proposed mixed-use commercial, residential tower

PROJECT No. 18215 File No. 18215_69 Sanders_FSR_Rev0.2 THE ODAN/DETECH GROUP INC.

PROPOSED MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL TOWER & RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT

69 SANDERS BOULEVARD AND 1630 MAIN STREET WEST

HAMILTON, ONTARIO

PROJECT No. : 18215

FUNCTIONAL SERVICING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT

Prepared For:

BLOOMFIELD DEVELOPMENTS INC.

Prepared By:

The Odan/Detech Group Inc.

Original: May 30th, 2018

i


TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1

2.0 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................... 2

3.0 WATER DISTRIBUTION ....................................................................................................................... 2

4.0 SANITARY/COMBINED SEWERS ..................................................................................................... 12

i) Available & Existing Infrastructure ...................................................................................................... 12

ii) Proposed Sanitary Servicing ............................................................................................................... 12

5.0 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT ...................................................................................................... 16

iii) Terms of Reference & Available Infrastructure ................................................................................... 16

iv) Allowable & Pre-Development Discharge Rate .................................................................................. 16

v) Proposed Conditions & Post-Development Flow Analysis ................................................................. 20

vi) Erosion Control ................................................................................................................................... 24

vii) Stormwater Quality Control ................................................................................................................. 24

6.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................. 27

7.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 28

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - AWWA M22 Figure 4-3 Excerpt showing domestic water demand ................................................... 5 Figure 2 - Pre-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model (2-Year Storm) ........................................................... 19 Figure 3 – Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model (100Y Storm) ...................................................... 22 Figure 4 - Excerpt from CETV Verification Statement for Stormceptor OGS .................................................. 25 Figure 5 - Excerpt from CETV Verification Statement for Jellyfish Filter ......................................................... 26

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 – Total Water Demand ....................................................................................................................... 3 TABLE 2 – Proposed Sanitary Flows ............................................................................................................... 13 TABLE 3 - Catchment Characteristics for Site, Pre-Development................................................................... 18 TABLE 4 – Pre-Development (allowable) 2-Year Storm Discharge ............................................................... 19 TABLE 5 – Allocated (allowable) 2-Year Storm Discharge ............................................................................. 19 TABLE 6 - Catchment Characteristics for Post-Developed Site ...................................................................... 20 TABLE 7 - Summary of Discharge from Site ................................................................................................... 22 TABLE 8 - Stormwater Storage ....................................................................................................................... 23 TABLE 9 - Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 27

ii


APPENDIX A Existing Site Aerial view of Site and surrounding areas Site Plan by Architectural Design Inc. Development statistics by Architectural Design Inc. City Engineering Criteria APPENDIX B Pre-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model Output 2-year storm Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model Output 2-year storm & 100-year storm CETV Verification Statement – Imbrium Systems Inc. Jellyfish Filter APPENDIX C Functional Servicing Plan Functional Grading Plan

1 69 SANDERS BLVD. & 1630 MAIN ST. W. – PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT FUNCTIONAL SERVICING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT


1.0 INTRODUCTION The property under study is a 0.505 ha (1.25 acre) site located at 69 Sanders Boulevard and 1630 Main Street West in the City of Hamilton. The site is irregularly shaped and is presently occupied by:

A one-storey restaurant building with associated parking at the southwest corner (1630 Main Street West)

A one-storey brick building which appears to have initially been constructed as a school and is now a student residence (69 Sanders Boulevard)

The site is bound by the following:

To the south: Main Street West

To the east: Existing residential lots

To the north: Sanders Boulevard

To the west: West Park Avenue and residential lots A daylight triangle at the site’s southeast corner is being taken in the proposed development, after which the site’s area will be 0.50 ha. For detailed topography of the existing site conditions, as of March 16, 2018, refer to the topographic survey prepared by A.T. McLaren Limited. It is proposed to construct a mixed-use commercial and residential development on the site. The development comprises a nine-storey residential tower with commercial space in the podium and two blocks of stacked townhouses with basement studio apartments. There is a below-grade parking structure proposed beneath most of the site. A driveway access is proposed from West Park Avenue from the site’s west property line. Pedestrian access is from the other bordering streets. Refer to the Site Plan by Architectural Design Inc. in Appendix A for the site’s layout. This report will evaluate the serviceability of the site with respect to sanitary waste water, water and storm water management (SWM) and will implement the SWM criteria identified by City staff in prior correspondence. Criteria for the site engineering was provided by Saleem Sial of the City of Hamilton in a memo to Daniel Barnett (City planning) dated February 15, 2018. The memo is provided here in Appendix A.



2.0 SCOPE OF WORK

THE ODAN/DETECH GROUP INC. was retained by Bloomfield Developments Inc. to review

the Site, collect data, evaluate the Site for the proposed use and present the findings in a Functional Servicing Report and Storm Water Management Report in support of a Rezoning Application. The scope of work in brief involves the following:

a) Collecting existing servicing drawings from the CITY in order to establish availability and

feasibility of Site servicing;

b) Meetings/conversations with CITY Engineers and Design Team.

c) Evaluation of the data and presentation of the findings in a FSR and Storm Water

Management Report in support of the Rezoning Application.

3.0 WATER DISTRIBUTION

Design Considerations The following watermains presently exist beneath the streets bordering the site.

Sanders Boulevard: 150mm watermain – a hydrant flow test was prepared for this hydrant, as provided below.

West Park Road: 200mm ductile iron watermain – a hydrant flow test was prepared for this hydrant, as provided below.

Main Street West:

o 300mm watermain – there are no hydrants connected to this main near the site o 400mm cast iron watermain – there are no hydrants connected to this main near the

site One domestic water and fire service connection are proposed to the 200mm West Park Ave. watermain. Refer to the Functional Servicing Plan. The unit rate and peaking factors of water consumption, minimum pipe size and allowable pressure in line were established from the City Design Manual Standards. The pressures and volumes must be sufficient for peak hour conditions and under fire conditions as established by the Ontario Building Code 2006. The minimal residual pressure under fire conditions is 140 kpa. (or 20.3 psi). The water demand is calculated as follows. Domestic water demand is calculated based on the AWWA M22 method, as per the table on the following page. The development statistics and fixture counts on which the calculation is based are provided in Appendix A. Detailed fixture counts were not available at the time of the zoning submission, therefore the fixture counts in Appendix A are a conservative estimate. Fire flow demand is calculated using the Fire Underwriters’ Survey Fire Flow calculation, on the following page. Fire flow calculations are provided for both townhouse blocks and the tower. The townhouse blocks have the largest fire flow demand and are thus taken as the developments critical fire flow demand.



a) Domestic Demand (AWWA M22) 85 GPM or 5.4 L/sec d) Fire flow as per FUS 1999 manual 3170 GPM or 200 L/sec (Townhouses)

(Refer to FUS calculation below) 2642 GPM or 167 L/sec (Tower)

TABLE 1 – Total Water Demand

L/sec USGM

Domestic Flow Demand (Entire Development) 5.7 90

Fire Flow Demand (Largest demand is townhouses)

200 3170

Total Water Demand 206 3260

Available Flow at 20 PSI Residual Pressure (Sanders Blvd. 150mm WM)

216 3421

Available Flow at 20 PSI Residual Pressure (West Park Rd. 200mm WM)

249 3946

The following assumptions were made in the Fire Underwriters’ Survey fire flow calculation:

9-Storey Residential Condominium Tower o The building will be of fire-resistive (reinforced concrete) construction o The contents will be non-combustible (residences) o The building will be sprinklered as per NFPA 13 and the sprinklers fully monitored o Horizontal separation from adjacent buildings as shown on the following Fire

Separation Distance Plan

Stacked townhouses o The buildings will be of ordinary construction (wood frame with masonry external) o The contents will be non-combustible (residences) o The building will not be sprinklered o Horizontal separation from adjacent buildings as shown on the following Fire

Separation Distance Plan A hydrant flow test was prepared by Jackson Water Works to the NFPA 291 standard. The flow test reports are included on the following pages. There are no available hydrants to test on Main Street West, therefore the hydrant tests were done on the other two streets to which the site fronts: Sanders Boulevard and West Park Avenue. The flow tests show that there is a flow rate of 3421 USGM available in the Sanders Boulevard 150mm watermain and a flow rate of 3946 USGM available in the West Park Road 200mm watermain. Both watermains are sufficient to provide fire service for the proposed development because the available flow in both watermains is greater than the total water demand – 3260 USGM.



AWWA M22 Domestic Water Demand Calculation

Fixture

Fixture Value

(GPM) at 60

psi

Number of

Fxitures

Fixture Value

(GPM)

Bathtub 8 0 0

Bedpan Washers 10 0 0

Bidet 2 0 0

Dental Unit 2 0 0

Drinking Fountain - Public 2 0 0

Kitchen Sink 2.2 182 400.4

Lavatory 1.5 0 0

Showerhead (Shower Only) 2.5 202 505

Service Sink 4 0 0

Toilet - Flush Valve 35 0 0

Toilet - Tank Type 4 295 1180

Urinal - Pedestal Flush Valve 35 0 0

Urinal - Wall Flush Valve 16 0 0

Wash Sink (each set of faucets) 4 295 1180

Dishwasher 2 182 364

Washing Machine 6 182 1092

Hose (50 ft Wash Down) 1/2 inch 5 0 0

Hose (50 ft Wash Down) 5/8 inch 9 0 0

Hose (50 ft Wash Down) 3/4inch 12 0

Total Fixture Value Total 4721

90

Demand (gpm) from Fig 4-2 of AWWA Manual M22 Second

Editon



Figure 1 - AWWA M22 Figure 4-3 Excerpt showing domestic water demand



F = 220 x C x √ AWhere:

F = required fire flow in liters per minute 1.5Wood Frame

C= Coefficient related to the type of construction 1 Ordinary

A = the total floor area in square meters

(excluding basements) in the building

considered 0.8

Non

combustible

0.6

Fire

Resistive

LOCATION: PROJECT:

OBC OCCUPANCY: PROJECT No:18215

BUILDING FOOT PRINT (m2): 1404 Contents Charge

# OF STOREYS 9 Non-Combustible -25%

limited

Combustible-15%

Combustible 0%

CONSTRUCTION CLASS: Free Burning 15%

` Rapid Buring 25%

AUTOMATED SPRINKLER PROTECTION Credit Total

NFPA 13 sprinkler standard yes 30%

Standard Water Supply yes 10%

Fully Supervised System yes 10%

50%

CONTENTS FACTOR: CHARGE: -15%

Separation Charge

EXPOSURE 1 (south) >45 0-3 m 25%

3.1 -10 m 20%

EXPOSURE 2 (east) Existing Garage 9.1 10.1 - 20 m 15%

20.1 - 30 m 10%

EXPOSURE 3 (west) Existing House 28.4 30.1 - 45 5%

> 45 m 0%

EXPOSURE 4 (north) Prop TH 17.4

Total: 45%no more

than 75%

ARE BUILDINGS CONTIGUOUS: Yes

FIRE RESISTANT BUILDING No

CALCULATIONS C = 0.6 Fire Resistive

A = 7722 m2 (2 Largest floors + 50% of floors above) STOREY AREAS m21404 1

F = 11599 L/min 1404 2

Round to Nearest 1000 L/min F = 12000 L/min must be > 2000 L/min 1404 3

1404 4

CORRECTION FACTORS: 1404 5

OCCUPANCY -1800 L/min 1404 6

FIRE FLOW ADJUSTED FOR OCCUPANCY 10200 L/min 1404 7

REDUCTION FOR SPRINKLER -5100 L/min 1404 8

EXPOSURE CHARGE 4590 L/min 1404 9

REQUIRED FIRE FLOW F = 9690 L/min

Round to Nearest 1000 L/min F = 10000 L/min 2642 usgm

F = 167 L/sec

Distance to Exposure Building (m)20%

Length - Height

WATER SUPPLY FOR PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION , FIRE UNDERWRITERS SURVEY

GUIDE FOR DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED FIRE FLOWS

Coefficient related to type of

construction

9-Storey Mixed-Use Tower (Bldg 1) 69 Sanders & 1630 Main St. W.

Residential & Commercial

Fire Resistive

50%

Limited Combustible


Length - Height

Are vertical openings and exterior vertical communications protected with a minimum one (1) hr rating?


Length - Height


Length - Height



Where:





considered 0.8

Non

combustible

0.6

Fire

Resistive

LOCATION: PROJECT:




limited

Combustible-15%

Combustible 0%


` Rapid Buring 25%


NFPA 13 sprinkler standard no 0%

Standard Water Supply no 0%

Fully Supervised System no 0%

0%


Separation Charge

EXPOSURE 1 (south) Prop Tower 17 0-3 m 25%

3.1 -10 m 20%

EXPOSURE 2 (east) Existing Shed 8.6 10.1 - 20 m 15%

20.1 - 30 m 10%


> 45 m 0%

EXPOSURE 4 (north) Prop TH 4.5

Total: 70%no more

than 75%



CALCULATIONS C = 1 Ordinary

A = 1440 m2 STOREY AREAS m2480 1

F = 8348 L/min 480 2


CORRECTION FACTORS:

OCCUPANCY -1200 L/min

FIRE FLOW ADJUSTED FOR OCCUPANCY 6800 L/min

REDUCTION FOR SPRINKLER 0 L/min

EXPOSURE CHARGE 4760 L/min



F = 200 L/sec


Length - Height


construction

SOUTH TH BLOCK (Building 2) 69 Sanders & 1630 Main St. W.

Residential

Ordinary

0%

Limited Combustible


Length - Height



Length - Height


Length - Height



F = 220 x C x √ AWhere:





considered 0.8

Non

combustible

0.6

Fire

Resistive

LOCATION: PROJECT:




limited

Combustible-15%

Combustible 0%


` Rapid Buring 25%


NFPA 13 sprinkler standard no 0%

Standard Water Supply no 0%

Fully Supervised System no 0%

0%


Separation Charge

EXPOSURE 1 (south) Prop Th 4.5 0-3 m 25%

3.1 -10 m 20%

EXPOSURE 2 (east) Existing Shed 12.4 10.1 - 20 m 15%

20.1 - 30 m 10%


> 45 m 0%

EXPOSURE 4 (north) Existing House 28

Total: 60%no more

than 75%



CALCULATIONS C = 1 Ordinary

A = 1521 m2 STOREY AREAS m2507 1

F = 8580 L/min 507 2


CORRECTION FACTORS:

OCCUPANCY -1350 L/min

FIRE FLOW ADJUSTED FOR OCCUPANCY 7650 L/min

REDUCTION FOR SPRINKLER 0 L/min

EXPOSURE CHARGE 4590 L/min



F = 200 L/sec


Length - Height

WATER SUPPLY FOR PUBLIC FIRE PROTECTION , FIRE UNDERWRITERS SURVEY

GUIDE FOR DETERMINATION OF REQUIRED FIRE FLOWS


construction

NORTH TH BLOCK (Building 3) 69 Sanders & 1630 Main St. W.

Residential

Ordinary

0%

Limited Combustible


Length - Height



Length - Height


Length - Height



4.0 SANITARY/COMBINED SEWERS

i) Available & Existing Infrastructure The following sewers presently exist beneath the streets bordering the subject site. Refer to the Functional Servicing Plan for the layout of the sewers bordering the subject site. Note that there are no separated sewers in the area of the site.

Main St. W. o There is a 450mm combined sewer flowing easterly, discharging into a 750mm

combined sewer flowing northerly beneath Westbourne Road. The 750mm Westbourne Road combined sewer ultimately discharges into the Sanders Blvd. combined sewer (below).

West Park Ave. o There is a 300mm combined sewer flowing northerly, discharging into the 450mm

combined sewer beneath Sanders Blvd. (below).

Sanders Blvd. o There is a 450mm combined sewer flowing easterly, becoming 525mm and then

750mm in diameter, receiving flows from both Main St. W. and West Park Ave. City staff have provided criteria for consideration of these existing sewers in the preconsultation notes (Appendix A). The criteria states that both sewers bordering the site are capacity-deficient and that backflow preventers are recommended.

ii) Proposed Sanitary Servicing Refer to Appendix A for the proposed development statistics. City staff have stated that sanitary flows are to be calculated by Part 8 of the Ontario Building Code. Calculations are provided below. Additionally, City standards for population densities and flow rates will be used. The following are provided in the City of Hamilton Comprehensive Development Guidelines and Financial Policies Manual (2016), Section E.1.4. Design Flows. Residential

Townhouses and maisonettes (30 upha) – 110 persons per hectare

High Density Apartments (100 upha) – varies (subject to detailed plans). Given that the criteria does

o There are 174 units proposed in this development as shown in the statistics in Appendix A

Commercial varies 125 to 750 ppha

Per person flow – 360 L/person/day Inflow/Infiltration

For areas where there will be storm sewers beneath the weeping tiles of the development, infiltration allowance is 0.4 L/s per hectare

Peaking Factor

𝑀 =5

𝑝0.2

Where p is population in thousands. 2<M<5.



The peak sanitary flow from the proposed development is thus calculated as follows, in Table 1. Note that Table 1 includes groundwater flow as discussed below.

TABLE 2 – Proposed Sanitary Flows

Population

(P)

Average Flow (l/s)

Peak Factor

Peak Sanitary (l/s)

Infiltration Allowance

(l/s)

Groundwater Flow (l/s)

Total Flow (l/s)

Townhouses 30 0.12 5 0.62

0.20 0.1 6.4 9 Storey Tower 250 1.04 5 5.20

Retail 15 0.06 5 0.32

A 250mm @ 2.0% sanitary sewer connection is proposed to the 450mm combined sewer beneath Sanders Boulevard. The pipe has a capacity of 87 L/s, which is adequate to convey the above post-development sanitary flow. A hydrogeological investigation – titled The Report on the Hydrogeological Assessment of the Property at 69 Sanders Boulevard and 1630 Main Street West by Candec Engineering (May 2018) – was prepared to qualitatively and quantitatively characterize the groundwater The hydrogeological investigation states in Section 4.0 (page 4) that the maximum groundwater extraction rate is estimated to be 1100 US Gallons per day (0.05 L/s) and that the pumping rate required to maintain this will be significantly less. A conservative groundwater flow rate of 0.1 L/s has been considered in the sanitary flow calculation (above), given the following discussion. There are typically different means of discharging water collected by foundation drains, as follows.

Option 1: Splashpad. Discussion: As in typical house construction, the sump might discharge onto the surface onto a splashpad and thereafter percolate into the underlying soil. This site is almost entirely underlain by the subject development’s below-grade parking structure, therefore any water discharged onto a splash pad will ultimately drain back into the building foundation drains. This is not acceptable as per MOE criteria, therefore this is not a feasible strategy for groundwater discharge.

Option 2: Infiltration gallery/soakaway pit/dry well. Discussion: It may have been possible to discharge water collected by foundation drains into one such infiltration measures. Such infiltration measures are required by the MOECC and OBC to be located a minimum of 5m horizontal distance away from buildings to prevent recirculation of the water. There is no location in the proposed development which satisfies this criteria, therefore this is not a feasible means of discharging groundwater collected by foundation drains.

Option 3: Discharge to City sewer. Discussion: This is the only feasible option for discharge of any groundwater collected by the foundation drains. The quantity is small relative to the development’s post-development sanitary flow, therefore it follows that this is the most reasonable approach. Further Section 5.0 (page 5) of the hydrogeological investigation concludes that the quality of water is such that it can be discharged to sanitary or combined sewer.



Further to the foregoing sanitary flow calculation based on the municipal design criteria, the sanitary flow rate is calculated to be 2.1 L/s as follows, based on the Ontario Building Code. `

PROJECT: Proposed Residential Townhouse Development CLIENT: Connect Communities 173-177 Dundas Street East DATE: 23-May-18Hamilton, Ontario PROJECT No.: 17263

DRAWING REF.: SET A

A B C D E F G H I J

Floor Area

(sq.ft.)

Floor Area

(sq.m.)

Establishment

Type

(OBC 8.2.1.3.B.)

Based on Floor Area Volume

(litres)

Total

Volume

(litres)

(B x E)

Volume

(litres)

Establishment

Type

(OBC 8.2.1.3.B.)

Based on Number of

Beds or Units

(ea.)

Volume

(litres)

(G x I)

3-Storey 2BR Townhouse 1100 2 Bedroom Dwelling 20 22000

Basement Studio Apartment 750 1 Bedroom Dwelling 8 6000

1 -Bedroom Condo Unit 750 1 Bedroom Dwelling 119 89250

2-Bedroom Condo Unit 1100 2 Bedroom Dwelling 55 60500

Retail 505 Shopping Centre 5 L/ 1 sqm floor area 2525 2525

Total Floor Area 0 0 2525 177750

180275

2.09

Total Volume (Average per day)

Total (l/sec)

Total Based on Number of Beds/UnitsTotal Based on Floor Area



SANITARY FLOW CALCULATIONS SCENARIO: Proposed Site

This program calculates the sanitary discharge from various land use

As per the City of Hamilton Guidelines FILL IN COLOURED CELLS AS REQUIRED

RESIDENTIAL SITE AREA (ha) = 0.5 69 Sanders + 1630 Main St. W.

COMMERCIAL SITE AREA (ha) = 0

TOTAL SITE AREA (ha) = 0.5

LAND USE NUMBER OF

UNITS

SITE

AREA,

(ha)

GROSS

FLOOR

AREA, m2

TO

TA

L

PO

PU

LA

TIO

N

TOTAL DAILY

FLOW

(LITERS)

AVERAGE

DAILY FLOW

l/sec

PE

AK

ING

FA

CT

OR

, M

TO

TA

L F

LO

W

FR

OM

LA

ND

US

E,

l/se

c

RESIDENTIAL Density 1, using

86 person/site area 0 0 0.00


110 persons/site area 0.27 30 1069 0.12 5.00 0.62


270 persons/site area 0 0 0.00 5.00 0.00


400person/site area 0 0 0.00 5.00 0.00


1.4 persons/unit (Studio/1BR) 105 147 52920 0.61 5.00 3.06


2.1 persons/unit (2BR) 49 103 37044 0.43 5.00 2.14


3.1 persons/unit (3BR) 0 0 0.00 4.50 0.00

Total Residential154 280 100656 1.17 5.00 5.83

COMMERCIAL, Using 100

persons/ha0 0 0.00 4.50 0.00

RETAIL, Using 300 ppha

505 15 5454 0.06 5.00 0.32

INSTITUTIONAL, Using 1.1

persons/unit 0 0 0.00 4.50 0.00

OFFICES, Using, 3.3

persons/100m20 0 0.00 4.50 0.00

TOTAL 0.270 V1= 106110 Q1= 5.83

Q2= 0.32

Q = (MqP/86400) + A * I (L/sec) Qinfil 0.20

where : P is population Qtot 6.34

Q1= total flow from Residential Land Use (L/sec) q = 360 L/cap/day

Q2= total flow from Commercial Land Use (L/sec) q = 360 L/cap/day

Qinfil = total flow from infiltration (L/sec)

Qtot = total flow (Land use + infiltration) A = gross site area

i = 0.40 L/sec/ha (infiltration rate)

V1= Total Volume from Land Use in liters Peaking Factor M = 5/((P/1000)^0.2) (2<M<5)



5.0 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT

iii) Terms of Reference & Available Infrastructure Presently there are only combined sewers beneath the streets bordering the site. There are no separated storm sewers in the area of the site. Refer to the above section for a description of the combined sewers adjacent to the site. Refer to the Functional Servicing Plan and the Pre-Development Drainage Plan on the following page for the layout of the existing sewers and adjacent drainage patterns. City engineering review staff provided criteria for stormwater management design in the critera memo provided here in Appendix A.

The quantity control criteria is to control 100-year post-development storm flow to the 2-year pre-development level.

The quality control criteria is to provide Level 1 quality control

The comments state that: o The runoff coefficient (C) for 1630 Main St. W. is 0.6 o The runoff coefficient (C) for 69 Sanders Boulevard is 0.8 o Notwithstanding these allocated C-values, the criteria calls for a pre-development

storm drainage plan and to control flows based on the pre-development flow The Hamilton Mount Hope 2 and 100 year Chicago Intensity-Duration-Frequency (IDF) design storms were used for stormwater runoff analysis for this site using Visual OTTHYMO. The Mount Hope 2 year and 100 year storm Intensity-Duration-Frequency equations are shown below 2 Year Storm: I2 = 646.0 / (T + 6)0.781 where: I = intensity (mm/hr) I2 = 72.1 mm/hr T = time of concentration (10min) 100 Year Storm: I100 = 2317.4 / (T + 11)0.836 I100=181.81 mm/hr

iv) Allowable & Pre-Development Discharge Rate The subject site drained in pre-development conditions as shown on the Pre-Development Drainage Plan on the following page. Pre-development catchment areas are delineated on that plan. The adjacent lands all drain externally of the subject property, with the exception of the rear yards of the residential lots west of the subject proposed townhouses – designated Catchment Area EXT-A on the Pre-Development Drainage Plan. All other bordering lands, including the residential lots to the east, Sanders Boulevard, Main Street West and West Park Ave all have self-contained storm drainage and drain away from the subject site. The pre-development catchment areas are delineated as follows.



The site was modelled in the pre-development scenario using Visual OTTHYMO 2.3.2 to determine the pre-development 2-year storm runoff flow rates. For drainage areas with significant imperviousness the calculation of effective rainfall in Visual OTTHYMO is accomplished using the “Standhyd” method. This method is used in urban watersheds to simulate runoff by combining two parallel standard unit hydrographs resulting from the effective rainfall intensity over the pervious and impervious surfaces. For pervious surfaces, losses are calculated using the SCS modified CN method. The catchment area statistics in the pre-development scenario are as follows.

TABLE 3 - Catchment Characteristics for Site, Pre-Development

Area I.D.

Area (ha)

Hyd

rolo

gy

Me

tho

d

% im

perv

ious

imp

erv

iousn

ess

directly

co

nn

ecte

d %

Loss M

eth

od

for

Pe

rvio

us

Are

a

CN

fo

r

Pe

rvio

us A

rea

Initia

l

Ab

str

actio

n

for

Pe

rvio

us

(mm

)

Tim

e t

o p

ea

k

(Tp)

EX-A 69 Sanders Roof

0.115 StandHyd 99 99 SCS 80 1 -

EX-B 69 Sanders Paved Area

0.083 StandHyd 90 90 SCS 80 1 -

EX-C 69 Sanders

Landscape Area 0.184 NashHyd - - SCS 80 5 0.11

EXT-A External Runoff

0.062 NashHyd - - SCS 80 5 0.11

EX-D 1630 Main St.

Roof 0.013 StandHyd 99 99 SCS 80 1 -

EX-E 1630 Main St. Paved Area

0.079 StandHyd 90 90 SCS 80 1 -

EX-F 1630 Main St.

Landscape Area 0.032 NashHyd - - SCS 80 5 0.11

The pre-development Visual OTTHYMO Model is as follows. Refer to the output in Appendix B.



Figure 2 - Pre-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model (2-Year Storm)

The peak pre-development 2-year storm discharge rate on the two sewers that the site fronts to is as follows. Refer to the pre-development visual OTTHYMO output in Appendix B. These flow rates will form the bases for the allowable release rate.

TABLE 4 – Pre-Development (allowable) 2-Year Storm Discharge

Outlet Location Catchment Area (Ha) Site Allowable (L/s)

Sanders Boulevard 0.382 + 0.062 (External) = 0.444 44

Main Street West 0.124 18

If the pre-development discharge rate were calculated using the Rational Method based on the pre-development C-value as stated in the City engineering preconsultation notes (Appendix A), the pre-development 2-year storm flow would be as follows.

TABLE 5 – Allocated (allowable) 2-Year Storm Discharge

Location

Run-off Coefficient

(Per City)

Rainfall Intensity

(mm/hr)

Catchment Area (ha)

Site Allowable (L/s)

Sanders Boulevard 0.8 72 0.382 61

Main Street West 0.6 72 0.124 15

Table 4 – based on the pre-development hydrology – provides more restrictive allowable release rate criteria, therefore this will be assumed as the site’s discharge quantity control criteria.

1

CATCHMENT EX-A69 SANDERS ROOFAREA = 0.115PeakFlow = 0.024 2

CATCHMENT EX-B69 SANDERS PAVEDAREA = 0.083PeakFlow = 0.016 3

CATCHMENT EX-C69 SANDERS SODAREA = 0.184PeakFlow = 0.005 4

CATCHMENT EXT-AEXTERNAL RUNOFFAREA = 0.062PeakFlow = 0.002

5

CATCHMENT EX-D1630 MAIN ROOFAREA = 0.013PeakFlow = 0.003 6

CATCHMENT EX-E1630 MAIN PAVEDAREA = 0.079PeakFlow = 0.015 7

CATCHMENT EX-F1630 MAIN SODAREA = 0.032PeakFlow = 0.001

8 9

SUBJECT SITEPRE-DEV QAREA = 0.382PeakFlow = 0.043 10

PRE-DEV FLOW TOSANDERS BLVDAREA = 0.444PeakFlow = 0.044

11 12

PRE-DEV FLOW TOMAIN ST WAREA = 0.124PeakFlow = 0.018



This report assumes that the component of the property with pre-development municipal address 69 Sanders Boulevard (Catchment Areas EX-A, EX-B, EX-C) – which fronts to both Sanders Boulevard and Main Street West – drains in pre-development conditions to the Sanders Boulevard 450mm combined sewer. This is given, as shown on the Pre-Development Drainage Plan, that the major overland flow path is towards Sanders Boulevard. This report assumes that the component of the property with pre-development municipal address 1630 Main Street West (EX-D, EX-E, EX-F) – which fronts to Main Street West – drains in pre-development conditions to the Main Street West 450mm combined sewer.

v) Proposed Conditions & Post-Development Flow Analysis

The proposed development will control the post development 100-year storm flows to the allowable flow rate (2-year pre-development) established above; on-site attenuation and storage will be provided. The proposed development will have two storm service connections, one draining to each of the pre-development outlets as identified above. The discharge from each of these outlets will be controlled as per the flow rates identified above. The following table summarizes the parameters used in Visual OTTHYMO to characterize the post development catchment areas. Refer to the Post-Development Drainage Plan on the following page and the Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model thereafter.

TABLE 6 - Catchment Characteristics for Post-Developed Site

Ou

tlet

Loca

tion

Area I.D.

Area (ha)

Hyd

rolo

gy

Me

tho

d

% im

perv

ious

imp

erv

iousn

ess

dire

ctly

co

nn

ecte

d %

Loss M

eth

od

for

Pe

rvio

us

Are

a

CN

fo

r

Pe

rvio

us A

rea

Initia

l

Ab

str

actio

n

for

Pe

rvio

us

(mm

)

Tim

e t

o p

ea

k

(Tp)

Ma

in S

t. W

.

450

mm

Se

we

r A – Tower Rooftop 0.14 StandHyd 99 99 SCS 80 1 -

B – Controlled Ground Level

0.05 StandHyd 90 90 SCS 80 1 -

C – Uncontrolled Ground Level

0.01 StandHyd 90 90 SCS 80 1 -

Sa

nd

ers

Blv

d.

450

mm

Se

we

r

D – Controlled Ground Level

0.21 StandHyd 80 80 SCS 80 1 -

E – Townhouse Roofs

0.10 StandHyd 99 99 SCS 80 1 -

EXT-A – External Runoff

0.06 NashHyd - - SCS 80 5 0.11



Visual OTTHYMO 2.3.2. will be used to model and determine the detention volume required. For drainage areas with significant imperviousness the calculation of effective rainfall in Visual OTTHYMO is accomplished using the “Standhyd” method. This method is used in urban watersheds to simulate runoff by combining two parallel standard unit hydrographs resulting from the effective rainfall intensity over the pervious and impervious surfaces. For pervious surfaces, losses are calculated using the SCS modified CN method.

The foregoing catchment areas appear in the post-development Visual OTTHYMO Model, as

follows. The model shows flows in a 100-year storm. Refer to the detailed Visual OTTHYMO Output in Appendix B.

Figure 3 – Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model (100Y Storm)

As evident above, the discharge to the Main Street 450mm combined sewer is 15 L/s and the discharge to the Sanders Boulevard 450mm combined sewer is 41 L/s. Both are less-than the respective allowable release rate (Table 4).

TABLE 7 - Summary of Discharge from Site

2 Yr. Storm

(L/s) 100 Yr. Storm

(L/s)

Total Peak Discharge to Main St. W.* 5 15

2-Year Pre-Development (Allowable) Flow to Main St. W. 18

Peak Controlled Flow to Sanders Blvd. 15 42

2-Year Pre-Development (Allowable) Flow to Sanders Blvd. 44

1

CATCHMENT ATOWER ROOFAREA = 0.15PeakFlow = 0.075 2

CATCHMENT BCONTRLD GROUNDAREA = 0.05PeakFlow = 0.024 3

CATCHMENT CUNCONTLD GRNDAREA = 0.01PeakFlow = 0.005

4

CATCHMENT DGRND CONTRLDAREA = 0.21PeakFlow = 0.097 5

CATCHMENT ETH ROOFSAREA = 0.1PeakFlow = 0.05 6

CATCHMENT EXT-AEXTERNAL RUNOFAREA = 0.06PeakFlow = 0.009

7 8

CNTRLD DISCHARGETO MAIN ST WAREA = 0.2PeakFlow = 0.015 9

PEAK CNTRLD + UCDISCH TO MAIN STAREA = 0.21PeakFlow = 0.015

10 11 12

CNTRLD DISCHGETO SANDERS BLVAREA = 0.37PeakFlow = 0.042

13

TOWER CONTROLNGROOF DRAINSPeakFlow = 0.015



*Note: The Peak Discharge Rate to Main St. W. is not the sum of the controlled and uncontrolled drainage areas. Rather, the peak discharge considers the different peaking time between the attenuated/controlled discharge and the uncontrolled drainage area.

Stormwater storage will be provided upstream of the attenuation on the roof of the proposed tower, in a tank upstream of the orifice control discharging to Main Street and in a tank upstream of the orifice control discharging to Sanders Boulevard. The required storage volumes are as follows. Refer to the Visual OTTHYMO output in Appendix B for the volume calculations. Refer to the Functional Servicing Plan for preliminary storm tank locations and footprints. Orifice design calculations and storm tank geometry etc. will be provided at the SPA stage.

TABLE 8 - Stormwater Storage

2 Yr. Storm (m3)

100 Yr. Storm (m3)

Required Storage Volume (Tower Roof ponding) 27 72

Provided Storage Volume (Tower Roof ponding) 75

Required Storage Volume (South Tank to Main St) 16 44

Provided Storage Volume (South Tank to Main St) 45

Required Storage Volume (North Tank to Sanders Blvd) 46 134

Provided Storage Volume (North Tank to Sanders Blvd) 140

The stage-storage-discharge relationship for the tower roof ponding is as follows.



ROOFTOP STORAGE

PROJECT: PROP MIXED-USE DEV CLIENT:

1620 MAIN ST W DATE: 16-May-18

Hamilton, ON PROJECT No.: 18215

DRAWING REF.: 18215 FSP

Relationship for Rooftop Control Devices

Conventional Roof

Area of Roof = 1500 m2

7 (7 Roof drains)

Head (m) Volume (m3) Discharge (l/s) Volume (ha-m) Discharge (m

3/s)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00000 0.00000

0.05 24.75 5.24 0.00248 0.00524

0.10 49.50 10.47 0.00495 0.01047

0.15 74.25 15.71 0.00743 0.01571

0.20 99.00 20.94 0.00990 0.02094

Discharge Sample Calculation:

H= 150mm

Q= # Weirs x (Head(mm)/25.4mm) x Weir Discharge (l/sec)

Q= 7 x (150/25.4) x 0.38

Q= 20.94 l/sec

Number of Weirs =

vi) Erosion Control Erosion and sediment control will be implemented on-site prior to construction and be maintained through the entire duration of construction. Erosion control measures to be implemented are: - silt fence around the entire site - sediment socks within existing and proposed catchbasins - an entrance mud mat for trucks - daily cleaning and weekly washing of roads

vii) Stormwater Quality Control Hamilton City staff identified the stormwater quality control criteria applying to the runoff from this site to be Level 1 quality control (80% total suspended solids removal), with a treatment-train approach to quality control. The City of Hamilton recognizes conventional Oil-Grit Separators as providing 50% TSS Removal, as certified by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). Most Canadian municipalities now consider the Canadian Environmental Verification (CETV) the approval authority for Oil-Grit Separators. The CETV certification for the Stormceptor STC-model conventional Oil-Grit Separator by Imbrium Systems Inc. concurs with the NJDEP certification that the STC-model conventional OGS provides 50% TSS removal. Figure 4, as follows, is an excerpt from the CETV Verification Statement – Imbrium Systems Inc. Stormceptor … Oil-Grit Separators (November 2017). Figure 4 shows that the Stormceptor conventional OGS provides typically 50-70% TSS removal, therefore the conclusion that a conventional OGS does not satisfactorily address the stormwater quality criteria for this site because it does not provide 80% TSS holds.



Figure 4 - Excerpt from CETV Verification Statement for Stormceptor OGS

The CETV also provides certification for stormwater quality filters that provide TSS removal by mechanical filtration through a filter media. One such model is the Jellyfish Filter by Imbrium Systems. The CETV verification statement for the Jelllyfish Filter by Imbrium Systems states that it can provide a minimum 80% TSS Removal. Figure 5, as follows, is an excerpt from the CETV Verification Statement – Imbrium Systems Inc. Jellyfish Filter … (August 2017). Figure 5 shows that the Jellyfish Filter provides 80% TSS Removal, therefore it addresses the City criteria for 80% TSS Removal. The entire Jellyfish Filter CETV Verification Statement is provided here in Appendix B.



Figure 5 - Excerpt from CETV Verification Statement for Jellyfish Filter

It is accordingly proposed to provide a Jellyfish Filter by Imbrium to address City criteria for 80% TSS Removal. This is instead of providing a conventional OGS with a treatment-train approach. The Jellyfish filter will be sized at the SPA stage.



6.0 CONCLUSIONS From the foregoing investigation, the site is serviceable utilizing existing sanitary, storm and watermain infrastructure within and adjacent to the site. Storm water management can be accommodated with on-site storage as described in this report. The following table summarizes the SWM and Servicing components of the proposed development.

TABLE 9 - Summary

Peak Sanitary Discharge (L/s) 6.4 L/s (City criteria) or 2.1 L/s (OBC Section 8)

Proposed Sanitary Service 200mm at 2.00%

Receiving Sanitary Sewer Sanders Blvd. 450mm Combined Sewer

Development Water Demand (Fire + Domestic)

3260 USGM

Proposed Fire Service 9-Storey Tower – 150mm Fire Service

Townhouses – Existing Hydrants

Proposed Domestic Service 100mm – from West Park Rd.

Allowable release rate from site 44 L/s (Sanders); 18 L/s (Main St)

Proposed release rate from site to (100 year storm)

42 L/s (Sanders); 15 L/s (Main St)

Quantity Control To be designed at SPA



7.0 REFERENCES

1. City of Hamilton Comprehensive Development Guidelines and Financial Policies Manual

(2016). 2. Storm water Management Planning and Design Manual, Ontario Ministry of the

Environment, March 2003. 3. Visual OTTHYMO v2.0 Reference Manual, July 2002

Respectfully Submitted; The Odan Detech Group Inc.

_________________________

Daniel Bancroft, P.Eng.

MAY 30/18

69 SANDERS BLVD. & 1630 MAIN ST. W. – PROPOSED MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT FUNCTIONAL SERVICING & STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT


APPENDIX A Existing Site Aerial view of Site and surrounding areas Site Plan by Architectural Design Inc. Fixture Count by Architectural Design Inc. City Engineering Criteria



Development Statistics & Fixture Count

Assumed Fixture Count

Laundry

Quantity Toilets Sink Shower Sink Dishwasher Laundry Machine

3-Storey (2BR) Townhouses 20 3 3 2 1 1 1

Basement Studio Apartment 8 1 1 1 1 1 1

Studio + 1BR 81 1 1 1 1 1 1

1BR + D 24 2 2 1 1 1 1

2BR 49 2 2 1 1 1 1

Total Fixtures: 295 295 202 182 182 182

9-Storey Tower

Bathroom Kitchen



Memorandum

Date: February 15, 2018

City Preconsultation Engineering Criteria To:

Daniel Barnett, Planner Development Planning Section

From:

Saleem Sial, Development Co-ordinator Development Engineering Section

File No: FC-18-014

Re: Formal Consultation Meeting – Application by Nick Logarakis & George Logaraski, for Lands Located at 69 Sanders Boulevard and 1630 Main Street West, Hamilton (Ward 1)

We have reviewed the above noted application attached to your letter dated January 26, 2018. The applicant proposes to construct a nine (9) storey multiple dwelling with 154 dwelling as a student residence and 830 sq. m. of commercial area. Additionally the applicant is proposing to construct 20, four (4) storey stacked townhouse dwellings and 12, three (3) storey back-to-back townhouse dwellings. The applicant is also proposing to establish 12 surface parking spaces at the rear of the multiple dwelling and 106 underground parking spaces. An application for Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control will be required to implement the proposal. We provide the following comments: Documents reviewed:

Site Plan, Level P1 Floor Plan Ground Floor Plan, dated October 23, 2017. Information:

The existing Road Right of Way width of Main Street West is 26.3 m. We would like to advise that Main Street West has been designated as a major arterial street in the City wide road network. The ultimate width of Main Street West could be up to 150 feet (45.72m). In addition, this section of Main Street West has been identified as a preferred rapid transit route. Therefore, a road widening dedication from the subject lands will be required to facilitate the implementation of the rapid transit plans.



A 12.19 m x 12.19 m daylight triangle will be required to be transferred to the City from the widened limits of Main Street West at the northeast corner of the intersection of Main Street West and West Park Avenue as a condition of development approval.

There are existing 450mm diameter combined sewer, and 300 mm and 400 mm watermain passing in front of the property along main street West.

There are 200 mm watermain and 300 mm combined sewer along the West Park Avenue.

There is existing 150mm watermain on Sanders Boulevard adjacent to the subject lands.

The proposed development can be serviced by the existing 300mm diameter watermain on Main Street West and/or the existing 150mm diameter watermain on Sanders Boulevard.

No private infrastructure or manholes should be proposed beyond private property or within municipal right of way.

For information, the following hydrant test data is available in the vicinity of the development:

Hydrant ID Address Pressure

Zone

Date of

Most

Recent

HFI2

Static

Pressure

(psi)

Residual

Pressure

(psi)

Test

Flow

(Imp

Gal/min)

DSR DSR2 FAR20

(Imp

Gal/min)

HA59H035 69

SANDERS

BLVD

2 8/04/15

2:21:14

PM

65 62 890 3 45 3841

HA59H007 WEST

PARK

AVE

2 8/12/15

5:38:28

AM

60 58 800 2 40 4033

According to City’s GIS database, the available services are:

A 450mm diameter combined sanitary sewer with 0.2% slope on Main Street

West. A 450mm diameter combined sanitary sewer with 0.4% slope on

Sanders Blvd. The two sewers are currently capacity-deficient. Therefore,

Backflow prevention devices are recommended to be installed to prevent the

potential backflow.



The runoff coefficient for 1630 Main Street West is 0.6, the runoff coefficient

for 69 Sanders Boulevard is 0.8.

Following information may be required to the satisfaction of relevant departments:

i. Condition Survey (Pre and post) for the adjacent buildings and ii. Infrastructure (water, storm, sanitary and roads) condition assessment ( post

and pre survey) iii. Hydrogeologic study to understand the dewatering requirements iv. Demonstrate the dewatering methods (i.e. capacity within the sanitary

sewer/storm sewer system). v. MOECC – Permit to take water PTTW vi. Vibration analysis and Impacts vii. Noise Study viii. Detailed Construction Management Plan including construction details

(location of excavators, Crane, material storage), traffic management Plan and communication plan.

ix. Shoring and tie backs – detailed drawings, impacts to underground and above ground infrastructures

x. Including LC for the above works

Comments:

1. A Functional Servicing Report prepared by a P.Eng. according to Comprehensive Development Guidelines and Financial Policies Manual (2016) City of Hamilton addressing Water, Sanitary and Storm Servicing comments shall be submitted with the re-zoning application.

Road widening:

2. The ultimate width of Main Street West would be 45.72m. The owner will be required to transfer land to the City to bring the road width of Main Street West equal to 22.86 m from the original centre line of the road.

3. A 12.19m x 12.19m daylight triangle is required to be transferred to the City from the widened limits of Main Street West at the intersection of Main Street West and West Park Avenue as a condition of development approval. The future road widening should be acknowledged at the time of zoning and will be dedicated to the City at the time of Site Plan approval

Water Servicing: 4. With future applications, the proponent is required to provide a servicing report,

prepared by a licensed Professional Engineer, addressing:



o intended occupancy and the anticipated water demands, including peak demand calculated using the fixture-unit approach.

o the required fire flow (RFF) calculated per “Water Supply for Public Fire Protection, 1999, Fire Underwriters Survey” (FUS), and supplemented where appropriate by NFPA 13; Details to support the RFF calculation (e.g. floor area, type of construction, fire wall location and fire resistance rating, content fire hazard, sprinkler system credit and exposure charges, etc., as applicable) shall be clearly identified and properly documented.

o if the proponent intends to install sprinkler systems to ensure fire protection of the proposed buildings, the hydraulic parameters (flow and pressure) required by this system will need to be provided for our records when available.

o summary of the available fire flow in the area, based on the two-hydrant flow tests, and a conclusion as to the adequacy of available flow from the municipal system for the proposal.

5. A watermain hydraulic analysis, identifying the modelled system pressures at pressure district (PD2) level under various boundary conditions and demand scenarios, may be required to support future applications; the need to provide supporting hydraulic analysis will be evaluated once the above requested information has been submitted for our review.

6. The proponent should ensure that the Fire Department/Building Department is satisfied with the hydrant coverage, accessibility and firefighting provisions.

Sanitary System:

7. The applicant is required to submit a wastewater generation assessment using

Part 8 of the latest edition of the Code and Guide for sewage systems to

establish an equivalent population density for our records.

8. A Serving Plan showing the sanitary connection to the municipal sewer.

Minor Storm System:

9. An existing condition drainage area plan.

10. A storm drainage area plan of the proposed condition to supplement the site

servicing and grading plans. This plan is to include:

appropriate runoff coefficients,

location of outlet points on the City’s receiving conveyance system(s),

controlled runoff release rate(s), if applicable

illustration and/or details of runoff control measures, if applicable.



11. An agreement to provide and maintain private onsite control measures should be

registered on title by the owner to ensure their permanent function, if applicable.

Stormwater Management:

12. The SWM Brief should demonstrate the followings:

a) Storm water quantity control criteria:

The proponent needs to demonstrate suitable storm outlet (s). 100 year post development flow from the subject site should be controlled to the lesser of the 2 year pre development level or free flow capacity of the existing storm lateral (if any).

b) Storm water quality control criteria:

Level 1 quality control as per the City standards should be provided

Following information will be required at the time of Site Plan application.

13. A geotechnical investigation report will be required to demonstrate that the

proposed underground parking will not have any impact on the ground water table.

Sourcewater:

14. The proponent is reminded that dewatering discharge must comply with City of

Hamilton Sewer Use Bylaw standards, whether it be from underground parking construction or ongoing dewatering needs if underground parking structure intercepts groundwater.

15. It is recommended to consult with the Superintendent of Environmental

Monitoring and Enforcement Group within Hamilton Water as early as possible in the approval process, given that additional review may be required by Hamilton Water to verify the wastewater system could accept the quantity and/or quality of the discharge. Email [email protected] to better understand water discharges to City infrastructure. If dewatering is expected to exceed 50,000 L/day, registration with the Environmental Activity Sector Registry or a Permit to Take Water from the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change may be required.

16. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be required

17. Grading and Drainage plan will be required.

mailto:[email protected]



18. Site Servicing Plan and payment of applicable servicing permit fees will be

required. 19. Appropriate refundable cash securities to cover the potential damage to

municipal infrastructure during construction will be required. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 4196.

C.C.: Jamal Syed, P. Eng., Senior Project Manager (e-mail)



APPENDIX B Pre-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model Output 2-year storm Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Model Output 2-year storm & 100-year storm CETV Verification Statement – Imbrium Systems Inc. Jellyfish Filter

THE ODAN/DETECH GROUP INC.

.

Pre-Development Visual OTTHYMO Output (2-year Storm) ===========================================================================================================

V V I SSSSS U U A L

V V I SS U U A A L

V V I SS U U AAAAA L

V V I SS U U A A L

VV I SSSSS UUUUU A A LLLLL

OOO TTTTT TTTTT H H Y Y M M OOO

O O T T H H Y Y MM MM O O

O O T T H H Y M M O O

OOO T T H H Y M M OOO

Developed and Distributed by Clarifica Inc.

Copyright 1996, 2007 Clarifica Inc.

All rights reserved.

***** D E T A I L E D O U T P U T *****

Input filename: C:\Program Files (x86)\Visual OTTHYMO 2.3.3\voin.dat

Output filename: P:\2018\18215\Visual OTTHYMO\Rev0\18215 SWM\PRE-DEV.out

Summary filename: P:\2018\18215\Visual OTTHYMO\Rev0\18215 SWM\PRE-DEV.sum

DATE: 5/16/2018 TIME: 11:33:57 AM

USER:

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

****************************

** SIMULATION NUMBER: 1 **

****************************

--------------------

| CHICAGO STORM | IDF curve parameters: A= 646.000

| Ptotal= 35.06 mm | B= 6.000

-------------------- C= .781

used in: INTENSITY = A / (t + B)^C

Duration of storm = 4.00 hrs

Storm time step = 10.00 min

Time to peak ratio = .33

TIME RAIN | TIME RAIN | TIME RAIN | TIME RAIN

hrs mm/hr | hrs mm/hr | hrs mm/hr | hrs mm/hr

.17 2.39 | 1.17 18.60 | 2.17 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.33 2.73 | 1.33 74.10 | 2.33 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.50 3.22 | 1.50 24.28 | 2.50 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.67 3.95 | 1.67 12.94 | 2.67 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.83 5.20 | 1.83 8.92 | 2.83 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

1.00 7.89 | 2.00 6.87 | 3.00 3.08 | 4.00 2.07

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |

| NASHYD (0004) | Area (ha)= .06 Curve Number (CN)= 80.0

|ID= 1 DT=10.0 min | Ia (mm)= 5.00 # of Linear Res.(N)= 3.00

-------------------- U.H. Tp(hrs)= .20

Unit Hyd Qpeak (cms)= .012

PEAK FLOW (cms)= .002 (i)

TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.500

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 9.400

TOTAL RAINFALL (mm)= 35.061

RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .268

(i) PEAK FLOW DOES NOT INCLUDE BASEFLOW IF ANY.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



-------------------- U.H. Tp(hrs)= .20


.








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |

| STANDHYD (0002) | Area (ha)= .08

|ID= 1 DT= 5.0 min | Total Imp(%)= 90.00 Dir. Conn.(%)= 90.00

--------------------

IMPERVIOUS PERVIOUS (i)

Surface Area (ha)= .07 .01

Dep. Storage (mm)= 1.00 1.00

Average Slope (%)= 1.00 2.00

Length (m)= 23.50 40.00

Mannings n = .013 .250

NOTE: RAINFALL WAS TRANSFORMED TO 5.0 MIN. TIME STEP.

---- TRANSFORMED HYETOGRAPH ----



.083 2.39 | 1.083 18.60 | 2.083 5.63 | 3.08 2.84

.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.250 2.73 | 1.250 74.10 | 2.250 4.79 | 3.25 2.63

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.417 3.22 | 1.417 24.28 | 2.417 4.18 | 3.42 2.46

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.583 3.95 | 1.583 12.94 | 2.583 3.73 | 3.58 2.31

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.750 5.20 | 1.750 8.92 | 2.750 3.37 | 3.75 2.18

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

.917 7.89 | 1.917 6.87 | 2.917 3.08 | 3.92 2.07

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 2.07

Max.Eff.Inten.(mm/hr)= 74.10 25.68

over (min) 5.00 5.00

Storage Coeff. (min)= 1.21 (ii) 4.51 (ii)

Unit Hyd. Tpeak (min)= 5.00 5.00

Unit Hyd. peak (cms)= .33 .23

*TOTALS*

PEAK FLOW (cms)= .02 .00 .016 (iii)

TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 31.84

TOTAL RAINFALL (mm)= 35.06 35.06 35.06

RUNOFF COEFFICIENT = .97 .34 .91

***** WARNING: STORAGE COEFF. IS SMALLER THAN TIME STEP!

(i) CN PROCEDURE SELECTED FOR PERVIOUS LOSSES:

CN* = 80.0 Ia = Dep. Storage (Above)

(ii) TIME STEP (DT) SHOULD BE SMALLER OR EQUAL

THAN THE STORAGE COEFFICIENT.

(iii) PEAK FLOW DOES NOT INCLUDE BASEFLOW IF ANY.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 27.70 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 33.83




.







-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



-------------------- U.H. Tp(hrs)= .20





.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 .00








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 22.90 40.00






.083 2.39 | 1.083 18.60 | 2.083 5.63 | 3.08 2.84

.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.250 2.73 | 1.250 74.10 | 2.250 4.79 | 3.25 2.63

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.417 3.22 | 1.417 24.28 | 2.417 4.18 | 3.42 2.46

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.583 3.95 | 1.583 12.94 | 2.583 3.73 | 3.58 2.31

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.750 5.20 | 1.750 8.92 | 2.750 3.37 | 3.75 2.18

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

.917 7.89 | 1.917 6.87 | 2.917 3.08 | 3.92 2.07

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 2.07


over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 31.84







.




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 9.30 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00

Storage Coeff. (min)= .69 (ii) 1.96 (ii)



*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 31.90









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0008) |

| 1 + 2 = 3 | AREA QPEAK TPEAK R.V.

-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0002): .08 .016 1.33 31.84

+ ID2= 2 (0001): .12 .024 1.33 33.83

==================================================

ID = 3 (0008): .20 .039 1.33 33.00

NOTE: PEAK FLOWS DO NOT INCLUDE BASEFLOWS IF ANY.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0011) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0006): .08 .015 1.33 31.84

+ ID2= 2 (0005): .01 .003 1.33 31.90

==================================================

ID = 3 (0011): .09 .018 1.33 31.85


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0009) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0003): .18 .005 1.50 9.41

+ ID2= 2 (0008): .20 .039 1.33 33.00

==================================================

ID = 3 (0009): .38 .043 1.33 21.55


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0012) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0007): .03 .001 1.50 9.21

+ ID2= 2 (0011): .09 .018 1.33 31.85

==================================================

ID = 3 (0012): .12 .018 1.33 25.90


.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0010) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0004): .06 .002 1.50 9.40

+ ID2= 2 (0009): .38 .043 1.33 21.55

==================================================

ID = 3 (0010): .44 .044 1.33 19.85


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FINISH

===========================================================================================================


.

Post-Development Visual OTTHYMO Output (2-year & 100-year Storms)

===========================================================================================================

V V I SSSSS U U A L

V V I SS U U A A L

V V I SS U U AAAAA L

V V I SS U U A A L

VV I SSSSS UUUUU A A LLLLL

OOO TTTTT TTTTT H H Y Y M M OOO

O O T T H H Y Y MM MM O O

O O T T H H Y M M O O

OOO T T H H Y M M OOO

Developed and Distributed by Clarifica Inc.

Copyright 1996, 2007 Clarifica Inc.

All rights reserved.

***** D E T A I L E D O U T P U T *****

Input filename: C:\Program Files (x86)\Visual OTTHYMO 2.3.3\voin.dat

Output filename: P:\2018\18215\Visual OTTHYMO\Rev0\18215 SWM\POST-DEV.out

Summary filename: P:\2018\18215\Visual OTTHYMO\Rev0\18215 SWM\POST-DEV.sum

DATE: 5/17/2018 TIME: 9:12:26 AM

USER:

COMMENTS: ____________________________________________________________

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

****************************


****************************

--------------------

| CHICAGO STORM | IDF curve parameters: A= 646.000

| Ptotal= 35.06 mm | B= 6.000

-------------------- C= .781







.17 2.39 | 1.17 18.60 | 2.17 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.33 2.73 | 1.33 74.10 | 2.33 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.50 3.22 | 1.50 24.28 | 2.50 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.67 3.95 | 1.67 12.94 | 2.67 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.83 5.20 | 1.83 8.92 | 2.83 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

1.00 7.89 | 2.00 6.87 | 3.00 3.08 | 4.00 2.07

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 8.20 40.00






.083 2.39 | 1.083 18.60 | 2.083 5.63 | 3.08 2.84

.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.250 2.73 | 1.250 74.10 | 2.250 4.79 | 3.25 2.63

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.417 3.22 | 1.417 24.28 | 2.417 4.18 | 3.42 2.46


.

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.583 3.95 | 1.583 12.94 | 2.583 3.73 | 3.58 2.31

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.750 5.20 | 1.750 8.92 | 2.750 3.37 | 3.75 2.18

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

.917 7.89 | 1.917 6.87 | 2.917 3.08 | 3.92 2.07

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 2.07


over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 27.91









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 18.30 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 31.84









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 31.60 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 33.83





.






-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



-------------------- U.H. Tp(hrs)= .20





.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 .00








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 25.80 40.00






.083 2.39 | 1.083 18.60 | 2.083 5.63 | 3.08 2.84

.167 2.39 | 1.167 18.60 | 2.167 5.63 | 3.17 2.84

.250 2.73 | 1.250 74.10 | 2.250 4.79 | 3.25 2.63

.333 2.73 | 1.333 74.10 | 2.333 4.79 | 3.33 2.63

.417 3.22 | 1.417 24.28 | 2.417 4.18 | 3.42 2.46

.500 3.22 | 1.500 24.28 | 2.500 4.18 | 3.50 2.46

.583 3.95 | 1.583 12.94 | 2.583 3.73 | 3.58 2.31

.667 3.95 | 1.667 12.94 | 2.667 3.73 | 3.67 2.31

.750 5.20 | 1.750 8.92 | 2.750 3.37 | 3.75 2.18

.833 5.20 | 1.833 8.92 | 2.833 3.37 | 3.83 2.18

.917 7.89 | 1.917 6.87 | 2.917 3.08 | 3.92 2.07

1.000 7.89 | 2.000 6.87 | 3.000 3.08 | 4.00 2.07


over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 33.84









.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 37.40 40.00



over (min) 5.00 10.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.42 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 34.06 11.89 29.61









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| RESERVOIR (0013) |

| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |

| DT= 5.0 min | OUTFLOW STORAGE | OUTFLOW STORAGE

-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0157 .0074

.0050 .0025 | .0209 .0099

.0105 .0049 | .0000 .0000

AREA QPEAK TPEAK R.V.

(ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

INFLOW : ID= 2 (0001) .150 .031 1.33 33.83

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0013) .150 .006 1.58 33.03

PEAK FLOW REDUCTION [Qout/Qin](%)= 17.98

TIME SHIFT OF PEAK FLOW (min)= 15.00

MAXIMUM STORAGE USED (ha.m.)= .0027

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0010) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0005): .10 .020 1.33 33.84

+ ID2= 2 (0004): .21 .036 1.33 29.61

==================================================

ID = 3 (0010): .31 .057 1.33 30.98


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0007) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0002): .05 .010 1.33 31.84

+ ID2= 2 (0013): .15 .006 1.58 33.03

==================================================

ID = 3 (0007): .20 .014 1.33 32.73


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0011) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0006): .06 .002 1.50 9.22


.

+ ID2= 2 (0010): .31 .057 1.33 30.98

==================================================

ID = 3 (0011): .37 .058 1.33 27.45


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------


| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |


-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0150 .0045



INFLOW : ID= 2 (0007) .200 .014 1.33 32.73

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0008) .200 .005 2.25 32.39




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------


| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |


-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0440 .0140



INFLOW : ID= 2 (0011) .370 .058 1.33 27.45

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0012) .370 .015 1.58 27.25




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0009) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0003): .01 .002 1.33 27.91

+ ID2= 2 (0008): .20 .005 2.25 32.39

==================================================

ID = 3 (0009): .21 .005 2.17 32.18


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

****************************


****************************

--------------------

| CHICAGO STORM | IDF curve parameters: A=2317.400

| Ptotal= 91.37 mm | B= 11.000

-------------------- C= .836







.17 5.36 | 1.17 54.83 | 2.17 14.69 | 3.17 6.56

.33 6.28 | 1.33 181.81 | 2.33 12.15 | 3.33 6.01

.50 7.60 | 1.50 71.90 | 2.50 10.36 | 3.50 5.56

.67 9.69 | 1.67 37.82 | 2.67 9.04 | 3.67 5.17

.83 13.40 | 1.83 25.04 | 2.83 8.02 | 3.83 4.83

1.00 21.77 | 2.00 18.55 | 3.00 7.21 | 4.00 4.54

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





.


Length (m)= 8.20 40.00






.083 5.36 | 1.083 54.83 | 2.083 14.69 | 3.08 6.56

.167 5.36 | 1.167 54.83 | 2.167 14.69 | 3.17 6.56

.250 6.28 | 1.250 181.81 | 2.250 12.15 | 3.25 6.01

.333 6.28 | 1.333 181.81 | 2.333 12.15 | 3.33 6.01

.417 7.60 | 1.417 71.90 | 2.417 10.36 | 3.42 5.56

.500 7.60 | 1.500 71.90 | 2.500 10.36 | 3.50 5.56

.583 9.69 | 1.583 37.82 | 2.583 9.04 | 3.58 5.17

.667 9.69 | 1.667 37.82 | 2.667 9.04 | 3.67 5.17

.750 13.40 | 1.750 25.04 | 2.750 8.02 | 3.75 4.83

.833 13.40 | 1.833 25.04 | 2.833 8.02 | 3.83 4.83

.917 21.77 | 1.917 18.55 | 2.917 7.21 | 3.92 4.54

1.000 21.77 | 2.000 18.55 | 3.000 7.21 | 4.00 4.54


over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 90.37 53.07 86.63









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 18.30 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 90.37 53.07 86.63









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 31.60 40.00


.



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 90.37 53.07 89.99









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



-------------------- U.H. Tp(hrs)= .20





.167 5.36 | 1.167 54.83 | 2.167 14.69 | 3.17 6.56

.333 6.28 | 1.333 181.81 | 2.333 12.15 | 3.33 6.01

.500 7.60 | 1.500 71.90 | 2.500 10.36 | 3.50 5.56

.667 9.69 | 1.667 37.82 | 2.667 9.04 | 3.67 5.17

.833 13.40 | 1.833 25.04 | 2.833 8.02 | 3.83 4.83

1.000 21.77 | 2.000 18.55 | 3.000 7.21 | 4.00 .00








-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 25.80 40.00






.083 5.36 | 1.083 54.83 | 2.083 14.69 | 3.08 6.56

.167 5.36 | 1.167 54.83 | 2.167 14.69 | 3.17 6.56

.250 6.28 | 1.250 181.81 | 2.250 12.15 | 3.25 6.01

.333 6.28 | 1.333 181.81 | 2.333 12.15 | 3.33 6.01

.417 7.60 | 1.417 71.90 | 2.417 10.36 | 3.42 5.56

.500 7.60 | 1.500 71.90 | 2.500 10.36 | 3.50 5.56

.583 9.69 | 1.583 37.82 | 2.583 9.04 | 3.58 5.17

.667 9.69 | 1.667 37.82 | 2.667 9.04 | 3.67 5.17

.750 13.40 | 1.750 25.04 | 2.750 8.02 | 3.75 4.83

.833 13.40 | 1.833 25.04 | 2.833 8.02 | 3.83 4.83

.917 21.77 | 1.917 18.55 | 2.917 7.21 | 3.92 4.54

1.000 21.77 | 2.000 18.55 | 3.000 7.21 | 4.00 4.54


over (min) 5.00 5.00



.



*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 90.37 53.07 89.99









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| CALIB |



--------------------





Length (m)= 37.40 40.00



over (min) 5.00 5.00




*TOTALS*


TIME TO PEAK (hrs)= 1.33 1.33 1.33

RUNOFF VOLUME (mm)= 90.37 53.07 82.90









-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------


| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |


-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0157 .0074

.0050 .0025 | .0209 .0099

.0105 .0049 | .0000 .0000



INFLOW : ID= 2 (0001) .150 .075 1.33 89.99

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0013) .150 .015 1.67 89.21




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0010) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0005): .10 .050 1.33 89.99

+ ID2= 2 (0004): .21 .097 1.33 82.90

==================================================

ID = 3 (0010): .31 .147 1.33 85.19


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0007) |



.

-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0002): .05 .024 1.33 86.63

+ ID2= 2 (0013): .15 .015 1.67 89.21

==================================================

ID = 3 (0007): .20 .036 1.33 88.56


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0011) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0006): .06 .009 1.50 47.87

+ ID2= 2 (0010): .31 .147 1.33 85.19

==================================================

ID = 3 (0011): .37 .155 1.33 79.13


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------


| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |


-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0150 .0045



INFLOW : ID= 2 (0007) .200 .036 1.33 88.56

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0008) .200 .015 2.25 88.22




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------


| IN= 2---> OUT= 1 |


-------------------- (cms) (ha.m.) | (cms) (ha.m.)

.0000 .0000 | .0440 .0140



INFLOW : ID= 2 (0011) .370 .155 1.33 79.13

OUTFLOW: ID= 1 (0012) .370 .042 1.58 78.93




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------

| ADD HYD (0009) |


-------------------- (ha) (cms) (hrs) (mm)

ID1= 1 (0003): .01 .005 1.33 86.63

+ ID2= 2 (0008): .20 .015 2.25 88.22

==================================================

ID = 3 (0009): .21 .015 2.17 88.14


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FINISH


.

APPENDIX C Functional Servicing Plan Functional Grading Plan