing Study was submitted to the City of Ottawa in December 2012, and was posted on the City of Ottawa website for review and comment, as part of the City of Ottawa development approvals process. The preliminary MSS featured a refined development concept (and consequently, refined servicing alignments) based on comments received from consultation activities to date.
Similarly, the April 2013 update of the MSS was posted on the City of Ottawa website for review and comment. This revised MSS included a revised concept plan as well as revisions to address agency comments and concerns. See Section 2.3 for a description of the revisions.
2.3 Report Revisions
2.3.1 First Submission
The first submission of this MSS was made in December 2012. The report was prepared based on the Terms of Reference provided in Appendix A . The report was circulated to RVCA and City staff, and comments were provided to the study team in January, February, and March 2013.
2.3.2 Second Submission
The second submission in April 2013 addressed the preliminary comments about the MSS and supporting studies that were received as a result of circulation to RVCA and City staff.
The second submission included detailed information relating to the integrated Planning and Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process and featured a refined development concept plan that modified the type, distribution, and layout of proposed
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 15 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
land uses as well as modified the concept plan boundaries. The other key updates were as follows:
‹ The proposed water supply system was re-designed to exclude connections between the 1E and 2E Pressure Zones and to increase reliability by providing additional watermain crossings of Cardinal Creek; ‹ The watermain network configuration was updated based on proposed infrastructure connections to the ongoing City of Ottawa ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project; ‹ Water demand projections were updated based on new information on City of Ottawa standards for large-scale community developments; ‹ The sanitary capacity analysis was updated based on current City of Ottawa growth projections; ‹ The storm drainage plan was revised to include fewer stormwater management ponds (to eliminate excess maintenance requirements); ‹ The 100-year water level and Normal High Water Mark were delineated in Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary, based on modifications to the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study Hydrologic Model (provided by the City of Ottawa); ‹ Pre-development and post-development flowrates were provided in the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek, to clarify infrastructure requirements; ‹ The hydrogeological study was updated to clarify groundwater contributions to existing watercourses and clarify groundwater recharge potential; ‹ A water budget for the site was prepared, with associated impact assessment; ‹ A study of creek baseflows was completed, based on background monitoring and compilation of existing City studies; ‹ An erosion assessment, featuring Continuous Simulation Model results, was completed for the proposed stormwater management facilities and receiving tributaries; ‹ The meanderbelt width for the South Tributary was delineated based on field investigations, and the meanderbelt width for Cardinal Creek was delineated based on previous City studies; ‹ The geotechnical analysis was updated, showing revised development setbacks associated with the revised development plan, and providing more information on slope stability; ‹ A preliminary structural analysis was completed for the existing culvert crossing the Hydro One corridor;
PAGE 16 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Development setback limits were clarified, based on the combination of geotechnical, flood, and natural environment constraints; ‹ Preliminary investigations by a Karst expert were undertaken and incorporated into the MSS reporting and background studies; ‹ Natural Heritage System and Headwater Assessment reporting was updated to clarify impacts of development; ‹ Sewer design & grading were updated according to City comments; ‹ An environmental impact assessment was developed for the preferred servicing plan, including proposed mitigation measures; and ‹ General edits to the MSS report were undertaken according to City comments.
A detailed inventory of all City of Ottawa and RVCA comments is provided in Appendix B, along with a record of how the comment was addressed in the second submission of the MSS report.
The second submission of the report was circulated to RVCA and City staff, and comments were provided to the study team in May and June 2013.
2.3.3 Third Submission
The MSS has been updated to address the recent comments about the MSS and supporting studies that were received as a result of circulation to RVCA and City staff.
Specifically: ‹ The Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan boundaries have been modified so that only the lands north of the South Tributary are included within the concept plan. The approximate 23 hectare rectangular portion of the study area south of the South Tributary has been deliberately excluded from the limits of the Concept Plan. These lands are to remain designated in the Official Plan as Urban Expansion Study Area. ‹ The future serviceability of the lands south of the South Tributary has been considered as part of the Master Servicing Study. ‹ Redevelopment of the 18 ha of existing residential land has been contemplated in the MSS, incorporating an estimated development potential of 575-650 low density units (or 1,725-1,900 people) into servicing designs. ‹ Clarification regarding the numbers of residential units that would experience peak hour pressures less than 40 psi and maximum pressures above 80 psi has been added to the MSS report and watermain analysis provided in Appendix H. ‹ Clarification regarding watermain design, construction details, and responsibilities of others have been added to the report to address concerns
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 17 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
about the design & construction of the water network in the vicinity of Trim Road at Old Montreal Road. ‹ Drainage areas have been refined according to the new concept plan and information contained in the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study hydrogologic models. Drainage areas discussed in the MSS have been reconciled with those provided in the modeling described in Appendix K. Subwatershed delineation (Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and Cardinal Creek Tributaries) has been provided on Figure 13. ‹ Clarification has been provided regarding areas where the target 2.4m freeboard has not been achieved. These areas represent sewer outfalls or slab-on-grade construction areas, and therefore do not required a 2.4m buffer between the HGL and centerline of road. ‹ Cross-sections for the proposed infrastructure (water and sewer) along hydro corridor has been provided in Figure 12A. ‹ Clarification regarding the implications of the climate change stress test has been further discussed in Section 9.0 . ‹ Preliminary design of a cascade feature has been included to describe how stormwater runoff will be directed to the forebay of Pond 1 located south of the Hydro One corridor. ‹ The design of Pond 1 and Pond 2 have been updated as per meetings with the City, in order to ensure maintenance and access requirements are met. ‹ The hydrogeology, geotechnical, erosion, karst, and water budget investigations have undergone updates in order to address City and RVCA comments. A record of agency comments and study team responses is included in Appendix B. The stormwater management design included in Section 9.0 has been updated accordingly. ‹ General edits to the MSS report have been undertaken according to City comments.
2.3.4 Fourth Submission
This Fourth Submission of the MSS addresses final comments from the RVCA provided on July 12, 2013 and final comments from the City of Ottawa provided on July 15, 2013. A record of agency comments and study team responses is included in Appendix B.
2.4 Background Studies
Future development of the Cardinal Creek Village lands was contemplated by the former Township of Cumberland as early as 1992, and the lands are now designated for development in the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan. It follows that the Cardinal Creek
PAGE 18 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Village lands and the surrounding neighbourhoods have been the subject of various land use, infrastructure, and environmental studies:
• East Urban Community Sewer and Water Study McNeely Engineering Consultants Ltd, June 1992.
• Master Drainage Plan, for the Township of Cumberland, East Urban Community, McNeely Engineering, December 1992.
• East Urban Community Sewer Servicing Study Novatech Engineering Consultants Ltd, July 1997. • Ottawa River Sub-Trunk and Trim Road Sanitary Sewer Assessment, Stantec Consultants Ltd, February 28, 2001.
• Stormwater Design Plan, Cardinal Creek Business Park, for the Township of Cumberland, Paul Wisner & Associates Inc., July 1992.
• Hydrologic and Water Quality Studies for the Cardinal Creek MDP, Volume II, for the Township of Cumberland, Paul Wisner & Associates Inc., 1992.
• Update to the Master Drainage Plan East Urban Community Expansion Area, for the City of Cumberland, Cumming Cockburn Limited, August 31, 2000.
• Supplementary Report to the Master Drainage Plan and Environmental Study Report, for the City of Cumberland, Cumming Cockburn Limited, August 2000, Revised May 2001.
• Design Brief Cardinal Creek Online Stormwater Management Facility, for the City of Ottawa, Cumming Cockburn Limited, July 2001.
• Gloucester and Cumberland East Urban Community Expansion Area and Bilberry Creek Industrial Park Master Servicing Update, for the City of Ottawa, Stantec Consulting Ltd., November 2004, updated June 2005, October 2005 and July 2006.
• Cardinal Creek Geomorphic Assessment, for the City of Ottawa, Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007.
• City of Ottawa Official Plan Review, Urban Residential Land Needs, Municipal Servicing Review, Taggart Cumberland Expansion Lands
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 19 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
IBI Group, December 2008.
• Engineering Servicing Evaluation, Cardinal Village In Support of an Official Plan Amendment Submission, David McManus Engineering Ltd, March 2009.
• Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report, for the City of Ottawa, AECOM, August 2009. (Subwatershed Study)
These studies help identify capacity constraints and design assumptions for the existing servicing network surrounding the subject lands, and also point to important natural environment and geomorphology considerations for Cardinal Creek and its tributaries. Relevant design information from the various background reports is discussed in Section 3.0 , according to subject matter.
2.5 Guidelines
The following guidelines were utilized in the preparation of the servicing plans presented in this MSS report:
• Sewer Design Guidelines, City of Ottawa, October 2012. (City Standards)
• Stormwater Planning and Design Manual, Ministry of the Environment, March 2003. (SWMP Design Manual)
• Ottawa Design Guidelines, Water Distribution, City of Ottawa, July 2010. (Water Guidelines)
• Ontario Building Code Compendium Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Building Development Branch, January 1, 2010 Update. (OBC)
• City of Ottawa Official Plan, City of Ottawa, adopted by Council 2003, amended by OPA 76 and OMB Decisions. (Official Plan)
PAGE 20 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
• Fire Underwriters Survey, 1999. (FUS) • Transitional Procedures and Guidelines for Permission Pursuant to Section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act, Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, April 2006. (RVCA Guidelines) • Erosion & Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction, Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Conservation Authorities, December 2006. (E&S Guidelines)
Guidelines utilized in the development of the specialty studies are referenced in each respective report, as listed in Table 1 .
2.6 Master Servicing Study Process and Approval Requirements
This MSS will require approval under the Planning Act as supporting information for an Official Plan Amendment application. As such, the MSS is subject to all normal notice requirements and rights of appeal by any person or public body to the Ontario Municipal Board under the provisions of the Planning Act .
As described in Section 2.1 , the municipal infrastructure projects for CCV are being identified, planned and approved through the development application process under Section 51 of the Planning Act in a manner that fulfills the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (Section A.2.9) process. As such, these projects will have satisfied the requirements outlined in Section A.2.9 of the Class EA process and will require no additional EA approvals. This allows the integration of both planning processes while ensuring the intent and requirements of both Acts are met.
The following is a list of permits and approvals that will be required for the development of the proposed servicing infrastructure identified in this report.
2.6.1 City of Ottawa
The City of Ottawa will consider this Master Servicing Study for approval under the Official Plan Amendment process. City approval is required prior to the development of any servicing infrastructure recommended in this report.
As discussed in Section 2.1 and Section 2.2.4 , review agencies and the public will have an opportunity to review this MSS, and will have the opportunity to appeal the City’s decision to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
Subsequent to MSS approval, the implementation of the required servicing infrastructure is expected to take place as Conditions of Approval within the Plan of Subdivision process. The City of Ottawa is expected to review, comment, and sign-off on detailed engineering submissions as they are submitted, and forward designs for the sanitary and storm sewers and the stormwater management plan to the Ministry of the
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 21 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Environment (MOE) for approval. The City is expected to review the watermains on behalf of the MOE through the Form 1 – Record of Watermains Authorized as a Future Alteration.
Additionally, proposed servicing easements within City-owned property will require review and approval.
2.6.2 Ministry of the Environment
The MOE is required to review the engineering design and issue Environmental Compliance Approvals (ECA) for sanitary and storm sewers and the stormwater management plan prior to the development of servicing infrastructure.
Sanitary and storm sewer approvals are expected to be completed through the City of Ottawa’s Transfer of Review Program. Stormwater management approvals are expected to be completed through the Direct Submission Program to the MOE: the proposed stormwater management facilities are subject to the Ontario Water Resources Act and will require Environmental Compliance Approval from the MOE.
2.6.3 Rideau Valley Conservation Authority (RVCA)
Concurrent with City and MOE approvals, approvals and permits will be required from the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority as per Ontario Regulation 174/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses as detailed design work advances for the servicing infrastructure.
Specifically: • The proposed slope stability work within the Cardinal Creek valley will require RVCA approval. • The detailed design of the stormwater management ponds and outlet structures will require RVCA approval (Section 8.0 ). • The watermain crossings and sanitary sewer crossing of Cardinal Creek (Section 7.0 and Section 8.0 ) will also require RVCA approval, as construction will require shoreline or watercourse alterations. • RVCA approvals will be required for the proposed closure of the North Tributary, east of the designated environmental protection zone, as detailed in Section 6.0. Mitigation is required for the headwater loss, with details to be established with the RVCA as part of subsequent subdivision approvals processes. • RVCA approvals will be required for the proposed closure of the North Branch.
It should be noted that services bundled within the proposed transportation corridors, such as those services located within the proposed Old Montreal Road crossing of Cardinal Creek, are subject to RVCA approvals and, as such, are listed above. It is expected that approvals would be coordinated with development of the proposed
PAGE 22 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
transportation projects outlined in the Cardinal Creek Village Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, July 2013).
Review of the final MSS by RVCA staff will occur and be coordinated as part of the City of Ottawa’s development approvals process.
2.6.4 Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)
Approval is expected to be required from the RVCA, acting as an agent for DFO, regarding any proposed alterations to Cardinal Creek. As detailed designs and construction requirements are developed for the recommended slope stability works in the Cardinal Creek valley, for the closing of the North Tributary, and for the proposed watermain and sanitary sewer crossings of Cardinal Creek, the RVCA would be required to assess any proposed shoreline works for Harmful Alteration, Disruption or Destruction (HADD) of fish habitat and provide mitigation advice to ensure that all proposed activities are acceptable under the current Fisheries Act.
The new Fisheries Protection Program, currently under development to support recent amendments to the Fisheries Act (June 29, 2012), is expected to modify the implementation of Section 35, which defines HADD. As such, consultation with the RVCA will be required at the detailed design stage in order to identify the appropriate approval requirements and procedures.
2.6.5 Hydro One
As discussed in Section 2.2.3 and Section 8.0 , Hydro One staff have provided feedback on the proposed servicing easement within the existing Hydro One corridor (in the vicinity of the existing Cardinal Creek crossing) and consider the proposed servicing easement alignment to be appropriate. Consultation is also being initiated regarding the stormwater management pond access road and storm outlet crossing through the provincially-owned Hydro One corridor in the vicinity of Pond 1, as well as the storm sewer crossing the Hydro One corridor west of the Major Collector. At the detailed design phase, to support the first Plan of Subdivision application, a land transfer application will need to be submitted to Hydro One for the proposed servicing easements. In addition, a detailed engineering submission will be required, which will be subject to Hydro One’s approval processes. A copy of correspondence with Hydro One staff regarding the preliminary easement requirements and preliminary servicing designs is provided in Appendix C.
2.6.6 Ministry of Natural Resources
The construction of servicing infrastructure, like the development of the transportation network and residential, commercial, institutional, and mixed-use blocks, will require that mitigation measures be implemented to protect the identified components of the natural heritage system. These measures are highlighted in Section 12.0 , along with
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 23 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
commitments to further work during detailed design, such as: specific construction timing for in-water works (outside of the more sensitive periods), visual inspection of terrestrial areas before undertaking work which could affect identified species, sediment and erosion control, protection for retained adjacent trees and forest edges, and specific schedules for clearing and grubbing. The Ministry of Natural Resources is to be contacted as part of future studies where required, to identify further required mitigation measures.
PAGE 24 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SITE CONSTRAINTS
3.1 Geotechnical Conditions
Geotechnical investigations of the subject lands have been undertaken by Paterson Group. Key implications are discussed herein, while full details are provided in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Paterson Group (July 2013), which is provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
The preliminary geotechnical investigations are based on a series of boreholes, sampling, laboratory testing, analytical testing, and in-situ testing. The borehole locations and existing well locations are depicted on Drawing 3.
The preliminary geotechnical investigations indicate that:
‹ Soil Profile: The overburden consists of topsoil or fill overlaying a stiff to very stiff silty clay deposit. The overburden is underlain by glacial till, consisting of silty clay with sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders. Based on the borehole and test pitting program, overburden thickness across the site generally ranges between 1 m and greater than 10 m across the study area. ‹ Bedrock: Based on available geological mapping, the depth to bedrock in the area is expected to range from 15 to 50 m within the west portion of the site and ground surface to 10 m depth within the east portion of the site. The bedrock which underlies the subject property consists of generally flat-lying carbonate sedimentary rock composed of layers of Paleozoic bedrock from the Middle and Upper Ordovician and Oxford Formations. Available geological mapping indicates that Dolomite, Limestone and Shale is present in the subject area. The bedrock contours provided by Paterson Group are depicted on Drawing 3. The existing topography largely reflects the presence and pattern of the bedrock beneath the site. Bedrock outcrops are present at isolated locations on the site. ‹ Preliminary Grade Raise Restrictions: A permissible grade raise restriction of 2 m is recommended for housing in the northern portion of the site, where existing ground ranges from elevations of 53 m to 56 m. A permissible grade raise restriction of 3 m is applicable to housing within the remainder of the site. A figure depicting the recommended grade raise restrictions is provided in Appendix R. Grade raise restrictions for roads are 1m higher than the housing restriction for each area. ‹ Groundwater: The groundwater table is expected to be between 3m and 5m below existing ground. A study of the hydrogeology of the site has been completed, and is summarized in Section 3.2. ‹ Slope Stability and Limit of Hazard Lands: A slope stability analysis has been completed to define the limit of hazard lands and contribute to the delineation of
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 25 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
the limit of development setback from the existing watercourses and slopes within the subject lands (Section 3.10.1 ). Results of the investigation are presented on Drawing 3, delineating the top of slope and the limit of hazard lands along Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary, including one proposed area for slope stabilization works (details provided in Section 3.10.1 ) where a slope failure has occurred.
As detailed designs are prepared as part of subsequent Plan of Subdivision Applications, a licensed geotechnical engineer is required to carry out a final geotechnical investigation for each phase of the proposed development, complete with a review of detailed grading plans and settlement analysis.
3.2 Drainage
Cardinal Creek Village lies primarily within the Cardinal Creek Subwatershed, with a small portion in the northeast located within Ottawa 1 Subwatershed. The site is bisected by two tributaries to Cardinal Creek , with the main branch of Cardinal Creek located adjacent to the subject lands, on the western side. The existing drainage catchments are depicted on Figure 13.
A site specific water balance report has been prepared as part of this MSS and is included in Appendix M. The drainage characteristics described in the Site Specific Water Budget Report (Appendix M) are summarized as follows:
‹ The North Tributary regularly runs dry in the summer months, and is therefore classified as intermittent. The watercourse is primarily sustained by surface runoff and inputs. The western portion of the tributary receives minor groundwater discharge from the Gull River Formation bedrock (see Appendix M). ‹ The South Tributary maintains a permanent flow regime, but the eastern portion near Frank Kenny Road commonly goes dry. The middle and lower reaches of the South Tributary have a permanent baseflow regime that is supported by groundwater discharge from karst springs from the Bobcaygeon Formation bedrock (see Appendix M ). These karst features (see Section 3.4 ) are recharged from areas south of the proposed development.
It should be noted that an existing Cardinal Creek on-line stormwater management pond (CCOM) outlets to Cardinal Creek upstream of the Study Area, and has an MOE Certificate of Approval Number 6422-4ZNFLK, issued on October 31, 2001. Design information is provided in the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, August 2009) and the Design Brief, Cardinal Creek Online Stormwater Management Facility (Cumming Cockburn Limited, July 2001). The stormwater management pond outflows are directed to the sinkhole and underground
PAGE 26 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
cave system located 100m south of Watters Road. Please see Section 3.4 for additional information on Karst features in proximity to the subject lands.
A surface water and rainfall monitoring program was carried out by JFSA for the spring, summer, and fall of 2012 to satisfy some of the field monitoring recommendations put forth in the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2009). The monitoring plan was reviewed by representatives from the City of Ottawa and the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority, and the results are summarized in the technical memo provided in the companion Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013). This baseflow analysis informed the Water Budget Report provided in Appendix M , as well as the Water Balance Analysis and recommendations contained in Appendix N.
3.3 Hydrogeology
An assessment of the hydrogeology of the site has been completed by Paterson Group, combining available background information from numerous literature sources with site specific fieldwork data, to summarize existing hydrogeological conditions at the site. Key implications are discussed herein, while full details are provided in the Hydrogeology Existing Conditions Report (June 2013) prepared by Paterson Group, which is provided in the companion Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
The Hydrogeology Report was used as background information for the development of the Site Specific Water Budget Report (Appendix M) , which is the key reference document for groundwater and geology conditions and details the relationship between infiltration and groundwater recharge. Again, key implications are discussed herein, while full details are provided in Appendix M.
‹ Groundwater Recharge: The majority of the site is underlain by low permeability marine clay and till deposits that have a low infiltration potential. However, areas of solution enhanced bedrock of the Gull River Formation and the Bobcaygeon Formation are present within the subject lands and are considered Important Recharge Areas because of their associated high infiltration potential. Surface water infiltrating vertically is anticipated to be taken up into the fractured bedrock zone which exists between the base of the overburden at the bedrock interface, and uppermost water bearing zone within the underlying carbonate bedrock. This captured water is anticipated to move along the gradient established by the existing surficial topography in a west to northwest direction, as influenced by Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River. In all instances, the ultimate discharge point for this water is the Ottawa River. ‹ Groundwater Flow: There are two main groundwater flow systems: one flow system in the overburden and another in the bedrock.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 27 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The preferential pathway for groundwater flow is northwards within the overburden groundwater flow system. This flow system is interrupted within the two bisecting tributaries where the overburden groundwater flow is altered and directed to the tributaries as surface water. Further to the north of the North Tributary, the flow system continues northward to the Ottawa River, closely following the existing topography. Surface water infiltrating vertically is anticipated to be taken up into the fractured bedrock zone which exists between the base of the overburden at the bedrock interface and uppermost water bearing zone within the underlying carbonate bedrock. This captured water is anticipated to move along the gradient established by the existing surficial topography in a west to northwest direction as influenced by Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River. ‹ Aquifers: There is a usable aquifer system present within the bedrock in which existing water wells on-site and within adjacent lands intercept. This aquifer system is present within the Middle Ordovician bedrock and the Lower Ordovician bedrock formations. ‹ Wells: Development with the study area may have some measurable impact on the downgradient wells located within both the study area and immediately to the west of the western study limits. The most likely measurable impacts would likely be in the form of lowered well yield and impairment of the quality of the raw groundwater resulting from the upgradient Cardinal Creek Village development. A baseline groundwater geochemistry and history of static water levels should be established for all existing water wells that are to remain in use both within the study limits and within a proposed groundwater monitoring area (see Hydrogeology Report provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report - July 2013). Specifically, a Terms of Reference for the groundwater monitoring and mitigation program is to be prepared to the satisfaction of the City of Ottawa, and the program is to be implemented 12 months prior to the start of construction within 500m of existing wells. Where permanent groundwater interference is demonstrated to have occurred in the wells and where resolution of groundwater interference/degradation is sought by the surrounding landowners under the Ontario Water Resources Act, mitigation of the impacts must be carried out by the developer. The mitigation measures proposed in the Hydrogeology Report include, but are not limited to, connecting the affected property to the municipal drinking water system. Existing water wells located on the subject property which will no longer be in use should be decommissioned in accordance with the governing legislation in order to prevent unconfined and rapid contamination of the upper and lower Middle Ordovician bedrock aquifer systems. Additional information on impacts to water supply wells and proposed mitigation measures are detailed in the Hydrogeology Report (provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report -July 2013) and in Section 12.0 of this MSS.
PAGE 28 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
3.4 Karst Topography
A Karst feature consisting of a tunnel valley system contained within limestone is present about 400m west of the subject lands. The Ministry of Natural Resources designated this feature - the Cardinal Creek Karst - as a Provincially Significant Earth Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) (MNR, 2008). The Cardinal Creek Karst is described in detail in the Hydrogeology Existing Conditions Report prepared by Paterson Group, which is provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
The term ‘karst’ usually refers to distinctive terrains attributable to the high solubility of the bedrock: solution caves, sinking streams, springs, or large enclosed depressions are referred to as macrokarst, while areas underlain by soluble rocks are referred to as microkarst. Karst features are noted as hazards in the Provincial Policy Statement, and require detailed analysis and engineering evaluation because of the potential for surface collapse.
Preliminary analysis of the subject lands completed by Worthington Groundwater and provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013) identified that the four geological formations underling the property - the Oxford, Rockcliffe, Gull River, and Bobcaygeon formations - all have the potential for karstification. Based on the topography of the subject lands, three areas were identified as potential areas for sinking streams (macrokarst) and are illustrated on Drawing 3.
No karstic hazards to construction are identified within the development area shown in the OPA Concept Plan. However, there are two karstic features that might be considered as possible development constraints within the broader MSS study area: one potential karstic feature within the existing residential area north of Old Montreal Road and east of Cardinal Creek, and one potential karstic feature south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area. Although there is a low probability that there are subsurface voids at these locations that would be a hazard to construction, it is recommended that either buildings be setback from these locations or excavation to bedrock be undertaken to examine the two potential karstic features for voids.
3.5 Natural Environment Features
Under existing conditions, agricultural uses dominate the subject lands. Remnant forested parcels are located to the south of Highway 174 and along the west and east edges of the site, north of Old Montreal Road. The previously forested area south of Old Montreal Road has been removed, with a remnant corridor remaining along an east-west tributary of Cardinal Creek and remnant hedgerows along the former forest edges.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 29 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The major natural environment features in the general area are the Cardinal Creek corridor to the west and the Ottawa River Corridor to the north. Also, as noted in Section 3.1 , the Ministry of Natural Resources designated the Cardinal Creek Karst as a Provincially Significant Earth Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (MNR, 2008).
Further information pertaining to the natural environment features within the study area is provided in the Natural Environment Existing Conditions Report (Muncaster Environmental Planning, February 2013), Existing Conditions Report on Fish Habitat and Fish Communities (Muncaster Environmental Planning, January 2013) and the Fish Habitat and Fish Communities Headwater Assessment (Muncaster Environmental Planning, June 2013) which are all included in the Cardinal Creek Village Existing Conditions Report (July 2013). These reports draw from the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2009), among other sources, and comprehensive field investigations. Key observations are described below.
3.5.1 Aquatic Environment
Cardinal Creek supports a range of cool and warm water fish communities and provides an important connection with the Ottawa River. Diverse fish habitat is present near the Ottawa River.
The North Tributary provides seasonal fish habitat and has a defined channel flowing (at least partially) through a forest.
The South Tributary (running east-west south of Old Montreal Road) supports fish communities and is associated with good riparian cover. However, bank erosion is extensive within the subject lands. No fish were captured or observed in the tributaries flowing into the South Tributary.
3.5.2 Terrestrial Environment
The Cardinal Creek corridor and the west portion of the South Tributary corridor are identified as Significant Valleylands, with many portions of the corridor also identified as Significant Woodlands. The forests north of Old Montreal Road in the northeast portion of the site are also identified as Significant Woodlands.
The agricultural fields that dominate the site support principally non-native and/or invasive ground flora that in turn support wildlife.
Two Urban Natural Areas, Cardinal Creek Valley and Petrie Island and Mainland (also a Provincially Significant Wetland and Life Science Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI)), are along the Cardinal Creek corridor adjacent to the west site boundary. Both features are associated with environmental attributes of significance, such as: landscape attributes; endangered, threatened and rare species; vegetation
PAGE 30 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
community/landform and species diversity; hydrological features; and/or condition of natural area.
3.5.3 Species at Risk and Other Species of Interest
The assessment identified the potential for sixteen species of interest, including two Species at Risk. Details are provided in the Natural Environment Existing Conditions Report (Muncaster Environmental Planning, July 2012) which is included in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013), while development impacts and mitigation and monitoring measures are provided in Section 12.0.
3.5.4 Natural Heritage System and Headwater Assessment
Based on the assessment of the environmental conditions, a recommended natural heritage system has been developed and is shown in Figure 2. The system includes:
• the Cardinal Creek Valley; • the South Tributary (running east-west south of Old Montreal Road); • the west (downstream) portion of the North Tributary (running east-west, north of Old Montreal road and south of the existing Hydro One corridor); • the remnant wooded areas of the valleylands of Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary; • the wooded areas along the north slope south of the old railway line in the northeast portion of the site; • the deciduous forests along the east side of the site; and • the fresh-moist ash deciduous north forest in the northeast corner of the site.
The existing Cardinal Creek Channel and the west portion of the North Tributary (Exhibit 1) are currently zoned as Environmental Protection Zone in order to offer protection from site alteration and development. The South Tributary is currently zoned as Parks and Open Space Zone.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 31 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STU DY TAMARACK (QUEEN STRE ET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLA GE
JULY 2013
North Tributary – Environmental Protection Zone
(City of Ottawa , 2012)
Exhibit 1: North Tributary - Environmental Protection Zone
The natural heritage system is to be protected to maintain biological and geological diversity, natural functions, and viable populations of indigenous species . As such, t he boundaries should shape the proposed land use plan, including the location of servicing easements and stormwater management ponds.
Please note that the proposed natural heritage system shown in Figure 2 is exclu sive to the lands north of the South Tributary, subject to the OPA. As the balance of the designated Urban Expansion Study Area (Area 11) south of the tributary is developed, it is anticipated that additional assessment and additional Urban Natural Feature designations would be extended to include this tributary and valley land (among other natural heritage system features).
The Headwater Assessment (Muncaster Environmental Planning, June 2013) further investigates the watercourses within the subject lands that contribute to Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary. The recommendations of the headwater assessment are as follows:
Downstream portion of North Tributary (Conservation 2 status): ‹ Must remain open; ‹ May be relocated using natural channel design; ‹ On -site water sources must be maintained or restored; ‹ External sources of flow must be maintained ; and ‹ Downstream connection must be maintained.
PAGE 32 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGI NEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Upstream portion of North Tributary (Conservation 2 status) – Upstream of the Environmental Protection Zone: ‹ On-site water sources should be replicated or maintained; ‹ External sources of flow must be maintained; ‹ Downstream connection of flow must be maintained; and, ‹ Should the tributary be closed and filled, the loss must be mitigated. Required rehabilitation/compensation program is to be developed with the RVCA as part of future subdivision approval processes. Compensation habitat is to be provided in other channels at a 1:1 ratio (bankfull width x linear length) to offset the environmental losses of this feature. North Branch 1 – No Protection Required : ‹ Can be closed and filled.
3.6 Fluvial and Geomorphologic Environment
“Streambank erosion is a natural process that plays an important role in shaping the alignment and the cross-sectional geometry of the creek system. (…) From a public safety perspective, the erosion process becomes a major concern when it poses risk to public and private property, and/or municipal infrastructure” ( Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report , AECOM, 2009). As part of the Subwatershed Study and the background Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007), Cardinal Creek was assessed for stream health and sensitivity, areas of concern with regards to degradation, and meanderbelt width. The assessment did not include an analysis of the South Tributary, due to access restrictions.
As such, Paterson Group and Parish Geomorphic Limited (PGL) have completed field investigations of Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary to supplement the previously completed studies, in order to determine suggested stormwater management constraints for the development of the subject lands, identify slope stabilization requirements, and to define appropriate development setbacks according to meanderbelt width.
The existing conditions of the two watercourses are summarized below.
3.6.1 Cardinal Creek
3.6.1.1 Previous Studies and Recommended Works
Generally, the Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007) found that the Cardinal Creek channel is considered stable to moderately stable within the Study Area. Specifically, the assessment indicates that:
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 33 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Cardinal Creek – North of Hydro One corridor: The Creek is stable, in regime, and in fair condition. The limiting feature for the ‘health’ of the Creek is riparian habitat conditions. ‹ Cardinal Creek – Between Old Montreal Road and Hydro One corridor: The Creek is in transition (widening) and in fair condition. The prominence of drains and urbanization are listed as the likely cause of the observed adjustment in this reach. The limiting feature for the ‘health’ of the Creek is riparian habitat conditions. ‹ Cardinal Creek – Between South Tributary and Old Montreal Road: The Creek is in regime and in fair condition. The limiting feature for the ‘health’ of the Creek is riparian habitat conditions. ‹ North Tributary: The North Tributary is in transition (widening/degradation) and in poor condition due to channel scouring and sediment deposition.
The report provides meanderbelt widths for Cardinal Creek, and suggests that stormwater management within the Cardinal Creek subwatershed should address matching flows below the two-year return because of the watershed’s sensitivity to changes in flow regime, specifically in regards to erosion. If conditions cannot be matched, the assessment suggests that other in-stream mitigation measures may be warranted.
The Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007) establishes a critical discharge of 0.05 m 3/s for Reach C10 of Cardinal Creek (directly upstream of Old Montreal Road). The monitoring data provided in this same report indicates that the baseflow in Cardinal Creek at Reach C10 (average baseflow in the range of 0.2 to 0.3 m 3/s from data over 2006-2007) has been observed to be significantly higher than the calculated threshold. This indicates significant and on-going erosion could be occurring within this section of Cardinal Creek, but also highlights the fact that there are limitations inherent to the erosion threshold analysis. “For example, the critical discharge defines approximately when movement of sediment may begin, and does not indicate the extent or severity of erosion that will occur. Also, threshold values are inherently conservative when applied to natural channels” ( Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report , AECOM, 2009).
Drawing on the 2007 Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek, the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2009) identifies areas of concern for streambank erosion and slope stability. Reach C10, immediately upstream of Old Montreal Road, is identified as an immediate concern and it is recommended that the channel be realigned to pass through the centre of the valley and the slopes be stabilized immediately. In addition, the Subwatershed Study draws on the conclusions of previous studies (Golder, 1990, McNeely Engineering, 1992, CCL, 2000) to recommend installation of toe erosion protection along reaches with active erosion and potentially unstable slopes. Each recommended erosion protection
PAGE 34 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
measure is assigned a priority group, based on rate of erosion, bank undercutting, and adjacent land uses. Areas where active erosion of the Cardinal Creek channel has caused or is likely to cause slope instability in the short term have been mapped in the Subwatershed Study (and provided in Appendix D of this MSS report). The corresponding recommendations are tabulated by location in the Subwatershed Study - a copy is provided in Appendix D . Six locations in Cardinal Creek between the Ottawa River and the South Tributary (including the location described above) have been identified as High Priority for erosion protection, slope stability, and creek realignment. In addition, thirteen other locations have been identified for survey or visual monitoring. These recommended works within the Cardinal Creek ravine have no formal status, have not received agency approval, and are therefore subject to additional discussions and modifications. As such, no improvement works in these areas has been completed to date. It is expected that if these works are approved in the future, they would be completed by others, as an independent undertaking. This MSS study does not rely on the outcome of the Subwatershed Study or its recommended works.
3.6.1.2 Current Analysis
Parish Geomorphic Limited reviewed the Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, August 2009) and the associated 2007 Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (including the meanderbelt width assessment) as part of the exercise of determining setbacks for the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village and determining the nature of existing erosion in the Creek.
The review concluded that: ‹ Quantity control is not required for stormwater outletting to the Ottawa River, according to the proposed pond location provided later in this MSS report (Section 1.0 ); and, ‹ Further field investigations should be completed to verify the erosion threshold value for Reach C10 of Cardinal Creek. It would be beneficial to also evaluate the downstream segments of the Creek and obtain erosion thresholds based on present channel conditions, given the sensitivity of the Creek explained in Section 3.6.1.1. Accordingly, additional field studies were completed in May 2013 in order to verify the erosion threshold in Cardinal Creek. These additional studies indicate that a governing threshold of 1.5m 3/s is to be used as the critical discharge for the creek. The additional field studies identified the bankfull width of the channel ranging between 6 - 12 m and bankfull depths ranging between 0.7 - 2 m. The additional investigations employed Rapid Geomorphic Assessments and Rapid Stream Assessment Techniques to characterize Cardinal Creek. The scores indicate that overall, Cardinal Creek is in adjustment downstream of its confluence with the South Tributary and that there is significant widening occurring in the system. All reaches within the Study Area were found to have generally high scores, with the
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 35 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
primary adjustment factor for all of the reaches being widening. Indicators of widening included fallen and leaning trees, occurrence of large organic debris, toe erosion on both sides of riffles, steep bank angles and evident bank scour.
Building on the Parish Geomorphic work, the Erosion Assessment provided in Appendix O recommends that this critical discharge rate be incorporated as a target within the stormwater management design of the site. In the absence of Subwatershed Study guidance, a standard used in different jurisdictions (Conservation Halton) has been adopted: it is recommended that the average annual erosion hours in the main branch of Cardinal Creek be maintained within 5% of the existing conditions erosion hours above this critical discharge rate, by implementing stormwater management controls on site.
Details of the Parish Geomorphic Limited review are provided in the Cardinal Creek Village – Erosion Threshold Assessment South Tributary (PGL – January 2013) and the Cardinal Creek Village – Erosion Threshold Assessment Main Branch (PGL – May 2013), which are provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013). Further information on the delineation of the meanderbelt width is provided in Section 3.10.1.
It should be noted that, as described in Section 3.1 , a slope reinstatement program is recommended as part of this MSS at one isolated location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, where an existing slope failure has occurred. This slope reinstatement program is to be completed as part of the Cardinal Creek Village development, and again, does not rely on the outcome of the Subwatershed Study.
3.6.2 South Tributary
As noted previously, the Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007) did not include an analysis of the South Tributary, due to access restrictions. Therefore, Paterson Group conducted a separate slope condition review for the South Tributary as part of the background studies for the development of Cardinal Creek Village, in order to gather information on toe erosion, surface erosion, and general slope stability. The field investigations indicated that the South Tributary is stable, with some toe erosion noted throughout where the watercourse is located close to the valley corridor wall. Slope stability analysis was used to inform the delineation of the limit of hazard lands for the South Tributary (Section 3.1, Section 3.10.1 and Drawing 3).
In addition, Parish Geomorphic Limited (PGL) completed field investigations of the South Tributary in December 2012. Based on a Rapid Geomorphic Assessment (RGA), it was determined that the tributary was in adjustment based on indicators of channel instability. A detailed survey of the most sensitive reach of the tributary was undertaken in order to be able to determine an erosion threshold for the channel: the critical discharge for the South Tributary was determined to be 0.43 m 3/s. It is recommended
PAGE 36 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
that, as detailed design work progresses for the stormwater management facilities, outlet flows be refined according to the identified critical discharge.
Similar to Cardinal Creek Main Branch, the Erosion Assessment provided in Appendix O recommends that this critical discharge rate be incorporated as a target within the stormwater management design of the site. It is specifically recommended that the average annual erosion hours in the South Tributary be maintained within 5% of the existing conditions erosion hours above this critical discharge rate, by implementing stormwater management controls on site.
For the South Tributary, the meander belt widths were not previously defined, and therefore PGL employed standard belt width delineation protocols to determine values. Further information on the delineation of the meanderbelt width is provided in Section 3.10.1.
3.7 Existing Land Use and Adjacent Land Uses
Existing land uses within the Study Area include agricultural fields and associated buildings, rural residential development along Old Montreal Road and Grand-Chêne Court, a church, a nursery and landscape supply centre, and vacant lands. The existing properties are serviced by private wells and septic systems, with stormwater runoff naturally draining to Cardinal Creek and its tributaries.
An existing Hydro One corridor runs through the northern portion of the site, along the alignment of a former railway line, and Old Montreal Road runs east-west, bisecting the site.
Existing urban development in Orleans, to the west and south-west of the subject lands, consists of residential uses, commercial plazas at the intersection of Trim Road and Watters Road and at the intersection of Trim Road and Innes Road, schools representing all four Boards of Education, religious facilities, and neighbourhood parks. These uses are serviced by existing municipal services, as detailed in Section 3.8.
The lands south of the study are designated as Agriculture Resource Areas in the City’s Official Plan and are currently used as active farms.
Rural residential lots are located east of the study area. Further east of the rural residential subdivision is the Cumberland Golf & Country Club and the Village of Cumberland.
3.8 Existing Utilities
As outlined in Section 2.2.3 , utility companies have been consulted with in the development of the Master Servicing Study. In terms of existing services:
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 37 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Hydro One has an existing pole line on Old Montreal Road; ‹ Enbridge has an existing gas main on Frank Kenny Road, as well as a plant on Old Montreal Road, west of Cardinal Creek; ‹ Bell and Rogers have existing plant on the Old Montreal Road pole line; and ‹ Hydro One has an existing corridor, running through the site south of OR 174.
Paterson Group completed a structural review of the existing concrete culvert under the existing Hydro One corridor, as described in a memo attached in Appendix P. The cast in place concrete box culvert structure includes wing walls and was constructed over 80 years ago. The surface of the concrete is pitted and worn from erosion over a significant period. Structurally, the culvert appears to be sound and over designed to handle the dynamic loading of loaded trains. At the present time, the culvert does not receive any train traffic loading – however does experience loading from hydro inspection vehicles. Culvert maintenance, consisting of crack repair and resurfacing of the pitted surface including the wing walls, is recommended to prolong its life cycle.
3.9 Existing Municipal Services
The following sections present an inventory of municipal services located near the subject lands.
3.9.1 Water Supply Servicing
Cardinal Creek Village is located adjacent to the current boundary of the 1E and 2E Pressure Zones. A summary of existing watermains in the vicinity of Cardinal Creek Village is presented in Table 2.
In addition, there are planned watermain network projects in the vicinity of Cardinal Creek Village, as approved in the City’s 2009 Infrastructure Master Plan. Consultation with City staff indicated that the projects listed in Table 3 will be constructed and in operation prior to the development of Cardinal Creek Village as part of the City’s ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project. The City is also undertaking the construction of the Orleans Watermain Link, which will improve the reliability of water supply to the East Urban Community.
PAGE 38 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Table 2: Summary of Existing Watermains
Existing Watermain – Location Size Year Constructed
St. Joseph Boulevard, ending at Trim Road 406mm 1983
Trim Road from St. Joseph Boulevard to Taylor Creek 406mm 1985 Boulevard / Dairy Drive Dairy Road ROW from Trim Road to the cul-de-sac end of 406mm 1992 Dairy Road North Service Road from Trim Road to East Extent 406mm 1996 Watermain east of Trim Road from Dairy Road to the North 406mm 1996 Service Road Trim Road, ending at Watters Road 610mm 2007 St. Joseph Boulevard, ending near Tenth Line Road 610mm -
Table 3: Summary of Planned Watermains
Planned Planned Watermain – Location Size Construction Date
New north/south watermain on Trim Rd., from the existing 610mm 2013 stub on Watters Rd. to St. Joseph Blvd New east/west watermain on Old Montreal Road, from Trim 406mm 2013 Road to Dairy Drive New east/west watermain stub on Old Montreal Road, east 406mm 2013 of Trim Road New east/west watermain on St. Joseph Blvd. from the 610mm 2013 - 2014 existing stub near Tenth Line Rd. to Trim Rd.
The existing and planned watermains are depicted on Figure 5, incorporating the limits and sizes of planned watermains from the City of Ottawa’s engineering drawings for the ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project.
The approved City of Gloucester & Township of Cumberland East Urban Community Sewer and Water Study (McNeely Engineering Consultants Ltd., 1992) contemplated the development of the Cardinal Creek Village lands as part of the ‘50-year Urban Boundary Expansion’ for the East Urban Community. At that time, it was recommended that the development would be serviced by extending the existing watermain network and connecting to the 2E Pressure Zone so as to limit peak pumping and watermain capacities, taking into account engineering, operations, and reliability considerations. A subsequent study, Engineering Servicing Evaluation - Cardinal Village In Support of an
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 39 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Official Plan Amendment Submission (David McManus Engineering Ltd, March 2009) further refined the conceptual servicing plan for Cardinal Creek Village lands, explaining that given the site location and the adequate static pressure available, a portion of the lands should be connected to the 1E Pressure Zone infrastructure.
Based on this previous reporting, the 70 meter contour line roughly approximates the pressure boundary between the two zones, and under existing conditions, approximately two-thirds of the subject lands fall within the 2E pressure district, and about one-third in the 1E pressure district.
To determine capacity of the existing watermain system, preliminary water and fire flow demands for the Study Area were established according to City of Ottawa guidance for large development areas and populations. Boundary conditions were requested from the City of Ottawa at three locations:
Boundary Condition Location 1: Pressure Zone 1E, North Service Road and East Extent, Existing 406mm PCV (existing elevation 52.4m);
Boundary Condition Location 2: Pressure Zone 1E, Dairy Road, End of cul-de-sac, Existing 406mm PCV (existing elevation 61.4m); and
Boundary Condition Location 3: Pressure Zone 2E, St Joseph Boulevard and Trim Road, Future 610mm Orleans WM.
The existing watermain pressures are provided in Table 4. Ministry of the Environment and City of Ottawa Guidelines indicate that it is best practice to have normal operating pressures between the range of 50psi to 80psi (345kPa to 552kPa). The information presented in Table 4 demonstrates that there are sufficient watermain pressures available at the connection points to Pressure Zone 1E & 2E; in short, in terms of water supply, there is capacity in the municipal watermain network to service Cardinal Creek Village. Further information regarding existing water supply conditions are discussed in Watermain Analysis Cardinal Creek Village (June 2013) prepared by Veritec Consulting and included in Appendix H.
Table 4: Existing Watermain Boundary Conditions
Boundary Condition Location Hydraulic Boundary Conditions- Hydraulic Grade Line (m) High Pressure Max day+fire (250 L/s) Peak Hour Check Zone 1E, North Service Road 107.9m 115m 93.2m Zone 1E, Dairy Road 107.9m 115m 93.3m Zone 2E, Trim/St. Joseph 123.4m 132m 123.4m
PAGE 40 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
3.9.2 Wastewater Servicing
The Cardinal Creek Village lands were previously assessed as part of the ‘50-year Urban Boundary Expansion’ for the East Urban Community in the City of Gloucester & Township of Cumberland East Urban Community Sewer and Water Study (McNeely Engineering Consultants Ltd., 1992). The 1992 McNeely Report identified a proposed 1200mm diameter trunk sanitary sewer named the ‘Cardinal East Trunk’, running through the subject lands and extending to the east and south of the Study Area. The assessment also identified a proposed ‘Ottawa River Sub Trunk’ and a proposed ‘Trim Road Trunk’, to link the East Urban Community to the existing sanitary network and treatment centre. The connection of the proposed Cardinal Creek Village sanitary sewer to the Trim Road Trunk is identified south of the intersection of the existing Hydro One corridor and Trim Road. The Cardinal Creek Village lands were included in the tributary sanitary drainage area to the proposed collector sewers in this study.
Further to the 1992 McNeely Report, the East Urban Community Sewer Servicing Study (Novatech Engineering Consultants Ltd, July 1997) was completed, and recommended that the Ottawa River Sub Trunk be sized as an 825mm diameter sewer (reduced from 1200mm). Subsequently, the Ottawa River Sub-Trunk and Trim Road Sanitary Sewer Assessment (Stantec Consulting Ltd, February 2001) was prepared to confirm or modify the recommendations in the 1997 Novatech Report, due to changes in land uses and changes in the sanitary sewer system at that time. The 2001 Stantec Report recommended that the Ottawa River Sub Trunk sanitary pipe size from Tenth Line Road to Trim Road would need to be 900mm in size. The Ottawa River Sub Trunk sewer has been constructed, and is depicted in Figure 6.
An inventory of the existing sanitary sewer network in the immediate vicinity of Cardinal Creek Village is presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Existing Sanitary Sewers
Existing Sanitary Sewer – Location Size
Dairy Drive ROW from Trim Road to the cul-de-sac end of 375mm Dairy Drive Trim Road ROW from Old Montreal Road to Dairy Drive 450mm / 525mm Trim Road ROW from Dairy Drive across Ottawa Route 174 to 825mm the North Service Road
As part of the Gloucester and Cumberland East Urban Community Expansion Area and Bilberry Creek Industrial Park Master Servicing Study Update (Stantec Consulting Ltd., July 2006) a broad level capacity analysis of the Orleans Cumberland Collector (otherwise known as the ‘Ottawa River Sub Trunk’) was completed. The analysis, completed in 2003, served to assess the capacity of the sewer in light of updated
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 41 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
buildout projections for the Cumberland Collector, Gloucester Cumberland Trunk / Trim Road Trunk, and Orleans Collector catchments. The assessment included all sanitary catchments within the urban boundary destined to the intersection of the Orleans Cumberland Collector and the Forest Valley Trunk, west of Jeanne D’Arc Boulevard. The report noted that flows slightly exceed the capacity of the OCC under buildout conditions (within the current urban area, excluding the Urban Expansion Study Areas south and east of the existing catchment). The report also noted, for discussion purposes, that the capacity of the OCC would be exceeded by 30% to 60% when taking into account growth projections outside the urban boundary. Based on this context, the capacity of the downstream collector sewers is currently being addressed as part of the City of Ottawa’s Infrastructure Master Plan, which considers required capacity upgrades and priorities for investment at a city-wide scale.
The focus of this MSS is to confirm that capacity is available in the vicinity of the subject lands, namely the Trim Road Collector & the eastern portion of the Ottawa River Sub- Trunk. The City of Ottawa has supplied contributing areas, populations and land uses, along with GIS data for sanitary drainage areas, which have informed a general sanitary system assessment for the Trim Road Collector and Ottawa River Sub Trunk operating conditions.
The tributary areas to the Trim road Collector sewer are depicted in Figure 6 , based on information provided by the City of Ottawa. A sanitary design sheet is included in Appendix E, demonstrating the following estimates of wastewater flow conditions within the Ottawa River Sub Trunk system.
‹ Trim Road Collector: 825mm diameter sewer at a slope of 0.15%, will operate at approximately 72% of its full flowing capacity following development of Cardinal Creek Village, assuming existing conditions within the catchment. Under proposed buildout to 2031 (of both the proposed Trim Road catchments and Cardinal Creek Village), the sewer will operate at 80% of its full flowing capacity. ‹ Ottawa River Sub Trunk: 900mm diameter sewer at a slope of 0.12%, will operate at approximately 68% of its full flowing capacity following development of Cardinal Creek Village, assuming existing conditions within the catchment. Under proposed buildout to 2031 (of both the proposed Trim Road catchments and Cardinal Creek Village), the sewer will operate at 78% of its full flowing capacity.
As such, sufficient capacity to support the proposed development is expected within the receiving sewer system.
3.10 Opportunities and Constraints
Based on the inventory of existing conditions:
PAGE 42 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ There is an opportunity to develop the subject lands in a way that protects the existing watercourses and the natural heritage system from alteration and development. ‹ Cardinal Creek, the South Tributary, the downstream portion of the North Tributary, and identified terrestrial features must be conserved and protected in the development of Cardinal Creek Village. ‹ If the upstream portion of the North Tributary is proposed to be closed and filled, it is agreed that rehabilitation or compensation is to be completed to mitigate the loss. Details of the rehabilitation or compensation to be undertaken will be developed with the RVCA as part of future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval processes. Compensation habitat is to be provided at a 1:1 ratio (bankfull width x linear length) to offset the environmental losses of this feature. ‹ There is an opportunity for the implementation of stormwater management systems within the subject lands to contribute to maintaining natural stream flow regimes and controlling erosive impulses within Cardinal Creek and its tributaries. ‹ The urbanization of the subject lands is expected to increase runoff and could increase erosive forces. Generally speaking, quantity control of post- development flows is expected to be required according to the following conditions: • No quantity control is required for the Ottawa River. • For the South Tributary, post-development flows are expected to require control to pre-development flows for storm events up to and including the 100-year design storm, minimizing percent of time in exceedance of the identified critical discharge rate of 0.43 m 3/s. • For the Main Branch of Cardinal Creek, post-development flows are expected to require control to minimizing percent of time in exceedance of the identified critical discharge rate of 1.5 m 3/s, and to ensure downstream flowrates match or are below existing flows up to and including the 100-year design storm (to ensure no adverse effects to downstream infrastructure). ‹ The Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and North and South Tributaries support fish communities, and therefore, according to MOE Stormwater Management Planning guidelines, stormwater runoff directed to the all of these watercourses is expected to require enhanced quality treatment (long-term average removal of 80% of suspended solids). ‹ The majority of the site is underlain by low permeability marine clay and till deposits that have a low infiltration potential. However, areas of solution enhanced bedrock of the Gull River Formation and the Bobcaygeon Formation
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 43 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
are present within the subject lands and are considered Important Recharge Areas because of their associated high infiltration potential. ‹ Natural stream flow regimes in the North and South Tributary should be used for pre-development and post-development comparison of the stormwater management plan, to minimize negative impacts on the existing watercourses and associated habitats. A multi-disciplinary water budget is recommended in order to ensure that the form and function of existing natural features and groundwater resources are maintained, specifically by implementing design measures to avoid or mitigate against adverse effects to Important Recharge Areas and to compensate for changes in the pre-development drainage areas and stormwater runoff rates. ‹ There is an opportunity to support the development of Cardinal Creek Village using the existing capacity of municipal trunk watermain infrastructure. ‹ Sufficient municipal wastewater capacity to support the proposed development is expected within the receiving sewer system. ‹ A preliminary site grade raise restriction of 2m is in effect for housing in the northern portion of the site (where existing elevations range from 53 m – 56 m), while a 3m grade raise restriction applies to housing within the remainder of the site. For roads, the permissible grade raise is 3m and 4m, respectively. ‹ No karstic hazards to construction are identified within the development area shown in the OPA Concept Plan. However, there are two karstic features that might be considered as possible development constraints within the broader MSS study area: one potential karstic feature within the existing residential area north of Old Montreal Road and east of Cardinal Creek, and one potential karstic feature south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area. Although there is a low probability that there are subsurface voids at these locations that would be a hazard to construction, it is recommended that either buildings be setback from these locations or excavation to bedrock be undertaken to examine the two potential karstic features for voids. ‹ A slope reinstatement program is recommended at one location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, south of the Hydro One corridor, where an existing slope failure has occurred. It is recommended that the lower portion of the slope face be re- shaped to improve overall slope stability of the slope at this location. ‹ There is a set of established recommended construction works within the Cardinal Creek valley (adjacent to the subject lands) for erosion protection and slope stability. These projects are identified as part of the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study – Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2009), but have not received agency approval. Should these projects be approved in the future, they are to be completed by others and do not represent a development constraint for Cardinal Creek Village.
PAGE 44 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
3.10.1 Limit of Development
Since the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study is on-going, detailed site specific studies have been undertaken to define development constraints as they relate to the existing natural environment conditions.
The limits of development for Cardinal Creek have been delineated based on the greater of the following:
‹ Limits of the defined Natural Heritage System (Section 3.5 and Figure 2 ); ‹ Development limits as established by the 100-yr water level; ‹ 30 metres from the estimated Normal High Water Mark in Cardinal Creek; ‹ Meanderbelt width (plus 10% buffer) mapping of the Cardinal Creek; ‹ Development limits as established by the geotechnical limit of the hazard lands and required erosion access allowance; and, ‹ Other setbacks from top of slope, as agreed to by the City and RVCA as part of a field staking exercise.
These constraints are compiled on Drawing 3 and detailed in the Limit of Hazard drawings provided in Appendix R . The geotechnical limit of hazard and erosion access allowance are the most restrictive parameter for Cardinal Creek, and therefore represent the limit of development. Further details regarding the delineation procedure are provided below.
Note that the development limits for the South Tributary will be field verified in the future. This will be completed by staking the top of bank in the field, and gaining consensus on the delineation from the City and the RVCA. Setbacks will then be applied to the satisfaction of the City and the RVCA, based on the following:
‹ Development limits as established by the 100-yr water level; ‹ 30 metres from the estimated Normal High Water Mark in the South Tributary; ‹ Geotechnical setbacks including stable slope allowance, toe erosion allowance, and 6m access allowance (where the 6m access allowance is the greater of the environmental setbacks, there is an agreement that at grade infrastructure can be built that does not encumber the passage of machinery); ‹ Meanderbelt width (plus 10% buffer) mapping of the South Tributary; and, ‹ Other setbacks from top of slope, as agreed to by the City and RVCA as part of future field staking exercises.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 45 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
100-Year Water Level
To define the 100-yr water level in Cardinal Creek, the study team employed the use of the hydrologic model (December 21, 2012) that was created as part of the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study . Storm flows were generated based on the 100- year 24-hour SCS Type II design storm and the 100-year 24-hour Chicago design storm flows, as per Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study Table 3 - Existing Conditions Flood Flow Targets (Dated 2012/11/06, and provided by AECOM) provided in Appendix L.
The boundary condition for the 100-year water level at OR 174, just upstream of the Cardinal Creek confluence with the Ottawa River, was set at 45.0 m as per the 1984 Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton ‘Ottawa River Flood Risk Map RV8’. Estimated 100-year water levels were generated using these modeling parameters, and applying: (1) the channel geometry based on 1.0m incremental contours of the channels, and (2) the hydraulic structure information provided in Table 2.2 - Summary of Hydraulic Structures of the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study - Existing Conditions Report (August 2009, AECOM).
The resulting 100-yr water levels were mapped following the detailed topography of the site: the estimated 100-yr water level boundary is shown in Drawing 3 and the Limit of Hazard drawings provided in Appendix R . The tabulated model results and files are provided in Appendix L.
Note that the development limits of the South Tributary will be field verified in the future. This will be completed by staking the top of bank and gaining consensus from the City and the RVCA. Setbacks will then be applied to this limit to the satisfaction of the City and the RVCA, with consideration given to the information presented above.
30m Setback from Normal High Water Mark
Similar to the method employed to determine the 100-yr water level, the study team employed the use of the hydrologic model (December 21, 2012) that was created as part of the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study to identify the Normal High Water Mark. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources uses the following working definition of the Normal High Water Mark (NHWM): “the usual or average level to which a body of water rises at its highest point and remains for sufficient time so as to change the characteristics of the land. In flowing waters (rivers, streams) this refers to the active channel/bankfull level which is often the one-to two-year flood flow return level (Adapted from Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2009)” (Natural Heritage Reference Manual, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Second Edition - March 2010). As such, to ensure a conservative development setback is applied, the greater of the flow return levels was used: the two-year return flood flow level.
PAGE 46 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The 2-year 24-hour SCS Type II design storm and 2-year 24-hour Chicago design storm flows were used to generate flowrates, as per Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study Table 3 - Existing Conditions Flood Flow Targets (Dated 2012/11/06 by AECOM) provided in Appendix L. The 2-year boundary condition at OR 174, just upstream of the Cardinal Creek confluence with the Ottawa River, was set at 42.29 m based on background investigations of Ottawa River water levels .
The estimated 2-yr water levels were generated using these model parameters, and applying: (1) the channel geometry based on 1.0m incremental contours of the channels, and (2) the hydraulic structure information provided in Table 2.2 - Summary of Hydraulic Structures of the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study - Existing Conditions Report (August 2009, AECOM). The resulting 2-yr water levels were mapped following the detailed topography of the site: the estimated 2-yr water level boundary is shown in Drawing 3 , and is meant to act as a proxy for the Normal High Water Mark. The 30m setback from this NHWM is depicted in the Limit of Hazard drawings provided in Appendix R. The tabulated model results and modeling files are also provided in Appendix L.
Note that the development limits of the South Tributary will be field verified in the future. This will be completed by staking the top of bank and gaining consensus from the City and the RVCA. Setbacks will then be applied to this limit to the satisfaction of the City and the RVCA, with consideration given to the information presented above.
Meanderbelt Width (Plus 10% Buffer)
The Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (Geomorphic Solutions, April 2007) provides meanderbelt width delineation for Cardinal Creek, including a recommended 10% buffer to account for corridor expansion and erosion, based on Toronto Region Conservation Authority’s Belt Width Delineation Procedures (TRCA, 2004). The report recommends an additional 15m erosion setback from the meanderbelt width be implemented to define the hazard lands, but notes that this is a conservative value which could be refined with more detailed analysis (see limit of hazard delineation below).
For Cardinal Creek, Parish Geomorphic Limited reviewed the 2007 Geomorphic Assessment of Cardinal Creek (including the meanderbelt width assessment) as part of the exercise of determining setbacks for the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village. Using aerial photography, a site topographic map developed using LiDAR, and the creek form, the meander axis was established for Cardinal Creek. The meander belt widths (as determined by Geomorphic Solutions in 2007), including the addition of the recommended 10% buffer on either side of the channel, were plotted for the three reaches downstream of the Southern Tributary confluence. The meanderbelt mapping method is outlined in the Parish Geomorphic April 2013 memo provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 47 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
For the South Tributary, the meander belt widths were not previously defined, and therefore PGL employed standard belt width delineation protocols to determine values. Using topographic mapping and aerial photography, the meander axis was established for the watercourse and a preliminary belt width was delineated for the study reach by drawing lines parallel to the governing outermost meanders and following the meander axis. A second approach which applies standard empirical relationships to calculate belt widths was also completed for each of the reaches to allow for a comparison. The belt width methodology is further detailed in the Parish Geomorphic memo provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013). It can be observed that the belt widths range from 27m to 30 m when the 10% buffer is applied.
The meanderbelt widths, featuring the 10% buffer for erosion and corridor widening, are shown for Cardinal Creek in Drawing 3 and in the Limit of Hazard drawings provided in Appendix R . The widths are summarized below, with reach names provided in the companion Parish Geomorphic April 2013 memo provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
Table 6: Meanderbelt Widths for Cardinal Creek and South Tributary
Reach Measured Belt Width (m) with Notes 10% Buffer Cardinal Creek - C10 123 Meanderbelts widths are per Cardinal Creek - C11 100 Geomorphic Solutions, 2007. Cardinal Creek - C12 116 South Tributary - R1 26.6* South Tributary - R2 26.6 Summary of empirically based meander belt widths for South South Tributary - R3 25.8 Tributary, from PGL, April 2013. South Tributary - R4 29.8 * R2 used as a surrogate for R1.
Note that the development limits of the South Tributary will be field verified in the future. This will be completed by staking the top of bank and gaining consensus from the City and the RVCA. Setbacks will then be applied to this limit to the satisfaction of the City and the RVCA, with consideration given to the meanderbelt widths identified above.
Geotechnical Limit of Hazard Lands
The Geotechnical Limit of Hazard was delineated by Paterson Group based on detailed site investigations, slope stability analysis, and borehole/laboratory/analytical testing. The method is described further in the Geotechnical Report (July 2013) which is provided in the Cardinal Creek Existing Conditions Report (July 2013).
The slope stability assessment was carried out using SLIDE computer software, which permits a two-dimensional slope stability analysis to calculate a Factor of Safety. For
PAGE 48 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
this analysis, Bishop’s method, which is a widely used and accepted analysis method, was employed and a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 was used as the criteria for slope stability. A 1.5 Factor of Safety is generally recommended for conditions where the failure of the slope would endanger permanent structures.
Based on the results of the geotechnical studies, the limit of hazard has been defined, complete with a stable slope allowance, a 5m – 7m toe erosion allowance, and a 6m erosion access allowance. The geotechnical limit of hazard and the associated limit of development for Cardinal Creek are illustrated on Drawing 3 and in the Limit of Hazard drawings provided in Appendix R.
The geotechnical studies have identified an area where slope stabilization is required. It is recommended that the lower portion of the slope face be re-shaped to improve overall slope stability of the slope. The works are expected to consist of a 1m thick layer of rip rap (300 to 500 mm diametre) extending a minimum of 1m above the 100 year water level and lined with a woven geotextile liner, and are to protect against toe erosion. The re-shaping will result in an overall slope stability factor of safety of greater than 1.5.
Two slope sections (Sections D and E) were completed along the slope located just south of the hydro easement within the northeast portion of the subject site. The slope was noted to be treed and was observed to be stable. Based on observations and slope stability analysis, the subject slopes are stable and no stable slope allowance is required.
Should the existing residential lands within the Concept Plan area be re-developed in the future, additional limit of development work would be required to establish geotechnical limits of hazards for these lands. Similarly, the development limits of the South Tributary will be field verified in the future. This will be completed by staking the top of bank and gaining consensus from the City and the RVCA. Setbacks will then be applied to this limit to the satisfaction of the City and the RVCA.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 49 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
4.0 NEED AND JUSTIFICATION FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICING
4.1 Development Plan
On June 12, 2012, the subject lands (Section 1.1 & Figure 1) were approved for inclusion in the City’s urban area and given an Urban Expansion Study Area designation in the City’s Official Plan. The Official Plan is a legal document developed through a public and legislative process in accordance with the Ontario Planning Act. Therefore, it provides a planning and technical basis for undertaking infrastructure studies.
Before development can occur within the subject lands, the private landowners are required to develop a Neighbourhood Concept Plan and prepare development applications that meet the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan policies. Among other objectives, the Concept Plan and subsequent development applications must provide a mix of housing to reach a minimum average net residential density of 34 units per net hectare.
4.2 Problem Statement
A servicing strategy is needed to support the wastewater collection requirements, water demands, storm drainage requirements, stormwater management requirements, and utility demands for the approved urban expansion area. The servicing strategy must be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), must meet City requirements, must meet the requirements of other approval agencies (e.g. MOE, DFO, MNR, RVCA), and must demonstrate good engineering practice for the protection of public safety, the environment, and sustainable operation.
4.3 Guiding Principles
Through agency and public consultation (Section 2.2 ), the following principles have been established to guide the overall development of Cardinal Creek Village:
• Create an environmentally sustainable community that respects existing natural heritage features; • Create distinct liveable neighbourhoods within the Cardinal Creek Village community; • Provide an opportunity for a mix of residential housing types and densities; • Provide for a connected network of community facilities including parks, schools, walkways and open spaces; • Encourage the development of an attractive commercial area which provides residents with a range of commercial uses; • Ensure timely and efficient phasing of future infrastructure; and
PAGE 50 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
• Provide a safe and efficient transportation system that accommodates all modes of transportation and integrates these systems with the land uses.
These guiding principles form the basis of the evaluation of alternative land use plans and servicing solutions described in the proceeding sections of this Master Servicing Study.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 51 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
5.0 IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE SERVICING SOLUTIONS
The following alternative solutions exist to support the water demands, wastewater collection requirements, storm drainage requirements, and stormwater management requirements for the approved urban expansion area.
The alternative solutions have been evaluated in terms of their ability to meet the problem statement (e.g. their ability to support the approved level of development and their ability to meet relevant regulations and guidelines) and their expected net environmental impacts. In considering net environmental impacts, consideration is given to impacts on: air, land, and water; plant, animal, and human life; social, economic, and cultural conditions; existing buildings and infrastructure; and the generation of noise, vibrations, radiation, and odours.
5.1 Water Distribution Alternatives
In order to address water supply for the urban expansion area, the following alternative solutions have been assessed:
‹ Do Nothing: By not developing any water infrastructure, the problem statement would not be addressed, as the approved development targets for Cardinal Creek Village could not be supported. Therefore, this option has not been carried forward. ‹ Construct Private Wells: Private wells are not expected to support the water demands for the approved level of development, specifically high density, institutional, and commercial uses. This solution is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), which states that municipal service is the preferred form of water supply in urban areas. Furthermore, the PPS states that individual on-site water services shall be used “for a new development of five or less lots or private residences where municipal water services and private communal water services are not provided and where site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services.” The construction of private wells would be inconsistent with all conditions in the PPS: the development is for greater than 3,000 units; existing municipal services are available in reasonable proximity to the development site; and private wells would be expected to impact groundwater resources. Therefore, this option does not address the problem statement, and has not been carried forward. ‹ Construct a New Municipal Well: A communal well could reasonably be expected to provide adequate water supply to the proposed level of development of the community. This solution would be consistent with the PPS, which states that “municipal water services should be promoted, wherever feasible”. However, the construction, operation, and maintenance of a new municipal well adjacent to the boundary of the existing municipal watermain network does not represent an
PAGE 52 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
efficient use of existing capacity, would be inconsistent with the City of Ottawa’s priorities for urban development, and would be expected to impact groundwater resources in the area. ‹ Expand Existing Municipal System: Municipal water services are the preferred form of servicing for urban areas in Ontario, as per the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). The existing municipal system has the capacity to support the planned mix of residential housing types and densities, community facilities, and commercial areas described in the guiding principles. An extension of the system would make efficient use of the existing capacity and is expected to be cost effective. This alternative also provides fire flows for emergency services, and limits groundwater impacts.
Of the two reasonable and feasible alternatives – constructing a new municipal well or extending the existing municipal system – the expansion of the existing municipal water network is the preferred water servicing solution . As discussed in Section 3.9.1 , the site is adjacent to two existing water pressure zones and adequate supply and pressure is expected to be available. Expanding the municipal water system would provide safe and reliable drinking water to the new community, would offer wide-spread fire protection, and would be consistent with City servicing practices for the urban area.
5.2 Wastewater Collection Alternatives
In order to address wastewater collection for the urban expansion area, the following alternative solutions have been assessed:
‹ Do Nothing: By not developing any wastewater infrastructure, the problem statement would not be addressed, as the approved development targets for Cardinal Creek Village could not be supported. Therefore, this option has not been carried forward.
‹ Private Septic Systems: Private septic systems are not expected to support the wastewater generated by the approved level of development. This solution is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), which states municipal sewage services are the preferred form of servicing within urban areas, and that private systems shall be used “for a new development of five or less lots or private residences where municipal sewage services are not provided and where site conditions are suitable for the long-term provision of such services.” Therefore, this option does not address the problem statement, and has not been carried forward. ‹ Municipal Sewer System – New Wastewater Treatment Plant: A new municipal wastewater plant and associated system is a reasonable solution to address the wastewater generated by the approved development area. This solution is consistent with the PPS, which states that municipal sewage services are the preferred form of servicing for urban areas. However, the construction,
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 53 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
operation, and maintenance of a new treatment plant is considered inefficient because of the development site’s close proximity to the existing network that has demonstrated residual capacity ( Section 3.9.1 ). Environmental approvals would be required to facilitate the development of a new treatment plant in Ottawa, as the City’s entire wastewater collection system currently conveys all wastewater to be treated at the R. O. Pickard Environmental Centre (ROPEC). ‹ Municipal Sewer System – Expand Existing Municipal System (Trim Road Collector) : Municipal sewage services are the preferred form of servicing for urban areas in Ontario, as per the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). The existing sanitary sewer system is expected to have capacity to support the planned mix of residential housing types and densities, community facilities, and commercial areas described in the guiding principles. The existing ROPEC wastewater treatment plant is also expected to be able to accommodate the expected wastewater flows. An extension of the system would make efficient use of the existing capacity and is expected to be the most cost effective solution.
Of the two reasonable and feasible alternatives – constructing a new municipal treatment plant or extending the existing municipal system – the expansion of the existing municipal sanitary sewer network is the preferred wastewater servicing solution . As discussed in Section 3.9.2 , the Trim Road Collector and Ottawa River Sub Trunk offer residual capacity in the segments closest to the subject lands, and the Orleans Cumberland Collector is also expected to offer capacity (through review and any upgrades identified as part of the city-wide Infrastructure Master Plan prepared by the City of Ottawa). Expanding the municipal wastewater system would provide reliable sanitary service and is consistent with provincial and municipal development policies for the urban area.
5.3 Stormwater Management Alternatives
In order to address stormwater management for the urban expansion area, a set of alternative solutions have been assessed. As discussed in Section 3.2 , under existing conditions, a portion of the site drains to the Ottawa River, while the majority of the site drains to Cardinal Creek and its tributaries. The urbanization of the approved development area would increase runoff and could increase erosive forces, so quantity control of post-development flows is expected to be required. The Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and the South Tributary support warm and cool water fish communities, and therefore, according to MOE Stormwater Management Planning guidelines, stormwater runoff directed to these tributaries is expected to require enhanced quality treatment (long-term average removal of 80% of suspended solids).
5.3.1 Conveyance Alternatives
‹ Do Nothing: By urbanizing the subject lands and not providing any stormwater management, the development would not achieve the Ontario Ministry of
PAGE 54 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Environment’s objectives of “preserving groundwater and baseflow characteristics; preventing undesirable and costly geomorphic change in the watercourse(s); preventing any increase in flood risk potential; protecting water quality; and ultimately maintaining an appropriate diversity of aquatic life and opportunities for human uses” (MOE SWMP Design Manual, 2003). Similarly, the approach is inconsistent with the City’s Stormwater Management Design Guidelines and RVCA policies for watershed management and protection of fish habitat. Therefore, this option does not address the problem statement and has not been carried forward. ‹ Implement Lot Level Best Management Practices: Lot level controls - such as rooftop storage, parking lot storage, superpipe storage, infiltration systems, pervious pipe systems, and rear yard storage - can contribute to quantity control and infiltration objectives for the development site. However, MOE, RVCA, and City guidelines suggest that a combination of stormwater management practices is required to address water resource concerns such as erosion, groundwater recharge, and water quality. Lot level controls alone are not sufficient to meet the expected SWM quality and quantity criteria for the site (given the stormwater management and erosion targets outlined in Section 3.10 ), but have been carried forward for incorporation into a stormwater treatment train approach, which is a recommended approach in City of Ottawa, RVCA, and MOE guidelines. ‹ Rural Cross-Section – Ditches: Open ditches and culverts are a reasonable and feasible solution for conveying stormwater runoff from the urbanized area to an outlet, as ditches would reduce flow velocities, provide infiltration opportunities, contribute to the prevention of geomorphic change in the watercourses, and contribute to the management of flood risk. Open ditches could also provide quality treatment for runoff (suspended solids and pollutant removal), thereby protecting water quality in the existing watercourses. However, open ditches are associated with large property footprints because of slope requirements. Therefore, open ditches alone cannot support the stormwater management requirements of the approved development: the expected property requirements for a completely rural ditch system would be at odds with the higher density, compact, transit-supportive land use principles driving the development of the site ( Section 4.3 ). However, the open ditch stormwater management solution has been carried forward into the incorporation of a stormwater treatment train approach for the site. ‹ Major / Minor Collection System: A dual drainage system is a reasonable and feasible alternative stormwater management solution for the site, with the minor system consisting of underground storm sewers that accommodate runoff from events up to the 5-year design storm, and the major systems consisting of overland flow routes for the less frequent, high intensity storm events. This system has smaller land footprint requirements as compared to rural ditches, and is the recommended stormwater conveyance form for urban scenarios as per the
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 55 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines . However, the dual drainage system alone cannot support the stormwater management requirements of the approved development area: the storm sewers and overland routes do not provide sufficient quantity or quality control, so must be paired with end-of-pipe treatment to achieve the receiving watercourse targets outlines in Section 3.10 . As such, the minor/major system alternative solution will be carried forward for incorporation into a treatment train approach.
5.3.2 Treatment Alternatives
‹ Stormwater Outlet with No Controls: The stormwater runoff collected by a ditch or dual drainage system could be discharged directly to a receiving waterbody. This alternative solution does not meet the quantity or quality control targets discussed above, and therefore does not meet City of Ottawa, RVCA, or MOE stormwater management guidelines. This option does not address the problem statement and has not been carried forward. ‹ Stormwater Management Facility – Dry Pond with Quantity Control: An end- of-pipe dry pond is a reasonable solution for stormwater management in Cardinal Creek Village. The dry pond would have no permanent pool of water and therefore would not provide measurable quality control, but could provide erosion and flood control. Because dry ponds provide limited quality treatment and have a tendency to re-suspend settled material, their use is generally restricted in Ontario. Therefore, this alternative solution does not meet the quality control targets discussed above, and has not been carried forward . ‹ Stormwater Management Facility – Wet Pond with Quantity / Quality Controls: End-of-pipe stormwater management facilities are feasible and reasonable solutions for stormwater management for the subject lands. Stormwater from a conveyance system (e.g. ditches or sewers) would discharge to the facility, where it would be treated before being discharged to a receiving waterbody. Outlet controls to the receiving body can be designed to minimize environmental impacts such as erosive impacts or impacts to fish habitat. The outlet requirements – like the average % removal of suspended solids or a specific flow rate - dictates the storage volume of the pond. Wet ponds are the most common type of stormwater management facility used in the province, and can be designed to meet City, MOE, and RVCA guidelines.
Based on the assessment above, a treatment train consisting of lot level best management practices, a minor/major collection system conveyance, select open ditches (where feasible), and a wet pond stormwater management facility is the preferred solution for stormwater management on site . The preferred solution addresses the problem statement in that it supports the proposed level of development and meets MOE, RVCA, and City of Ottawa guidelines for stormwater management. The treatment train approach provides maximum protection to the receiving watercourses.
PAGE 56 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
5.4 Preferred Servicing Solution – Extend Municipal Services
Expanding the existing municipal wastewater and water infrastructure is the preferred servicing solution for Cardinal Creek Village, as it supports the planned development of a mixed-use community, is consistent with the provincial and municipal policies for urban development, and minimizes negative environmental impacts.
In terms of stormwater management, a treatment train approach is recommended, using best management practices for site controls, a dual drainage system, and a set of stormwater management facilities that provide stormwater quality and/or quantity control, where required.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 57 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
6.0 MUNICIPAL SERVICING ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCEPT PLANS
The Land Use Plan for Cardinal Creek Village draws upon the physical, locational, visual and contextual factors in the area that may be affected by the plan.
Together with the guiding principles outlined in Section 4.3 , the following design guidelines provide a framework for the overall identity and structure of Cardinal Creek Village, as well as for the appearance of new buildings, streetscape, parks and open spaces within the community:
‹ Create integrated, safe, passive and active green spaces; ‹ Create a central focus for the community; ‹ Forested areas should be conserved whenever possible; ‹ The rural and natural landscape character of the Cardinal Creek should be conserved; ‹ Old Montreal Road is the gateway into Cardinal Creek Village and development along it should have a consistent level of design quality; ‹ Developments that are visible from Highway 174 should present a positive image; ‹ The views and vistas into and from the Concept Plan area should be optimized and enhanced whenever possible; ‹ Developments on the ridge should present an active skyline that is integrated with the existing forested areas; ‹ Park, open space and community uses should be designed to facilitate convenient and safe pedestrian, cycling and other non-motorized recreational activities. Pedestrians and cyclists should be given priority in consideration of land use and road pattern design; ‹ Infrastructure works such as bridges over the creek, drainage corridors, and stormwater management facilities, should be architecturally designed and serve as visual and recreational amenities; and, ‹ New collector roads should connect with and extend the existing arterial road system.
6.1 Preliminary Neighbourhood Concept Plans The preferred servicing solution – to expand the existing municipal water and sanitary sewer network and to provide a treatment train of stormwater management techniques – was conceptually applied to four preliminary alternative neighbourhood concept plans early in the development of the project (November 2012).
PAGE 58 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The preliminary concept plans, developed by Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited, addressed: • the natural heritage system described in Section 3.5 ; • the findings of the Community Transportation Study (IBI Group, June 2013); • general grading constraints discussed in the Geotechnical Investigations of the site (Section 3.1 ); • the findings of other background reports completed by the broader study team (Section 1.2 ); and • the guiding principles outlined in Section 4.3 .
All of the preliminary concept plans: • Contained a mix of residential unit types and densities; • Incorporated a hierarchy of transportation corridors; o Propose one crossing of Cardinal Creek (for Old Montreal Road); o Propose a connection to OR 174; • Included mixed use, institutional, and park land; • Included designated potential stormwater management lands in suitable areas according to the natural topography of the site; and • Proposed that the North Branch be filled and the North Tributary, east of the designated natural heritage system, be filled.
The preliminary concept plan options are presented in Exhibit 2, and comments on differentiating factors are provided below. These concepts were presented at the November 2012 Public Open House, for review and comment. For further information on the generation and evaluation of alternatives, please refer to the Public Consultation Report (Delcan Corporation, March 2013).
Note that these early concepts for Cardinal Creek village considered lands south of the South Tributary for development, including a portion of land outside of the existing urban boundary. However, the preferred concept plan (Section 6.3 and Figure 4) has been refined to include only the lands north of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area.
Option A features a minor realignment of Old Montreal Road, which would include a designated transit route. Option B features a major realignment of Old Montreal Road, and has the collector crossing the South Tributary. Both Options A and B site the intersection of the north-south collector and OR 174 in the north-eastern portion of the subject lands. Option C brings transit along the existing Hydro One corridor, features a minor realignment of Old Montreal Road, and features two transportation corridors crossing the South Tributary. Option D does not include a transit corridor, and has only one crossing of the South Tributary. The intersection of the north-south collector and OR 174 is located closer to north-central portion of the subject lands in both Option C and Option D.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 59 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
PAGE 60 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
PREFERRED
Exhibit 2: Preliminary Neighbourhood Concept Plans (November 2012)
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 61 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
PAGE 62 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
6.2 Municipal Servicing Assessment of Alternative Neighbourhood Concept Plans
6.2.1 Evaluation Process
A preliminary list of criteria groups and sample criteria were presented to the public at the July 2012 Open House, so that feedback could be obtained and the indicators could be refined. Evaluation criteria groups include the natural, social and physical environments; technical transportation and services; and the economic environment. Please refer to the Public Consultation Report prepared by Delcan Corporation (March 2013) for further information regarding the development of evaluation criteria and the approach to impact assessment.
For the evaluation of alternative neighbourhood concepts and alternative transportation designs, the intent was to compare various alternatives to determine which best meets the problem statement and guiding principles. In Sections 6.2.2, 7.0, 8.0, and 9.0 that follow, alternatives being assessed are comparatively evaluated based on the qualitative impact assessment technique described in the diagram below. The indicator used for impact assessment varies depending on the scale of the evaluation, so is addressed separately in each of Sections 6.2.2, 7.0, 8.0 & 9.0 .
Diagram 1: Qualitative Assessment Terms and Descriptions (Delcan, 2012)
Terms describing Comparative Negative Positive Impacts Definition Evaluation Impacts (i.e., Benefits) Negligible/Low Greatest The impact exists, but is of a magnitude small enough that it has little effect, or is of limited Most benefit, or has the least impact compared to all Preferred the alternatives.
Greatest compliance, contribution or benefit. Slight Good The impact exists and is of relatively low magnitude.
Provides a moderate effect or contribution or benefit. Some Reasonable The impact exists and has an effect that is of a moderate magnitude.
Provides a measurable contribution or benefit. Significant Limited The impact exists and has an effect that is relatively large, or has the most impact when Least compared to other alternatives. Preferred
Little to no contribution or benefit.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 63 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
At the MSS level, capital costing is general and considers overall anticipated cut / fill requirements, bedrock excavations, stormwater facilities, etc., relying on past data from similar developments within the City. The costs are to be used for comparison of alternatives only, and are not for budgetary purposes.
6.2.2 Evaluation of Neighbourhood Concept Plans
With input from Paterson Group, IBI Group, Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Associates Limited, Delcan, and Muncaster Environmental, the following impact assessment was completed to compare the four alternative preliminary concept plans. Impacts were assessed according to the technique described in Diagram 1, and assigned a comparative ranking represented by the symbols below.
Diagram 2: Qualitative Assessment Ratings (Delcan, 2012)
Best Good Fair Poor
In order to meaningfully evaluate the four concepts from a site grading, stormwater management, and servicing implications perspective, grading plans were developed for each concept and are included in Appendix F. The grading plans make use of existing topography to minimize cut/fill requirements. These grading plans dictate the general storm drainage pattern for each concept. By reading the grading plans in conjunction with the bedrock contours provided in Drawing 3 , areas where significant bedrock excavation would be required have been identified. Local water, sanitary, and storm sewers are expected to follow the proposed road network in each concept.
The results of this analysis indicate that there is not a significant difference, from a technical servicing perspective, between the four preliminary concept plans. Therefore, urban design, transportation, and environmental implications have driven the preferred concept.
The comprehensive and integrated analysis of the neighbourhood concept plans is presented in Table 7: based on the integrated analysis, Option D is the preferred alternative. This evaluation was presented to the public for review and comment at the November 2012 Open House.
PAGE 64 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Table 7: Evaluation of Preliminary Neighbourhood Concept Plans
Criteria Criteria Indicator Option A Option B Option C Option D Groups Wildlife Linkages and Best - South Tributary with only one road Fair - Increased greenspace south of hydro Fair - Less woodlot retention in northwest and Best - South Tributary with only one road habitat crossing. Crossing in less sensitive open corridor and east of Cardinal Creek, south of SWM in northeast forest. South Tributary crossing in less sensitive open area. No SWM in protection area. No SWM in northeast forest. Second North Tributary. But South Tributary crossed crossed by Transitway and collector road in northeast forest. Second northwest SWM pond northwest SWM pond in existing disturbed by both Transitway and arterial road in more less sensitive open area. in existing disturbed area. area. sensitive locations. Fisheries Linkages and Best – South Tributary with only one road Poor - South Tributary crossed by both Fair - South Tributary crossed by Transitway Best – South Tributary with only one road habitat crossing in less sensitive open area. Transitway and arterial road in more and collector road in less sensitive open area. crossing in less sensitive open area. protection sensitive locations. Watercourses Riparian Best – South Tributary with only one road Poor - South Tributary crossed by both Fair - South Tributary crossed by Transitway Best – South Tributary with only one road protection crossing in less sensitive open area. Transitway and arterial road in more and collector road in less sensitive open area. crossing in less sensitive open area. Natural sensitive locations. Environment Woodlots Area retention Best - No SWM in northeast forest. Good – SWM in northeast forest. Poor – Less woodlot retention in northwest Best - No SWM in northeast forest. and SWM in northeast forest. Vegetation Area retention Best – No SWM in northeast forest. Good - Increased greenspace south of hydro Fair - Increased greenspace north of South Best – No SWM in northeast forest. Increased Increased greenspace along north arterial line and east of Cardinal Creek south of Tributary. greenspace to east of north arterial road. road. North Tributary. Drainage Disruption of Good – Drainage outlet effects limited to Fair - Additional disturbance of the natural Fair - Additional disturbance of the natural Good – Drainage outlet effects limited to natural Cardinal Creek. environment due to direct outlet to Ottawa environment due to direct outlet to Ottawa Cardinal Creek. environment at River. River. stormwater outlets Physical Perceived Poor - Major and minor collector roads Fair - Major and minor collector roads Poor - Major and minor collector roads Best - Major and minor collector roads provide connectivity barriers provide connections within the community; provide connections within the community; provide connections within the community; connections within the community. within the however, transit corridor aligned with Old however, transit corridor aligned with Old however, north-south transit corridor may be No transit corridor to be perceived as a physical community Montreal Road (arterial road), may be Montreal Road (arterial road), may be perceived as a physical barrier due to its barrier within the community. perceived as a physical barrier due to its perceived as a physical barrier due to its combined size with the proposed major Additional road connection to Frank Kenny combined size. Additional collector road combined size. Re-aligned Old Montreal collector road. Additional collector road Road achieved within study area lands. connection to Frank Kenny Road not Road provides alternative connection to connection to Frank Kenny Road not achieved achieved within study area lands. Frank Kenny Road. within study area lands. Archaeology Disruption of Good – All significant archaeological Good – All significant archaeological Good – All significant archaeological Good – All significant archaeological resources Social archaeological resources will be protected. resources will be protected. resources will be protected. will be protected. Environment resources Heritage Stone house Best – Retention of stone house within Good – Retention of stone house within Poor - No retention of stone house or Good – Retention of stone house within retention and Community Park; retention of driveway trees Community Park; no retention of driveway driveway trees. Community Park; no retention of driveway trees driveway trees due to road layout. trees due to road layout. due to road layout. Noise Exposure to Fair – Some low density residential land Poor – Significant exposure of low density Fair – Some low density residential land uses Best – No exposure of low density residential/ sensitive users uses along major roads/transit. residential uses to major roads/transit along major roads/transit. sensitive land uses to transit corridor. corridor. Recreation Public Parks Fair – A total of 6 Neighbourhood and Good – A total of 6 Neighbourhood and Poor – Fewer Neighbourhood Parks. Best – A total of 6 Neighbourhood and Community parks; but two Neighbourhood Community parks; generally centrally and Community Parks; parks have better Parks located at edges of community. evenly distributed. relationships to identified school sites.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 65 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Criteria Criteria Indicator Option A Option B Option C Option D Groups Land Diversity of Best – Most diversity of residential land uses Fair – Less diversity of residential land uses Good – Reasonable balance of residential Good – Reasonable balance of residential land Requirements residential land and largest mixed use land supply. and mixed use land supply. land uses and adequate mixed use land uses and mixed use land supply. /Use uses and supply. quantity of mixed use land supply Views and Access to / Poor – Views/vistas primarily available from Fair – Views/vistas only available from some Good – Views/vistas available from some Best – Highest proportion of views/vistas are vistas creation of private spaces. public areas. public areas. available from public areas. views and Social vista Environment Pedestrian Opportunities Poor – Old Montreal Road (arterial Poor – Old Montreal Road (arterial Fair – Transit corridor provide physical barrier Best – No transit corridor to provide physical (cont’d) linkages and barriers to road)/Transit corridor provide physical barrier road)/Transit corridor provide physical barrier to pedestrian connectivity between west and barrier to pedestrian connectivity; enhanced pedestrian to pedestrian connectivity between north and to pedestrian connectivity between north and east components of the community due to pedestrian realm along north-south major connections south components of the community due to south components of the community due to scale of infrastructure but aligned with major collector road provides significant pedestrian within the scale of infrastructure. scale of infrastructure. collector road. opportunity. community Good – Sidewalks provided along both sides Good – Sidewalks provided along both sides Good – Sidewalks provided along both sides Good – Sidewalks provided along both sides of of widened Old Montreal Road. Pedestrian of widened Old Montreal Road. Pedestrian of widened Old Montreal Road. Pedestrian widened Old Montreal Road. Pedestrian destinations within the Community (schools, destinations within the Community (schools, destinations within the Community (schools, destinations within the Community (schools, parks, mixed-use areas) are located on parks, mixed-use areas) are located on parks, mixed-use areas) are located on parks, mixed-use areas) are located on arterial either arterial or collector roads, which will arterial or collector roads, which will have arterial or collector roads, which will have or collector roads, which will have sidewalks. have sidewalks. sidewalks. sidewalks. Soils Appropriatene Good – Soil conditions underlying site are Poor – Major infilling and modifications to Good – Soil conditions underlying site are Good – Soil conditions underlying site are (grading) ss of soils for suitable for development. slopes required for Old Montreal Road suitable for development. suitable for development. development realignment at crossing of South Tributary. Bedrock Minimize Good – Longest route through escarpment Poor – Bedrock removal required to Fair – Major bedrock removal required to Good – Direct route through escarpment for Physical (grading) bedrock for main collector minimizing depth of accommodate Old Montreal Road accommodate both the collector road and main collector road. Depth of cut increased but Environment removal bedrock cut. realignment and main collector. transit corridor. area of bedrock disturbance minimized. requirements Groundwater Groundwater Good – No significant impacts to Poor – Major disturbance and bedrock Good – No significant impacts to Good – No significant impacts to groundwater. protection groundwater. excavation required for Old Montreal Road groundwater. realignment at South Tributary. Transit Effect on Good – Bus lanes on Old Montreal Road will Good – BRT/ LRT corridor penetrates Good – BRT/ LRT corridor penetrates Best – BRT/LRT corridor along Trim Road/ Ridership transit improve transit travel times making transit Cardinal Creek Village development. Cardinal Creek Village development. Centrally Frank Kenny Extension corridor provides ridership and more attractive. Centrally located transit station. located transit station. greatest transit coverage for East Orleans with Transit Modal direct rapid transit service to the existing Split Fallingbrook and Cardinal Creek Communities. Network/ Connectivity, Fair – Good road connectivity between local/ Fair – Realigned Old Montreal Road to Good - Good road connectivity between local/ Good - Good road connectivity between local/ System and collector/ arterial streets, however curb-side Wilhaven Drive creates possible negative collector/ arterial streets. Transit corridor collector/ arterial streets. Transit corridor Integration conformance HOV lanes difficult to convert to LRT, which impacts to wider network due to change in achieves City objective of providing rapid achieves City objective of providing rapid transit Technical with City’s is City’s ultimate objective. traffic patterns eg. increased traffic along transit link between the East Transitway and link between the East Transitway and (Transportation) objectives/ Wilhaven; traffic from the section of Old Cumberland Transitway. Cumberland Transitway. TMP Montreal Road east of the development area forced to ‘cut-through’ the community on lower classification roads – local streets/ minor collectors. Level of Transit/ Good – Bus lanes centrally located within Fair – Transit centrally located in community, Good – Rapid Transit Corridor centrally Good – Rapid transit corridor along Trim Service vehicular community. however increased vehicular traffic impact located within community. Higher Transit accessible via feeder buses from Cardinal Level of from the east on internal development Modal Split leads to reduced automobile traffic Creek Village. Service network due to realigned Old Montreal Road. volumes.
PAGE 66 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Criteria Criteria Indicator Option A Option B Option C Option D Groups Geometry Adherence to Good – Improved Old Montreal Road Poor – Smaller radius curves introduced on Fair – Improved Old Montreal Road Best – Improved Old Montreal Road alignment. design alignment. Sub-standard curves removed on Old Montreal Road combined with increased alignment. Transit alignment and profile at BRT/LRT lanes within median of Trim Road. standards approach to Frank Kenny intersection. gradient will reduce stopping sight distances. close to minimum acceptable standards for Frank Kenny Road Extensions – mostly straight Major intersection of Collector Road and Old LRT operation due to topography. alignment with moderate curves. Vertical profile Montreal Road located on a curve. Reverse within acceptable standards. curves on approach to Wilhaven. Transit alignment and profile at close to minimum acceptable standards for LRT operation due to topography. Technical Capacity Number and Good – Four vehicular lanes plus two bus Good – Four vehicular lanes on Old Good – Four vehicular lanes on Old Montreal Good – Four vehicular lanes on Old Montreal (Transportation) configuration lanes provided on Old Montreal Road. Montreal Road. Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor. Road. Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor. Road. Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor. (cont’d) of vehicular/ bus lanes Operation Efficiency of Fair – HOV lanes will improve transit travel Good - Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor Good - Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor provides Best - Exclusive BRT/ LRT corridor provides Transportation times between Cardinal Creek Village and provides improved transit travel times and improved transit travel times and overall improved transit travel times and overall service network Trim Station, however City rapid transit overall service efficiency. Transit corridor service efficiency. Transit corridor crosses 6 efficiency. Transit corridor crosses 6 at-grade objective (ie. BRT/LRT link between existing crosses 5 at-grade intersections and several at-grade intersections. Requires separate intersections. Transit corridor along Trim Road Transitways) not met. residential driveways. Requires separate express routes which impacts the overall more conducive to running feeder buses from express routes which impacts the overall efficiency of the wider transitway system. the surrounding communities to access efficiency of the wider transitway system. BRT/LRT routes at Transitway stations. Network/ Ability to meet Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately System City guidelines serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. Integration for WM/SAN/STM servicing Level of Ability to meet Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Good – Mix of land uses can be adequately Service & City guidelines serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. serviced according to City guidelines. Capacity for Technical WM/SAN/STM (Services) servicing Operation Minimize Fair - Major overland flows are expected to Good – Major overland flows are expected to Good – Major overland flows are expected to Fair – Major overland flows are expected to conveyance of cross collector roadways in at least 3 areas. cross collector roadways in 1 or 2 areas. cross collector roadways in 1 or 2 areas. cross collector roadways in at least 3 areas. 100-year overland flow across collector roadways
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 67 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Criteria Criteria Indicator Option A Option B Option C Option D Groups Capital Cost Comparative Best – Curb-side HOV lanes cheaper than Poor – Increased costs due to possible Fair – Increased costs due to embankment Good – At-grade transit corridor within median estimate of exclusive transit corridor options. grade separation required in vicinity of Dairy and cut sections required to enter community of Trim Road. capital cost - Drive. New bridge structure at Cardinal from hydro corridor alignment. transportation Creek; cut sections along south side of OMR; culvert/ bridge structure for South Tributary crossing. Comparative Good – Servicing costs minimized by Poor – Significant costs associated with Fair – Elevated servicing costs associated Good – Servicing costs minimized by estimate of minimizing bedrock excavation. bedrock removal for Old Montreal Road with major bedrock removal for both the minimizing bedrock excavation capital cost - realignment and main collector. collector road and transit corridor. servicing Operational Comparative Best – Shortest length of new roads and Poor – Longest length of new roads and Good – Moderate length of new roads and Good – Moderate length of new roads and and estimate of transit corridor to maintain. transit corridor to maintain. transit corridor to maintain. transit corridor to maintain. Maintenance operational No significant differences in operation or No significant differences in operation or No significant differences in operation or No significant differences in operation or Costs and maintenance costs are expected for the maintenance costs are expected for the maintenance costs are expected for the water, maintenance costs are expected for the water, maintenance water, sanitary, and storm sewers, or water, sanitary, and storm sewers, or sanitary, and storm sewers, or stormwater sanitary, and storm sewers, or stormwater Economics cost stormwater management ponds. stormwater management ponds. management ponds. management ponds. Economic Amount of Best – Most mixed use land supply providing Poor – Least opportunities for commercial Fair – Some opportunities for commercial Good – Opportunities for commercial Activity non-residential commercial opportunities. development within mixed use lands. development within mixed use areas. development within mixed use areas but development balanced with residential land uses. potential (i.e. mixed use areas) Implementa- Ability to Good – Location of existing arterials allows Poor – Realignment of Old Montreal Road to Good - Location of existing arterials allows for Good - Location of existing arterials allows for tion/ phase – for flexibility in phasing of internal road Wilhaven Drive corridor will significantly flexibility in phasing of internal road network. flexibility in phasing of internal road network. Constructabil Transportation network. Major/ minor collector road system impact the ability to phase the development. Major/ minor collector road system allows for Major/ minor collector road system allows for -ity infrastructure allows for introduction of transit into the introduction of transit into the community in introduction of transit into the community in community in early phases. early phases. early phases. Ability to Fair- Watermain, sewer, and stormwater Good – Watermain, sewer, and stormwater Good – Watermain, sewer, and stormwater Fair – Watermain, sewer, and stormwater phase – facilities service five distinct geographic facilities service six distinct geographic facilities service six distinct geographic areas. facilities service five distinct geographic areas. servicing areas. areas. infrastructure
Overall Preferred Good Poor Fair Best Option
PAGE 68 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
6.3 Concept Plan Refinements and Preferred Concept Plan
Following the open house, public comments were reviewed and additional meetings were held with City staff and review agencies. Subsequent refinements were made to the preferred Option D concept between November 2012 and July 2013. Exhibit 3 illustrates the revised plan and Table 8 identifies the principle changes and rationale.
Table 8: Concept Plan Refinements
Concept Plan Revision Reason Component
Stormwater Reduced in number City of Ottawa request that the number of ponds Management from 5 to 3 and be reduced to minimize required maintenance Facilities relocated accordingly operations
Development Limits Adjustments in various Development limits adjusted in response to further locations geotechnical and watercourse reviews
Neighbourhood Two Neighbourhood Two Neighbourhood Parks situated south of Old Parks Parks re-located Montreal Road were re-located in response to City of Ottawa staff comments recommending proximity to higher density areas
Neighbourhood Minimum park size Minimum park size and road frontage increased in Parks increased to 1.2 ha. and response to City of Ottawa staff comments to road frontage meet minimum size requirements adjustments
Community Park Adjustment to park Park configuration adjusted in response to City of block configuration Ottawa staff comments regarding additional road (north of Old frontage Montreal Road)
Future Potential Two transit corridor Future Potential Transit corridor options identified Transit Corridor options provided to allow for corridor protection through the City’s Transportation Master Plan update
Medium Density Re-location of certain Re-distribution of certain medium density Residential Lands medium density residential blocks in response to landowner residential uses review; adjustments to development limit; and, re- location of SWM facilities & park blocks
Local Road Network Adjustments in various Local road network adjusted in response to locations reduction of SWM facilities, refinement of development limits and adjustment to park blocks
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 69 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Concept Plan Revision Reason Component
School Blocks Adjustment to block Two school blocks adjusted in response to configurations reduction of SWM facilities, refinement of development limits and relocation of Neighbourhood Parks
Mixed Use Area Substitution of one To ensure opportunity to achieve Official Plan Blocks medium density block housing mix target with a mixed use area block
Urban Natural Enlargement of Feature Urban Natural Feature boundary associated with Features South Tributary expanded to properly reflect natural feature limits (South Tributary) Concept Plan does not Technical analyses to-date have identified that Urban Area include lands located further study is required to consider the potential south of the southern natural heritage and other impacts regarding tributary to the Cardinal transportation and servicing infrastructure Creek. extensions across the Cardinal Creek tributary in this location. Further, a potential karst feature has been identified which also requires further study. Substitution of certain Mixed use areas adjusted in response to public Arterial ‘A’ and mixed use blocks with and City comments. Arterial ‘A’ and ‘B’ uses have Arterial ‘B’ Arterial ‘A’ or Arterial ‘B’ specific allowable commercial and residential land uses components, as outlined in the companion Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan document.
Land use statistics associated with the refined option are provided in Table 9 and Table 10. As noted in Table 8 , earlier concepts for Cardinal Creek village considered lands south of the South Tributary for development, including a portion of land outside of the existing urban boundary. The concept plan has been refined to include only the lands north of the South Tributary, within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area.
PAGE 70 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Exhibit 3: Preferred Neighbourhood Concept Plan
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 71 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Table 9: Land Use Summary
Land Use Area (ha) % (within Urban Boundary) Low Density Residential 50 24 Existing Residential 18 9 Medium Density 13 6 Mixed Use (including Arterial Mainstreet) 22 11 Parks 10 5 Schools 10 5 Open Space 43 21 SWM Ponds 6 3 Roads 36 17 Total Area 208 100
The areas noted in Table 9 only include the 208 hectare OPA Concept Plan Area, which encompasses all of the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area lands that are north of the South Tributary. The proposed Concept Plan has been translated into projected populations in Table 10, including the potential future redevelopment of the existing residential areas with a mix of low (75%) and medium (25%) density residential uses.
Table 10: Population Estimates
Density Units Household Population Dwelling Unit Area (uph) Projections (ha) Min. Max. Min. Max. Size (ppu) Min. Max. Low Density (Singles/Semis) 50 26 28 1,298 1,397 3.3 4,282 4,612 Medium Density (Multi-Family) 13 50 60 662 794 2.5 1,655 1,986 Mixed Use (Apartments) 8 60 75 464 580 1.8 835 1,044 Existing Residential - Low Density 14 26 28 351 378 3.3 1,158 1,247 Existing Residential - Medium Density 5 50 60 225 270 2.5 563 675 Total 89 2,999 3,420 8,493 9,564
Development projections from the OPA Concept Plan are provided in Appendix G , matching the projections provided in Table 10. The proposed development and
PAGE 72 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
potential future re-development of the existing residential lands is expected to generate populations of about 8,500– 9,600 people.
The neighbourhood is also expected to offer 67,000 square meters of commercial space contained in mixed-use blocks and arterial mainstreet blocks, representing about 30% of the total mixed use block land area. According to the population projections above, 26% of the mixed use block and arterial mainstreet land area is attributed to high- density residential development. For the purpose of this MSS, the remainder of the land area is assumed to be landscaped areas and transportation uses associated with the mixed use development.
The proposed development concept:
‹ Includes one stormwater management pond discharging to the Ottawa River;
‹ Includes one stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary;
‹ Includes one oil and grit separator to treat stormwater runoff destined to the North Tributary;
‹ Requires closing and filling in the North Tributary, upstream of the protected Natural Heritage System;
‹ Requires closing and filling the North Branch;
‹ Does not propose new transportation crossings of Cardinal Creek;
‹ Features connections to OR 174; Old Montreal Road; and Frank Kenney Road.
In Figure 4, the refined development concept is overlain by the required development setbacks described in Section 3.10.1 , Drawing 3, and Appendix R. No residential, commercial, industrial, or institutional lot boundary is proposed to exceed the defined limit of development.
The following sections of the report examine alternative methods of implementing the preferred solution – expanding municipal water and sanitary systems and applying a stormwater treatment train – to the refined concept plan.
For the purpose of infrastructure sizing in this MSS, an additional population of 1,400 persons is assumed as the development potential of the 23 hectares of land excluded from the OPA, but within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Area (the lands south of the South Tributary). This represents a gross density of about 60 persons/hectare, which is consistent with Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines that recommends, in the absence of any specific information, 60 persons per gross hectare density be used to estimate average population for suburban type of residential development. This projected population is to be carried forward to the servicing designs provided in Sections 7.0 –
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 73 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
9.0 , to ensure that sufficient capacity is provided in the servicing network to service the lands in the future.
PAGE 74 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
7.0 WATER SERVICING PLAN
The preferred water servicing approach is to extend municipal water supply to Cardinal Creek Village via connection to the municipal watermain network, as described in Section 5.1 . The existing municipal water supply system is described in Section 3.9.1 .
The following water servicing plan outlines the municipal water servicing design for the proposed development area. Further information is provided in the Watermain Analysis Cardinal Creek Village prepared by Veritec Consulting (June 2013) and included in Appendix H.
7.1 Design Criteria
To size the main watermain network, a water distribution model has been prepared for ultimate conditions using the boundary conditions provided by the City of Ottawa for planning-level consumption rates (Section 3.9.1 ). As development proceeds, the City is expected to provide new boundary conditions for each phase of the development, to inform the detailed design of the different phases of the distribution network.
The applicable Water Distribution Guidelines (City of Ottawa, July 2010) and recommended consumption rates (City of Ottawa Email Correspondence, February 2013) that were used in the design of the water distribution network are summarized in Table 11. The consumption rates differ from those presented in the Water Distribution Guidelines (City of Ottawa, July 2010), as the Water Distribution Guidelines are intended for the design for developments less than 50 ha.
Based on these criteria and the maximum density for the specified land uses from the Concept Plan (Appendix G), the overall demands associated with the development were calculated. Demands in the hydraulic model were distributed evenly over the site within the respective pressure districts. For the purpose of water demand calculations:
‹ The arterial mainstreet and mixed use block land areas were assumed to be comprised of commercial uses at ground level (100% of mixed use block area) plus additional high density apartments (26% of mixed use block area) above ground level. These assumptions are appropriate for the planning-level consumption rates given in l/hectare/day and l/unit/day, respectively. Although the Concept Plan does not contemplate such intensive level of development, the use of these parameters provides design flexibility as the commercial uses and land use configuration for these mixed use blocks is refined.
‹ Lands south of the study area were assigned an assumed population of 1,400. These demands were assigned based on low density (single/semi) land use with 3.3 person per unit (PPU) which results in the highest water uses due to Outdoor Water Demand allocations.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 75 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ As per Section 6.3 , the existing residential uses within the Concept Plan area are projected to potentially accommodate about 1,900 people within a mix of low and medium density residential areas. Because the actual distribution of land uses is unknown at this time, in terms of water servicing, demands for the existing residential areas were assigned based on a low density (single/semi) land use with 3.3 person per unit (PPU) in order to result in the highest water uses due to Outdoor Water Demand allocations.
Table 11: Water Supply Design Criteria
Design Parameter Value Extracted from Section 4: Ottawa Design Guidelines, Water Distribution (July 2010) Minimum Watermain Size 150 mm diameter Minimum Service Lateral Size 19 mm diameter Soft Copper Type ‘K’ 2.4 m from top of watermain to finished Minimum Depth of Cover grade Desired Range of Operating Pressures 350 kPa and 480 kPa Fire flow operating pressure minimum 140 kPa / 15,000 L/min City of Ottawa – Email Correspondence (February 2013) Average Day 570 L/unit/day Residential – Single Outdoor Water Demand 1050 L/unit/day Family Max Day Average + OWD (L/unit/day) Peak Hour 1.5 x Avg Day + 2.1 x Max Day (L/unit/day) Average Day 560 L/unit/day Outdoor Water Demand 0 Residential – Multi-Family Max Day Average (L/unit/day) Peak Hour 1.6 x Max Day (L/unit/day) Average Day 400 L/unit/day Outdoor Water Demand 0 L/unit/day Residential - Apartment Max Day Average (L/unit/day) Peak Hour 1.6 x Max Day (L/unit/day) Average Day 8500 L/ha/day Institutional / Commercial/ Outdoor Water Demand 0 L/ha/day Industrial Max Day Average (L/ha/day) Peak Hour 1.3 x Max Day (L/ha/day) Total Average Day Sum of Average Day for all land uses Total Max Day Sum Max Day for all land uses Total Peak Hour Sum of Peak Hour for all land uses High Pressure Check Minimum Hour = Average Day
PAGE 76 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Fire flow requirements were calculated according to the ISO Guide for Determination of Needed Fire Flow , as referenced by the Fire Underwriters Survey (FUS). The fire flow design condition is determined as maximum day plus fire.
‹ For low density residential land uses a 100 L/s (6000 L/min) fire flow requirement was assumed, which is typical for urban single family dwellings. ‹ For medium density land uses a 167 L/s (10,000 L/min) design flow was used, which is typical for closely spaced townhomes. ‹ Mixed use and industrial, commercial, and institutional (ICI) land uses were assigned a 250 L/s (15,000 L/min) fire flow since no specific plans for the lands have been developed at the MSS level. This 250 L/s estimate should be adequate for most types of structures and occupancies, but should be confirmed at the detailed design level.
In addition, the City of Ottawa Design guidelines indicate that feedermains, which have been provided primarily for the purpose of redundancy, shall meet, at a minimum, the basic day plus fire flow demand, and must be sized to accommodate failures in the primary distribution mains.
Based on the water distribution model and these network criteria, the following alternative distribution networks have been explored.
7.2 Alternative Water Distribution Designs
The practical alternatives available for extension of the municipal watermain system are established by the existing watermain infrastructure in the vicinity of the proposed development area. Existing watermain infrastructure is illustrated in Figure 5. The subject lands will fall under two separate pressure zones: Pressure Zone 1E, for the lower third of the site, and Pressure Zone 2E for the remaining two thirds of the site, at a higher elevation. The City of Ottawa has confirmed that both pressure districts can accommodate the additional water demands (Section 3.9.1 ).
The following municipal watermains are available for service connection (Figure 5 ): ‹ Connection Option 1: Pressure Zone 1E, 406mm watermain between Dairy Road and the North Service Road via extension of a new watermain along the Hydro One corridor; ‹ Connection Option 2: Pressure Zone 1E, 406mm watermain within Dairy Road via extension of a new watermain west along Old Montreal Road and north along Dairy Road; and, ‹ Connection Option 3: Pressure Zone 2E, Future 610mm watermain at the Trim Road and Old Montreal Road, to be constructed starting in 2013 as part of the City of Ottawa’s ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 77 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Connection Option 4: Pressure Zone 2E, Existing 610mm watermain at the Trim Road and Watters Road intersection via extension at Watters Road.
In order to provide reliability and redundancy within the expanded municipal watermain system, a continuous looped system with two points of connection is recommended for each Pressure Zone, to service Cardinal Creek Village.
Earlier versions of the MSS report (December 2012) and watermain analysis (Veritec, January 2013) proposed a connection to Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3 identified above, plus an emergency Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) within the subject lands at the pressure district boundary. The PRV was meant to provide network security, allowing flow from the 2E zone into the 1E zone in an emergency situation. Feedermains were proposed along the existing Hydro One Corridor and along Old Montreal Road, making use of the existing culverts at Cardinal Creek.
Option 4, connecting to the existing watermain stub at Watters Road, was precluded because of the expected negative net environmental effects of extending the watermain through the Cardinal Creek Karst ANSI (Section 3.1). It was noted that should the urban growth boundary be modified in future years to incorporate urban lands east of Cardinal Creek and south of the subject lands, than the potential to loop Pressure Zone 2E services could be re-evaluated: the Pressure Zone 2E watermain could loop south of the identified ANSI, cross Cardinal Creek, and then run north to Cardinal Creek Village, to improve redundancy.
In consultation with the City of Ottawa ( Appendix B ), it was determined that the use of a central PRV station should not be pursued, because of network redundancy concerns. As such, additional alternative alignments and connection points were evaluated:
‹ Alignment Option 1: Proposed 1E and 2E feeds along Old Montreal Road, combined with 1E and 2E feeds along the Hydro Corridor. ‹ Alignment Option 2: Proposed 1E and 2E feeds along Old Montreal Road, combined with a 1E feed along the Hydro Corridor and a 2E feed under Cardinal Creek. ‹ Alignment Option 3: Proposed 1E feeds along the Hydro Corridor and along Old Montreal Road; and dual Zone 2E mains along Old Montreal Road, on opposite sides of the ROW.
The cross-section configuration in Alignment Option 3 - featuring three feedermains within the Old Montreal Road municipal right-of-way - was not carried forward, as the configuration is not expected to meet the City’s redundancy requirements in case of failure. Both Alignment Options 1 and 2 are considered feasible, with alignment Option 2 being preferred because it requires less 2E infrastructure, and therefore offers capital and operation cost efficiencies. The environmental impacts of the additional crossing of Cardinal Creek associated with Option 2 are considered insignificant (with proper
PAGE 78 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
mitigation – Section 12.0 ), as vegetation removal and in-creek works can be minimized through the use of trenchless construction technologies. Servicing easements required for both Alignment Options 1 and 2 are all within existing City-owned property, thus minimizing any impacts to private property.
7.3 Preferred Water Distribution Network
Therefore, provided that there are limited corridors available to extend the municipal watermains to the site from the west, the preferred water distribution design incorporates the Option 1, Option 2, and Option 3 connections points identified above, and an additional connection to Pressure Zone 2E via a new unique connection near the intersection of Old Montreal Road and Trim Road. This satisfies City recommendations to provide a continuous looped system with two points of connection for each Pressure Zone.
Consultation and coordination with the City of Ottawa’s ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project is underway, in order to ensure that future proposed pipe and valve arrangements at the intersection of Old Montreal Road and Trim Road can be designed such that there is no single point of failure of the proposed 2E feedermains.
7.4 Water Distribution Network Design
The preferred trunk watermain network incorporates the Alignment Option 2 for feedermains, then follows the proposed municipal right-of-ways identified within the subject lands ( Section 6.3 ). The proposed on-site watermain network follows the proposed road network, with the exception of servicing easements across the northernmost ridge, across the North Tributary, within the Hydro One corridor, and through the residential block southwest of the intersection of Old Montreal Road and the major collector road. The preferred water distribution network is shown in Figure 7 and detailed in Appendix H: all development blocks can be adequately serviced by local distribution mains or connected directly to one of the trunks. The proposed distribution system results in no zone isolation valves or dead ends.
It should be noted that the lands south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Study Area will require a 400mm diameter watermain loop for servicing in the future. Capacity has been designed within the proposed watermain system to ensure future serviceability. As a detailed land use concept is developed for the lands south of the South Tributary, an easement through the existing residential lands will likely be required in order to provide this required watermain loop, as well as two watermain crossings of the South Tributary. Opportunities to bundle the watermain infrastructure with the transportation network should be considered as detailed concepts are prepared for the lands outside of the current Cardinal Creek Village OPA.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 79 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The proposed watermains within the development were sized to the minimum diameter which would satisfy the greater of maximum day plus fire flow and maximum hour demand. Pipe sizes were verified through failure mode analysis, and re-sized as required. Further description of the preferred water distribution network is provided in the following sections.
7.4.1 Pressure Zone Boundary Delineation
Based on the boundary conditions described in Section 3.9.1 , the service elevations ranges of Pressure Zones 1E and 2E were determined.
The optimum service elevations of pressure district 1E and 2E were determined by calculating the maximum and minimum allowable pressure head at the various elevations throughout the site. As per the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis provided in Appendix H: (Veritec Consulting, June 2013)
‹ Pressure district 1E can service an elevation range of approximately 44 m to 79 m with an optimum range of 59 m to 72 m. ‹ Pressure district 2E can service an elevation range of 61 m to 95 m with an optimum range of 76 m to 88 m. ‹ The zone boundary was assigned as 70 m, though there is a band between approximately 63 m and 77 m which can be serviced by either pressure zone. Care needs to be taken in this band; to ensure adequate pressure and flow; avoid over pressurization; and provide network looping avoiding hydraulic dead ends.
The pressure zone boundary delineation method and mapping is provided in Appendix H, based on the proposed block pattern and proposed grades ( Section 9.0 ).
7.4.2 Cardinal Creek Crossings
The preferred water distribution design incorporates an extension of an existing 406mm Pressure Zone 1E municipal watermain along existing City of Ottawa property and along the existing Hydro One corridor. The extension of the municipal watermain will require servicing easements in these locations, and will require City and Hydro One approval, as described in Section 2.6 . The proposed crossing is over Cardinal Creek, via the existing culvert ( Section 3.8 & Appendix P); the proposed alignment is shown in Figure 7, while detailed plan and profiles are provided in Drawing 12. Cross sections are provided in Figure 12A. Localized slope re-shaping/modifications are proposed within Cardinal Creek valley to support the proposed watermain design, as shown in Drawing 12.
The preferred water distribution design ( Figure 7) includes a 2E watermain extending north on Trim Road from the intersection at Old Montreal Road, then extending east
PAGE 80 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
along Dairy Drive. From this point, the proposed 2E watermain would extend north within City-owned lands (west of 1001 Dairy Drive), then extend east on City-owned lands (north of 1001 Dairy Drive) before crossing under Cardinal Creek. It is proposed that a trenchless watermain crossing be implemented to avoid adverse effects on Cardinal Creek. Based on the available geotechnical information at the approximate crossing location, it is expected that directional drilling or horizontal boring would be effective in the installation of the watermain. Further information is provided in Paterson Group’s geotechnical investigation memo included in Appendix P (April 2013).
The southernmost crossing of Cardinal Creek, at Old Montreal Road, includes both 1E and 2E mains, likely to be installed within the embankment above an existing culvert. As detailed designs progress, trenchless technologies could also be investigated. In both cases, the 2E crossing will be installed at elevations lower than the 61 m minimum service elevation identified in Section 7.4.1 and will be subject to pressures in excess of 689 kPa (100 psi). This will have to be accounted for in detailed design of the crossing, especially as it relates to material specifications of pipes and joints. These same recommendations apply to the trenchless crossing north of 1001 Dairy Drive (detailed above).
7.4.3 Multiple Watermains in Proposed Municipal Right-of-Way
Within the subject lands, two watermains – a 200 mm 1E watermain and the 400 mm 2E watermain (east of the proposed trenchless crossing) – are proposed to travel within the same municipal right-of-way for about 2 to 3 blocks.
As per the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis (Veritec Consulting, June 2013) provided in Appendix H:
‹ The 1E watermain is necessary to provide looping to ensure adequate fire flow and to prevent dead ends in the 1E network; and, ‹ The 400 mm 2E watermain serves as a transmission main along this stretch with no branches or service connections.
Since the proposed 400 mm watermain has no connection points along this stretch, installation is flexible to accommodate other utilities in the right of way as it can be installed sufficiently deep to avoid conflict.
7.4.4 Local High Points
The easternmost edge of Old Montreal Road (east of the easternmost local road intersection) has a maximum elevation which is slightly above the 95 m maximum service elevation identified for pressure zone 2E. This section of Old Montreal Road has no proposed lot frontage, and therefore no service connections. Pipe diameters leading to this area have been maximized to limit hydraulic losses, however low pressures (approximately 5% deficient) are experienced under the peak hour design condition.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 81 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
It is recommended that, for this area:
‹ Detailed design of the site grading should minimize the ground floor elevations as much as possible; ‹ 25 mm service connections be utilized for any future service connections; ‹ Detailed design include internal plumbing considerations to minimise hydraulic pressure losses. Note that the minimum allowable pressure at any given fixture is generally 69 kPa (10 psi) according to the Ontario Building Code; and, ‹ Pressure monitoring after the first phases of construction be undertaken, to validate and/or calibrate the model and further refine requirements.
Further details regarding the recommended design techniques to be implemented in this local high point are detailed in the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis (Veritec Consulting, June 2013) provided in Appendix H.
7.4.5 Modeling Results
Based on the detailed modeling for the proposed network, provided in Appendix H, the service pressures are expected to range from 365 kPa to 605 kPa in pressure zone 1E and from 290 kPa to 625 kPa in zone 2E.
‹ The areas which may exceed 552 kPa (80 psi) represent approximately 60 units and 300 units in pressure districts E1 and E2 respectively. These units should be fitted with a pressure reducing valve (PRV) in the home/building, located downstream of the meter. ‹ The area which may experience low pressure is the local high point at the eastern end of old Montreal Road. This total number of units which the modeling indicates could experience a short term period of low pressure is approximately 36 units. This is a function of elevations and grading plans produced during detailed design will lower these areas as much as possible. This area is modeled under a conservative, worst case condition. The period of low pressure is only during the “peak” hour condition which is defined as, “t he short-term demand placed upon the system by usages other than fire fighting. The peak rate demand is usually taken as the average water usage over the maximum hour.” Under normal operating conditions the anticipated pressures are expected to be well above minimum operating pressures. Fire flow is achievable in this area. Note ‘Max day’ is the 24h average of the worst day of the year while ‘Peak hour’ is the largest demand hour on the Max day. The anticipated pressures in this area between max day and minimum hour are expected to range between approximately 280 kPa and 350 kPa.
Network conditions can change over time as additional infrastructure is installed and new developments are constructed. Future pressure values may vary from those in the
PAGE 82 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
modeling. Monitoring system pressures as construction progresses in earlier phases is recommended to confirm modeling results.
With the use of PRVs and the proposed 25mm service, all blocks are expected to serviceable by the proposed water distribution network.
The modeling and reporting provided in Appendix H also indicate that all fire flows requirements can be met for the 100 L/s, 167 L/s and 250 L/s testing conditions.
The existing elevations for the lands south of the South Tributary are below the upper service elevation range of 95m for Zone 2E, and future demands associated with this parcel have been incorporated into the model as per Section 7.1 . The results show peak hour demand pressures of 337 kpa, minimum hour high pressures check of 441 kpa, and residual pressure at required fire flow of 336 kpa at the proposed stub north of the South Tributary, where a future watermain extension would be required. Based on these results, all domestic and fire flows can be provided in the future for the lands south of the South Tributary, as per Ministry of the Environment, City of Ottawa and Fire Underwriters Criteria.
7.5 Redundancy and Failure Testing
As described in the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis provided in Appendix H, the proposed watermain network was tested for two failure/shutdown conditions per pressure zone:
‹ Failure/shutdown of the North 400 mm watermain river crossings of pressure zone 1E and 2E, respectively. ‹ Failure/shutdown of the South 400 mm watermain river crossings of pressure zone 1E and 2E, respectively.
Any other failure or shutdown would be part of the looped network, maintaining service.
As a result of the failure analysis, many of the proposed watermains within the subject lands were re-sized from earlier designs, in order to offer improved failure conditions. Based on the modeling work appended in Appendix H, the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis concludes that most of the site can attain the required fire flows in failure conditions, with some exceptions.
The exceptions include:
‹ Some outlying locations where fire flow was lowest, though adequate, prior to failure testing; and, ‹ At some 250 L/s mixed use or school sites.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 83 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The deficiencies found are further detailed in Appendix H, and could only be remedied with significantly larger pipes throughout the network or changes to site elevation. It should be noted that larger pipe diameters than those proposed could results in high water age, which could become a water quality concern.
Therefore, because the failure analysis is considered conservative in nature - using high required fire flows estimates and maximum day demands (rather than average day demands) – and due to the potential for water quality concerns with additional upsizing, no further adjustments to the proposed network are recommended.
7.6 Commitments for Detailed Design
Detailed hydraulic analysis will be prepared for the proposed water distribution network at the time of detailed design to determine that water supply is made available to the Cardinal Creek Village as specified in the City of Ottawa Water Distribution Guidelines .
The water distribution network will be designed to support phased development; the phased water supply system will be looped to provide for system security and redundancy.
During detailed design:
‹ Demands will be updated and distribution refined, once the lot distribution is determined; ‹ Demand factors according to Section 4.2.1 of the City of Ottawa Design Guidelines will be used (for localized areas with populations less than 3,000 and/or areas less than 50 ha); ‹ Local watermain sizing will need to be re-evaluated at the subdivision approval stage. ‹ Individual ICI plots will be evaluated for required fire flow as detailed plans for these sites are developed; ‹ Site grading will be optimized for the identified low pressure area at the eastern section of Old Montreal Road, in order to minimize elevations; ‹ Residential units with service pressures above 552 kPa will be identified for installation of PRVs per City of Ottawa Design Guidelines; ‹ Residential units with service pressures below 310 kPa will be identified for a 25 mm service connection as per City of Ottawa Design Guidelines; ‹ Pressure monitoring in early phases should be carried out to determine the true distribution pressures and validate the modeling;
PAGE 84 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Creek crossings will be designed to have regard for the high pressures and proposed mitigation measures proposed in the Watermain Network Hydraulic Analysis (Veritec Consulting, June 2013) provided in Appendix H; ‹ Profile and valving details at the crossings and in the vicinity of Trim Road at St Joseph should be reviewed by ESD staff at the preliminary/detail design stage; ‹ Steel casing for the proposed watermain over the Cardinal Creek culvert crossing will be required; and, ‹ Material specifications at the crossings will have to be reviewed with ESD staff where the maximum operating pressure is expected to exceed 100 psi.
Hydro One approval is required to grant access to the provincially-owned corridor for construction of one of the proposed 1E feedermains. A meeting was held with Hydro One in December 2012, at which Hydro One’s representative advised that the proposed service routing along the Hydro One owned corridor is permitted, provided that the following elements are satisfied prior to construction:
i) Hydro One review and approval of detailed engineering design drawings and a complete legal plan of survey to identify the affected Hydro One owned property;
ii) 15m clear separation to be maintained between the services and Hydro One pole structures;
iii) Verification that provincial Environmental Assessment requirements have been satisfied for the proposed servicing infrastructure; and
iv) Servicing easements to be granted by Hydro One to the City of Ottawa for occupation and access.
7.7 Water Supply Conclusion
The hydraulic analysis provided in Appendix H has been completed to ensure compliance with the current City of Ottawa Water Distribution Guidelines, July 2010. A pressure district boundary between the City of Ottawa Zones 1E and 2E has been determined to approximately follow the 70 m contour.
The proposed watermain network, including the recommended design features for detailed design, is expected to deliver all domestic and fire flows as per Ministry of the Environment, City of Ottawa and Fire Underwriters Criteria to support development within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area (inclusive of the OPA Concept Plan lands, the existing residential lands, and the additional 23 hectares south of the South Tributary). Specifically, estimated fire flows of 100 L/s for single family residential, 167
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 85 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
L/s for medium density and 250 L/s for mixed use or ICI land uses can be achieved for the development.
Network redundancy will be provided through two proposed 400 mm connections per pressure district. With these two trunks, the hydraulic modeling indicates that most of the site can attain the required fire flows with one trunk failure/shutdown. There are a few deficiencies under failure testing at outlying locations or some high fire flow areas such as schools or mixed use blocks. Considering the conservative nature of the analysis; water quality concerns with larger diameter pipes; and the multiple failure nature of the analyses; no additional increases to the network are recommended based on the redundancy analysis.
PAGE 86 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
8.0 WASTEWATER SERVICING PLAN
The preferred Cardinal Creek Village wastewater servicing approach is to convey sewage to the existing municipal wastewater system, as described in Section 5.2 . The existing municipal wastewater sewer system and infrastructure are described in Section 3.9.2.
The following wastewater servicing plan outlines the municipal wastewater servicing design for the proposed development area.
8.1 Design Criteria
The City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines are to be used to design the development wastewater conveyance system. Criteria employed in the preliminary design of the proposed wastewater system are summarized in Table 12 .
Table 12: Wastewater Supply Design Criteria
Design Parameter Value Residential Average Flow 350 L/p/d Peaking Factor Applied Harmon’s Equation Commercial / Institutional Flows 50,000 L/ha/day Commercial / Institutional Peak Factor 1.5 Industrial Flows 35,000 L/ha/day Industrial Peaking Factor Per Figure in Appendix 4-B Park Flows 9,300 L/ha/d (75 p/acre per Sewer Guidelines Appendix 4-A) Additional Park Flow 5 L/s/park (fixed flow allowance per park for splash pad) Park Peaking Factor 1.0 Infiltration and Inflow Allowance 0.28 L/s/ha Sanitary sewers are to be sized 1 2 1 employing the Manning’s Equation Q = AR 3 S 2 n The City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines state that, wherever possible, the design of sanitary sewers should be based on the ultimate sewage flows permitted by the land use zoning. Since the Concept Plan document and associated population projections provided in Section 6.3 represent the best available planning information, these population projections have been used for the purpose of sizing sanitary sewers. A summary of the associated design assumptions is provided below:
‹ Low Density Residential Areas: The maximum density for low density residential uses in the Concept Plan is 28 units per net hectare. At 3.3 people per unit, this translates to 92 people per net hectare. Including transportation uses, the sanitary catchments for low density residential areas are estimated to contain on average 75 people per gross hectare. As per the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, a residential average flow of 350 L/p/d should be applied to these
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 87 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
projected populations and an inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire gross hectare sanitary catchment area. ‹ Medium Density Residential Areas: The maximum density for medium density residential uses in the Concept Plan is 60 units per net hectare. At 2.5 people per unit, this translates to 150 people per net hectare. Including transportation uses, the sanitary catchments for medium density residential areas are estimated to contain on average 90 people per gross hectare. As per the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, a residential average flow of 350 L/p/d should be applied to these projected populations and an inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire gross hectare sanitary catchment area. ‹ Mixed Use and Arterial Mainstreet Blocks: The Mixed Use and Arterial Mainstreet blocks are expected to contain a mix of residential and commercial uses. The residential component is expected to be 26% of each Arterial Mainstreet block area and 100% of the Mixed Use block area. The combined residential area for the Mixed Use and Arterial Mainstreet blocks for the entire concept plan area is 8 hectares (as per the Concept Plan projections in Section 6.3 and Appendix G ). With a density of 75 units per net residential hectare and a population of 1.8 people per unit, the expected population for these blocks is 135 people per net residential hectare. As per the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines, a residential average flow of 350 L/p/d should be applied to the projected population within each block. For the purpose of sanitary calculations, the remaining (e.g. non-residential) land in each block should be attributed to commercial use and a flow rate of 50,000 L per gross commercial hectare per day should be applied, as per the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines. An inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire block area. ‹ Park Blocks: A splash pad allowance of 5 L/s should be applied for each proposed park in the Concept Plan. An inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire block area. ‹ School Blocks: A flow rate of 50,000 L/ha/day should be applied to the 10 hectares of schools within the concept plan area. An inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire block area. ‹ Residential Area South of the South Tributary: A flow rate of 350 L/p/d should be applied to the projected population of 1,400 people within the lands excluded from the Concept Plan (see Section 6.3 ), and an inflow and infiltration allowance should be provided for the entire 23 hectare sanitary catchment area.
8.2 Alternative Wastewater Conveyance Designs
Wastewater design alternatives are governed by the availability of residual capacity within the municipal system to accommodate anticipated wastewater flow rates from the Cardinal Village Creek development. The anticipated peak wastewater flow rate generated from the ultimate build-out of the Study Area (Area 11 Urban Expansion
PAGE 88 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Study Area) is 226.14 L/s, as calculated in the sanitary sewer design sheet presented in Appendix I. Based on the sanitary capacity analysis presented in Section 3.9.2 and detailed in Appendix E , the Trim Road Collector sewer and Ottawa River Sub Trunk sewer system have sufficient capacity to accept the projected 226.14 L/s generated from development within the Study Area.
The most direct connection to the existing municipal sanitary sewer system – without encountering flow restrictions resulting from smaller diameter sewers or physical obstructions in the form of adverse topography – is via extension of a piped conveyance system along the Hydro One corridor to the existing 825mm diameter sanitary sewer situated within Trim Road (Trim Road Collector), south of OR 174. This approach would take advantage of the Cardinal Creek Village site topography by situating the wastewater outlet in the northwest corner of the development area at a lower elevation than the balance of the Study Area. This would allow for development to be serviced by an internal gravity sewer network without requirement for mechanical systems internal to the Study Area.
As such, the following wastewater collection design alternatives have been considered, based on locating the Cardinal Creek Village wastewater outlet in the northwest corner of the development area as described above, with the municipal sewer connection following the alignment of the Hydro One corridor west towards the receiving Trim Road collector.
8.2.1 Option A – Conventional Gravity Sewer Outlet
Conventional gravity sewer systems are employed as the preferred approach for municipal servicing. Gravity sewer systems are typically less costly to maintain than mechanical alternatives (pumps), and incur lower cost for installation and lifecycle maintenance in suitable conditions.
The extension of a conventional gravity sewer outlet pipe along the Hydro One corridor is feasible, as demonstrated in Drawing 10 and Drawing 12.
A continuous sewer slope of 0.14% would be required to provide clearance overtop of the existing Cardinal Creek culvert within the Hydro One corridor, in order to achieve a conventional gravity sewer outlet into the existing 825mm diameter Trim Road collector, as illustrated on Figure 6. This gravity sewer connection scenario is illustrated in Drawing 12. The ultimate development peak flow rate of 226.14 L/s and slope of 0.14% would result in a sewer size of 675mm flowing at 72% of the pipe’s full flow capacity, as calculated in the sanitary sewer design sheet provided in Appendix I.
8.2.2 Option B – Pumping Station and Forcemain
The implementation of a mechanical wastewater pumping station presents a means to convey wastewater underneath Cardinal Creek to the outlet into the Trim Road
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 89 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
collector. The conceptual pumping station and forcemain design is illustrated in Figure 8.
The City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines (S.7.1.1) clearly establish that the extension of servicing by means of pumping station will only be considered where it can be shown that this situation provides a lower life-cycle cost solution than servicing by means of gravity sewers, or where insurmountable constraints prohibit the design of a gravity based system.
Anticipated peak wastewater flow from the Cardinal Creek Village development will be approximately 226.14 L/s, which, based on the guidelines, would suggest a submersible pumping station as flows are under 400 L/s. Pump motors would be less than 110 kW, and the wet well would be less than 12m deep.
The requirements for land and costs for the pumping station would be similar to the temporary pumping station in the Kanata West Development. Based on similarly sized pumping station systems, the land requirement would be approximately 30m X 30m, with a construction budget for the station and forcemain of approximately 3.0 million dollars (excluding land cost).
8.2.3 Option C – Gravity Sewer and Siphon Crossing Under Cardinal Creek
The implementation of an inverted siphon underneath Cardinal Creek also presents a means to convey wastewater underneath Cardinal Creek to the outlet into the Trim Road collector. The conceptual siphon design is illustrated in Figure 9 .
The flow velocity required to prevent deposition of solids with a sanitary sewer siphon is approximately 0.9 m/s (Metcalf and Eddy, 1991). The velocity simulated within the pipe for a peak flow of 226.14 L/s is 0.95 m/s.
A hydraulic grade line analysis of the siphon system demonstrates that a siphon is feasible after full build-out of the Cardinal Creek Village development, without creating impacts of backwater on the downstream sections of the sewer network. However, the siphon would not function at the flow rates associated with the initial stages of development. Further, the low velocities within the system at the early stages of development would cause potential maintenance issues associated with deposition of solids across the siphon. Therefore, this option is not deemed viable, and is not carried forward. The gravity outlet and pumping station are deemed to be superior options to the siphon.
8.3 Preferred Wastewater Conveyance Design
Of the two feasible alternatives – constructing a conventional gravity sewer or a pumping station and forcemain – the conventional gravity sewer is the preferred
PAGE 90 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
wastewater servicing solution . This approach avoids the costly maintenance and life cycle costs associated with a mechanical pumping system.
8.4 Sanitary Sewer System Design
The proposed flows from Cardinal Creek Village are made up of residential, commercial and institutional flows from the proposed development area. The total peak wastewater flow generated by the Cardinal Creek Village is estimated at 226.14 L/s, as calculated in the sanitary sewer design sheet presented in Appendix I using the design criteria and assumptions listed in Section 8.1. The design sheets show a total population of 11,080 people, which is approximately equal to the projected 9,600 people from the Concept Plan plus the addition projected 1,400 people south of the South Tributary in the future (with population differences attributing to catchment area rounding). The sanitary design sheet also includes 23.06 hectares of commercial and institutional space, which is consistent with the design assumptions listed in Section 8.1 .
The internal Cardinal Creek Village development wastewater conveyance system will consist of a network of sanitary sewers running within the municipal roads, and along the Hydro One corridor and City property, with eventual outfall into the Trim Road collector, as depicted in Figure 10. Steel casing for the proposed sanitary sewer over the Cardinal Creek culvert crossing will be required. A cross section of the proposed watermain through the Hydro One corridor is provided in Figure 12A , while plan and profiles are provided in Figure 12.
A sanitary easement is required along the northernmost ridge, to enable connections to the proposed sanitary sewer within the Hydro One corridor. Slope reshaping is proposed on the eastern bank of the Cardinal Creek ravine where it intersects with the Hydro One embankment, in order to support this proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure.
All sanitary sewers and appurtenances are to be designed in accordance with the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines prior to plan of subdivision approval. The proposed trunk sanitary sewer network is described in detailed calculation sheets in Appendix I and plan and profiles shown in Drawing 11 .
It should be noted that the lands south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Study Area will require an extension of the sanitary trunk sewer (Trunk 3) across the South Tributary for servicing in the future. Capacity has been designed within the proposed sanitary sewer system to ensure future serviceability. As a detailed land use concept is developed for the lands south of the South Tributary, an easement through the proposed residential lands will likely be required in order to provide this required extension. Opportunities to bundle the sanitary sewer infrastructure with the transportation network should be considered as detailed concepts are prepared for the lands outside of the current Cardinal Creek Village OPA.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 91 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
8.5 Commitments for Detailed Design
The wastewater conveyance system will be designed to support phased development at the plan of subdivision stage. All proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure will be designed in accordance with the City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines .
The initial phase of development will include extension of the gravity sanitary sewer along the Hydro One corridor, with steel casing over the Cardinal creek culvert and with outlet connection to the existing 825mm diameter sewer at Trim Road south of Highway 174 to the west of the development area, as depicted in Figure 12. This proposed connection requires consultation and coordination with the City of Ottawa’s ‘Trim Road Realignment and St. Joseph Boulevard & Old Montreal Road Widening’ project – consultation is currently underway.
Hydro One approval is required to grant access to this corridor for construction of the proposed outlet sewer. A meeting was held with Hydro One in December 2012, at which Hydro One’s representative advised that the proposed service routing along the Hydro One owned corridor is permitted, provided that the following elements are satisfied prior to construction:
i) Hydro One review and approval of detailed engineering design drawings and a complete legal plan of survey to identify the affected Hydro One owned property;
ii) 15m clear separation to be maintained between the services and Hydro One pole structures;
iii) Verification that provincial Environmental Assessment requirements have been satisfied for the proposed servicing infrastructure; and
iv) Servicing easements to be granted by Hydro One to the City of Ottawa for occupation and access.
The proposed 675mm diameter sanitary sewer will cross an existing concrete culvert within the Hydro One corridor, and will require local slope stabilization in Cardinal Creek Valley, as depicted in Drawing 12 . The existing structure has been reviewed by Paterson Group to evaluate the culvert’s integrity and ability to support the proposed infrastructure. The Paterson Group geotechnical investigation memo is included in Appendix P, and the findings are summarized as follows:
‹ Structurally, the culvert appears to be sound and over designed to handle the dynamic loading of loaded trains. The concrete culvert has a narrow span and is slightly arched for rigidity. At the present time, the culvert does not receive any traffic loading other than the occasional traffic from hydro inspection vehicles (since the previous rail alignment is now a provincially-owned Hydro One
PAGE 92 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
corridor). The culvert is in need of maintenance to prolong its life cycle, which would consist of crack repair and resurfacing of the pitted surface including the wing walls. ‹ The proposed site servicing will be crossing perpendicular to the existing culvert within the soil cover. From a geotechnical perspective, it is expected that any services crossing the concrete culvert will be placed in an excavated open trench with adequate soil cover for frost protection. Consideration may be given to surrounding the piping material with rigid insulation for additional frost protection for the portion directly over the culvert. Lightweight fill (EPS blocks) may be considered for additional frost protection if insufficient soil cover is available. As per Section 8.4 , the sanitary sewer is to be provided with steel casing over the Cardinal Creek culvert.
8.6 Wastewater Servicing Conclusion The Trim Road Collector sanitary sewer is the identified municipal wastewater outlet for the site. An analysis of the existing infrastructure indicates that there will be sufficient capacity in the existing municipal sanitary system to support development within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area (inclusive of the OPA Concept Plan lands, the existing residential lands, and the additional 23 hectares south of the South Tributary). The proposed gravity sewer conveyance system follows the proposed road network, with the exception of servicing easements across the northernmost ridge, within the Hydro One corridor, and within adjacent City property. All proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure will be designed and constructed in accordance with the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines .
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 93 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND STORM CONVEYANCE PLAN
9.1 Existing Storm Drainage
Cardinal Creek Village lies primarily within the Cardinal Creek Subwatershed, with a small portion in the northeast located within Ottawa 1 Subwatershed. The site is bisected by two tributaries to Cardinal Creek, as detailed in Section 3.2 and Section 3.5.
Existing drainage catchments within the study area have been identified using the hydrologic model provided by the City of Ottawa from the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study, Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, December 21, 2012) and detailed Lidar point data and contour intervals. ArcGIS extension ArcHydro has been used to generate the flow path network based on existing conditions. Following the contours and flow paths, a manual delineation of the catchment areas and subwatersheds has been created across the study area.
Under existing conditions, approximately 42 ha of the subject site drains to the Ottawa River, 42 ha drains to the main branch of Cardinal Creek, 78 ha drains to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek, and 43 ha drains to the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek. Existing storm drainage patterns are illustrated in Figure 13, and are summarized in Table 14.
Existing conditions and site constraints are described in detail in Section 3.0.
9.2 Design Criteria
9.2.1 Minor and Major System Conveyance Design Criteria
Table 13 summarizes the parameters to be used to design the stormwater conveyance system. The parameters are based on City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines .
PAGE 94 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Table 13: Stormwater Conveyance Design Parameters
Design Parameter Value Minor System Design Return Period 1:5 year (1:10 year capture for Old Montreal Road) Major System Design Return Period 1:100 year Intensity Duration Frequency Curve (IDF) A 5-year storm event. i = ()+ C A = 998.071 tc B B = 6.053 C = 0.814 Minimum Time of Concentration 10 minutes Rational Method Q = CiA
Storm sewers are to be sized employing 1 2 1 the Manning’s Equation Q = AR 3 S 2 n Runoff coefficient for paved and roof areas 0.9 Runoff coefficient for landscaped areas 0.2 Minimum Sewer Size 250mm diameter Minimum Manning’s ‘n’ for pipe flow 0.013 Minimum Depth of Cover 2.0m from crown of sewer to grade Minimum Full Flowing Velocity 0.8m/s Maximum Full Flowing Velocity 3.0m/s Clearance from 100-Year Hydraulic Grade 0.30m Line to Underside of Footing Freeboard in Hydraulic Grade Line analysis 2.4 m between top of manhole elevation and 100-year hydraulic gradeline (Refer to Appendix J for illustration of standard road cross sections and depth of footing below centerline of road.) Max. Allowable Flow Depth on Municipal 30 cm above gutter (Refer to Appendix J for Roads illustration of standard road cross sections and depth of major system flow within right of way.) Extent of Major System To be contained within the municipal right-of-way. Stormwater Management Model DDSWMM (release 2.1), SWMHYMO (v. 5.02) and XPSWMM (v. 10) Model Parameters Fo = 76.2 mm/hr, Fc = 13.2 mm/hr, DCAY = 4.14/hr, D.Stor.Imp. = 1.57 mm, D.Stor.Per. = 4.67 mm Imperviousness Based on runoff coefficient (C) where Percent Imperviousness = (C - 0.2) / 0.7 x 100%. Design Storms Chicago 3-hour Design Storms and 24-hour SCS Type II Design Storms. Maximum intensity averaged over 10 minutes. Historical Events July 1st, 1979, August 4th, 1988 and August 8th, 1996 Climate Change Street Test 20% increase in the 100-year, 3-hour Chicago storm Minor System Losses Refer to JFSA June 2013 report in Appendix K for manhole loss coefficients. (Minor losses entered as exit losses at the end of pipes entering manholes, based on the angle between the inlet pipe and the outlet pipe.) Downstream HGL Free outfall conditions at all SWM facility outlets.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 95 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
9.2.2 Quantity and Quality Control Targets
Stormwater management (SWM) criteria have been established on the basis of aquatic habitat protection and the sensitivity of receiving watercourses. Quality and quantity control objectives have been developed based on the recommendations of the Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study Existing Conditions Report (AECOM, 2009) and supplemental environmental, hydrogeological and geomorphic studies completed by Muncaster Environmental, Paterson Group and Parish Geomorphic, respectively (as described in Section 3.0 of this report).
Based on the recommendations of background studies, post development stormwater runoff will generally be required to meet the following objectives:
Discharge to the Ottawa River : i) No quantity control is required; and ii) Quality control is to be provided to treat development runoff to the MOE Enhanced level of protection (long-term average removal of 80% of total suspended solids) to protect aquatic habitat.
Discharge to the Cardinal Creek : i) Quantity control is required to adhere to the erosion threshold of 1.15 m3/s (generally targeting matching post-development hydrographs to pre-development hydrographs for events up to and including the 2-year storm) and to match pre- development water levels at downstream infrastructure for events up to and including the 100-year design storm; and ii) Quality control is to be provided to treat development runoff to the MOE Enhanced level of protection (long-term average removal of 80% of total suspended solids) to protect aquatic habitat.
Discharge to the Cardinal Creek South Tributary : i) Quantity control is required to match pre-development rates for events up to the 100-year storm, and adhere to erosion threshold of 0.43 m 3/s (match post- development hydrographs to pre-development hydrographs for events up to and including the 2-year storm); and ii) Quality control is to be provided to treat development runoff to the MOE Enhanced level of protection (long-term average removal of 80% of total suspended solids) to protect aquatic habitat.
Discharge to the Cardinal Creek North Tributary : i) Quantity control is to be provided to allow only flow rates up to the 2-year storm to be released into the downstream reach of the North Tributary to maintain the natural stream flow regime within the watercourse; and
PAGE 96 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
ii) Quality control is to be provided to treat development runoff to the MOE Enhanced level of protection (long-term average removal of 80% of total suspended solids) to protect aquatic habitat.
9.3 Alternative Stormwater Management Designs
The identification and evaluation of various SWM conveyance and treatment alternatives is summarized in Section 5.3 . A treatment train SWM approach, consisting of lot level best management practices, minor/major collection system conveyance, and wet pond stormwater management facility end of pipe treatment has been selected as the preferred solution for stormwater management control to support the Cardinal Creek Village development.
The following three treatment train and pond location alternatives have been selected to establish and identify the preferred stormwater management approach for the development.
9.3.1 Option 1 – One Stormwater Management Pond for Cardinal Creek Village
Option 1 is a conceptual alternative employing a single pond at the north end of the development as illustrated in ‘Stormwater Management Alternatives – Option 1’, (Drawing 14 ). This option incorporates the collection of stormwater runoff within the entire Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area (inclusive of the existing residential lands, OPA Concept Plan lands, and lands south of the South Tributary), and conveyance of stormwater to a single pond with outlet to the Ottawa River.
Option 1 proves to be undesirable for the following reasons:
‹ Sewer sizes increase considerably as water is conveyed from the south end of the site to the pond at the north end of the development. ‹ Sewer gradient and site topography create excessive sewer depths within the central area of the site. ‹ The pond block size is very large, encumbering the mixed use block at the north end of the site, and disrupting the preferred development concept plan. ‹ The scope of earthworks required to support the site grading necessary to accommodate the storm sewer design is increased, as demonstrated by the deep fills along the western boundary of the site that exceed allowable grade raise restrictions, and deep cuts along the eastern boundary. ‹ Overland flow exceeds the typical surface flow carrying capacity within standard municipal roadways.
Note that Drawing 14 shows conceptual development of the lands south of the South Tributary for discussion purposes only – specifically for the purpose of evaluating conceptual stormwater management alternatives. These lands have no status in the OPA.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 97 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
9.3.2 Option 2 – Two Stormwater Management Ponds for Cardinal Creek Village
Option 2 considers two ponds within the OPA Concept Plan area, with a pond situated at the north end of the development and a pond situated south of Montreal Road. This alternative is illustrated in ‘Stormwater Management Alternatives – Option 2’ ( Drawing 15 ). This option incorporates the collection of stormwater runoff within the development area to the north of Old Montreal Road – along with a small existing residential area to the south of Old Montreal Road - in a single catchment treated by a pond with outlet to the Ottawa River. The catchment south of Old Montreal Road would be treated by a pond with outlet to the Cardinal Creek South Tributary.
Option 2 provides the following desirable attributes:
‹ The trunk storm sewers servicing development to the north of Old Montreal Road can be separated into several sub-catchments to maintain practical sewer sizing. ‹ The locations of the two ponds allows for efficient integration of the minor/major stormwater conveyance system design with the natural topography of the site, and reducing the scope of earthworks required to grade the site. ‹ The implementation of a single pond north of Old Montreal Road allows for the re-direction of flow towards the lower reach of the North Tributary watercourse to maintain base flow, without the requirement for a full wet pond facility and associated maintenance. ‹ The two pond approach results in reduced facility maintenance costs associated with the four pond approach presented in Option 3 below. Note that stormwater management for the lands south of the South Tributary is assumed to be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary in Option 2.
9.3.3 Option 3 – Four Stormwater Management Ponds for Cardinal Creek Village
Option 3 considers four separate drainage areas within the OPA Concept Plan area, with individual minor/major conveyance systems and SWM ponds that outlet into the Ottawa River (one pond), Cardinal Creek (one pond), the Cardinal Creek North Tributary (one pond), and the Cardinal Creek South Tributary (one pond). This alternative is illustrated in ‘Stormwater Management Alternatives – Option 3’ ( Drawing 16 ).
Option 3 provides the following desirable attributes:
‹ Storm sewer runs are shortened, resulting in smaller sewer sizes. ‹ Pond block sizes are reduced, and are easily incorporated into the preferred development concept plan. ‹ The locations of the ponds allows for efficient integration of the minor/major stormwater conveyance system design with the natural topography of the site, and reducing the scope of earthworks required to grade the site.
PAGE 98 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Option 3 proves to be undesirable for the following reasons:
‹ The addition of two ponds, in comparison to Option 2 above, will increase facility maintenance costs throughout the lifecycle of the development. Increased maintenance costs are inconsistent with the objectives of municipal infrastructure design.
Note that Drawing 16 shows conceptual development of the lands south of the South Tributary for discussion purposes only – specifically for the purpose of evaluating conceptual stormwater management alternatives. These lands have no status in the OPA. Stormwater management for the lands south of the South Tributary is assumed to be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary in Option 3.
9.4 Preferred Stormwater Management Alternative
Of the three alternatives evaluated, the single pond (Option 1) and four pond (Option 3) approaches proved inefficient and undesirable due to flow conveyance, grading and maintenance shortcomings described above. The construction of two ponds (Option 2) within Cardinal Creek Village is the preferred SWM servicing solution. This approach provides the most efficient scenario to support the proposed development, and is consistent with consultation with City of Ottawa staff (Appendix B).
9.5 Proposed Stormwater Management System Design
Cardinal Creek Village has a proposed development area of approximately 208 hectares that will be treated by two SWM facilities and an oil and grit separator unit, as illustrated in the preferred Stormwater Management Alternatives Option 2 presented in Drawing 15 . No controls are proposed for the Cardinal Creek and North and South Tributary valley lands, as delineated by the limit of development provided in Appendix R. Storm water management for the lands excluded from the OPA but within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area (e.g. lands south of the South Tributary) would be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary.
Pond 1 is proposed to treat about 138 ha of the Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan area for quality control only and discharge to the Ottawa River. Note that major system flows from approximately 36 ha of the 138 ha drainage area to Pond 1 will discharge directly overland to the main branch of Cardinal Creek.
Furthermore, basement weeping tile flows and design storm flows up to a 2-year level generated by 10 ha of this 36 ha area will be treated locally by an oil and grit separator before discharging to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek to contribute to the natural stream flow regime. Additional details on this approach are provided in the companion Site Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013) that investigates the relationship between surface water and groundwater contributions in the North Tributary.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 99 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Pond 2 will treat 40 ha of the of the Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan area for quality control, erosion control and quantity control up to the 100-year level, before discharging to the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek.
Under proposed conditions, 7 ha and 25 ha of existing external residential areas that drain through the subject site to the Ottawa River and the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek, respectively, will be diverted to the Ottawa River by a cut-off swale within the eastern edge of the OPA Concept Plan lands that will discharge directly to a culvert under OR 174 (Section 9.5.4 ). The proposed development will have no impact on the existing external drainage areas from east of Frank Kenny Road and south of the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek, which will continue to drain to the South Tributary as under existing conditions.
Table 14 presents a summary of existing and proposed drainage areas from the OPA Concept Plan area to the receiving watercourses. The existing drainage conditions are illustrated in Figure 13 , while the proposed drainage conditions are shown in Drawing 15 and Figures 17 and 18.
Table 14: Existing and Proposed Conditions Drainage Areas for Cardinal Creek Village
Description of Drainage Area Drainage Area (ha) Existing Proposed
To Ottawa River 42 138 (via Pond 1) 3 (via culvert under OR 174) To Main Branch of Cardinal 42 36* Major flows from 36 ha (of the 138 ha above) Creek To North Tributary of 78 10* 2-year flows from 10 ha (of the 36 ha above) Cardinal Creek To South Tributary of 43 41 (via Pond 2) Cardinal Creek Within Cardinal Creek Valley 3 2 (North Tributary Valley) & South Tributary Valley 8 (Cardinal Creek Valley North of Hydro corridor) 16 (Remaining Cardinal Creek and South Tributary Valley Lands) Total 208 208
* The 36.4 and 10.1 hectare flow diversion areas are included within the 137.8 hectare Pond 1 catchment area, as described in Section 9.5.1. As such, these areas have been excluded from the calculation of total drainage area.
To provide additional details regarding drainage catchment diversions, a precise breakdown of pre-development and post-development drainage areas is provided in the Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan and Stormwater Management Facility Design (JFSA, June 2013) in Appendix K. The detailed breakdown shows that there is no net change in the total on-site pre-development and post-development drainage areas: when considering only the lands within the limits of development described in Section 3.10.1 and Appendix R , the pre- and post- development drainage areas total
PAGE 100 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
177.12 hectares each . Note that any minor differences (+/- 1.5 hectares) within the drainage areas reported in Appendix K and those reported in Table 14 are due to rounding of the combined detailed catchment areas.
9.5.1 Minor and Major System Drainage
A dual drainage system approach is incorporated into the proposed stormwater management system design, as discussed in Section 5.3.1 . This approach involves both minor and major system flow conveyance within the individual storm catchments.
The minor system will capture storm events up to and including the 5-year event for conveyance within an underground piped sewer system – the 10-year event will be captured for arterial roads (Old Montreal Road) in accordance with the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines – which will discharge to the receiving stormwater management facilities. The storm sewer network is to be designed in accordance with the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines . The proposed minor system design and storm sewer network are illustrated in Figure 17 & Drawing 19 .
Major system conveyance, or overland flow (OLF), is provided to accommodate flows in excess of the minor system capacity. OLF is accommodated by generally routing surface flow along the municipal road network.
Major system design routing is varied amongst the proposed stormwater facility catchments, depending on the quantity control requirements associated with the receiving watercourse, as described in Section 9.2.2 . The proposed major system flow routing design is illustrated in Figure 18 , and is generally described as follows:
‹ Pond 1: OLF within this catchment is directed to the Ottawa River and to the main branch of Cardinal Creek. There is no major system quantity control required within this pond catchment. In areas where street grading or surface conveyance capacity prevent conveyance of OLF toward the pond, direct outlets to the Ottawa River and Cardinal Creek are proposed. Under proposed conditions, major system flows from approximately 37 ha of the drainage area to Pond 1 will discharge directly overland to the main branch of Cardinal Creek. The balance of OLF is routed to the proposed pond via the municipal road network, easements and cut-off swales, as illustrated by the OLF route arrows in Figure 18. Note that the OVF route for arterial mainstreet blocks north of the Hydro One corridor is also directed to Pond 1, as per Drawing 15 . A culvert under the major collector or 100 year intake will be required to convey flows from west of the major collector to east of the major collector, north of the Hydro One corridor. The OLF is proposed to by-pass the proposed forebay in Pond 1 to avoid re- suspension of sediments ( Section 9.4.3 ). Appropriate storm drainage easements will be designated within the development plan at the Draft Plan of Subdivision stage.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 101 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Pond 2: OLF within this catchment is directed into the South Tributary, and must be controlled to pre-development release rates and adhere to erosion thresholds. Therefore, OLF within this pond catchment is directed to the stormwater management facility for quantity control prior to release into the South Tributary. ‹ Major Collector at OR 174: The stormwater management design for the small drainage area located at the foot of the major collector hill, at the northern edge of the Study Area, is to be integrated with the future design of the intersection with OR 174. It is expected that minor system flows would be captured and treated for quality control (e.g. by an oil and grit separator), and overland flow would be directed under OR 174 via the culvert at Pond 1 or the existing culvert at the proposed location of the major collector road. Flows may be conveyed to the outlet via open ditches or storm pipes, to be decided at detailed design when the configuration of the intersection is known. Note that during detailed design the stormwater controls for this portion of the site will be guided by any stormwater controls set forth in the ongoing OR 174 Environmental Assessment. In the absence of stormwater design for OR 174, the targets for the Ottawa River discussed in Section 9.2.2 will be applied.
The DDSWMM program was used to simulate the proposed conditions major system flows and minor system inflows for the drainage areas to the SWM facilities. The XPSWMM program was used to model the conveyance of the minor system flows and the operation of the SWM facilities. Refer to J.F. Sabourin and Associates Preliminary Stormwater Management Plan and Stormwater Management Facility Design (JFSA, June 2013) in Appendix K for further details related to the stormwater analysis.
The post-development drainage catchments have been assigned runoff coefficients (C) based on the proposed land uses shown in the Concept Plan, where C = 0.7 x imperviousness ratio + 0.2. General runoff coefficients are shown on Figure 17 , while the detailed runoff coefficients by block that have been used in the design of the major and minor stormwater system are shown in Appendix J, detailed in Appendix K , and summarized below: ‹ Low Density and Medium Density General Residential Areas (Including Roads): These areas have been assigned an average runoff coefficient of 0.70 to account for impervious surfaces (driveways, roads, roofs) and pervious surfaces (backyards). These C values are representative of Tamarack Homes’ medium and low density developments in other parts of Ottawa. ‹ Mixed Use, Medium Density, and Arterial Mainstreet Blocks: These higher density blocks are expected to have less pervious areas (landscaped areas and backyards) than the low and medium density residential blocks, and have been assigned runoff coefficients of 0.8 and 0.9 depending on the specific development guidelines contained in the Concept Plan. ‹ Park Blocks: These blocks have been assigned an average runoff coefficient of 0.4, associated with lawns.
PAGE 102 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ School Blocks: These areas have been assigned an average runoff coefficient of 0.7 to account for impervious surfaces (parking lots, asphalt play areas, and roofs) and pervious surfaces (fields). ‹ Open Space: These areas have been assigned an average runoff coefficient of 0.25 to represent undeveloped existing conditions.
Minor system flows from the proposed development will be treated by SWM facilities and outlet to the downstream watercourses, with the exception of approximately 10.12 ha located in the western half of the site, north of Old Montreal Road. The 2-year, 24- hour SCS Type II design storm flows generated by this 10.12 ha area will be treated locally by an oil and grit separator before discharging to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek to contribute to the natural stream flow regime. A 1.8 m long weir at an invert of 59.15 m will be installed in a diversion manhole to divert these 2-year flows into the lower reach of the North Tributary.
In accordance with City of Ottawa standards, the minor system has been designed to accommodate the 5-year post development flows from within the site. For modeling purposes, minor system capture rates were limited to 112% of the 5-year flows simulated in DDSWMM, in order to account for additional flows captured by standard inlet control devices and catchbasins during the 100-year storm. On Old Montreal Road, 112% of the 10-year flows simulated by DDSWMM will be captured by the minor system to meet City standards for arterial roads. The minor system has also been designed to accommodate 5-year flows from the arterial mainstreet blocks north of the Hydro One corridor.
To achieve the proposed OVF and minor system design described above, a grading plan has been prepared and is illustrated in Drawing 15 . It should be noted that a permissible grade raise restriction of 3 m is recommended for roadways within the north portion of the site, where the existing ground surface ranges between geodetic elevations of 53 to 56 m, and a 4 m permissible grade raise restriction is recommended for roadways within the remainder of the subject site. Where proposed roadway grades exceed the permissible grade raise recommendations, a settlement surcharge program can be implemented to ensure long-term settlements are minimal (as per the companion July 2013 Geotechnical Report prepared by Paterson Group).
Note that open channels will convey flows from the storm sewer outfalls at MH 1214, MH 6110 and MH 6210 to Pond 1. For the purpose of the preliminary stormwater management analysis, trapezoidal channels with 2.5 m bottom widths and 3H:1V side slopes were assumed. Design of erosion control for these channels, as well as the cut- off swale at the eastern edge of the site, will be undertaken at the detailed design stage.
Similarly, detailed specification for the outfalls at MH 1214, MH 6110 and MH 6210 are to be addressed as part of detailed design. Because of the natural topography of the site, a cascading stream feature is the proposed approach for the design of the outfall from storm trunk 6B to the Pond 1 forebay south of the Hydro One corridor. The
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 103 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
feasibility of such approach is confirmed in the memo prepared by Coldwater Consulting Ltd and enclosed in Appendix Q . A similar approach is expected to be implemented in the detailed design of other outfalls or swales that require substantial grade changes.
As detailed in JFSA June 2013 (Appendix K), average unit capture rates (excluding the pond block and external areas) of 262 L/s/ha, and 252 L/s/ha were provided for the drainage areas to Ponds 1 and 2 respectively.
The following parameters and assumptions were incorporated into modeling the routing of major system flows along the municipal road system:
‹ 0.5% longitudinal slope, 3% road cross-slope and 3.5% shoulder cross-slope; [Note that, due to the topography of the existing site, the longitudinal road slope will be higher than 0.5% in many locations. Although some local roads will have saw-toothed road patterns with high point-to-high point slopes of less than 0.5%, these areas were still modelled with a 0.5% slope to avoid overestimating attenuation from overland flow routing. Due to the existing topography of the site, minimal surface storage will be provided under proposed conditions; and surface storage was modeled as negligible on an overall basis for the purposes of this analysis. Actual road slopes and surface storage will be incorporated into the model at the detailed design stage.] ‹ The length parameter for the DDSWMM model was measured along the centerline of the road for street sub-catchments, and along the centreline of the drainage swale or path for other subcatchments; ‹ The width parameter for DDSWMM was set as equal to double the measured length, as flows drain to the road or swale from two directions; ‹ The DDSWMM model depression storage and infiltration parameters are as per the October 2012 City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines ; and, ‹ The percent imperviousness values of the drainage areas were calculated based on the development runoff coefficient (C), where C = 0.7 x imperviousness ratio + 0.2.
9.5.2 Analysis of Flow Depths on Streets
In accordance with City of Ottawa design standards, the total 100-year depth of water (static and dynamic) on the street must be retained within the right-of-way and should not exceed 30 cm. Although static ponding depths are unknown at this stage of the design, dynamic flow depths were simulated in DDSWMM, based on typical road dimensions, for the 100-year 3-hour Chicago storm. The dynamic flow depths are below 30 cm in most locations, allowing for some static ponding depth to be incorporated into the detailed design without exceeding City standards for total depth of water.
PAGE 104 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The one location with a 100-year flow depth of greater than 30 cm (30.8 cm within the Pond 4 catchment) will be addressed at the future detailed design stage. However, it should be noted that excessive flow depths in this area are exaggerated due to the large scale of the model and the assumed slope of 0.5%, which will likely to be higher at the detailed design stage. Flows may be redirected to a different overland flow route, attenuated in surface storage or captured to the minor system in order to reduce flow depths if necessary. In general, it may be concluded that it is possible to provide a total 100-year depth of water that is less than 30 cm and retained within the right-of-way, in accordance with City standards. Refer to Appendix J for standard road cross-sections (from 14m single-loaded road to proposed 26m major collector), including dimensions to illustrate depth of ponding within the road allowance.
Simulated dynamic flow depths for the development, based on a 20% increase in the 100-year 3-hour Chicago storm, in accordance with the climate change stress test prescribed in the October 2012 City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines , are presented in the JFSA June 2013 analysis in Appendix K. No changes are proposed to address surface flooding under the climate change stress test at this time, as information available at the detailed design stage is required to properly define and address any issues that may occur. Ponding at 38 cm is shown in the cross-sections provided in Appendix J , showing that the maximum expected ponding of 38 cm under the climate change stress test will not have adverse effects on private property.
9.5.3 Hydraulic Grade Line Analysis
Minor system and hydraulic grade line analyses were completed for the proposed system using the XPSWMM program, based on the following parameters:
‹ Evaluation of the 100-year 3-hour Chicago and 100-year 24-hour SCS design storms; and the July 1st 1979; August 4th, 1988; and August 8th 1996 historical events. ‹ Free outfall conditions were modeled, as the 100-year water levels along the surrounding watercourses are well below the proposed pond elevations. (Note that the flowing full pipe velocities are not less than 0.8 m/s, and are no greater than 3.0 m/s, for all of the proposed sewer pipes.) ‹ A freeboard of 2.4 m between the 100-year hydraulic grade line and the proposed center line of road elevation was targeted for the purpose of demonstrating that a 0.3 m freeboard will be provided to the underside of footing of all lots at the detailed design stage. (Refer to Appendix J for illustration of standard road cross sections and estimated depth of footing below centerline of road.) ‹ A hydraulic simulation for the climate change stress test, based on a 20% increase in the 100-year 3-hour Chicago storm, as per the October 2012 City of Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines . No changes are proposed to address hydraulic gradeline elevations under the climate change stress test at this time,
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 105 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
as information available at the detailed design stage is required to properly define and address any issues that may occur.
Refer to Attachment ‘A’ in JFSA June 2013 in Appendix K for tabulated results of the hydraulic grade line analysis. The 100 yr HGL is also illustrated on Drawing 19 .
Note that those locations with slightly less than 2.4 m freeboard (i.e. within 5-10 cm of 2.4 m) are considered to be within a reasonable tolerance of the target, and any deficiencies will be addressed by lot grading at the detailed design stage. Locations with significantly less than 2.4 m freeboard do not have storm sewer connections to buildings; therefore a 2.4 m freeboard is not required at these points (e.g. Mixed Use blocks). It is expected that an appropriate buffer of 0.3m between USF and HGL can be achieved at detailed design, to meet City Standards.
9.5.4 Stormwater Management Facility Characteristics
Preliminary designs for the preferred (Option 2) SWM facilities, Ponds 1 and 2, are presented in Figures 20 and 21 . Detailed hydraulic and hydrologic calculations supporting the preferred SWM plan are presented in JFSA June 2013 in Appendix K. As noted in Section 9.4 , Cardinal Creek Village has a specific proposed post- development area of 177.12 hectares that is to be addressed by the proposed stormwater management plan:
‹ SWM facilities 1 and 2 will provide quality control for 167.00 ha of the site, while the remaining 10.12 ha will be treated locally by an oil and grit separator and discharge to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek. ‹ Pond 2 also requires erosion control, provided based on the detention of the 25 mm storm runoff for a drawdown time of approximately 96 hours. The effectiveness of this erosion control was confirmed by a continuous erosion analysis, as documented in the June 2013 Cardinal Creek Village / Continuous Erosion Analysis memo provided in Appendix O . ‹ Pond 2 may also require the implementation of thermal mitigation measures, as determined through additional monitoring of the existing natural thermal regime of the South Tributary.
Pond 1 is equipped with two sediment forebays; a south forebay separate from the main cell of the pond, and a north forebay connected to the main cell of the pond by a standard forebay berm. Inflows to the south forebay will be treated for quality control before discharging to the downstream main cell of the pond. Inflows to the north forebay will pass through a splitter manhole, where peak flows up to the 25 mm design storm will be directed to the forebay, and excess flows will spill to the main cell of the pond via a 3.0 m long weir at an invert of 51.4 m. Pond 2 is equipped with one sediment forebay connected to the main cell of the pond by a standard forebay berm.
PAGE 106 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The SWM facility permanent pool volumes are sized to provide an enhanced protection level (80% long-term suspended solids removal) per Ministry of the Environment SWMP Design Guidelines . In accordance with Ministry of the Environment enhanced protection requirements for wet ponds, the permanent pool depths are greater than 1.5 m. An extended detention volume of 40 m 3/ha minimum was provided for quality control in Pond 1 and detained for approximately 24 hours in the main cell and the separate south forebay of the pond. The erosion control volume for Pond 2 was sized to detain the 25 mm storm runoff for a maximum drawdown time of approximately 96 hours, with the 40 m3/ha minimum quality control volume provided within this erosion control volume.
Pond 1, discharging to the Ottawa River, requires no quantity control. However, there is an existing 1.5 m wide x 1.15 m high and 37 m long concrete box culvert that will convey the pond outflows underneath OR 174 to the Ottawa River, the capacity of which must be respected. Given the 100-year water level on the Ottawa River at this location (approximately 45.0 m as per the 1984 Regional Municipality of Ottawa- Carleton Ottawa River Flood Risk Map RV8 ) and the 46.49 m upstream edge of road elevation, the capacity of the culvert is approximately 6.3 m 3/s under outlet control based on a differential head of 1.49 m. This culvert is large enough to accommodate outflows from the proposed cut-off swale and a portion of outflows from Pond 1 (e.g. for earlier phases, before full build-out of Cardinal Creek Village). However, under ultimate conditions, a second culvert under OR 174, such as a 2.4 m wide x 1.5 m high concrete box culvert, is recommended to be installed in order to convey additional outflows from Pond 1 (upper limit estimated as 15.5 m3/s total) and re-directed existing external flows from the proposed cut-off swale to the east of Pond 1 (approximately 3.1 m3/s 100-year flow from the 6.77 ha and 24.72 ha existing external residential areas). Since quantity control is not required for the flows discharging to the Ottawa River, this proposed upgrade to the outlet under OR 174 is recommended as opposed to increasing the pond footprint to match the existing culvert.
Pond 2, discharging to the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek, requires 2- to 100-year post- to pre-development quantity control. Target release rates for Pond 2 were calculated based on existing flows simulated with AECOM's 2013 Cardinal Creek XPSWMM model for the 24-hour SCS Type II design storms, pro-rated by existing drainage area from the subject site to the South Tributary. This source is appropriate as it superceeds the AECOM August 2009 Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study - Existing Conditions . The location of flow nodes used in AECOM’s model are shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix K.
As noted above, it is recommended that additional monitoring of the South Tributary be undertaken prior to the construction of Pond 2. Specifically, the natural thermal regime of the South Tributary should be tracked, in order to determine if mitigation measures are needed to control temperature impacts of the stormwater flows entering the Tributary from Pond 2. Pond 2 must be designed to protect and support the South Tributary hydrologic characteristics based on the conclusions of this additional monitoring. If thermal mitigation is needed, design features such as a reverse-graded
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 107 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
pipe in a deep pool (to draw the cooler water from the deepest portions of the ponds), a high length to width ratio (to allow for effective shading with landscape material), and/or a buried storm outlet (to cool water via lower underground temperatures as compared to surface temperatures) may be implemented as part of detailed design of Pond 2.
A summary of the proposed SWM facility operating conditions is presented in the JFSA June 2013 analysis provided in Appendix K , including a comparison of the existing and proposed conditions flows from the subject site to Cardinal Creek. The performances of the SWM facilities were assessed in XPSWMM under free outfall conditions using the proposed stage-storage-discharge curves. All quantity control requirements were met by the proposed outlet controls, while still providing a 0.3 m freeboard between the maximum water level in the pond and the top of bank elevation, and a maximum 100- year active storage depth of 2.0 m. Pond outlet details are to be addressed in detailed design.
Pond 1 is located at the bottom of a steep embankment. According to the Cardinal Creek Village Geotechnical Report (Paterson Group July 2013), a limit of hazard lands setback is not required in the vicinity of the proposed SWM Pond 1 location, as the nearby slopes are stable and the proposed pond is not located adjacent to a watercourse.
Ponds 2 is located along the north embankment of the Cardinal Creek South Tributary. Based on the findings of the Paterson Group Geotechnical Report (July 2013), specifically Slope Section G and Section CC, the proposed pond design next to the South Tributary yields a slope stability factor of safety of greater than 1.5, which is considered stable under static conditions. The slope stability analysis also indicates a slope stability factor of safety of greater than 1.1 under seismic loading conditions, which is indicative of a stable slope under seismic loading. Detailed design of Pond 2 will take into account the future delineation of the limit of development, as described in Section 3.10.1.
9.6 Watercourse and Groundwater Impact Assessment of Proposed Stormwater Management Plan
9.6.1 Erosion Assessment
Under existing and proposed conditions, by means of 36 years of continuous hydrologic simulations using hourly rainfall data from the Ottawa International Airport from 1967 to 2003, flows at three erosion sites within the Study Area were computed and compared. The erosion threshold for Reach 2 of the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek was set at 430 L/s as per the Cardinal Creek Village Erosion Threshold Assessment (Parish Geomorphic, January 2013). The erosion thresholds for the main branch of Cardinal Creek between Old Montreal Road (Reach C10) and the confluence with the Ottawa River (Reach C12) were set a 1500 L/s as per the Cardinal Creek Village Erosion Threshold Assessment - Main Branch (Parish Geomorphic, May 2013). Erosion results
PAGE 108 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
were also computed for proposed conditions without SWM measures in place for comparison purposes. A continuous SWMHYMO model of Cardinal Creek was created for the purposes of this analysis based on the XPSWMM existing conditions model provided by AECOM on December 21, 2012, which includes the external areas contributing flows to Cardinal Creek and its North and South Tributaries.
Based on the erosion analysis, provided in Appendix O , it was confirmed that extended detention of the 25 mm storm with a drawdown time of approximately 96 hours in Pond 2 is sufficient for erosion control. With the proposed stormwater management measures in place, the proposed conditions average annual erosion hours in the main branch of Cardinal Creek at Old Montreal Road and at its confluence with the Ottawa River are within 5% of the existing conditions erosion hours. A percent difference of 5% is a standard used in other jurisdictions, such as that of Conservation Halton.
Although the percentage change in average annual erosion hours between existing and proposed conditions is greater than 5% at the erosion site in Reach 2 of the South Tributary (e.g. 9.4% exceedance in annual erosion hours), this is due generally to the infrequency of erosion in this reach rather than a significant increase in erosion hours. Erosion occurs for 5.20 hours and 5.75 hours in an average year under existing and proposed conditions, respectively, at the South Tributary erosion site; that is, for 0.11% and 0.12% of the total simulation duration.
Therefore, the erosion assessment of the proposed stormwater management system shows that it will effectively maintain a level of stream erosion such that the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek can continue to fulfill normal functions.
9.6.2 Water Budget Analysis
According to the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Management Plan - Stormwater Management Design Criteria dated November 22, 2012 by AECOM, existing infiltration within the Cardinal Creek Village site should be maintained under proposed development conditions. However, the Site Specific Water Budget Report -Cardinal Creek Village Development prepared by Palmer Environmental Consulting Group Inc. (June 2013) and appended in Appendix M was completed in response to comments from RVCA and City of Ottawa staff to support a more precise approach to maintaining infiltration and subsequent baseflow in the North and South Tributaries of Cardinal Creek.
Existing conditions regarding site infiltration and hydrogeology are provided in Section 3.3 . Based on this information, specifically the delineation of Important Recharge Areas, the Site Specific Water Budget Report details the reasoning and methodology employed to arrive at these key findings:
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 109 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Based on the proposed Concept Plan, 0.96 hectares of development is proposed within the Bobcaygeon Formation, and 11.53 hectares of development is proposed within the Gull River Formation. ‹ The North Tributary has an intermittent flow regime, primarily sustained by surface water, but also receiving minor groundwater discharge from the Gull River Formation bedrock. Stream flows in the North Tributary are expected to be maintained based on the proposed stormwater management design: the 2-year 24-hour SCS Type II design storm flows generated by weeping tiles and storm runoff capture from 10.12 ha of the proposed development will be treated locally by an oil and grit separator before discharging to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek. This mitigation measure will offset impacts to infiltration expected from the proposed development within the Important Recharge Area of the Gull River Formation. ‹ A 30 m buffer is recommended around the middle and lower reaches of the South Tributary of Cardinal Creek to protect local baseflow contributions, as per the Concept Plan in Section 6.3 . The middle and lower reaches of the South Tributary are supported by groundwater discharge from karst springs. The recharge areas are south of the Study Area and will not be impacted by the development of Cardinal Creek Village. ‹ Additionally, design storm flows from the 39.08 ha drainage area to Pond 2 will pass through the pond and discharge to the South Tributary to help maintain a natural flow regime similar to existing conditions. ‹ The deficit in infilitration and recharge within the Gull River Formation is not interpreted to support stream flow or groundwater baseflow within the Study Area. The pre-development infiltrated water is likely flowing to the Ottawa River and Cardinal Creek through the bedrock aquifer. ‹ Mitigation measures to enhance post-development infiltration on and surrounding Important Recharge Areas should be implemented if feasible, and should be incorporated into detailed design for stormwater management and grading as part of future Draft Plan of Subdivision applications. Such mitigation measures include: installing a small number of perforated pipes in rearyards on top of the Bobcaygeon Formation, or on areas underlain by shallow bedrock or adjacent to steep changes in elevation; decreasing the thickness of the existing marine clay overlying bedrock, again with a focus on areas near steep changes in elevation; and/or providing granular bedding of buried services. ‹ A three year surface water and private well monitoring program should be undertaken, in accordance with the recommendations set forth in Appendix M and the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013), in order to further characterize the relationship between surface water runoff, infiltration, groundwater baseflow, and stream flow. As part of the surface water monitoring program, temperatures in the South Tributary should be tracked in order to guide the future detailed design of Pond 2.
PAGE 110 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The report concludes that, based on the Concept Plan that largely avoids Important Recharge Areas combined with the proposed mitigation measures for maintaining infiltration, recharge areas supporting stream baseflow will be maintained under post- development conditions. As a result, the proposed development of the Concept Plan is not predicted to adversely impact groundwater contributions to stream baseflows or the quantity of water available for existing water users within and downstream of the study area.
J.F. Sabourin & Associates (JFSA) have applied the findings of the June 2013 Water Budget Report to quantify pre- and post-development infiltration and investigate the feasibility of the proposed mitigation measures. A copy of JFSA’s Water Balance Analysis dated June 21, 2013 is included in Appendix N.
‹ The estimated change in infiltration is from 148,044m3/year in pre-development conditions to 57,779 m 3/year. ‹ Losses in infiltration on those areas dominated by marine clay and sandy silt till are not critical. ‹ Furthermore, it is held that it is not essential to maintain infiltration in Important Recharge Areas that simply contribute groundwater baseflows to the lower reaches of the main branch of Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River, as these watercourses are well-supported by large drainage areas and will not suffer negative effects due to a minor reduction in baseflow contributions from the Cardinal Creek Village site. ‹ Overall, groundwater baseflows in the North and South tributaries of Cardinal Creek are not predicted to be adversely affected by the proposed Cardinal Creek Village development. ‹ The proposed mitigation measures – including other mitigation measures not identified in the June 2013 Water Budget Report, such as amending soils by topping park blocks with fine sandy loam soils (291 mm/year as per the March 2003 Ministry of the Environment SWMP Design Manual )- will be selected and further refined during detailed design. These infiltration measures should be considered where feasible, but are not necessary in order to maintain the form and function of existing natural features and groundwater resources under post- development conditions.
In addition, J.F. Sabourin & Associates (JFSA) have quantified how the existing groundwater baseflow in the North Tributary may be impacted and mitigated by the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village. While it is difficult to accurately evaluate future flows from the proposed stormwater management plan, the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines suggest that weeping tile flows from foundation drains could range between 2 to 5 L/s/gross ha. Using the lower value of 2 L/s/gross ha for the 10 ha proposed weeping tile drainage area would suggest that baseflows of 20 L/s could be generated, an order of magnitude higher than the post-development loss in groundwater
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 111 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
baseflow estimated at 1.6 L/s (as per the Site Specific Water Budget Report). Therefore, the proposed stormwater management plan should more than mitigate any impacts to baseflows on the North Tributary. In order to not exceed maximum pre-development flow conditions, the flows to the North Tributary will be controlled via a diversion manhole with an orifice plate. Flows which exceed the capacity of the orifice plate will be directed to SWM Pond 1 which outlets to the Ottawa River. A memo describing the groundwater baseflows in the North Tributary under pre- and post-development conditions is provided in Appendix N.
9.6.3 Stream Flow Analysis for Cardinal Creek and the North and South Tributaries
AECOM’s XPSWMM model, provided by AECOM on December 21, 2012, was used to compare stream flows in Cardinal Creek under existing and proposed conditions. The results are summarized in Attachment F of Appendix K. Proposed conditions flows in Cardinal Creek and its tributaries are equal to or less than existing conditions flows, with the exception of between nodes CO3 and IO2 on the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek during the 2- and 5-year storms, as identified in Attachment F of Appendix K . Flows at this location exceed existing flows for frequent events - by 0.55 m 3/s and 0.01 m 3/s in the 2- and 5-year storms, respectively – due to the proposed measures taken to compensate for the expected changes in flow regime in the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek. As previously noted, the 2-year 24-hour SCS Type II design storm flows generated by weeping tiles and storm runoff capture from 10.12 ha of the proposed development will be treated locally by an oil and grit separator before discharging to the North Tributary of Cardinal Creek in order to compensate for the loss of upstream surface drainage and the loss of groundwater contributions. Note that this supplemental 2-year flow of 1.20 m 3/s does not exceed the existing 2-year flow from the North Tributary of 1.84 m 3/s simulated with AECOM's 2013 Cardinal Creek XPSWMM model: therefore, the exceedance listed above is due to the location of the outlet and the cumulative effect of combining runoff in the North Tributary environmental protection zone in storm events with the supplemental consistent flows from the oil and grit separator.
Notwithstanding the exceedance listed above, the combined minor and major system outflows (including the major system flows from approximately 36.61 ha of the 138.04 ha drainage area to Pond 1 that discharge directly overland to the main branch of Cardinal Creek) will not exceed existing conditions flows to the main branch of Cardinal Creek. Therefore, the level of service of existing crossings on Cardinal Creek will not be impacted by the proposed development.
9.7 Commitments for Detailed Design
The minor and major stormwater sewer system and associated stormwater management facilities will be designed to support phased development at the Draft Plan of Subdivision stage. All proposed storm sewer infrastructure will be designed in
PAGE 112 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
accordance with the Ottawa Sewer Design Guidelines . Pond design will be completed according to City guidelines and the MOE SWMP Design Manual , further detailing inlet and outlet structures, orifice sizing, and pond block design – including amenity space and multi-use pathways. Pond side slopes to vary according to future detailed designs, and design is to be approved by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer prior to construction. In addition, the design of the cut-off swale, proposed open ditches, and trunk sewer outfalls will be designed according to City standards, with attention to flood conveyance and erosion issues.
All proposed box pipes will be subject to approval by the City of Ottawa during detailed design, ensuring maintenance considerations are addressed.
The initial phase of development will require design and construction of Pond 1, with consideration for timing of construction of the proposed additional culvert under OR 174.
Hydro One approval is required to grant access to the provincially-owned corridor for construction of the proposed Pond 1 outlet sewer and access road. Similarly, a servicing easement will be required west of the major collector road, across the Hydro One corridor, for the proposed storm sewer destined to Pond 1.
Easement sizing for the proposed swales and OVF routes will be detailed further is subsequent designs, and included as part of Draft Plan of Subdivision approvals.
9.8 Stormwater Servicing Conclusion
A treatment train approach has been identified for the OPA Concept Plan area, using best management practices for site controls and a dual drainage system. Three stormwater management facilities are proposed: one stormwater management pond discharging to the Ottawa River (to provide quality control), one stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary (to provide erosion, quality, and quantity control), and one oil and grit separator discharging to the North Tributary (to provide quality control). Storm water management for the lands excluded from the OPA but within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area (e.g. lands south of the South Tributary) would be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary.
A site grading scheme has been developed to minimize earthworks and provide major system conveyance to the receiving watercourses (Cardinal Creek, the South Tributary, the North Tributary and the Ottawa River). Where proposed roadway grades exceed the permissible grade raise recommendations, a settlement surcharge program can be implemented to ensure long-term settlements are minimal (as per the companion July 2013 Geotechnical Report prepared by Paterson Group).
The design of the storm sewer network is in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines and follows the road network, except for servicing easements for overland flow and within the Hydro One corridor, all to be further detailed in subsequent Planning
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 113 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Act applications. The storm sewers discharge directly to the proposed stormwater management facilities or to conveyance channels or to cascading stream features destined to the proposed stormwater management facilities.
A cut-off swale is proposed along the eastern edge of the Concept Plan area, north of Old Montreal Road, in order to accommodate existing drainage from residential areas east of Ted Kelly Lane. The outlet for Pond 1 and this cut-off swale is an existing 1.5 m wide x 1.15 m high and 37 m long concrete box culvert that will convey the flows underneath OR 174 to the Ottawa River. This culvert is large enough to accommodate outflows for earlier phases of development, before full build-out of Cardinal Creek Village. However, under ultimate conditions, a second culvert under OR 174, such as a 2.4 m wide x 1.5 m high concrete box culvert, is recommended to be installed.
The oil and grit separator unit has been identified to divert treated weeping tile flows and storm flows up to the 2-year storm design flowrate from 10.12 ha of the proposed developed lands to the North Tributary, to compensate for reductions in stream flow due to the closing of a the portion of the North Tributary (upstream of the environmental protection zone) and due to drainage catchment diversion and urbanization.
Groundwater baseflow in the South Tributary is primarily supported by groundwater discharge linked to Important Recharge Areas external to the subject lands or Important Recharge Areas that are to be maintained as open space within the preferred development concept plan. Therefore, no groundwater baseflow compensation is required for the South Tributary under post-development conditions. The proposed stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary will contribute stormwater runoff to support the natural stream flow regime.
The Important Recharge Areas identified in the appended Site Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013) have been generally retained as undisturbed open space. However, 0.96 hectares of development is proposed within the Bobcaygeon Formation, and 11.53 hectares of development is proposed within the Gull River Formation. The introduction of impervious surfaces in these Important Recharge Areas and across the remainder of the site is expected to reduce infiltration from pre-development levels. However, it is not essential to maintain pre-development infiltration levels over the site, as groundwater recharge contributes to surface discharge in the Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and the Cardinal Creek tributaries. Of these watercourses, the natural flow regime is to be maintained within the North and South Tributaries via the stormwater management plan for the site, and Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River are supported by large drainage areas and will therefore not suffer adverse effects due to a minor reduction in groundwater baseflow caused by the proposed development.
An erosion analysis of the proposed stormwater management system shows that it will effectively maintain a level of stream erosion such that the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek can continue to fulfill normal functions.
PAGE 114 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
The combined minor and major system outflows will not exceed existing conditions flows to the main branch of Cardinal Creek. Therefore, the level of service of existing crossings on Cardinal Creek will not be impacted by the proposed development.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 115 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
10.0 PHASING STRATEGY
The overall development of Cardinal Creek Village will occur in discrete phases which are tied to infrastructure investments.
Development of Phase 1 is targeted to commence in 2013, with subsequent phases following in subsequent two to three year intervals. The suggested phasing plan is shown on Figure 23 , however the projected timelines will be subject to future approvals, market conditions, and general development patterns in the City.
11.0 UTILITY COORDINATION
Through consultation with utility providers and based on the development plan and phasing plan presented in this report, it has been determined that there are no utility capacity issues for Cardinal Creek Village. The planned utility service is as follows:
‹ Hydro One: Hydro One has an existing pole line on Old Montreal Road, which will be used to service Phase 1. The remainder of Cardinal Creek Village will be serviced from a new Substation, to be completed in 2015. A new pole line will be installed from Frank Kenny to Regional Road 174. All the residential and commercial properties will be fed with underground plant connected to the existing and new pole lines. Easements (5.0m x 5.0m) may be required in order to accommodate Hydro One’s switchgear, and will be identified during detailed designs for subsequent Plan of Subdivision applications. ‹ Enbridge Gas: Enbridge will extend the existing gas main, located east of the subject lands, along Old Montreal Road (from Frank Kenny Road) to service Phase 1. Eventually Enbridge will need to connect to the plant on Old Montreal Road, west of Cardinal Creek. The gas main extension will be coordinated with the Civil Consultant and the City, once the crossing of Cardinal Creek is finalized in future detailed design package associated with subsequent Plan of Subdivision applications. Also during detailed design, easements may be identified in order to accommodate select high pressure stations. ‹ Telecommunications: Both Bell and Rogers will be able to service all the Phases and connect to their existing plant on the Old Montreal Road pole line. Both utility providers will install fibre optic cable to all customers. Easements (5.0m x 5.0m) will be required in order to accommodate Bell cabinets, and will be identified during detailed designs for subsequent Plan of Subdivision applications. Similarly, Rogers will require select easements for their vaults, the locations of which will be identified during detailed design.
PAGE 116 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
12.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The preferred municipal infrastructure designs associated with the Cardinal Creek Village concept plan include:
‹ Two stormwater management ponds, one oil and grit separator unit, and associated storm sewage collection network: ‹ On-site sanitary sewer collection network and off-site extensions to connect to existing municipal sanitary infrastructure; ‹ On-site water distribution network and off-site extensions to connect to existing municipal watermain infrastructure; and ‹ Slope stability work within the Cardinal Creek valley.
The preferred transportation projects for Cardinal Creek Village are outlined in the concurrent Cardinal Creek Village Transportation Master Plan (IBI Group, July 2013) and include:
‹ Major Collector Road; ‹ Minor Collector Road ‘A’; ‹ Minor Collector Road ‘B’; ‹ Realignment and widening of Old Montreal Road between Dairy Drive and Frank Kenny Road; and ‹ Old Montreal Road/ Frank Kenny Road intersection modifications and various new on-site and off-site intersections.
Because the proposed services generally follow the proposed transportation network (future municipal right-of-ways), the environmental impacts of the projects are intrinsically tied together. As such, a comprehensive impact assessment has been prepared encompassing both the transportation and servicing plans.
The values and conditions identified in the documentation of existing conditions were used as the basis for assessing the effects of the preferred servicing and transportation plans on the natural, social, physical and technical environments. The impact analysis involved applying the following steps:
‹ Step 1 : Identify and analyze instances where the project may interact with existing environmental conditions. ‹ Step 2: Acknowledge pre-determined project activities that act as built-in mitigation measures. ‹ Step 3 : Identify the residual environmental effects, if any.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 117 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
‹ Step 4 : Identify opportunities for further mitigation of residual effects , if possible/practical. ‹ Step 5 : Determine the significance of the residual environmental effects, after further mitigation. (See Section 12.2 for further description of identification of significance.)
12.1 Built-in Mitigation Measures
In this assessment, “built-in mitigation” is defined as actions and design features incorporated in the pre-construction, construction, and operational phases that have the specific objective of lessening the significance or severity of environmental effects which may be caused by the project.
The project will be further designed and implemented with the benefit of contemporary planning, engineering, and environmental management practices. Regard shall be had for current legislation, policies, regulations, guidelines, and best practices at the time of development. Where possible, mitigation measures will be prescribed in construction contracts and specifications. Examples of practices that should be employed, based on current standards, are described below. These measures can be considered “built into” the preferred design for Cardinal Creek Village. They will be updated and refined during the pre-construction, construction, and operation phases of the project.
12.1.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
The purpose of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is to determine the degree of erosion and sedimentation that would occur under normally anticipated weather conditions during the life of the project, and to develop and implement mitigative strategies to control any areas determined to be pre-dispositioned to the problem. This would include: the identification of planting and slope rounding specifications within the contract tender; identifying and specifying seeding and sodding locations; identifying areas requiring slope benching or retaining structures in the detailed design process; and post construction monitoring and mitigative practices.
12.1.2 Construction and Traffic Management Plan
A Construction and Traffic Management Plan will be developed to manage the road network transportation function for all travel modes including equipment and material deliverables at various times during the construction period. The objective of the plan will be to maintain safe and clear pedestrian routes, maintain existing traffic as close as possible to its current conditions, and outline the road signage program.
12.1.3 Archaeological Findings
If during the course of construction archaeological resources are discovered, the site should be protected from further disturbance until a licensed archaeologist has
PAGE 118 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
completed the assessment and any necessary mitigation has been completed. In the event that human remains are encountered during construction activities, local law enforcement authorities and/or the coroner will be notified immediately, followed by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, and the Registrar of Cemeteries at the Ministry of Consumer Services.
12.1.4 Emergency Response Plan
The preparation of an Emergency Response Plan to be used by the Contractor will be included to allow full access to emergency services during the construction period, so that at any given time there is a method to access all adjacent land uses. Additionally, the Emergency Response Plan should include provisions for providing temporary services to end users in the event of a construction related service outage or other service disruption.
12.1.5 Environmental Protection Plan
It will be the responsibility of the Contractor to ensure that no contamination, waste or other substances, which may be detrimental to aquatic life or water quality, will enter a watercourse as either a direct or indirect result of construction. In this regard, any floating debris resulting from construction which accumulates on watercourse beds and watercourse banks is to be immediately cleaned up and disposed of. Any spills or contamination, waste or other substances which may be detrimental to aquatic life or water quality will also be immediately cleaned up.
Any work which will cause or be the cause of discharge to watercourses is to be prohibited. At all times, construction activities are to be controlled in a manner that will prevent entry of deleterious materials to watercourses. In particular, construction material, excess material, construction debris and empty containers are to be stored away from watercourses and the banks of watercourses.
Spills or discharges of pollutants or contaminants will be reported immediately. Clean up shall be initiated quickly to ensure protection of the environment.
12.1.6 Landscape Plan
Forested areas and other trees adjacent to the work areas will be protected. Where tree removal will occur, plantings of native trees and shrubs will assist in mitigating the removal. The Landscape Plan will minimize tree removal in woodlots, and will ensure the protection of the Natural Heritage System.
12.1.7 Slope Stability Management Plan
A slope reinstatement program will be completed at ‘Section Q’ shown in Appendix R , where a slope failure has occurred. It is recommended that the lower portion of the
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 119 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
slope face be re-shaped to improve overall slope stability of the slope. The re-shaping will result in an overall slope stability factor of safety of greater than 1.5.
12.1.8 Management of Contaminated Materials
The Ministry of Environment and the Construction Manager are to be notified immediately upon discovery of any contaminated material encountered within the construction area. If contaminated materials or contaminated groundwater are encountered within the construction limits, these are to be removed and disposed of in accordance with all applicable Acts and Regulations. Treatment and discharge of contaminated groundwater are also to be in accordance with applicable legislation and regulations.
12.1.9 Well Decommissioning Plan
Where an existing drinking water well is to be decommissioned within the Study Area or within the monitoring area described in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013), the wells must be abandoned in accordance with Ontario Regulation 903 requirements. Where the existing wells located within the development areas are known to be required to be decommissioned, the wells should be clearly identified in the field and the decommissioning works should be undertaken prior to the commencement of in ground works within 100 m of the wells. In all instances, all decommissioning works should be overseen by a qualified Professional Engineer of Ontario, or Professional Geoscientist of Ontario and a updated MOE WWR of the abandonment should be reviewed by the supervision professional prior to submission to the MOE.
12.2 Assessment and Evaluation Results
Determination of an environmental effect for the proposed Cardinal Creek Village projects requires consideration of the interaction between the project (i.e. project activities) and the environment. Pre-construction, construction and operational activities were all assessed. Professional judgment and experience formed the basis for identifying environmental effects and mitigation measures. The analysis was based primarily on comparing the existing environment with the anticipated future environment, during and after construction. Consideration was given to:
‹ the magnitude, spatial extent, and duration of effects;
‹ the proportion of a species population or the number of people affected;
‹ direct or indirect effects;
‹ the degree to which the effect responds to mitigation; and
‹ the level of uncertainty about the possible effect.
PAGE 120 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
In this assessment, “residual” environmental effects are defined as changes to the environment caused by the project, and vice versa, when compared to existing conditions and taking into account all mitigation measures. Potential residual environmental effects are assessed as to their significance, including spatial and temporal considerations, and are categorized according to the following definitions:
“Negligible ” means an effect that may exhibit one or more of the following characteristics:
‹ nearly-zero or hardly discernible effect; or ‹ affecting a population or a specific group of individuals at a localized area and/or over a short period.
“Insignificant ” means an effect that may exhibit one or more of the following characteristics:
‹ not widespread; ‹ temporary or short-term duration (i.e., only during construction phase); ‹ recurring effect lasting for short periods of time during or after project implementation; ‹ affecting a specific group of individuals in a population or community at a localized area or over a short period; or ‹ not permanent, so that after the stimulus (i.e., project activity) is removed, the integrity of the environmental component would be resumed.
“Significant ” means an effect that may exhibit one or more of the following characteristics:
‹ widespread; ‹ permanent transcendence or contravention of legislation, standards, or environmental guidelines or objectives; ‹ permanent reduction in species diversity or population of a species; ‹ permanent alteration to groundwater flow direction or available groundwater quantity and quality; ‹ permanent loss of critical/productive habitat; ‹ permanent loss of important community archaeological/heritage resources; or ‹ permanent alteration to community characteristics or services, established land use patterns, which is severe and undesirable to the community as a whole.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 121 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
These definitions of significance were adopted for use in this assessment because many of the impacts cannot be quantified in absolute terms, although changes and trends can be predicted. The definitions provide guidance and are intended to minimize bias. Table 15 describes the potential effects, mitigation, residual effects and their significance, and monitoring recommendations for the preferred alternative.
PAGE 122 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Table 15: Environmental Effects Evaluation
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
‹ Potential creation of dust from construction. ‹ Control of dust/debris during construction will be the responsibility of Construction monitoring Insignificant Natural the Contractor and will be managed through construction Air Quality Environment specifications – for example, construction requirements may include the application of water to cleared and unpaved construction areas.
‹ Clearing and grubbing activities may impact wildlife ‹ Construction timing to minimize potential impacts on wildlife. Remove Construction monitoring Insignificant within the proposed municipal ROWs; stormwater vegetation outside of the breeding bird period (generally April 15th to blocks; and within servicing easements. July 30th).
‹ Avoid core of woodlots and other natural communities. Natural Wildlife Environment ‹ Fencing off of the work area, where appropriate, to limit the area of disturbance.
‹ If wildlife is encountered, humane trapping and relocation may be implemented under the direction of a qualified professional.
‹ Construction of infrastructure may displace breeding ‹ To protect breeding birds, no tree or shrub removal should occur Construction monitoring Insignificant Natural bird habitat. between April 15th and July 30th, unless a nesting survey conducted Wildlife Environment within five days of the woody vegetation removal identifies no breeding activity.
‹ In-water channel modifications are proposed in ‹ Erosion and Sediment Control Plan which may include the installation, Construction monitoring Insignificant Cardinal Creek for slope stability. These in-water use and proper maintenance of turbidity curtains and coffer works are associated with potential impacts to fish dams/watercourse isolation system with fish outs of each isolate passage/habitat during construction including section. disturbance of in-water structure and elevated turbidity levels ‹ Ensure at all times the free flow of water and a water supply sufficient to maintain fish habitat functions downstream of the work area. ‹ Construction of watermain infrastructure within the Natural Fisheries and existing Old Montreal Road ROW at Cardinal Creek ‹ Complete de-fishing for in-water work that will isolate the work area Environment Watercourses may require limited in-water works, resulting in from the adjacent channel. Captive fish are to be immediately potential impacts to fish habitat/passage during returned to the aquatic environment to avoid fish mortality. construction. ‹ During construction, qualified biologists should be on-site to ensure ‹ Construction of watermain and sanitary infrastructure excessive turbidity and sedimentation is not occurring on the site and within the Hydro One Easement will require local slope to monitor water quality downstream of the site at appropriate modifications within the existing Cardinal Creek locations during in water works channel, and may require limited in-water works, resulting in potential impacts to fish habitat/passage ‹ The work to be done is in existing disturbed areas with minimal loss of
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 123 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
during construction. riparian habitat.
‹ In-water work has been limited with bridges (roads) and trenchless installation (pipes).
‹ For roads ensure the proper sized culverts are used and complete culvert installation in the dry. For pipes where trenches are required install in the dry.
‹ Stabilize watercourse banks as required. If working in the dry – complete a de-fishing of the work area.
‹ Avoid in-water work during the more sensitive March 15 – June 30 period.
‹ Restore areas with fish habitat enhancements such as coarse material and woody debris.
‹ Uncontrolled erosion, sedimentation, and machine use ‹ An Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, Environmental Protection Construction monitoring Insignificant (including potential spills) during construction could Plan and Spill Prevention and Control Plan shall be prepared at Natural Fisheries and result in a loss of topsoil, release of deleterious detailed design. Control of erosion, sedimentation, and spills will be Environment Watercourses materials (fuel, oil, lubricant, etc.) into the the responsibility of the Contractor and will be managed through watercourses, and/or degradation of water quality construction specifications. within the limits of construction and outlying areas.
‹ Stormwater runoff captured by the proposed ‹ Post-development stormwater runoff to be controlled and treated via Construction and lifecycle Insignificant stormwater infrastructure could exacerbate existing stormwater management ponds, discharging to the Ottawa River and monitoring erosion issues in Cardinal Creek and the South South Tributary. The design of the proposed ponds outletting to South Tributary if released to the Creek without quantity Tributary and the proposed flow contributions to the North Tributary control. and Cardinal Creek have undergone Continuous Simulation Modeling Natural Fisheries and and erosion assessment, and the proposed SWM system is expected Environment Watercourses to effectively maintain a level of stream erosion such that the watercourses can continue to fulfill normal functions.
‹ Stormwater Management Facilities must be put in place before any development occurs on-site.
‹ The watercourse may be impacted during construction ‹ Erosion and Sediment Control Plan which may include the installation, Construction monitoring Insignificant staging, where water may be redirected temporarily, use and proper maintenance of turbidity curtains and coffer so that proposed slope stability mitigation measures dams/watercourse isolation system with fish outs of each isolate Natural Fisheries and and slope re-shaping in Cardinal Creek can be section. Environment Watercourses completed in the dry. ‹ All in-water works will be conducted outside of the fish spawning periods of March 15th to June 30th.
PAGE 124 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
‹ Ensure at all times the free flow of water and a water supply sufficient to maintain fish habitat functions downstream of the work area.
‹ Complete de-fishing for in-water work that will isolate the work area from the adjacent channel. Captive fish are to be immediately returned to the aquatic environment to avoid fish mortality.
‹ During construction, qualified biologists should be on-site to ensure excessive turbidity and sedimentation is not occurring on the site and to monitor water quality downstream of the site at appropriate locations during in water works.
‹ Detailed construction staging plans will be prepared during detailed design, and will be implemented by the Contractor.
‹ RVCA permits for watercourse and shoreline alterations will be pursued during detailed design, modifying the construction plan accordingly if required.
‹ A Permit-to-Take-Water application will be completed for dewatering in excess of 50,000L/day from a lake, river, stream or groundwater source.
‹ Stormwater runoff, captured by the proposed ‹ Stormwater Management Facilities have been designed to treat Construction and lifecycle Insignificant stormwater infrastructure, could affect water quality in stormwater according to Provincial and Municipal Approval criteria. monitoring. Monitoring of the the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek if released natural thermal regime in the without quality and thermal control. ‹ Stormwater Management Facilities must be put in place before any South Tributary, to inform development occurs on-site. detailed design of stormwater facilities. ‹ The natural thermal regime of the South Tributary should be monitored in order to determine if mitigation measures are needed to control temperature impacts of the stormwater flows entering the Natural Fisheries and Tributary from Pond 2. Pond 2 must be designed to protect and Environment Watercourses support the South Tributary hydrologic characteristics based on the conclusions of this additional monitoring. If thermal mitigation is needed, design features such as a reverse-graded pipe in a deep pool (to draw the cooler water from the deepest portions of the ponds), a high length to width ratio (to allow for effective shading with landscape material), and/or a buried storm outlet (to cool water via lower underground temperatures as compared to surface temperatures) may be implemented as part of detailed design of Pond 2.
Natural Fisheries and ‹ The proposed closing of the North Tributary ‹ A compensation program is required to mitigate this loss, specifically None required Insignificant Environment Watercourses constitutes a loss in the natural headwaters draining to at a 1:1 compensation ratio (bankfull width x linear length). Details are Cardinal Creek and a loss of complex contributing fish to be developed by the RVCA as part of future Planning Act
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 125 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
habitat. applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision approvals for the Cardinal Creek Village Concept Plan.
‹ Tree removal and associated fragmentation for new ‹ Environmental surveys have informed the delineation of a Natural Construction monitoring Insignificant roads, stormwater management facilities and within Heritage System for Cardinal Creek Village whereby the preferred proposed servicing easements will result in permanent plan minimizes tree removal, with most services constructed in loss of existing vegetation which could impact the existing disturbed areas. integrity of the woodlots, including increased impacts ‹ At detailed design stage fine-tune work areas to minimize tree of invasive flora and urban wildlife and connectivity removal in woodlots. Where tree removal will occur, plantings of with other natural areas. Natural native trees and shrubs will assist in mitigating the removal. Woodlots Environment ‹ Natural Heritage Areas are to be delineated with temporary fencing prior to the start of construction and monitored throughout development.
‹ Where practical, avoid woodlots. Use woodlot edges as much as possible and avoid linkage areas and unique communities/habitat. For pipes use trenchless construction where possible.
‹ Potential disruption / removal of Species At Risk (SAR) ‹ Butternut Health Assessor to complete field reviews before Monitor effectiveness of Insignificant due to clearing and/or construction activities within construction to determine if any healthy butternut stems will be mitigation and compensation proposed municipal ROWs, within proposed impacted within 25 m of the work areas. No site disturbances that work as applicable stormwater blocks, and within proposed servicing may harm the butternuts are to occur within a radius of 25 metres of easements. Construction may impact butternut trees. the tree until butternut health assessments are completed.
‹ When removals occur the proponent may be required to create an overall net benefit through plantings of pure seedlings, seed and scion collection and/or research funding as per consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources.
‹ If impacts are anticipated within 25 m of a healthy butternut specimen Natural Species at complete a mitigation or compensation package. Environment Risk ‹ General mitigation measures to avoid impacts may include but will not be limited to:
o All equipment will stay within the confines of the work area so as not to disrupt tree roots.
o The storage of equipment and vehicles within 25 m of healthy butternut trees is prohibited.
o Protect all healthy butternut trees within 25 m of the work area by installing snow fence outside of the tree’s drip line/root zone.
‹ Do not store fuel within 25 m of healthy butternut trees, and exhaust
PAGE 126 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
fumes from all equipment must not be directed towards any tree’s canopy.
‹ If there is a land use change that results in the creation of habitat, ‹ Other than the butternut, no species at risk or habitat None required unless Insignificant field reviews will be required before construction to confirm that no Natural Species at have been identified within the study area. Current and otherwise identified in future Species at Risk have repopulated the area. As required, complete a Environment Risk future land use is not anticipated to provide habitat for compensation packages mitigation or compensation package with the Ministry of Natural potential species at risk within the study area. Resources.
‹ Vegetation removals will be required in infrastructure ‹ Construction corridors will be clearly delineated to minimize the Construction monitoring to Insignificant corridors. construction footprint and will be identified during detailed design and ensure protection measures implemented by the Contractor. are properly installed
‹ Protect adjacent vegetation with sturdy construction fencing. Monitoring the success of tree and shrub plantings in ‹ Minimize vegetation removal as much as possible. accordance with Natural requirements of Landscape Vegetation Environment ‹ Native vegetation is to be reinstated within servicing easements and Plan identified stormwater management facility areas.
‹ Restore with native plantings from local stock and consider transplanting healthy stems of desirable native species.
‹ Where practical concentrate vegetation removal on non-native and prone species including ash, elm, Manitoba maple and poplar.
‹ In order to compensate for the reduction in groundwater baseflow ‹ Urbanization of the subject lands and permanent re- Surface monitoring and Insignificant and surface runoff contributions in the North Tributary, treated direction of portions of the existing drainage area is baseflow characterization for weeping tile flows from 10.12 ha of developed lands will be directed Natural expected to impact the natural stream flow regime in 3 years, to further understand Drainage to the North Tributary. Environment the North Tributary. the relationship between surface water and groundwater
‹ Potential disruption to existing drainage patterns on ‹ A cut-off swale is proposed along the eastern boundary of the site, Construction monitoring of Negligible adjacent private properties. north of Old Montreal Road, to capture existing drainage east of the the proposed stormwater site. projects Natural Drainage Environment ‹ No changes are proposed to the existing culvert under Frank Kenney Road. Combined with the proposed stormwater controls to support the development, no impacts are expected to areas currently draining to the South Tributary.
Social Physical ‹ On-street and off-street pathways and sidewalks will ‹ None required. None recommended Positive Environment connectivity provide connectivity within the community and to
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 127 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
within the adjacent areas. community ‹ Major multi-use pathway shall be incorporated into the north-south major collector road right-of-way.
‹ An integrated network of multi-use pathways, cycling facilities and sidewalks will facilitate pedestrian movement throughout the Cardinal Creek Village community, and provide connections to adjacent communities.
‹ Site alteration (excavation, grading) could disturb ‹ Undertake Stage 3 Archaeological Assessment at identified As per recommendations of Insignificant Archaeology Social archaeological resources. archaeological sites. Subsequently, where required, implement Stage Stage 2 or 3 Assessments or Environment 4 avoidance or excavation strategies for significant archaeological Stage 4 avoidance and
sites. protection decisions
‹ Potential major road/transit-related noise exposure to ‹ Single loaded roads have been utilized in the concept plan to None recommended Insignificant low density residential and other sensitive uses. minimize noise impacts. Social Noise Environment ‹ Noise barriers to be implemented where noise exceeds city guidelines.
‹ The construction of watermain infrastructure on Trim ‹ A Traffic Management Pan will be developed during detailed design Construction monitoring Insignificant Road, Old Montreal Road, and Dairy Drive will require and adhered to by the Contractor, considering staging of the Social Existing Land construction phasing and lane closures. Access to construction efforts and maintaining access to private property. Environment Use nearby properties and businesses may be affected by Impacted property owners to be notified of construction staging, construction activities. detours, etc. prior to start of construction. Site access to be restricted in construction specifications.
‹ Permanent access easements will be required to ‹ Access easements to be coordinated with landowners as required. Social Land None required Insignificant facilitate off-site connections to infrastructure on Trim Environment Requirements Road/ Dairy Drive.
‹ Neighbourhood parks will provide a local gathering ‹ None required. None recommended Positive and recreational space for nearby residents. Community parks will incorporate a variety of active Social Recreation recreational opportunities such as sports fields, tennis Environment courts, splash pads, children’s play areas, pedestrian walkways, and seating areas or other facilities determined by the City of Ottawa.
‹ The construction of watermain infrastructure on Trim ‹ A Traffic Management Plan (including cycling and pedestrian detours) Construction monitoring Insignificant Social Pedestrian Road, Old Montreal Road, and Dairy Drive and a will be developed during detailed design and adhered to by the
PAGE 128 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
Environment Linkages sanitary connection on Trim Road will require Contractor. Appropriate signage will be provided to notify impacted construction phasing and may result in disruption of users prior to the start of construction.. cycling /pedestrian movements during construction. ‹ Sidewalks will be provided along at least one side of all collector roads. A network of off-road pathways providing connections to proposed green space/ parks in the development and off-site pathways/ destinations – Future Cardinal Creek pathway, Trim Transit Station, etc.
‹ Excavation could encounter unexpected contaminated ‹ A Phase 1 - Environmental Site Assessment was completed for the Construction monitoring Insignificant materials. proposed development; a Phase 2 Assessment is not required.
‹ Additional investigations of the existing nursery will be undertaken during detailed design, prior to development.
Physical ‹ Existing wells and septic systems to be decommissioned prior to Soils Environment development.
‹ The Contractor shall notify MOE and Construction Administrator immediately upon discovery of any contaminated material encountered within the construction area, and is to remove and disposed of the materials in accordance with all applicable Acts and Regulations.
‹ Proposed grade raises within silty clay areas. ‹ Provided proposed grade raises are within permissible grade raise Additional geotechnical Insignificant limitations, no mitigation measures are required. studies, if required, during detailed design Physical Soils ‹ Where proposed grade raises exceed permissible grade raise Environment (grading) recommendations, consideration could be given to placing lightweight Monitoring during settlement fill, as required, or completing a settlement surcharge program. surcharge program, if Additional geotechnical studies will be required during detailed required design.
‹ A slope reinstatement program will be completed at ‹ Detailed geotechnical studies and recommendations regarding the Geotechnical consultant to Insignificant Section Q shown in MSS - Appendix R where a slope proposed works to be completed during detailed design. supervise throughout duration failure has occurred. It is recommended that the lower of program portion of the slope face be re-shaped to improve overall ‹ Contractor to use best management practices, such as silt fencing Physical slope stability of the slope. The re-shaping will result in Slope Failures within work area and floating turbidity curtains to limit sediment Environment an overall slope stability factor of safety of greater than discharge into watercourse. 1.5. In addition, slope re-shaping is proposed within the eastern bank of the Cardinal Creek ravine, adjacent to the Hydro One embankment, in order to support proposed watermain and sanitary infrastructure.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 129 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
‹ Bedrock may be encountered above proposed service ‹ Contractor to remove bedrock above proposed bedding level. Pre-construction baseline Insignificant invert levels. Excavation and rock removal (including groundwater monitoring and blasting) will be required for installation of services ‹ Existing wells and septic systems within the development lands to be construction monitoring throughout the site and may have a potential localized decommissioned prior to development. effect on groundwater quality, due to rock fractures, or on nearby Karst features. ‹ A Blasting Program will be prepared and specifications for peak Physical Bedrock particle velocity limits will be adhered to by the Contractor, to prevent Environment (grading) extensive rock fracture and protect off-site wells and nearby Cardinal Creek Karst from damage.
‹ A baseline Water Quality Program will be implemented by the Contractor for wells located within the immediate vicinity of the subject property: prior to the start of construction, identified wells will be inspected to identify baseline groundwater quality and quantity.
‹ Based on a desktop review, there are no karstic ‹ Although there is a low probability that there are subsurface voids at Additional geotechnical Insignificant hazards to construction within the Concept Plan these locations that would be a hazard to construction, it is investigations for any future Area. However, there are two karstic features that recommended that either buildings be setback from these locations or proposed development might be considered as possible development excavation to bedrock be undertaken to examine the two potential outside of the Cardinal Creek Physical Karst constraints within the broader MSS study area: one karstic features for voids. Concept Plan Area Environment Features potential karstic feature within the existing residential area north of Old Montreal Road and east of Cardinal Creek, and one potential karstic feature south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area, as shown in MSS - Drawing 3.
‹ Dewatering is anticipated to be necessary to install ‹ A dewatering management plan will be implemented by the Construction monitoring Insignificant services and construct stormwater management Contractor. Groundwater infiltration into the temporary excavations facilities. The dewatering is expected to be of a short will be controlled by the Contractor using open sumps and pumps for the relatively shallow excavations. Where dewatering is required, Physical term, temporary nature - as such, no long term Dewatering effluent shall be discharged in a way that prevents sedimentation of Environment impacts are anticipated from either a hydrogeological or geotechnical perspective. the watercourses. ‹ A Permit to Take Water (PTTW) application will be completed (if required).
‹ The Important Recharge Areas identified in the Site ‹ The infiltration deficit is considered insignificant: it is not essential to Surface monitoring and Insignificant Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013) maintain pre-development infiltration levels over the site, as baseflow characterization for (MSS - Appendix M) have been generally retained as groundwater recharge contributes to surface discharge in the Ottawa 3 years, to further understand undisturbed open space. However, 0.96 hectares of River, Cardinal Creek, and the Cardinal Creek tributaries. Of these the relationship between Physical Groundwater development is proposed within the Bobcaygeon watercourses, the natural flow regime is to be maintained within the surface water and Environment Resources Formation, and 11.53 hectares of development is North and South Tributaries via the stormwater management plan for groundwater proposed within the Gull River Formation – both the site, and Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River are supported by Important Recharge Areas. The introduction of large drainage areas and will therefore not suffer adverse effects due impervious surfaces in Important Recharge Areas and to a minor reduction in groundwater baseflow caused by the proposed across the remainder of the site is expected to reduce development.
PAGE 130 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
infiltration from pre-development levels.
‹ Development of Cardinal Creek Village in accordance ‹ Where permanent groundwater interference has been demonstrated Baseline groundwater Insignificant with the Concept Plan may have measurable impacts to have occurred in the wells included in the monitoring program and geochemistry and history of on wells within the MSS Study Area or within the where resolution of groundwater interference/degradation is sought by static water levels within the recommended monitoring plan area illustrated in the the surrounding landowners under the Ontario Water Resources Act, study limits and within a Physical Groundwater companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, mitigation of the impacts must be carried out by the developer. The proposed groundwater Environment Wells June 2013). Likely impacts would be in the form of mitigation measures focus on connecting the affected properties to monitoring area identified in lowered well yield and impairment of the quality of the the municipal drinking water systems at the developer’s expense. the companion Hydrogeology raw groundwater. Report (Paterson Group, June 2013)
‹ Sequence of construction phasing may hinder transit ‹ Ensure phasing allows for good collector road connectivity to support Coordination with City of Insignificant service. interim transit routes. Ottawa/ OC Transpo Technical Transit (Transportation) Ridership ‹ Potential for residential areas to fall outside of required ‹ Layout of collector roads designed to maximize transit service minimum walking distance to transit (400m). coverage and to provide flexibility for routing.
‹ The construction of proposed watermain infrastructure ‹ A Traffic Management Pan will be developed during detailed design Construction Monitoring Insignificant on Trim Road, Old Montreal Road, and Dairy Drive and adhered to by the Contractor, considering staging of the and proposed sanitary connection on Trim Road will construction efforts and maintaining access to private property. Network/ Technical require construction phasing and will result in System (Transportation) disruption of traffic. ‹ Impacted property owners to be notified of construction staging, Integration detours, etc. prior to start of construction.
‹ Site access to be restricted in construction specifications.
‹ Delay to traffic due to construction activity on ‹ Contractor to prepare Traffic Management Plan in accordance with Construction Monitoring Insignificant roadways could impact LOS. City and Provincial guidelines. Police assistance at intersections when required. Peak period restrictions on construction may be required at Transportation Impact Technical Level of ‹ Construction phasing may impact LOS at arterial critical intersections. Studies in support of Plan of (Transportation) Service (LOS) intersections. Higher volume of vehicles at some Subdivision Applications to intersections in the interim until full roadway network is ‹ Interim intersection modifications may be required. review and identify interim completed. roadway capacity requirements
‹ Delay to traffic due to construction activity on ‹ Contractor to prepare Traffic Management Plan in accordance with Construction Monitoring Insignificant roadways could impact roadway/ intersection capacity. City and Provincial guidelines. Police assistance at intersections when Technical required. Peak period restrictions on construction may be required at Transportation Impact Capacity (Transportation) ‹ Construction phasing may impact capacity at arterial critical intersections. Studies in support of Draft intersections. Higher volume of vehicles at some Plan of Subdivision intersections in the interim until full roadway network is ‹ Ensure phasing allows for good collector road/ arterial road Applications will review and identify interim roadway
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 131 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Monitoring Significance of Criteria Project Activity / Impact Mitigation Measure Recommendations Impact
completed. connectivity. Interim intersection modifications may be required. capacity requirements
‹ The overall efficiency of the transportation network ‹ Contractor to prepare Traffic Management Plan in accordance with Construction Monitoring. Insignificant could be impacted by delays due to construction City and Provincial guidelines. Police assistance at intersections when Consultation with City of activity. required. Peak period restrictions on construction may be required at Ottawa for work impacting Technical Operation critical intersections. adjacent arterial roadways or (Transportation) transit service
‹ The proposed servicing plan requires connections to ‹ Existing infrastructure to be protected during construction. Details to Construction monitoring Insignificant Network/ Technical existing watermains on Trim Road, Dairy Drive, and be incorporated into detailed infrastructure design and construction System (Services) within a servicing easement, which could potentially specifications. Integration impact the function of the existing watermain.
‹ The proposed servicing plan requires a connection to ‹ Existing infrastructure to be protected during construction. Details to Construction monitoring Insignificant Network/ the existing Sanitary sewer west of Trim Road (Trim be incorporated into detailed infrastructure design and construction Technical System Road Collector), including a stub extension across specifications. (Services) Integration Trim Road, which could potentially impact the function of the existing sewer.
‹ The proposed servicing infrastructure could conflict ‹ Utility companies were consulted during the development of the Construction monitoring Insignificant with utilities within the Municipal ROW. Master Servicing Study, and indicated that the proposed site is Network/ Technical immediately serviceable. System (Services) Integration ‹ Coordination with utility companies must continue during detailed design.
PAGE 132 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
12.3 Monitoring
Monitoring is important to verify the accuracy of effects predictions. Monitoring measures are recommended to determine which effects actually occur with project implementation, and may result in the modifications of mitigation measures to improve their effectiveness. In addition to standard construction monitoring, the following specific monitoring measures have been identified in Table 15:
12.3.1 Fisheries
A qualified inspector will conduct frequent visits during construction to ensure that the Contractor is constructing the project in accordance with the design drawings, and that the mitigation measures are being implemented and maintained as specified. Bulkhead barriers, filter cloths on open surface structures, and silt fencing may require removal of sediment and repairs. The inspector must ensure that construction vehicles and chemicals, fuels and other potentially hazardous materials remain in designated areas.
The inspections will include frequent monitoring of watercourses in the vicinity of work areas. Any water quality issues such as elevated turbidity levels are to be addressed immediately with cessation of work until sediment and erosion controls are properly functioning. Fish passage or fish removal to be monitored for all in-water work.
12.3.2 Butternut
Work areas and adjacent lands will be monitored to ensure protection of any identified Species at Risk. If a mitigation or compensation plan is required, the success of the plan - such as the health of butternut plantings or collection of butternut seeds – will also require monitoring. Monitoring reports will be submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources.
12.3.3 Groundwater and Surface Water
A baseline groundwater geochemistry and history of static water levels should be established for all existing water wells that are to remain in use both within the study limits and within the proposed groundwater monitoring areas described in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013). Specifically, a Terms of Reference for the groundwater monitoring and mitigation program is to be prepared to the satisfaction of the City of Ottawa, and the program is to be implemented 12 months prior to the start of construction within 500m of existing wells. The baseline data should be summarized in a preconstruction report and should continue to be readily available throughout the proposed in ground works within the study limits. A minimum duration of 12 months of groundwater monitoring of wells within the proposed area of influence is recommended.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 133 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
It is recommended that the preconstruction baseline potentiometric elevations of the water levels within the wells be referenced against a geodetic datum prior to the completion of the baseline program. This groundwater flow data should also be assessed against the proposed site specific in-ground works proposed at the time of Draft Plan approval. The updated elevation data and works assessment should be utilized to re-evaluate the groundwater flow directions in the proposed monitoring areas and re-evaluate the limits of monitoring in order to ensure that all relevant wells are included in the program.
As described in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013) and in Table 15, where permanent groundwater interference has been clearly demonstrated to have occurred in the wells included in the monitoring program and where resolution of groundwater interference/degradation is sought by the surrounding landowners under the Ontario Water Resources Act, mitigation of the impacts must be carried out by the developer. The mitigation measures proposed in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013) consist of connecting the affected property to the municipal drinking water systems or, where impossible to do so, securing an alternative permanent water supply.
A blasting program should be set up where bedrock is to be drilled and blasted as part of the construction phase. The blasting program should act to compliment the water well baseline study and should set monitoring limits on ground vibrations to offsite wells.
In addition, as described in Appendix M , a surface monitoring and baseflow characterization program is recommended to be undertaken for 3 years, to further understand the relationship between surface water and groundwater. As part of the surface monitoring, the natural thermal regime of the South Tributary is to be monitored, in order to inform the detailed design of thermal mitigation measures for Pond 2 (discharging to the South Tributary).
PAGE 134 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
13.0 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MASTER SERVICING PLAN
13.1 Future Development Applications
The Master Servicing Study defines required neighbourhood-wide servicing infrastructure to support the proposed development of Cardinal Creek Village in the City of Ottawa.
As part of the MSS, the capacity of the existing sanitary and water systems have been confirmed: the existing municipal systems should be expanded to support the proposed development. In addition, studies of Cardinal Creek and the South Tributary indicate that stormwater runoff from the proposed site can be appropriately received by the watercourses, by implementing stormwater quality and quantity control on-site.
The Master Servicing Study (MSS) provides high-level design information for the proposed water supply, sanitary collection system, storm drainage system, stormwater management, grading, and utility network, which have been developed using environmental assessment planning principles. The MSS defines the course of subsequent detailed design: servicing requirements, additional approvals, and design criteria are set out to guide detailed servicing designs in support of future development applications for the subject lands. As described in Section 2.1 and Section 2.6 , no additional Environmental Assessment Act approvals are required with subsequent planning applications.
The transportation corridors within the community are the predominant rights-of-way identified for the on-site services. As such, should the proposed transportation links and block pattern be modified as development applications are submitted and approved, then the servicing network is also expected to be modified. Similarly, the preferred servicing system has been sized to support the specific land uses set out in the Concept Land Use Plan (Figure 4 ). Should these land uses changes as development applications are submitted and approved, infrastructure sizes may require adjustment to maintain appropriate level of service. A process for amending the MSS is included in Section 13.4 , differentiating between minor and major modifications to the servicing network and concept plan.
13.2 Property Requirements
Based on the preferred servicing plan presented in Sections 7.0, 8.0 and 9.0, the following off-site property requirements have been identified:
‹ A servicing easement will be required along the existing Hydro One corridor in the vicinity of the existing Cardinal Creek crossing. Discussions with Hydro One during the course of the development of the MSS suggest agreement in principle, subject to land transfer review upon receipt of detailed engineering drawings.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 135 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Therefore, as detailed designs are completed for the crossing of Cardinal Creek, on-going consultation with Hydro and RVCA will be required. ‹ A servicing easement will be required along the Hydro One corridor in the vicinity of Pond 1, for access roads and stormwater outlet. Similarly, a servicing easement will be required west of the major collector road, across the Hydro One corridor, for the proposed storm sewer destined to Pond 1. Discussions with Hydro One have been initiated regarding easements. Therefore, as detailed designs are completed for the crossing of Cardinal Creek, on-going consultation with Hydro and RVCA will be required. ‹ A servicing easement will be required within City-owned property south of the Hydro One corridor, between Cardinal Creek and the Trim Road Park and Ride, to accommodate the proposed sanitary connection to existing infrastructure (as per Drawing 12 ). ‹ A servicing easement will be required along the northwest corner of the existing City-owned Park and Ride, to accommodate the proposed sanitary connection to existing infrastructure (as per Drawing 12 ). Consultation is underway with the appropriate City of Ottawa staff. ‹ A servicing easement will be required for the watermain crossing under Cardinal Creek, north of the private property at 1001 Dairy Drive. The proposed watermain location is within City-owned lands. This watermain connection will also require a servicing easement running north-south on City-owned lands, to connect to Dairy Drive. ‹ A servicing easement will be required across the North Tributary, to support local watermain looping. Details of the crossing are to be developed during detailed design. ‹ A servicing easement will be required through the residential block southwest of the intersection of Old Montreal Road and the major collector road, for watermain looping. ‹ In addition, land will be transferred to the City for the stormwater management pond blocks and associated servicing and major flow easements to be identified as part of future Draft Plan of Subdivision approval processes. ‹ Additional easements would be required to support development within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Area lands south of the South Tributary. Detailed servicing design for these lands has not been completed as part of the MSS, and therefore the definition of easement requirements is to be deferred until such time as a detailed land use concept is prepared for these lands.
PAGE 136 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
13.3 Financial Implementation Plan – Development Charges
Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation is required to prepare a financial implementation plan and commit to providing the on-site and off-site servicing systems supported by the recommendations of this Master Servicing Study.
As such, an infrastructure assessment will be completed as a separate undertaking, to define the cost of municipal infrastructure that could be subject to development charges. Works eligible for development charges will include the following:
‹ Watermains greater than 400mm in diameter; and ‹ Sanitary sewers greater than 375mm.
Cost recovery and eligibility is detailed in the City of Ottawa Development Charge Background Study ( Stantec, March 2009).
13.4 Process for Amending the Master Servicing Study
As factors influencing the development of the site will change over time, the following process is recommended to be implemented to address any required amendments to the preferred servicing plans described in this report. The change process distinguishes between minor and major changes. A substantive design change would require approval by Planning Committee and external agencies as necessary, and may necessitate the completion of an amendment to the MSS, whereas a minor change would not. Minor changes may be made at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals and incorporated into subdivision and/or site plan approvals.
13.4.1 Minor Changes
Minor design changes may be defined as those which do not appreciably change the expected net impacts or outcomes associated with the project. For example, median width, pathway connections, and underground infrastructure sizes, adjustments to the distribution of low and medium density residential areas, minor changes to the location and configuration of neighbourhood parks, minor changes to the residential mix, minor adjustments to stormwater management pond block size and location would be considered minor. Slight changes in alignment or facility footprints, which have the agreement of all affected landowners, would also be considered as minor.
All affected landowners and appropriate stakeholders will be provided details of the modification. The majority of such changes could likely be dealt with during the detailed design phase and would remain the responsibility of the proponent to ensure that all relevant issues are taken into account.
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 137 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
13.4.2 Major Changes
Major changes may be defined as those which change the intent of the EAs or appreciably change the expected net impacts or outcomes associated with the project. An example of a major change would result from a proposed shift in a preferred design alignment or configuration which would warrant changes in mitigation to the number of storm ponds, the relocation of school and community park sites, or a major change to Cardinal Creek and related tributaries. In this case, the MSS should be updated to ensure that the preferred servicing plan remains valid in comparison to all relevant alternatives.
If the proposed modification is major the recommendations and conclusions associated with the change would require updating. An addendum to the Master Plans may be required to document the change, identify the associated impacts and mitigation measures and allow related concerns to be addressed and reviewed by the appropriate stakeholders. Major changes will be subject to approval by Planning Committee and external agencies as required.
PAGE 138 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
14.0 CONCLUSION
Tamarack (Queen Street) Corporation has retained David Schaeffer Engineering Ltd. (DSEL) to prepare a Master Servicing Study in support of their Official Plan Amendment application to support the development of Cardinal Creek Village within a portion of the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area in the City of Ottawa. The MSS includes the following contributions: stormwater management analysis provided by J.F. Sabourin and Associates Inc., watermain analysis provided by Veritec Consulting Inc. , geomorphology and erosion analysis provided by Parish Geomorphic Ltd., geotechnical and hydrogeological investigations completed by Paterson Group Inc., natural environment investigations completed by Muncaster Environmental, water budget analysis provided by Palmer Environmental Consulting Group Inc. , karst investigations prepared by Worthington Groundwater, conceptual conveyance ditch design prepared by Coldwater Consulting Ltd ., and environmental assessment led by Delcan Corporation.
The preceding Master Servicing Study has been prepared to provide sufficient detail to support Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act approval to proceed with the planned development, in accordance with the servicing recommendations made herein.
The principal conclusions of this study are as follows: 1) The City of Ottawa, RVCA, other agencies, and the public have been consulted concerning the proposed development plan. 2) Sufficient background research and analysis have been completed to support the proposed development plan, including a detailed inventory of existing environmental conditions. 3) Various concept plans have been created and evaluated using environmental assessment principles. 4) A preferred development concept plan has been selected for the proposed development, based on refinements recommended as part of the consultation program. 5) The loss of the North Tributary headwater (upstream of the environmental protection zone) associated with the preferred development concept is to be mitigated. The required rehabilitation/compensation works will be developed in consultation with the RVCA as part of future subdivision approval processes. 6) Expanding the existing municipal wastewater and water infrastructure is the preferred servicing solution for Cardinal Creek Village, as it supports the planned development of a mixed-use community, is consistent with provincial and municipal policies for urban development, and minimizes negative environmental impacts. 7) A municipal water servicing approach has been presented, meeting the City of Ottawa design guidelines for development. Water supply is to be provided by:
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 139 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
• A 1E feedermain extending from an existing feedermain west of the site, running through City and Hydro One property, and crossing over Cardinal Creek via the existing Hydro One corridor culvert; • A 2E feedermain extending north on Trim Road from the intersection at Old Montreal Road, then extending east along Dairy Drive, north within City-owned lands (west of 1001 Dairy Drive), and east within City- owned lands (north of 1001 Dairy Drive) before crossing under Cardinal Creek via trenchless watermain construction; and • 1E and 2E feedermains crossing Cardinal Creek at Old Montreal Road, within the road right-of-way. 8) A proposed gravity sewer conveyance system has been designed in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines. The Trim Road Collector sanitary sewer is the identified municipal wastewater outlet for the site, and an analysis of the existing infrastructure indicates that there will be sufficient capacity in the existing municipal sanitary system to support the development of Cardinal Creek Village. 9) A stormwater management system has been established in accordance with City of Ottawa design guidelines - incorporating a minor and major system treatment train conveyance approach and the following three end-of-pipe treatment facilities: one stormwater management wet pond discharging to the Ottawa River (to provide quality control), one stormwater management wet pond discharging to the South Tributary (to provide erosion, quality, and quantity control), and one oil and grit separator unit discharging to the North Tributary (to provide quality control). 10) A cut-off swale is proposed along the eastern edge of the Concept Plan area, north of Old Montreal Road, in order to accommodate existing drainage from residential areas east of Ted Kelly Lane. 11) The outlet for Pond 1 consists of an existing 1.5 m wide x 1.15 m high and 37 m long concrete box culvert that will convey the pond outflows and outflows from the proposed cut-off swale underneath OR 174 to the Ottawa River. This culvert is large enough to accommodate outflows for earlier phases of development, before full build-out of Cardinal Creek Village. However, under ultimate conditions, a second culvert under OR 174, such as a 2.4 m wide x 1.5 m high concrete box culvert, is recommended to be installed. 12) The oil and grit separator unit has been identified to divert combined treated weeping tile flows and storm flows up to the 2-year design storm event from 10.12 ha of the proposed developed lands to the North Tributary, to compensate for reductions in stream flow due to the closing of the portion of the North Tributary upstream of the environmental protection zone and due to drainage catchment diversion and urbanization. 13) Groundwater baseflow in the South Tributary is primarily supported by groundwater discharge linked to Important Recharge Areas external to the
PAGE 140 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
subject lands or Important Recharge Areas that are to be maintained as open space within the preferred development concept plan. Therefore, no groundwater baseflow compensation is required for the South Tributary under post- development conditions. The proposed stormwater management pond discharging to the South Tributary will contribute stormwater runoff to support the natural stream flow regime. 14) An erosion analysis of the proposed stormwater management system shows that it will effectively maintain a level of stream erosion such that the South Tributary and Cardinal Creek can continue to fulfill normal functions. 15) A site grading scheme has been developed to minimize earthworks and provide major system conveyance to the receiving watercourses (Cardinal Creek, the North and South Tributaries, and the Ottawa River). Where proposed roadway grades exceed the permissible grade raise recommendations, a settlement surcharge program can be implemented to ensure long-term settlements are minimal (as per the companion July 2013 Geotechnical Report prepared by Paterson Group). 16) A slope reinstatement program is recommended at one location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, south of the Hydro One corridor, where an existing slope failure has occurred. It is recommended that the lower portion of the slope face be re- shaped to improve overall slope stability of the slope at this location. In addition, slope reshaping is proposed on the eastern bank of the Cardinal Creek ravine where it intersects with the Hydro One embankment, in order to support the proposed watermain and sanitary infrastructure. The proposed works will require RVCA review and approval as part of detailed design, and may require design changes to address environmental impacts. 17) The Important Recharge Areas identified in the appended Site Specific Water Budget Report (PECG, June 2013) have been generally retained as undisturbed open space. However, 0.96 hectares of development is proposed within the Bobcaygeon Formation, and 11.53 hectares of development is proposed within the Gull River Formation. The introduction of impervious surfaces in these Important Recharge Areas and across the remainder of the site is expected to reduce infiltration from pre-development levels. However, it is not essential to maintain pre-development infiltration levels over the site, as groundwater recharge contributes to surface discharge in the Ottawa River, Cardinal Creek, and the Cardinal Creek tributaries. Of these watercourses, the natural flow regime is to be maintained within the North and South Tributaries via the stormwater management plan for the site, and Cardinal Creek and the Ottawa River are supported by large drainage areas and will therefore not suffer adverse effects due to a minor reduction in groundwater baseflow caused by the proposed development. 18) A baseline groundwater geochemistry and history of static water levels is recommended to be undertaken for all existing water wells that are to remain in
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 141 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
use both within the study limits and within a proposed groundwater monitoring area identified in the companion Hydrogeology Report (Paterson Group, June 2013). A Terms of Reference for the monitoring study is to be prepared subject to City of Ottawa approval, and is to be implemented 12 months prior to the start of construction within 500m of existing wells. Where permanent groundwater interference has been demonstrated to have occurred in the wells included in the monitoring program and where resolution of groundwater interference/degradation is sought by the surrounding landowners under the Ontario Water Resources Act, mitigation of the impacts must be carried out by the developer. Possible measurable impacts would likely be in the form of lowered well yield and impairment of the quality of the raw groundwater. The mitigation measures focus on connecting the affected properties to the municipal drinking water systems at the developer’s expense. 19) Other proposed mitigation and monitoring programs and commitments to future work have been established, based on predicted environmental effects. 20) Sufficient capacity is provided in both the proposed sanitary system and water supply network to service the lands excluded from the OPA (south of the South Tributary within the Area 11 Urban Expansion Study Area) in the future. Storm water management for the excluded lands would be entirely self- contained south of the South Tributary. 21) Utility companies have been contacted to establish that the proposed site is immediately serviceable. 22) Multiple servicing easements will be required along the existing Hydro One corridor in order to support the proposed sanitary, water, and storm servicing plans. As such, ongoing consultation and submission of land transfer applications is recommended. 23) Similarily, servicing easements are to be coordinated with the City of Ottawa as designs progress for the proposed sanitary, water, and storm servicing plans. 24) Depending on the forthcoming recommendations from the Greater Cardinal Creek Subwatershed Study , erosion mitigation measures may be required in Cardinal Creek in the future by others.
Through the MSS, the following infrastructure projects have been identified and planned in accordance with the integration provisions of the Municipal Engineers Association’s Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (June 2000, as amended in 2011):
Water Supply Projects:
‹ Extend a 1E Pressure Zone feedermain to site within a Hydro One corridor and municipal property, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Extend a 2E Pressure Zone feedermain from Trim Road at Old Montreal Road to site (via Trim Road right-of-way, Dairy Drive right-of-way, and municipal
PAGE 142 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
property), including the use of trenchless technology for crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Extend 1E and 2E watermains within the proposed Old Montreal Road right-of- way, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule A+). ‹ Establish an on-site water distribution network and all works necessary to connect the system to the identified feedermains (Schedule B).
Sanitary Servicing Projects:
‹ Establish a sanitary trunk sewer within a Hydro One corridor and municipal property to connect to the existing Trim Road collector sewer, including crossing of Cardinal Creek (Schedule B). ‹ Establish a sewage collection system on-site and all works necessary to connect to the identified trunk sanitary sewer (Schedule B).
Stormwater Management Projects:
‹ Construct Stormwater Management Pond # 1 and associated storm sewers, culverts, and ditches, including construction of a culvert under OR 174 (Schedule B). ‹ Construct oil and grit separator unit and associated storm sewers (Schedule B). ‹ Construct Stormwater Management Pond # 2 and associated storm sewers (Schedule B). ‹ Construct ditch to convey drainage from external areas (Schedule B).
Slope Stability Works:
‹ Slope reinstatement program at one location in the Cardinal Creek ravine, south of the Hydro One corridor, where an existing slope failure has occurred (Schedule A).
Development may proceed in accordance with the preferred servicing recommendations presented in this study, following the appropriate development approvals process in accordance with the Planning Act .
DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. PAGE 143 © DSEL MASTER SERVICING STUDY TAMARACK (QUEEN STREET) CORPORATION CARDINAL CREEK VILLAGE
JULY 2013
Prepared by,
David Schaeffer Engineering Ltd.
Per: Matt Wingate, P.Eng. Per: Steve Pichette, P.Eng.
Per: Laura Maxwell, B.Sc. (Civil), M.Pl
© DSEL Z:\Projects\11-513 Cardinal Village Community\B_Design\B3_Reports\B3-2_Servicing (DSEL)\2013-07-17_MSS_Rev3\MSS-Rev3- 2013-07-16.docx
PAGE 144 DAVID SCHAEFFER ENGINEERING LTD. © DSEL