Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
1.1 Background
Canada and the United States. More than 16 million cars, trucks and
per cent of Canada-United States truck trade. In 2001 alone, this two-
and American trade and tourism increase through the years, projected
additional border crossing which will have the capacity to handle the
currently spans across the Detroit River and links up Detroit and Windsor
before a driver can reach the border crossing they need to cross several
street lights within the city core. This causes large traffic jams and
impede on the overall traffic ease of the city. This is why the new border
stages such that the traffic flow matches the facility capacity. Once the
Border Crossing Plaza site. This report will contain two parts: Firstly, a
report .In addition to that the technical report should follow best
management guideline.
The western edge of the proposed site runs along the Detroit River. The
existing site terrain inclines towards the South Eastern edge of the
proposed site. At the same time, it is fairly flat; the rough elevation
proposed site borders and area. The calculations and design specifications
will be based on those drawings. The map below was obtained from
Google EarthTM.
Figure 2.1 - Plaza Site Outlined
Since the percentage of the paved road is very small when compared to
the landscape area, the resulting runoff coefficient for the existing
condition is assumed to be cultivated land. So C = 0.34 and 0.47 for 5
Fennie
does not cause excess rainwater to fall into neighboring properties and
water after construction because the run off coefficient for the soil would
increase. The runoff coefficient of asphalt is 0.90, this means that during
a typical storm, 10% of the water on the asphalt will be absorbed by the
ground, 90% of the water would need to be diverted elsewhere.
Therefore, the post development coefficient will be higher than the pre-
crossing plaza site and its surrounding area. This map was obtained from
figure 3.03 is based on the natural flow path of water and existence of
neighboring land has a slope facing the border crossing site, it will be
storm water management pond exists in front of the area with a slope
facing the border crossing plaza site, the land will not be considered part
land that is connected to a piece of land which will lead into the border
Figure 3.04 outlines smaller drainage areas. These areas are determined
based on the flow path of rainwater. Figure 3.04 also outlines the existing
flow path of water with arrows. By following Figure 3.04 we see that
water from total drainage area will naturally flow into the Detroit River.
Figure 2.04: Existing flow path of water
The objective of this project is to create a storm water management
system with a 100 year storm capacity. Water will need to be routed
site. Figure 3.05 outlines how the drainage areas will be divided:
Main Drainage Area A: This area is the most important drainage area
of this project. The rainwater that lands on this area will need to be
processed for quality and quantity volumes for up to a 100 year storm. As
discussed in the Preliminary report, this area will include a main channel
which will divert all rain water into the main wet ponds. The ponds the
the drainage areas outside the project area. The Runoff from these areas
Water Quality:
is also connected two major highways. This means that chemical spills
lead and PCB’s. During a rainfall, theses chemicals can make their way
into the leachate and contaminate the water system i.e: the Detroit
River. This will ultimately endanger the ecosystem and drinking water
source.
Sediment Control:
Water is a highly abrasive medium and with enough time, water will
earth under the roads can compromise the structural integrity of any
and landslides. For the safety of drivers these large driving surfaces
North and the East sides of the site may contain large amounts of
can cause sewers to be filled with sediment and destroy fish habitat in
the river.
Road Safety:
drained such that driving surfaces are un-slippery and safe enough to
drive on. In addition to that, we want to make sure that during a heavy
100 year rainfall, water is properly diverted from driving surfaces and
Plaza requires quality, quantity and erosion controls for the peak flows
from the Plaza, as the increase in impervious area will increase the
overall peak flows from the site, as well as the overall pollutant
event.
Based on the results and the site conditions, the solutions retained
were storage SWMP’s and oil/grit separators. The storage SWMP’s will
provide quality treatment, erosion control and quantity control for the
the green spaces south of the proposed plaza and a linear open
channel. The pond system provides closer outlets for the sewer
flow from one pond to the other. The pond system would control the
with the Plaza, a shut off valve or alternative damming procedure will
5 Design
management structures built within the border crossing plaza site. The
design portion be split into two parts the design of Storm water management
system within the Main Drainage Area A and the design of the storm water
and C.
From the conceptual report, the BMP’s of our storm water management
system would include ponds and a large channel leading up to the pond.
The quality and quantity pond would be located at the most western
2. Water has a much shorter distance to flow into the Detroit River if
along the southern edge of the site. The channel will be in this
configuration because:
1. The channel will be at the bottom of the site slope in such a way that
excess rainwater is forced to flow towards channel and does not pool
2. It will run along the greatest length of the site, catching a majority of
3. The border crossing plaza has the greatest free space allocation along
Pre-development conditions:
that the site is highly flat. The existing elevation difference between the
highest and lowest part of our channel is 2.72m over a 1110m span. The
MOE 2003 storm water management guideline outlines that grass swales are
ideal storm water management structures for flat terrain. Thus the main
channel leading up to the pond will be a grassed swale. Grass swales also
entrance to the projected pond entrance along the southern edge of the site.
The elevation data was obtained from the city of Windsor corporation
website.
The design constraints of the proposed site are mainly the flatness and
ground water table elevation. Figure 5.05 describes the design constraints of
the channel. The highest elevation at the eastern swale entrance is 178.72m.
The current ground level of the pond entrance is 176.00m. This point is
highly important, as it will determine the level at which the Main Swale will
enter the pond. The Detroit River Website measured that the highest water
level of the ground water table to be 3m below ground level. The MOE
guideline also states that the storm water management pond must be built
0.50m above the ground water table to prevent ground water intrusion.
Therefore the lowest point of the wet pond is 173.50m. Through shear
design. Thus the channel floor cannot be lower than 175.75m. The Main
Drainage Swale and Wet Pond design will be based upon the constraints
outlined above.
Figure 5.05: Existing main channel elevation profile
5.2.1. By looking at Figure 5.05 the height available for between the
swale floor at the pond entrance and the ground level of the most
eastern point of the swale is 2.98m. The MOE also states that a one foot
clearance between the 100 year water elevation of the swale and the
ground level above the swale is required. Thus, the swale design requires
that the sum of the 100 year water level of the swale and the elevation
the swale would not exceed 1m in depth for a 100 year storm and that
determine the water level of our channel for a 100 year storm. The water
V=kn*R23*S0.5
Q: 100 year Post Development flow m3/s. For our site area it is
9.3305m3/s
channels
A: MOE 2003 STMWTR Guideline specifies that the swale will need a
A=(B+Zy)y
specifies 6m. However due to the fact that the site is very flat we will use
a swale base of 7m
Z is defined as the horizontal distance per meter of the side slope MOE
y is the height and water level of the trapezoid for a 100 year storm it is
Unknown: Y
2.5:1m Side
Slope
6m Base (MOE
2003)
R=(B+Zyy/(B+2*y1+Z20.5)^(23)
S: Channel Slope, after optimization the best slope to use given the site
constraints is 0.125%. This is a very minor slope however given the water
table depth, site elevation and resulted channel depth this value is the
most optimal.
Now that all values are defined we solve for y in the following equation:
0=B+ZyyB+ZyyB+2*y1+Z20.523-Q*n/(1.49*S0.5)
Due to the fact we will be designing many channel in this project we have
Y5MDS=0.67m
Now that the water level is found, figure 3.07 outlines the profile view of
the section
sectional dimensions:
Secondary Channels:
In this design section we will consider the runoff predicted to enter our site
from neighboring lands. Figure 3.04 and 3.05 demonstrate that there is a
considerable amount of runoff that will find itself onto our site due to the pre
existing drainage pattern. Because we cannot interfere with the natural
drainage pattern this area and so we must let the water pass through our
site. However there are no quality requirements, meaning that water does
not need to be processed to meet provincial quality standards. So we will
simply route the water flow from surrounding sites directly into the river
because we have assumed that 3. 06 Secondary Channels:
In this design section we will consider the runoff predicted to enter our site from
neighboring lands. Figure 3.04 and 3.05 demonstrate that there is a considerable
amount of runoff that will find itself onto our site due to the pre existing drainage
pattern. Because we cannot interfere with the natural drainage pattern this area
and so we must let the water pass through our site. However there are no quality
requirements, meaning that water does not need to be processed by us to meet
provincial quality standards. So we will simply route the water flow from
surrounding sites directly into the Detroit River because we have assumed that it is
the neighbor’s responsibility to process their own water for quality.
In Figure 3.10 we see that the total drainage area has been split into 3 main areas:
The Plaza site area, The Major Secondary Drainage Area and the Minor Secondary
Drainage. Ultimately the water from outlined secondary drainage area will be routed
directly into the river through the large Major and Minor Drainage Swale (MMDS).
The Minor Drainage Swale (MinDS) will have a slope of 0.20% and lead directly in to
the MMDS. The Major Drainage Swale (MajDS) will have two design components the
design of the grassed Major Drainage Swale leading up to the Major which will have
a 0.02% slope towards the culvert entrance, and the Major Drainage Culvert
(MajDC) which will lead directly into the MMDS.In design of the following 4 channels
we are using a 100year peak flos as the guiding design parameter.
Minor Drainage
Swale (MinDS)
Flow
Direction
Major drainage
Culvert (MajDC:
under the road)
Major Drainage
Swale
Border Plaza Drainage (MajDS)
Area
The MinDS will route all the excess rainwater from Minor Secondary Drainage area
to MMDS. The Minor Secondary drainage area was determined to be 77642m2, with
15695m2 paved with concrete (C=0.95) and 619500m2 with grass (C=0.47). The
intensity of a 100 year storm is 75mm/h for 35 minutes. By using Rational method
(Q=CiA) the resulting flow is 2.3107m3/s. by using approached outlined in Section 3.
05.03 inputs in the Manning’s equation are as follows: Q=2.3107m3/s, n=0.03,
S=0.2%,Z=2.5m=B=4m. After applying Manning’s formula, we solve for y=0.43m
The MajDS will route all the excess rainwater from Major Secondary Drainage area
to MMDS.The Major Secondary drainage area was determined to be 434983m2, with
109285m2 paved with concrete (C=0.95) and 325698m2 with grass (C=0.47). The
intensity of a 100 year storm is 75mm/h for 35 minutes. By using Rationnal method
(Q=CiA) the resulting flow is 5.3521m3/s. by using approached outlined in Section 3.
05.03 inputs in the Mannings equation are as follows: Q=5.3521m3/s, n=0.03,
S=0.2%,Z=2.5m=B=6m. After applying Manning’s formula, we solve for y=0.56m
The Culvert will route all the excess rainwater from MajDS to the MMDS. The culvert
will be designed to go underneath the border crossing plaza’s roads and buildings it
will be incased in reinforced concrete with a strength able to sustain the weight of
the largest truck multiplied by a safety factor of 3. The culvert will be trapezoidal as
all of our other channels are trapezoidal: The inputs of the Manning’s equation are
as follows: Q=5.3521m3/s, n=0.017 (for Sewer Concrete), S=0.2%,Z=2.5m=B=6m.
After applying Manning’s formula, we solve for y=0.40m
The Swale will route all the excess rainwater from surrounding sites to the Detroit
River. The flow value is simply the sum of the 100 peak flow for MinDS and the
MajDS which is Q=7.6628m3/s. The culvert will be trapezoidal as all of our other
channels are trapezoidal: The rest of the inputs of the Manning’s equation are as
follows:, n=0.03 (for Grass) , S=0.2%,Z=2.5m=B=6m. After applying Manning’s
formula, we solve for y=0.68m
In Figure 3.10 we see that the total drainage area has been split into 3
main areas: Our site are, The Major Secondary Drainage Area and the
Minor Drainage
Swale
Major drainage
Culvert (under the
road)
10
20
30
40
4.1
Rational method was used in determining for the peak flows of both
Qpeak = C*i*A
C - runoff coefficient
The drainage area to be used in the design should include all those
areas which will reasonable or naturally drain to the storm system. The
area term in the Rational Method formula represents the total area
tributary under consideration. For this proposed site, the drainage area
developed flows are C = 0.34 for 5 year event, and C = 0.47 for 100
Runoff Coefficient
Description Area (m2) Area (ha)
5 year 100 year
Under the requirement of City of Windsor, 5-year and 100 year storm
the time required for flow to reach the pond from the most remote part
Tc = L / (3600 * V)
where Tc - time of concentration (hrs)
V – velocity (ft/s)
The velocity can be estimated by knowing the land use and the slope
4.3.1Design Criteria
The rational method was used in the determining pre- and post-
storage volumes.
40
4.1
The tributary area of the pond will be 63.9 hectares of which 33.2
900mm diameter piped splitter storm sewer and via an overland flow
placed within the 875mm outlet pipe. The pond bottom will be graded
events. The pond invert (174.7 m) is above the level of the local water
table (173.5 m), and the side slope gradient has been reduced to 4:1 to
The proposed pond was calculated into the 5 and 100 year post-
flows. The pre-developed flows are 2.7759 m3/s and 6.2564 m3/s for 5
year and 100 year storm events respectively with an existing runoff
coefficient of 0.34 for 5 year and 0.47 for 100 year storm events and a
4.4675 m3/s and 9.3305 m3/s for 5 year and 100 year storm events
Summary
Storm Storage Volume (m3) Peak Flows (m3/s)
Events Pre- Post-
Pre-development development development
Post-development
Items
5 yr 5 yr 4783.6521
100 yr 52.7759
yr 4.4675
100 yr
100
Area yr
(ha) 8693.129
63.8956 63.8956 6.2564
63.8956 9.3305
63.8956
Runoff
0.34 0.47 0.5472 0.7009
Coefficient
The maximum water level during the 1:100 storm event will be
4.1Design Criteria
Based on the above information, and with reference to Table 3.2 in the
Data Collection
The data information was gathered from MNR, DRIC draft environmental
The subsurface conditions in the Windsor area are characterized by flat-lying soils
including:
Beneath the existing pavement structures, topsoil and / or surficial fill materials,
granular materials consisting of sand and gravel, sands and silty sands were
surface in the clayey silt and silty clay materials. The silty clay, clayey silt, sand
and gravel and sands are considered to be slightly erodible and the silty sands are
Qpost = Cpost * I * A
Flow
Post-
development
Peak Flow, Qpost
Storage
Pre-
Required,
development
S
Peak Flow, Qpre
Time
Tbase = 2tc or 2.67 tc
Pre-development (100 years)
Area : 52.97 ha
Coefficient: 0.5 (assumption)
Tc : 10 mins
Intensity: 161.5 mm/hr
Qpre100 = 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.5 * 161.5 = 11.88 m3 /sec
5 years storm
Area : 52.97 ha
Coefficient: 0.5 (assumption)
Tc : 10 mins
Intensity: 102.8 mm/hr
Qpre5 = 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.5 * 102.8 = 7.563 m3 /sec
Qpost5= 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.6851 * 102.8 = 10.363 m3/sec
Orifice
Qo = c * A * sqrt(2 * g * H)
The smallest diameter orifice to ensure that clogging does not occur in a
stormwater system is 75 mm. The preferred minimum orifice size is 100mm where
the effects of freezing are a concern. 5 year storm was used to control the size of
the orifice. Therefore,
Qo = Qpre5
Pond Design
Water table: 3 m below surface
Length to width ratio: 4 to 1
Permanent Pool Depth: Max. depth 2.5m mean depth: 1 – 2 m
Active Storage Depth: Water Quality and erosion control max 1.0m total
2m
Figure 5.03: Ground water table is at 173.00m. The MOE 2003 guideline
specifies that a 0.50m clearance is required between the ground water table
and the pond floor. The pond floor is thus at an elevation of 173.50m. The
175.00m elevation was determined as the lowest channel floor elevation since
the pond water surface must be lower than the swale floor. The predevelopment
ground elevations the pond is 176.00m.The current ground conditions at the
swale entrance is 178.72m