addendum no. 7 tender call no. 256-2015 for the ... · q11. in section 21 07 00; page #1 we are...

Michael Pacholok Director

Purchasing and Materials Management Division City Hall, 18th Floor, West Tower 100 Queen Street West Toronto, Ontario M5H 2N2

Joanne Kehoe Manager Construction Services

September 25, 2015 Via Internet Posting – 56 pages

ADDENDUM NO. 7

TENDER CALL NO. 256-2015

FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF EMS MULTI-FUNCTION STATION

AT 1300 WILSON AVENUE, TORONTO.

CLOSING DATE: OCTOBER 2, 2015 12:00 NOON (LOCAL TIME)

Please refer to the above Request for Tender (RFT) document in your possession and be advised of the

information as outlined below:

1. Questions & Answers:

See attached for questions & answers for this project.

2. Specifications and Drawings:

See attached for "Architectural Addendum 4" with the revised Specifications and drawings & added

information.

The deadline for questions is September 29, 2015 at 12:00 p.m.

Should you have any questions regarding this addendum, please contact Brenda Duffley at email:

[email protected] or fax (416) 397-7779.

Please attach this addendum to your Request for Tender document and be governed accordingly. Bidders must

acknowledge receipt of all addenda on the space provided on the Tender Call Cover Page as per the Process

Terms and Conditions, Section 1, Item 8 - Addenda, of the Tender Call document. All other aspects of the

Tender remain the same.

Yours truly,

Joanne Kehoe

Manager, Construction Services

Purchasing & Materials Management

1 of 56

mailto:[email protected]

Architectural Addendum 4 Summary:

Bidder’s questions by topic (9 Pages): Adjacent property clarifications, GC experience clarifications, civil

drawings clarifications, panel and cladding clarifications, M/E clarifications, alternate product

clarifications, cash allowance clarifications, architectural clarifications, site clarifications, spec

clarifications.

Attached drawings: A1.3, ADD 25, ADD 26, ADD27, ADD 28, ADD 29, ADD 30, CV-1, CV-2, CV-3.

Attached Documents: New Spec Section 08 33 30 Rolling Fire Doors (2 Pages), Stormwater Management Report (33 Pages)

2 of 56

22 September, 2015 1312 City of Toronto ARCHITECTURAL ADDENDUM NUMBER 04 Toronto EMS Multi - Function Station Page 1 of 9

Thomas Brown Architects Inc

Bidder Questions: Q01. Accordingly to the tender documents, Contractor will require encroachment permit for

neighborhood property. Could you please confirm if the City has the encroachment permit? If there is no permit, could you please confirm that it will be part of contingency allowance? If the encroachment will not be permitted, the bidders will assume that the Owner will be responsible for design modification.

A01. The city owns the adjoining property, but the adjacent roadway access must be maintained.

Q02. Shoring system as noted on the drawings is close to property line. could you please advise if

there is any encroachment agreement with neighbouring property, as tie back for the shoring system may needed to be installed and may extend to other property.

A02. No shoring is to disrupt the adjacent land – it is anticipated that it will be a Raker

System.

Q03. We have looked through the project details and have roughly calculated the project value

which is about $7.0M. In the tender document under mandatory requirements, it requires the GC to have project experience of over $9.0. We feel this requirement to be exorbitant and will narrow down GC's opportunity to participate in the bid competition. Most of the Fire stations with paramedic stations we had constructed in the past years were within $4M to $5M range. We request to your revise this requirement to include projects with experience of over $3.0M

A03. Owner will accept any new building project over $9.0 M.

Q04. Is it possible for you to kindly provide clarification on the requirements. Would the criteria of

three projects completed each over $ 9 million with fire station and/or EMS station experience suffice. Or is the City of Toronto insistent on the criteria posted below and what is considered new construction?

A04. Owner will accept any new building project over $9.0 M.

Q05. Our Estimating Dept. just advised that Addendum No. 3 has the cover page only indicating

the 3 CV drawings, but not the actual drawings. -our earlier question was: There are no Civil Drawings on the cd (CV-1, CV-2, CV-3).

A05. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum.

Q06. Civil Work Drawings CV-1, CV-2 & CV-3 and Energy System Drawings GHX-1 & GHX-2 are

missing from the drawings set. Can you please add this drawings in tender documents?

A06. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum. Drawings GHX-1 and GHX-2 were included in the tender set.

3 of 56

1312 22 September, 2015 ARCHITECTURAL ADDENDUM NUMBER 04 City of Toronto Page 2 of 9 Toronto EMS Multi - Function Station

Thomas Brown Architects Inc.

Q07. Please provide site services drawings with water, sanitary sewer, storm sever, and gas lines.

A07. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3, and Functinal Servicing and Stormwater Management Report attached in this addendum.

Q08. On drawing A0.1, it shows a list of CIVIL DRAWINGS. But we could not find any civil

drawings (CV1/2/3). Could you please advise?

A08. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum.

Q09. Specifications calls for two colours and on drawings all cladding is tagged as one. Please

confirm what is correct and what colour(s) to include.

A09. Two colours are to be provided under the scope of the contract. Both colours of the same series, final colour selection and locations to be determined.

Q10. Due to material limitations new joints have to be introduced, please advise how to divide

large panels.

A10. Configuration and joints of panels reflect design intent. If additional joints are required advise the consultant through shop drawings.

Q11. In section 21 07 00; page #1 we are told to insulate the Fresh Air and the Heat Pumps supply

air ductwork, however on page 4 of the same section (duct Insulation) those areas are not mentioned. Please Clarify what is to be done. Please clarify.

A11. Regarding 21 07 00, there is no insulation requirement for fresh air ductwork, it is

tempered to room temperature in the heat recovery unit. Also there is no insulation required for the heat pump ductwork since it is sound lined as per 23 31 00 item 3.1.21.

Q12. There is no information on Legend for the "T" beside the receptacle represent. Please clarify. A12. The note being referred to denotes CSA 5-20A receptacle. Q13. There is no information on Legend for the receptacle with outside shaded represent. Please

clarify. A13. The note being referred to denotes receptacle with isolated ground. Q14. There is no information on Legend for the Wall Mnt. $OS2. Please clarify. A14. The note being referred to denotes line voltage Infrared occupancy sensor with two

relay, Wattstopper #PW-200.

Q15. Can you please confirm if there is any security work included in this bid.

A15. Installation of security systems is covered under cash allowance. Refer to

Architectural Addendum 3 under Owner/Architect Changes Section 2.1.2. Please note that supply and installation of conduit and boxes is covered under division 16. Refer to tender drawings and specifications to determine relevant scope of work.

4 of 56



Q16. On the spec sheets, section 11 24 19 Page 2 for Built-in Vacuum Cleaning Equipment under

Part 2 - Products, Section 2.3, #3 it says "refer to drawings for anticipated number of outlets and anticipated locations". We couldn't find anything on the drawings

A16. There will be a total of 10 vacuum outlets required. 4 required on the ground floor

located between gridlines 1 and 5 and A and E. 6 required on the second floor, locations to be determined.

Q17. This is to inquire if your Tenders for various fire-stations require any fire-rated glass, and if

you will consider KERALITE as an approved alternate. A17. Refer to Specification Section 00 43 37 Bidder’s Proposed Alternate Bid Form

Supplement for instructions on requesting alternative products. Q18. Collins Sales also represents Innovative Technology for a full line of surge protection

products. I have attached the cut sheets for your viewing and seeking your assistance to be considered for this projects and others in the future for surge protection applications.

A18. Refer to Specification Section 00 43 37 Bidder’s Proposed Alternate Bid Form

Supplement for instructions on requesting alternative products. Q19. Please find attached Owens Corning product equivalency request for acoustic batt insulation

on the project Wilson EMS Multifunction Station. If there are any further questions about the request or products contained within please do not hesitate to contact me.

A19. Refer to Specification Section 00 43 37 Bidder’s Proposed Alternate Bid Form

Supplement for instructions on requesting alternative products.

Q20. What is the name of the preferred subcontractor responsible for the Direct Geo-Exchange Ground Heat Exchanger?

A20. There is no preferred subcontractor. Q21. Curtain wall specifications. A21. Refer to spec section 08 41 00.

Q22. In Specs 03 30 00, there seems to be a reference to Specs 03 20 00, however there is no

such section provided. Please clarify. A22. Refer to spec section 03 30 00 issued with Architectural Addendum 2.

Q23. We are on spec for Dinoflex Rubber Flooring, and the colour specified is Grey Ghost, which

is not one of the colours in our range. We do however have a colour very close to this one called Metro Line Grey, see photo attached. We also can have Dinoflex do a custom to match the colour possibly better if the Metro Line is not close enough. The other question for clarification would be are these mats to be Interlock (loose laid) or Square (glued down)?

5 of 56



A23. Refer to answer to Q.11 in Architectural Addendum 2. The mats are to be square (glued down).

Q24. Rhinotek would like to be added to the list of approved manufacturers for the Automatic Door

Operators. Please see the attached document from Rhinotek describing their product A24. The specification does not list specific manufacturers for automatic door operators.

Rhinotek is approved provided their manufactured product meets the requirements of the specification.

Q25. Please provide site plan with finished grades. Please include elevations for toe wall and concrete wall around planting in the center of the parking lot.

A25. All concrete toe walls shall be in accordance with OPSD-4066-01. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum.

Q26. Please let us know if concrete curb will require along toe wall type A and wall in the center of the parking lot.

A26. All concrete toe walls shall be in accordance with OPSD-4066-01. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum.

Q27. Note for toe wall A on drawing A1.1 has reference to drawing CV-1. Please provide the

drawings.

A27. Please refer to drawings CV-1, CV-2, CV-3 attached in this addendum. Q28. Could also please provide us with the location of the roof access ladder, as we cannot seem

to locate it on the drawings.

A28. Refer to drawings ADD26 and ADD27 attached in this addendum. Q29. As per sections 1&2/A5.1 there is no shelter fascia. Please advise what will be the substrate

for the soffit and how should ACM soffit be attached to the structure at the perimeter. Should we include ACM fascia at the shelter?

A29. Refer to drawing ADD25 attached in this addendum.

Q30. What will be the substrate for ACM soffit?

A30. Refer to drawing ADD25 attached in this addendum.

6 of 56



Q31. Specification 07 52 16 item 2.2.6.2 notes that the roof system shall meet a wind speed requirement of 90 mph. This is not applicable for the specified roof systems. Please clarify.

A31. In accordance with the Specifications, the successful proponent is to complete and submit FM Global Form 2688 “Application for Acceptance of Roofing System” for the roofing systems specified. In the event that the 90mph windspeed requirement cannot be met, the roofing systems shall meet the FM Class 60 rating as specified.

Q32. Specification 07 52 16 item 2.8.2 notes that an aluminized bitumen sheet vapour barrier. Please clarify where, if required - as it is not specified in the execution.

A32. Aluminized bitumen sheet is specified as an acceptable Air and Vapour Barrier that can be used in the roofing assemblies. It is one of three options listed as acceptable materials that can be used in the roofing assemblies. The intent of the Contract Documents is that all roofing assemblies that specify an air and or vapor barrier are installed using components that meet the requirements of the specifications.

Q33. Specification 07 52 16 item 2.2.6.2. notes that the roof system shall meet the requirement of FM Class 60. Is this an FM insured building (question 5 applies)? If so, please provide a RoofNAV number.

A33. In accordance with the Specifications, the successful proponent is to complete and submit FM Global Form 2688 “Application for Acceptance of Roofing System” for the roofing systems specified. A RoofNAV number is not available.

Q34. Exterior finish on wall X6 is missing.

A34. Refer to sketch ADD29 issued with this addendum.

Q35. Please confirm finish and assembly for wall P24 noted on elevation 3/A4.1 between lines 3 and 4.

A35. On Sheet A4.1 all references to P24 are to be revised to read ‘X25’. The ‘X25’ assembly is to be applied to the P24 walls that are at the interior side of the building envelope.

Q36. Please provide locations of louvres as shown in schedule issued with addendum 3. These

are not identified on architectural drawings and louvre sizes do not match HVAC drawings A36. Refer to sketch ADD 30 showing louver locations attached in this addendum.

Q37. Please provide drawings for precast bridge, or confirm that it will be supplied and installed by others.

A37. In accordance with the tender documents the design, supply, and installation of the precast concrete tee is part of the scope of contract. Refer to drawing A1.3 attached in this addendum for additional details.

7 of 56



Q38. Details of the drawings A1.2 are referred to Drawing A1.3 which seems to be missing from the drawings set, can you please provide the drawing to us

A38. Refer to drawing A1.3 attached in this addendum. Q39. Drawing A1.3 is missing.

A39. Refer to drawing A1.3 attached in this addendum. Q40. Drawing 1.3 seems to be missing from the architectural drawings, which should have on it the

bridge rails. We need drawing 1.3 with the bridge rails and details. If you could also kindly provide us with the location of the roof access ladder which is referred to in section 5500 part 3.

A40. Refer to drawing A1.3 and sketch ADD 27 (for roof access ladder locations) attached in

this addendum.

Q41. We cannot establish the height of the concrete retaining wall and the planter wall as the details referenced to architectural drawings but such details are not available in the architectural drawings as above question. Please advise.

A41. Refer to drawing A1.3 attached in this addendum.

Q42. Drawings refer to sections at A1.3, we cannot locate A1.3 in drawings


Q43. There is a reference to Drawing A1.3 in drawing A1.2 and A2.2. Drawing A1.3 is not in our documents package. Please advise.


Q44. On drawing A2.2 there is a note at the corner of gl F and ^ that points to detail 14/A1.3 but there is no drawing A1.3


Q45. Can you please have the consultant issue drawing A1.3 as referenced on drawing A1.2 for the sections of the retaining wall.


8 of 56



Q46. It is noted that we have to refer to L-1 for the planter wall details. However, such details are not available in L-1. Please advise.

A46. For planter wall details refer to drawing A1.3 attached in this addendum.

9 of 56



Owner/Architect Changes

1. General Instructions

.1 All Tenderers are hereby advised that the information contained in the Bidding Documents, dated and issued on July 29, 2015 for the above captioned project, has been amended to include the information contained within this document, and such information is to be covered in the tender submission and shall form part of the Contract.

2. Affected Sections of the Project Manual

1. Refer to Section 09 31 00 – TILING .1 All references to materials ‘by Olympia Tile’ shall be revised to read ‘by Olympia tile or approved equal’.

2. Refer to Section 01 50 00 – TEMPORARY WORK .1 Insert the following paragraph under Section 1.12.5:

“Provide a separate trailer for use of the Owners Representative: An office consisting of a 3660 mm x 6095 mm (12'x20') trailer, Atco or equal, with: two (2) full height, moveable partitions; adequate electric heating, air conditioning and lighting. Equip the offices with the following: one (1) new double pedestal executive lockable desk and one (1) new swivel chair; 1-folding table, 1-plan table, 1- plan rack, 1-4-drawer filing cabinet, 1- phone with 1-fax and 1-voice line, multi function printer, fax, canner, copier with 11 x 17 multi copy capacity. Provide and pay for telephone services consisting of one (1) business lines on one (1) key sets for local calls. The Owners Representative will determine the distribution of the equipment and telephone service within the trailer.”

3. Add to Project Manual Section 08 33 30 – ROLLING FIRE DOORS (Attached)

10 of 56



Affected Drawings

1. Refer to Drawing A2.4 – ROOF PLAN

.1 Add pavers and location of access ladders. Refer to attached drawings ADD27.

2. Refer to Drawing A7.2 – STAIRS/MISC METALS

.1 Insert to sheet roof access ladder detail. Refer to attached drawings ADD26.

.2 Insert to sheet section through roof access stair. Refer to attached drawings ADD28.

3. Refer to Drawing A6.3 – WALL SECTIONNS

.1 Insert to sheet aluminum panel fascia perimeter of canopy. Refer to attached drawings ADD25.

4. Add Drawing A1.3 – RETAINING WALL DETAILS (ATTACHED)

END OF DOCUMENT

11 of 56

12 of 56

INTEGRAL PREFINISHEDALUMINUM COPINGBY PREFINISHED METALCLADDING MANUFACTURER

LAP ROOF MEMBRANE ANDMEMBRANE FLASHING OVERPARAPET (TYP.)

PT WOOD FRAMING TO SUPPORT PA-1FASCIA AT PERIMETER OF CANOPY(TYP.)

PA-1

AP(S)

RDRD

1

ADD25

Sim

ScaleDateProject number

197 Spadina Avenue, Suite 200Toronto, ONM5T 2C8

Tel: 416‐364‐5710 ext [email protected]

As indicated

9/22/2015 9:17:03 PM

ALUMINUM PANEL FASCIA PERIMETER OF CANOPY

1312

TORONTO EMS MULTI-FUNCTION STATION

22/9/2015

ADD25Revision14 ADDENDUM #04 22/09/15

1 : 101PERIMETER FLASHING AT NORTH CANOPY

1 : 2002ROOF PLAN NORTH CANOPY

13 of 56

A700-5500-AL-1

IF H

EIG

HT

FRO

M A

CC

ESS

LEV

EL T

O H

IGH

EST

RU

NG

IS >

5m

AN

D <

9m

CA

GE

IS R

EQU

IRED

MAX

. 3m

(VER

T.)

400

710

360

200

1070

NOTES:ALL STEEL GALVANIZED.ALL LADDERS TO BE DESIGNED INACCORDANCE WITH OBC AND OHSAREQUIREMENTS AND REGULATIONS.REF. OHSA ENG DATA SHEET 2-04(CURRENT REVISION).CAGE REQUIRED IF LADDER EXCEEDS5m IN HEIGHT.

1245

874

1220

686 448

305

TYP.

32mm X 32mm STEELTUBING GUARD RAIL - TYP.

75mm X 45mm 3MM STEELTUBING STRINGER - TYP.

50mm X 6mm STEELVERTICAL STRAPS - TYP.

50mm X 6mm STEEL HOOPAND WALL BRACKET - TYP.

32mm X 32mm STEELTUBING RUNG - TYP.

2100

FR

OM

LEV

EL O

F AC

CES

SS

EE N

OTE

S FO

R L

ADD

ER

CAG

E R

EQU

IREM

ENTS

345

178

100

690

R 345R 44 5

* ENGINEERED STAMPED DRAWING REQUIRED PRIOR TO FABRICATION

TOP OF ROOF




1 : 25

9/22/2015 8:53:29 PM

ROOF ACCESS LADDER DETAIL

1312


22/09/15


1 A700 5500-AL-1 - EXTERIOR ROOF ACCESS LADDER DETAIL

14 of 56

DN

C

4

4

5

5

1

ADD28

SCUPPERREF A700 7000 SCUP-1

ROOF ACCESS LADDERFROM ROOF PLAN 7800 AFF TOTOP OF PARAPET 9500 AFFSEE DETAIL 1/ADD26

ROOF ACCESS LADDERFROM LOW ROOF 4500 AFF TOTOP OF PARAPET 8000 AFFSEE DETAIL 1/ADD26

PROVIDE PRECAST PAVER PATHTO ACCESS LADDER

ROOF ACCESS STAIRSEE DETAIL 1/ADD28

1735

975

940




1 : 75

9/22/2015 8:50:55 PM

Unnamed

1312


22/09/15


1 : 751ROOF PLAN SHOWING ACCESS LADDERS

15 of 56

SECOND FLOOR5600

u/s LOW ROOF DECK3800

C

LANDINGGALVANISED STEEL BAR GRATING

TYPE W-19-4 (SERRATED)

TYPICAL TREADGALVANISED STEEL BAR GRATING

TYPE W-19-4 (SERRATED) C/WCHECKERED PLATE NOSING

40MM OUTSIDE DIAMETER STEELPIPE HANDRAIL SUPPORTS

330

190

1525 1205

300

1125

375

1105

1105

915

NL1223B

PC1

NOTE: ALL STEEL GALVANIZED




1 : 25

9/22/2015 8:49:57 PM

SECTION THROUGH ROOF ACCESS STAIR

1312


22/09/15


1 : 251SECTION THROUGH STAIR

16 of 56

R - 38 (U -0.1)X6

PREFINISHED METAL FLASHINGMINERAL WOOL INSULATIONAIR BARRIEREXTERIOR SHEATHING150MM METAL STUDS @ 400mm o/cMINERAL WOOL INSULATIONVAPOUR BARRIER12.7MM TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD

CI - R15290MM

250




1 : 20

9/22/2015 10:56:45 PM

REVISED X6 EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY

1312


22/09/15


1 : 201REVISED X6

17 of 56

BCDE AF

L9L6 L7

B C D EA FL3

L4

L5

12345 3A6L1

L8L2




1 : 300

9/22/2015 10:57:49 PM

14 ADDENDUM #04LOUVER LOCATIONS ON BUIULDING ELEVATIONS

1312


22/09/15

ADD30

1 : 3001EAST ELEVATION LOUVER LOCATIONS

1 : 3002WEST ELEVATION LOUVER LOCATIONS

1 : 3003NORTH ELEVATION LOUVER LOCATIONS

18 of 56

Wilson EMS Multifunction Station Section 08 33 30 ROLLING FIRE DOORS Page 1

1 GENERAL 1.1 SUMMARY

.1 Furnished materials shall include all curtains, bottom bars, guides, brackets, hoods, operating mechanisms and any special features.

.2 Work not to be included includes design of, material for and preparation of door openings but not limited to structural or miscellaneous iron work, access panels, and finish painting.

1.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE

.1 All rolling fire doors shall be constructed in accordance with an approved testing agencies requirements and shall bear a 1-1/2 hour rating label.

2 PRODUCTS 2.1 MATERIALS

.1 The door curtain shall be constructed of interconnected strip steel slats conforming to ASTM A-653. The proper gauge of steel shall be chosen as follows: .1 22 gauge with a No. 5 (measuring 2-1/4” high by 5/8” deep) flat slat. .2 The finish on the door curtain shall consist of the following:

.1 Grade 40 steel, ASTM A-653 galvanized steel zinc coating

.2 Bonderized coating for prime coat adhesion

.3 Factory applied Thermosetting Powder Coating applied with a minimum thickness of 2 mils. The color shall be selected by the architect and shall be chosen from standard color chart.

.2 The bottom bar shall consist of two 1/8” steel angles mechanically joined together. The finish on the bottom bar shall be the same finish as indicated in the curtain section.

.3 The guides shall consist of 3 steel angles bolted together with 3/8” fasteners to form a channel for the curtain to travel. The wall angle portion shall be continuous and fastened to the surrounding structure with either minimum 1/2” fasteners or welds, both on 36” centers. The finish on the guide angles shall be the same finish as indicated in the curtain section.

.4 The brackets shall be constructed of steel not less than 1/4” thick and shall be bolted to the wall angle with minimum 1/2” fasteners. The finish on the brackets shall be the same finish as indicated in the curtain section.

.5 The barrel shall be steel tubing of not less than 4” in diameter. Oil tempered torsion springs shall be capable of correctly counter balancing the weight of the curtain and shall have both a main and an auxiliary spring. The barrel shall be designed to limit the maximum deflection to .03” per foot of opening width. The springs shall be adjusted by means of an exterior wheel. The barrel shall be unpainted.

.6 The hood shall be fabricated from 24 gauge galvanized steel and shall be formed to fit the curvature of the brackets. The finish on the hood shall be the same finish as indicated in the curtain section.

19 of 56

Section 08 33 30 Wilson EMS Multifunction Station ROLLING FIRE DOORS Page 2 2.2 OPERATION

.1 The Auto-Test Motor Operated Fire Door shall have a model FS, UL listed and FM approved operator, NEMA 1 enclosure rating, horsepower as recommended by manufacturer, 208/230v three phase service. Provide an open drip-proof motor, removable without affecting setting of limit switches; UL listed thermal overload protection; maintenance free solenoid actuated brake; planetary reduction gearing and adjustable rotary limit switch mechanism; transformer with 24 v control secondary; and all integral electrical components prewired to terminal blocks. .1 Automatic closure shall be activated by a central smoke/fire alarm system. Doors

shall not require a releasing device for alarm signal activation.

.2 Door shall maintain a closing speed of not less than 6” (152 mm) nor more than 9” (229 mm) per second during automatic closure. When automatic closing is activated, electric sensing edge and push button are inoperable.

.3 Doors shall be fail-safe and close upon power failure.

.4 Resetting of spring tension or mechanical dropouts shall not be required. Upon restoration of power and/or clearing of the alarm signals, door shall immediately reset by opening with the push button.

.5 The electrical contractor shall mount the control station(s) and supply the appropriate disconnect switch, all conduit and wiring per the overhead door wiring instructions.

.2 UL 325-2010 Compliance – .1 Constant Pressure to Close – Pressure must be maintained on “close” for the

duration of each close cycle. .3 A Secondary Entrapment Protection Device may be used in conjunction with a set of

primary entrapment protection photo eyes or with constant pressure to close operation. .1 Provide a wireless electric sensing edge device. Contact before door fully closes

shall cause the door to immediately stop downward travel and reverse direction to the fully open position. Provide a wireless sensing edge connection to motor operator eliminating the need for a physical traveling electric cord connection between bottom bar sensing edge device and motor operation.

3 3.0 EXECUTION 3.1 INSTALLATION

.1 All Rolling Fire Doors shall be installed in accordance with NFPA Bulletin 80. 3.2 WARRANTY

.1 All Rolling Fire Doors shall be warranted for a period of 2 years from the time of shipment against defects in workmanship and materials.

END OF SECTION

20 of 56

CHECKED BY :

ISSUE OR REVISION

The Contractor shall verify all dimensions prior

to commencement of the work.

All print and specifications are the property of

the Architect and must be returned upon

completion of the work.

DRAWN BY:

SCALE :

DATE :

DESIGNED BY:

PROJECT No. :

DWG STATUS :

DRAWING No. : REVISION

PR

OJE

CT

:

DWG TITLE :

PROFESSIONAL SEAL :

Approval to Proceed

Project Phase

Authorization (signature)

1/30/2015 6:44:39 P

M

1 : 300

1

2014-055

JL

CV-1

MLS

JB

MARCH 2015

DESIGN

SITE GRADING PLAN

1300 W

ilson S

treet

Toronto, O

N

No. Description Date

1 ISSUED FOR PERMIT 03-13-15

CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca

Email: [email protected]

Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario

400 Bronte Street South

TO

RO

NT

O E

MS

MU

LT

I-F

UN

CT

IO

N S

TA

TIO

N

2 ISSUED FOR TENDER 09-04-15

3 REVISED AS PER SITE PLAN 09-09-15

4 REISSUED FOR SPA 09-16-15

21 of 56

CHECKED BY :

ISSUE OR REVISION






DRAWN BY:

SCALE :

DATE :

DESIGNED BY:

PROJECT No. :

DWG STATUS :


PR

OJE

CT

:

DWG TITLE :

PROFESSIONAL SEAL :

Approval to Proceed

Project Phase


1/30/2015 6:44:39 P

M

1 : 300

1

2014-055

JL

CV-2

MLS

JB

MARCH 2015

DESIGN

SITE SERVICING

PLAN

1300 W

ilson S

treet

Toronto, O

N



CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


TO

RO

NT

O E

MS

MU

LT

I-F

UN

CT

IO

N S

TA

TIO

N




22 of 56

CHECKED BY :

ISSUE OR REVISION






DRAWN BY:

SCALE :

DATE :

DESIGNED BY:

PROJECT No. :

DWG STATUS :


PR

OJE

CT

:

DWG TITLE :

PROFESSIONAL SEAL :

Approval to Proceed

Project Phase


1/30/2015 6:44:39 P

M

1 : 300

1

2014-055

JL

CV-3

MLS

JB

MARCH 2015

DESIGN

DETAILS PAGE

1300 W

ilson S

treet

Toronto, O

N



CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


TO

RO

NT

O E

MS

MU

LT

I-F

UN

CT

IO

N S

TA

TIO

N




23 of 56

1300 Wilson Ave FUNCTIONAL SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT

prepared for:

Thomas Brown Architects

prepared by:

MGM Consulting Inc. 400 Bronte Street South Suite 201 Milton, Ontario L9T 0H7

File No. 2014-055

September 16, 2015

24 of 56

Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report Page 1 of 11 1300 Wilson Ave., Toronto Ontario September 15, 2015

1.0 Purpose of Report

MGM Consulting Inc. has been retained by Thomas Brown Architects to prepare a Functional Servicing and Stormwater Report to address the site-specific infrastructure required to support a proposed Site Plan Application for a commercial development located in Toronto.

The subject property is located at 1300 Wilson Avenue within the City of Toronto, between Lexfield Avenue to the west and Julian Road to the east. The legal description for the property is Part of Lot 11, Concession 4, West of Yonge Street, Geographic Township of York, now in The City of Toronto.

2.0 Existing Conditions

The subject property is approximately 1.22 hectares in size. The site fronts Wilson Ave and is bordered by laneway to the east, residential homes to the west and Calais Ave to the north. Historically, the site was developed with a two storey brick school building which has recently been demolished along with other site features including retaining walls and underground utilities. There remains an existing paved access off of Wilson Avenue, a paved parking area in the south portion of the site, a driveway along the west site of the site accessing another paved parking area which was north of the demolished building, a paved driveway access from the Calais Ave. cul-de-sac to the parking area north of the demolished building and an additional paved parking area adjacent to the Calais Ave. cul-de-sac. The mid portion is currently grass covered with some trees.

The topography within the site varies substantially with elevations ranging from 158.8 m along the Wilson Avenue frontage, to 153.6 m. along the west property limit approximately 55 metres north of the Wilson Avenue right of way. Drainage from the north and south portions of the site are conveyed to this location along the west property limit to existing catchbasins which outlet to an existing 1200 mm diameter storm sewer which traverses the site from east to west immediately north of the demolished building. The existing 1200 mm diameter storm sewer traversing the site currently conveys storm flows from properties to the east of the site, across the site to a gabion lined channel and drainage ditch to the west. Wilson Avenue is a four lane road with an urban cross section. There are pedestrian sidewalks on both sides of Wilson Avenue and overhead hydro located within the south boulevard. Calais Ave is a two lane road with an urban cross section. Calais Ave terminates as it meets our site to the north. Overhead hydro is located within the east side of the Calais

25 of 56


Avenue Road right of way. Based on existing topography, there is an external drainage area that contributes flows to Calais Avenue that presently flows into the north portion of the site.

The existing site has been indicated on Figure No.1.

Record drawings obtained from the City of Toronto indicate that there is an existing 250-300mm concrete sanitary sewer located within the Wilson Avenue right of way which provided sanitary service for the original development. An existing 300mm municipal watermain is located within the north side of the Wilson Ave right of way which provides the feed for one fire hydrant fronting the site and an existing 600-750mm concrete storm sewer located within the north side of the Wilson Avenue roadway.

The municipal record drawings have been appended to this report.

Wilson Avenue looking west

26 of 56


Wilson Avenue looking west at the intersection of the east laneway and Wilson 3.0 Development Scenario

The proposed redevelopment includes for a new 2 story multi-functional EMS and Fire Station building with a footprint of approximately 2023 sq. m. The main building entrance will front Wilson Avenue. Asphalt parking will be located on the east side and rear to the building. The site will be accessed through a driveway from Wilson Avenue and a proposed paved access from the cul-de-sac at Calais Ave. to the rear parking area.

4.0 Proposed Site Grading

The proposed site grading will take into account the existing topography, perimeter elevations, the proposed vehicular accesses off of Wilson Avenue, and as required to provide sufficient frost cover on storm servicing. Slopes within the paved areas of the site will typically be set between 1% and 5%, with the exception of the 8% driveway access off Wilson Ave. Grading will also be completed such that the majority of drainage is contained within the site and conveyed to the proposed internal storm system and proposed stormwater management features. Grading is proposed as required to convey major external flows from Calais Avenue to the west side of the site to the location along the west property limit where overland flow exits to an existing municipal drainage channel, consistent with the existing condition. Proposed grading

27 of 56


ensures that external flows are kept separate from internal site flows, so as to not compromise the proposed stormwater management controls. External flows from the surrounding northeast and northwest lands will be directed through proposed swales along the east and west edge of the property through landscaped areas and directed into existing double catch basins. External flows will be directed into the existing storm sewer easement, consistent with existing conditions. Given the existing site topography and elevations on adjacent lands, extensive retaining walls are required in order to contain drainage and not encroach on adjacent properties. Existing retaining walls along the west edge of the property will remain in order to maintain existing overland flow drainage pattern as per the drainage act.

Proposed Site Grading is indicated on Drawing No. CV- 1.

5.0 Stormwater Management

Based on the City of Toronto’s Wet Weather Management Flow Guidelines, the proposed development would fall under Development Type No. 4 (b) from Table 7 from the guidelines. Type No. 4 is categorized as “Non-residential and mixed uses (e.g. industrial / commercial / institutional infill) – relatively small isolated development or intensification situations with site areas less than 5ha and storm/combined sewer infrastructure exists. (a) Site area - greater than 0.3 ha but smaller than 5 ha, including large expansions to non-residential buildings (expansion exceeds 50% of the gross floor area of the existing building)

The following summarizes the requirements under development Type No.4 (a) and how each requirement is being met.

5.1 Water Balance

In all cases, the minimum on-site runoff retention requires the proponent to retain all runoff from a small design rainfall event - typically 5 mm (on average, the total rainfall from all small events with daily rainfall amounts, less than or equal to 5 mm, is equivalent to about 50% volume of the total average annual rainfall in Toronto) through infiltration, evapotranspiration & rainwater reuse. The proposed development layout includes for a 15.0 x 5.0m x 1.0m deep infiltration pit which has been sized to infiltrate 2.9mm of rainfall over the site. The infiltration pit has been located and sized to ensure a minimum clearance of 1.0m from ground water elevation. Detailed calculations have been included in Appendix A. The equivalent initial stormwater retained within the site is 9.3mm through infiltration and evapotranspiration.

28 of 56


5.2 Water Quality TSS Removal Require long-term average removal of 80% of TSS on an annual loading basis from all runoff leaving the site. (Suspended solids removal efficiency is to be calculated based on 100% of the total runoff volume resulted from all storm events that occur in an average year.) � Overall efficiency in TSS removal can be considered in combination with minimum on-site runoff retention and other conveyance & end-of-pipe controls (i.e. the treatment train approach).

Stormwater quality controls are proposed with the installation of a Jellyfish Model JF6-6-1 Treatment unit. Based on the manufacturer’s modeling software, the selected unit will provide the following: • Greater than 85% capture of the TSS load, including particles less than 5 microns • Capture of particulate-bound pollutants such as nutrients, toxic metals,

hydrocarbons and bacteria • A minimum mean total phosphorus removal of 55% and a minimum mean total

nitrogen removal of 50%. • Capture of free oil, floatable trash and debris • Treating the water quality flow rate

It is our understanding that the specified Jellyfish treatment unit has achieved field performance verified under the US TARP Tier II testing protocols, and as such, the unit achieves the claimed TSS removal.

5.3 Disinfection

Not applicable.

5.4 Water Quantity Flood Flow Management

For development sites within the City’s chronic basement flooding areas (see Basement Flooding Relief Work Program Location Map & Schedule in Appendix D), the proponent shall consult Toronto Water – Sewer Asset Planning Section for details of requirements, where applicable The City of Toronto has adopted the 100-year storm as the level of protection for properties, where feasible, against surface flooding from ponding on streets, particularly, in areas of the City experiencing chronic basement flooding and/or when a proper major (overland flow) stormwater drainage system does not exist (see Section 2.2.3.8 for overland flow drainage system requirements).

29 of 56


On site controls are proposed with the installation of a 125 mm diameter orifice tube, located at the downstream end of the proposed internal storm system. The proposed stormwater management system will control post development flows to a predevelopment site coefficient of 0.3, which was used to design the existing drainage ditch predating the school development. Contributing storm flows from the site will therefore not increase through the drainage ditch as a result of the proposed development during all storm events. During severe storm events when an outlet is blocked, emergency overland flow will occur from the site at an elevation of 156.99 m. to an existing municipal drainage channel over the west property limit.

Stormwater management calculations have been included in Appendix A.

5.5 Erosion Not applicable.

5.6 Erosion & Sediment Control During Construction Regardless of size for all development sites, temporary erosion and sediment control for construction must be provided on-site. All erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be designed, constructed and maintained in all development sites in accordance with the GTA CA’s Erosion & Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction (2006) and/or other City of Toronto requirements on a site-by-site basis, where applicable. In 2006, The Greater Golden Horseshoe Area Conservation Authorities prepared a guideline entitled "Erosion & Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction". Based on the guideline, all projects involving the removal of topsoil or site alteration requires an ESC (Erosion and Sediment Control) Plan in place prior to commencing construction. Failure to adhere to the plan could lead to the potential for prosecution under the various pieces of environmental legislation. The following principles assist in creating an effective ESC Plan. (Ref. Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban Construction)

• Adopt a multi-barrier approach to provide erosion and sediment control through erosion controls first.

• Retain existing ground cover and stabilize exposed soils with vegetation where possible.

• Limit the duration of soil exposure and phase construction where possible. • Limit the size of disturbed areas by minimizing nonessential clearing and

30 of 56


grading. • Minimize slope length and gradient of disturbed areas. • Maintain overland sheet flow and avoid concentrated flows. • Store/stockpile soil away (e.g. greater than 15 meters) from watercourses,

drainage features and top of steep slopes. • Ensure contractors and all involved in the ESC practices are trained in ESC

Plan, implementation, inspections, maintenance, and repairs. • Adjust ESC Plan at construction site to adapt to site features. • Assess all ESC practices before and after all rainfall and significant snowmelt

events. The guideline stresses that prevention of erosion is the preferred mitigation measure for reducing the potential for sedimentation. Erosion and sediment control measures can be categorized as Erosion prevention controls and Sediment controls. Erosion controls include minimizing the reduction in vegetative ground cover or immediate stabilization of disturbed areas by top soiling, seeding, sodding, mulching, erosion control blankets, etc. Sediment Controls are further broken down into Perimeter Controls, Settling Controls and Filtration Controls. Some major perimeter controls include silt fences, cut-off swales and mud-mats. Settling controls reduce run-off velocity allowing the soil particles to settle out. Settling controls include sediment traps, rock check dams, straw bales and sediment control ponds. Filtration controls are achieved by filtering silt laden water through the use of a filer media such as a geotextile or sand. Filtration controls include storm inlet filter cloths, sediment bags and filter rings.

5.7 Infrastructure Discharge Criteria to Municipal

The allowable release rate to the municipal storm sewer system from the development site during a 2-year design storm event must not exceed the peak runoff rate from the site under pre-development conditions during the same storm event, or existing capacity of the receiving storm sewer, whichever is less. Unless directed by City staff, the consultant shall demonstrate that existing downstream system has capacity to accommodate design flows from point of connection of the development site to an existing outfall or municipal trunk sewer (confirm existing capacity and/or original design parameters and contributing drainage areas with local district staff). When the % imperviousness of a development site under pre-development condition is higher than 50% (regardless of what the post-development condition is), the maximum value of C (Runoff Coefficient) used in calculating the pre-development peak runoff rate is limited to 0.5.

31 of 56


Unless directed by City staff, the minor storm sewer system shall be designed to a 1 in 2 years design storm frequency based on City of Toronto Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) curves and a 10-minute inlet time (or initial time of concentration). Storm runoff, which exceeds the allowable release rate defined above but complies with all other requirements (i.e. water balance, water quality, flood flow and erosion controls) is allowed to discharge off-site via overland flow routes (major system) of sufficient capacities (up to a 100 year design storm). If no approved or adequate overland flow route exists, then all flow from the 2 year up to the 100-year return event storms shall be stored on site and released at the allowable release rate defined above or the capacity of the existing minor system, whichever is less. As indicated above under the Flood Flow Management requirements, the redevelopment flows will be reduced to below the allowable rates with the installation of a control orifice located at the outlet from the proposed internal storm system.

5.8 Sewer Connections New Private Sewer Connections The direct connection of any new private storm sewer to the municipal storm sewer system is prohibited for any new or reconstructed residential, industrial, commercial or institutional buildings. Application for an exemption must be supported by a Stormwater Management Report identifying the storm water quantity and quality control measures being proposed for the site, and may be approved for any proposed direct connection to the municipal storm sewer system, where the report successfully demonstrates that there is no practical alternative means of drainage available on site and the proposed method is satisfied by the City staff. Based on the existing perimeter grades, flood flow management cannot be achieved with surface ponding alone an outlet below grade to achieve the quantity objectives.

Roof Water Leaders / Downspouts (a) No new connections to sanitary, combined and storm sewers will be permitted for roof water leaders or downspouts. (b) Existing roof/downspout connections to the combined sewer systems shall be eliminated except under exceptional circumstances. If necessary due to site constraints, existing roof/downspout connections to the combined sewer systems may be permitted to reconnect to the storm sewer systems, where road sewer separation from the combined sewer systems has been implemented. (c) Storm water collected from roof water leaders / downspouts shall be directed to pervious areas for infiltration or other areas for re-use on site. Storm water collected by a down-pipe from the eavestrough shall be discharged at grade with provisions to prevent soil erosion and

32 of 56


shall be conducted away from the building in such a manner that the storm water will not accumulate at or near the building and will not adversely affect adjacent properties. Storm water collected from roof water leaders will be directed to an infiltration pit through the proposed private storm system. The inlet to the infiltration pit has been designed to ensure all flows from the site during frequent storm events (< 5mm) will be conveyed through the Stormceptor for TSS removal and directed to the infiltration pit.

Foundation Drains (a) All new foundation drains shall be pumped to the grade, wherever possible, subject to soil conditions with respect to environmental impacts and soil permeability. (b) Weeping tiles / foundation drains shall not be connected to any municipal sewers. If necessary due to site constraints, foundation drains may be permitted by City staff, to reconnect to the storm sewer systems, where road sewer separation from the combined sewer systems has been implemented. (c) Where no practical alternative means of drainage is available; staff would review the application for an exemption on a case-by-case basis and may approve the direct connection to the municipal sewer systems with set conditions on proper safeguard to protect the City from any liability in the event of basement flooding. Foundation drains will be directed to the infiltration pit via the proposed storm system.

6.0 Water Servicing

As per the City of Toronto’s water servicing requirements, the proposed redevelopment requires a water distribution system designed to meet the greater of the following demands: a. Maximum Daily Demand plus Fire Flow b. Maximum Hourly Demand

The Ontario Building Code provides estimation of water service demand for different types of development. The following information has been taken from the Ontario Building Code, Table 8.2.1.3A and 8.2.1.3B

Type of Development Average Day Service Demands

(L/9.3m2/day)

Total Demand (L/s)

Institutional (2741 sq.m.)

75

0.26

Design Factors for the Water Distribution System

33 of 56


• Maximum Daily Demand Peaking Factor (Commercial) = 1.10 • Maximum Hourly Demand Peaking Factor (Commercial) = 1.20

The City of Toronto requires that the Fire Flow demand requirement be calculated in accordance with the Water Supply for Public Fire Protection Guidelines by the Fire Underwriters Survey.

Based on the water demand calculations included in Appendix B, the water demand for the site will be governed by Maximum day plus fire flow. All water demands calculations will be verified at the detailed design stage. A pressure test will be completed on the hydrant fronting the subject property. At the time of the preparation of this report, the test could not be completed as the City does not allow hydrant testing during the winter months. The test results will be provided to the City under a separate cover upon receipt of the test results.

A 100mm domestic watermain and 150mm fire line will be required to service the subject property. A private hydrant is proposed within the front parking lot, 30m from the proposed Siamese connection will provide fire protection in accordance with OBC requirements.

7.0 Sanitary Servicing

Proposed sanitary servicing will consist of a proposed 150 mm diameter PVC sewer extending from the building to a proposed inspection manhole located at the south property limit. A new 150 mm diameter sanitary service connection is proposed outletting to the existing 300 mm diameter sanitary sewer on Wilson Avenue. An in-line backflow preventer and clean out will be installed as part of the proposed sanitary sewer system. We are of the opinion that the site’s contributing sanitary discharge will not negatively impact the city’s existing sanitary sewer system based on the following:

• The proposed site will not discharge to a combined sewer. • All wet weather flows will be directed to the existing open channel on the west side of

the subject site. • A backflow preventer will be proposed on the proposed sanitary service to protect the

subject building in the event of backwater surcharging. • The existing school that was located on the site had a much higher occupancy load and

provided higher sanitary flows than what is anticipated by the new EMS station. Based on the lower occupancy loading, the redevelopment will reduce the overall flows from the site to the sanitary sewer. Proposed site servicing is indicated on Drawing CV-2.

34 of 56


8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on our analysis, the site can be adequately serviced with municipal storm water and sanitary sewers without any adverse effects on the adjacent properties.

Prepared by: MGM CONSULTING INC.

John Bishop, CET. M.L.Stairs, P. Eng

35 of 56

36 of 56

FIGURE 2

MARCH 10 2015

1:1250

2014-055-C3

1300 WILSON AVE.

TORONTO, ONTARIO

EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS

CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


37 of 56

FIGURE 3

MARCH 10 2015

1:1250

2014-055-C3

1300 WILSON AVE.

TORONTO, ONTARIO

EXISTING DRAINAGE AREAS

CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


AREA (ha)

COEFFICIENT

DRAINAGE AREA

LEGEND

38 of 56

FIGURE 4

SEPT 16, 2015

NTS

2014-055-C2

1300 WILSON AVENUE

TORONTO, ONTARIO

TORONTO EMS MULTIFUNCTION STATION

POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE AREAS

CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


DRAINAGE AREA (ha)

RUN-OFF CO-EFFICIENT

39 of 56

FIGURE 5

SEPT 16, 2015

NTS

2014-055-C2

1300 WILSON AVENUE

TORONTO, ONTARIO

TORONTO EMS MULTIFUNCTION STATION

EXTERNAL DRAINAGE AREAS

CNIGNITLUSNOC

www.mgm.on.ca


Suite 201 Fax: (905 )875-1339

Tel: (905 )567-8678

L9T 0H7

Milton, Ontario


DRAINAGE AREA (ha)

RUN-OFF CO-EFFICIENT

EXTERNAL DRAINAGE AREAS

EXTERNAL DRAINAGE DIRECTION

40 of 56

41 of 56

alanPolygonal Line

alanCalloutSUBJECT SITE @ 0.3 SITE COEFF.

alanCalloutEXISTING DRAINAGE DITCH

APPENDIX A

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS

42 of 56

Appendix ADetailted Stormwater Management Calculations

Page 1 of 3

1.0 DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS

1.1 Pre-Development Drainage Areas (see Figure No. 1)"c" Area (ha)

Unattenuated Areas:Site Area 0.30 1.225

Totals 0.30 1.225

1.1 Proposed Drainage Areas (see Figure No. 2)"c" Area (ha)

Attenuated Areas:Impervious areas 0.90 0.559Pervious Areas 0.25 0.325Green Roof Areas/Perm. Pav. 0.60 0.050Conventional Roof Areas 0.95 0.168

SubTotals 0.70 1.102

Unattenuated Areas:Pervious Areas 0.25 0.123

Totals 0.66 1.225

2.0 Allowable Post Development Flows

2.1Allowable Post Development Flows - Subject Site Only

Given that the exsiting site imperviousness exceeds 0.50, peak flows during the 2 to 100 year storm events are to be controlledto the 2 year rate based on a site imperviousness of 0.50.

Based on Tc = 10 minutesIntensity 'I' = AT^cFor 2 year storm,

A = 21.8c = -0.78

Therefore I = 88.2 mm/hr

Flow "Q" - cIA/360, where c = 0.30Therefore Q allow = 0.090 cms.

* Site to be controlled down to 0.3 site coefficient based on City of Toronto Drainage Are and drainage ditch designWhich corresponds with drainage ditch and gabion channel design parameters predating school development

3.0 Orifice Control Calculations:

A 125mm orifice tube is proposed at the outlet of Manhole No. 1 that will control peak flowsduring the 2 to 100 year storm events to the two year predevelopment flow rate.

3.1 Two Year Post Development Flow:Invert at controlled outlet = 154.04 m

2 year Ponding Elevation = 156.85 mCentreline Orifice Elevation = 154.10 m

Maximum Head on Orifice (H) 2.75 m

Orifice equation = Qa = CA*(2gh)^1/2

Where:C is the co-efficient of discharge (-) g is the gravitational constant (m/s^2)A is the cross-sectional area (sq.m.) h is the head

Qa is the orifice discharge flow (m^3/s)

H = 2.75 m A = 0.0123 m^2 g = 9.81Q = 0.07388 m^3/s D = 125 mm. C = 0.82

Based on the above, a 125 mm orifice tube will provide a controlled flow during the 2 year storm event = 0.074 cmsTotal site flow (attenuated + unattenuated) during a 2 year storm event = 0.081 cms

* bellow allowable

3.2 100 Year Post Development Flow:Invert at controlled outlet = 154.04 m

43 of 56


Page 2 of 3

Ponding Elev. during 1:100 yr. storm = 156.99 mCentreline Orifice Elevation = 154.10 m

Maximum Head on Orifice (H) 2.89 m

H = 2.89 m A = 0.0123 m^2 g = 9.81Q = 0.07574 m^3/s D = 125 mm. C= 0.82

Based on the above, a 125mm orifice tube will provide a controlled flow during the 100 year storm event = 0.076 cmsTotal site flow (attenuated + unattenuated) during a 100 year storm event = 0.091 cms

*approx. equal to allowable*within accuracy of modelling

4.0 On-Site Storage Required

4.1 Two Year Storage Calculation

2 Year Attenuated Unattenuated Controlled Aprox.Rainfall Rainfall Flow Flow Flow From DetentionDuration Intensity (I) From Site From Site Site* Volumes

min. s mm/h m^3/s m^3/s m^3/s m^310 600 88.2 0.1896 0.0075 0.0739 69.415 900 64.3 0.1382 0.0055 0.0739 57.920 1200 51.4 0.1104 0.0044 0.0739 43.8

A maximum detention volume required when the 2 year post development flow is controlled to the 2 year allowable flow rate = 69.4 cu.m

4.2 100 Year Storage Calculation

100 Year Attenuated Unattenuated Controlled Aprox.Rainfall Rainfall Flow Flow Flow From DetentionDuration Intensity (I) From Site From Site Site* Volumes

min. s mm/h m^3/s m^3/s m^3/s m^310 600 250.3 0.5382 0.0213 0.0757 277.515 900 181.0 0.3891 0.0154 0.0757 282.020 1200 143.8 0.3091 0.0123 0.0757 280.125 1500 120.3 0.2586 0.0102 0.0757 274.3

Based on the above, the required 100 year site storage = 282.0 cu.m.

5.0 On-site Storage Provided

5.1 Undergrond Storage

The detention volume available within the storm sewer pipes is as follows:

From To Size Length Vol. (cu.m.)1 2 600 26.3 7.42 3 750 34.5 15.27 3 300 11.2 0.85 2 375 30.0 3.34 TEE 300 1.0 0.16 TEE 300 0.6 0.01 8 600 39.5 11.28 9 300 20.4 1.4

11 TEE 300 2.8 0.2

Total Pipe Storage = 39.7 cu.m.

5.2 Aboveground Storage

The detention volume available within the ponding areas at an assumed elev of 160.35 m. is as follows:Grate Elev. Ponding

Catchbasin No's Elevation Elevation Area Depth Volume4, 5, 6, and 7 156.69 156.85 557 0.16 29.7 (2 Year Ponding)4, 5, 6, and 7 156.69 156.99 2810 0.30 281.0 (100 Year Ponding)11 156.82 156.85 0 0.03 0.0 (2 Year Ponding)11 156.82 156.99 79 0.17 4.5 (100 Year Ponding)

Total 2 year site storage provided (underground and aboveground) = 69.4 cu.m.Total 100 year site storage provided (underground and aboveground) = 325.2 cu.m.

6.0 Water Balance Calculation

Water contained within the proposed clear stone of the infiltration trench and within the landscaped areas of the site will infiltrateinto surrounding soils as required to provide the required water balance.

Structure No.

44 of 56


Page 3 of 3

6.1 Infiltration Trench

Trench Dimensions = 1.0m x 5 m x 15 mVolume of Stone = 90.0 cu.m.Storage Vol. (based on 40% voids) = 36.0 cu.m.Equivalent depth over site area 2.9 mm.

6.2 Permeable Pavers

Area 140 sq.m.Initial Abstraction 5 mmVolume 0.7 cu.m.Equivalent depth over site area 0.1 mm.

6.2 Soft Landscaped Areas

Area 4480 sq.m.Initial Abstraction 5 mmVolume 22.4 cu.m.Equivalent depth over site area 1.8 mm.

6.3 Green Roof Areas

Area 360 sq.mInitial Abstraction 5 mmVolume 1.8 cu.m.Equivalent depth over site area 0.1 mm.

6.4 Impervious Areas

Area 7270 sq.mInitial Abstraction 1 mmVolume 7.3 cu.m.Equivalent depth over site area 4.3 mm.

Total Water Balance Provided 9.3 mm.

6.4 Estimate Time For Infiltration

The estimated time to infiltrate water contained within the infiltration trench is as follows:

Existing soil permeability as confirmed by geotechnical engineer (grain size analysis) is between .01 cm/sec and .001 cm/secfor an average permeability = 0.0055 cm/sec. = 3.0 min/cm

Applying safety factor of 3.5 = 10.5 min/cm

Depth of trench = 1000 mmAverage "T" time = 21.0 min/cm.Time to infiltrate = 2100 min = 35.0 hours

45 of 56

AREA1

Page 1

MGM CONSULTING Inc.STORM SEWER DESIGN SHEET

1300 Wilson Street By: Alan PalaganasDate: Sept 16, 2015

Location Areas A * C Rainfall Flow Sewer DesignManhole Manhole Area Cumulative Weighted Incremental Cumulative Time Intensity Pipe Slope Max. Flow Max Velocity Length Time in

from to Area Coefficent A * C A * C I2 Q Size Q max V max Sectionha ha C min mm/hr. cms mm. % cms m./sec. m. min.

5 2 0.108 0.108 0.56 0.061 0.061 10.0 88.2 0.015 375 2.20 0.260 2.36 30.0 0.21

7 3 0.358 0.358 0.57 0.203 0.203 10.0 88.2 0.050 300 2.00 0.137 1.94 11.2 0.106 TEE 0.058 0.058 0.90 0.052 0.052 10.0 88.2 0.013 300 2.00 0.137 1.94 1.0 0.014 TEE 0.223 0.223 0.86 0.192 0.192 10.0 88.2 0.047 300 0.50 0.068 0.97 0.6 0.013 2 0.639 0.45 10.1 87.5 0.109 600 1.00 0.615 2.17 44.8 0.342 1 0.748 0.51 10.4 85.3 0.121 750 1.00 1.115 2.52 26.3 0.17

9 8 0.250 0.250 0.74 0.185 0.185 10.0 88.2 0.045 300 1.00 0.097 1.37 20.4 0.2511 TEE 0.105 0.105 0.75 0.079 0.079 10.0 88.2 0.019 300 2.00 0.137 1.94 2.8 0.028 1 0.355 0.26 10.2 86.5 0.063 600 2.10 0.891 3.15 39.5 0.21

1 JELLYFISH 1.102 0.77 10.6 84.2 0.1810.074 250 2.00 0.084 1.72 3.5 0.03

*CONTROLLED FLOW

JELLYFISH 10 1.102 0.77 0.074 300 1.00 0.097 1.37 2.2 0.03

10 EX.MH 1.102 0.77 0.074 300 2.00 0.137 1.94 5.6 0.05

n = 0.013

46 of 56

APPENDIX B

FIRE FLOW AND WATER DEMAND CALCULATIONS &

FIRE FLOW TEST RESULTS

47 of 56

Fire Flow Calculation

The FUS requires that a minimum water supply source 'F' be provided at 150 kPaThe min flow 'F' can be calculated as such:

F=220C√Awhere:F- Required fire flow in L/minC- Coefficient related to constructionA- Total area in sq.m

C = 0.8 (Non-combusitble construction )

For non-combustible construction, the area shall be a total of all floors (excluding basementsat least 50 percent below grade) in the building being considered.

A = 2741 sq.m

Therefore,

F= 9214.40 L/min

Reduction Factors:

F'=F*f1*f2

where:f1- Occupancy factorf2- Sprinkler protection factorStandard Occupancy 1.0Assuing that the units will be sprinklered f2= 0.5

F' = 4607.201 L/min

Exposure Factors:F" = F'*f3where:f3- Exposure factor not to exceed 75%Assuming worst-case scenario, using the max exposure factor of f3= 1.75

F" = 8062.602 L/min

Therefore a minimum flow of approximately 8000 L/min must be available at the nearest hydrant with a minimum pressure of 150 kPa.

Note: This fireflow calculation has been prepared as a guide only. Confirmation should beobtained from a Fire Protection professional for confirmation

48 of 56

APPENDIX C

Topographic Survey Prior to Demolition

49 of 56

50 of 56

APPENDIX D

MUNICIPAL RECORD DRAWINGS

51 of 56

52 of 56

53 of 56

APPENDIX E

WATER PRESSURE TEST RESULTS

54 of 56

.

Nicole

400 Bronte Street South, Suite 201Milton Ontario L9T 0H7

MGM Consulting Inc.

Trusting this meet with your approval, we are...

Yours truly,

Mark SchmidtJackson Waterworks

Jackson Waterworks has completed fire hydrant flow testing for the site at 1300 Wilson Street in Toronto andoffer our report accordingly.

We define the Test Hydrant as the one being flowed, and the Base Hydrant as the one where static andresidual pressure readings are recorded.

There were no irregularities to report.

18 August 2015

Ms. Talpa

55 of 56

56 of 56

256-2015 Addendum 7 - 1312 - Architectural Addendum 4 Documents.pdfA1_3 Retaining wall detailsADD25ADD26ADD27ADD28ADD29ADD3008333_Coiling Fire Shutters2014-055 A1-CV12014-055 A1-CV22014-055 A1-CV32015 09 15 FSR&STM REPORTTitle PageFSR SWM Report1.0 Purpose of Report3.0 Development Scenario4.0 Proposed Site Grading5.0 Stormwater Management6.0 Water Servicing8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

Figures 1-52015 055 C3 FIG 12015 055 C4-FIG 22014-055 C4-FIG 32014-055 C2-FIG42014-055 C2-FIG5

DOC_6 1APPENDIX A2014-055-SWM DesignSWM DESIGN

Storm Design - apAREA1

APPENDIX BAPPENDIX C & D2015 03 13 FSR&STM REPORT 22 - appendix C2015 03 13 FSR&STM REPORT 232015 03 13 FSR&STM REPORT 242015 03 13 FSR&STM REPORT 252015 03 13 FSR&STM REPORT 26

Fire Flow Requirement CalculationSheet1

APPENDIX FWater Pressure Test ResultsCover LetterWilson Street, 1300