Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1.1 Background
Canada and the United States. More than 16 million cars, trucks and
per cent of Canada-United States truck trade. In 2001 alone, this two-
and American trade and tourism increase through the years, projected
additional border crossing which will have the capacity to handle the
currently spans across the Detroit River and links up Detroit and Windsor
before a driver can reach the border crossing they need to cross several
street lights within the city core. This causes large traffic jams and
impede on the overall traffic ease of the city. This is why the new border
stages such that the traffic flow matches the facility capacity. Once the
Border Crossing Plaza site. This report will contain two parts: Firstly, a
report .In addition to that the technical report should follow best
management guideline.
The western edge of the proposed site runs along the Detroit River. The
Parkway and Broadway Street. The site measures 54.3 ha. By looking
existing site terrain inclines towards the South Eastern edge of the
proposed site. At the same time, it is fairly flat; the rough elevation
The 54.3 hectare area to be used for the proposed Canadian Plaza is
and assumed that the entire existing area is cultivated land. The
resulting runoff coefficients for the existing condition are C = 0.34 and
0.47 for 5 year & 100 year storm event respectively (see Table 2.1).
Table 2.1 – Runoff Coefficient for Use in the Rational Method
Character of
Return Period (years)
Surface
Undeveloped 5 100
Cultivated land
0.34 0.47
Flat, 0 – 2%
Developed
The data information was gathered from MNR, DRIC draft environmental
about 3 metres below ground surface in the clayey silt and silty clay
materials. The silty clay, clayey silt, sand and gravel and sands are
be moderately erodible.
properties and cause them flood damage. The proposed site is built on
coefficient for the soil would increase. The runoff coefficient of asphalt
is 0.90, this means that during a typical storm, 10% of the water on the
asphalt will be absorbed by the ground, 90% of the water would need
crossing plaza site and its surrounding area. This map was obtained
Figure 2.2 is based on the natural flow path of water and existence of
neighboring land has a slope facing the border crossing site, it will be
storm water management pond exists in front of the area with a slope
facing the border crossing plaza site, the land will not be considered
into the border crossing plaza area, it will be considered part of the
drainage area.
Figure 2.2 - Outlined drainage area based on rough contour outline
Figure 2.3, the water from total drainage area will naturally flow into
system with 5 and up to 100 year storm capacity. Water will need to be
crossing plaza site. Figure 2.4 outlines how the drainage areas will be
divided:
Figure 2.05 - Divided Drainage Areas
This area is the most important drainage area of this project. The
rainwater that lands on this area will need to be processed for quality
Preliminary report, this area will include a main channel which will divert
all rain water into the main wet ponds. The ponds the runoff will go to
area. The Runoff from these areas will simply need to be diverted into
Water Quality:
is also connected two major highways. This means that chemical spills
and PCB’s. During a rainfall, theses chemicals can make their way into
the leachate and contaminate the water system i.e: the Detroit River.
This will ultimately endanger the ecosystem and drinking water source.
Sediment Control:
Water is a highly abrasive medium and with enough time, water will
shape any material to its movement. Water abrasion of roads and earth
under the roads can compromise the structural integrity of any driving
landslides. For the safety of drivers these large driving surfaces cannot
afford to be structurally compromised, secondly it is also important to
North and the East sides of the site may contain large amounts of
sediments during the construction stage. This sediment laden runoff can
cause sewers to be filled with sediment and destroy fish habitat in the
river.
Road Safety:
The border crossing area is intended to be used as a high traffic area for
drained such that driving surfaces are un-slippery and safe enough to
drive on. In addition to that, we want to make sure that during a heavy
100 year rainfall, water is properly diverted from driving surfaces and
3.2 Considerations
Plaza requires quality, quantity and erosion controls for the peak flows
from the Plaza, as the increase in impervious area will increase the
overall peak flows from the site, as well as the overall pollutant loading.
This will lead to erosion issues downstream, as well as impact the
rooftops. The principle concern for large sites with a high imperiousness
designed based on a 100-year design flow and be controlled for all storm
Based on the results and the site conditions, the solutions retained were
storage SWMP’s and oil/grit separators. The storage SWMP’s will provide
quality treatment, erosion control and quantity control for the catchment
the facilities, discharging to the Detroit River via an outlet channel. The
pond system provides closer outlets for the sewer system, lowering the
the other. The pond system would control the release rate to the Detroit
River. In the event of a contaminant spill with the Plaza, a shut off valve
Site Overview:
This section will include the technical design of the major storm water
management structures built within the border crossing plaza site. The
design portion will be split into two parts the design of stormwater
management system within the Main Drainage Area A and the design of
From the conceptual report, the BMP’s of our storm water management
system would include ponds and a large channel leading up to the pond.
The quality and quantity pond would be located at the most western edge
2. Water has a much shorter distance to flow into the Detroit River if
there is a larger than expected storm that occurs.
The main storm water channel leading up to the pond will be placed along
the southern edge of the site. The channel will be in this configuration
because:
1. The channel will be at the bottom of the site slope in such a way
that excess rainwater is forced to flow towards channel and does
not pool in critical traffic areas
2. It will run along the greatest length of the site, catching a majority
of the excess rainwater.
3. The border crossing plaza has the greatest free space allocation
along the southern edge of the site
Figure 4.1 - Channel and pond configuration
4.2 Main Channel Design
Pre-development conditions:
see that the site is highly flat. The existing elevation difference between
the highest and lowest part of the channel is 2.72m over a 1110m span.
The MOE 2003 storm water management guideline outlines that grass
swales are ideal storm water management structures for flat terrain. Thus
the main channel leading up to the pond will be a grassed swale. Grass
entrance to the projected pond entrance along the southern edge of the
site. The elevation data was obtained from the City of Windsor official
website.
Design Constraints
The design constraints of the proposed site are mainly the flatness and
ground water table elevation. Figure 4.2 describes the design constraints
178.72m. The current ground level of the pond entrance is 176.53 m. This
point is highly important, as it will determine the level at which the Main
profile
Figure 4.2 - Existing main channel elevation
Swale will enter the pond. The Detroit River Website measured that the
required for the pond design. Thus the channel floor cannot be lower than
175.75m. The Main Drainage Swale and Wet Pond design will be
Section 4.2. By looking at Figure 4.2 the height available for between
the swale floor at the pond entrance and the ground level of the most
eastern point of the swale is 2.98m. The MOE also states that a one foot
clearance between the 100 year water elevation of the swale and the
ground level above the swale is required. Thus, the swale design
requires that the sum of the 100 year water level of the swale and the
found that the swale would not exceed 1m in depth for a 100 year storm
determine the water level of our channel for a 100 year storm. The
V=kn*R23*S0.5
Q=1.49n*AR23S0.5
9.3305m3/s
channels
A - MOE 2003 STMWTR Guideline specifies that the swale will need a
A=(B+Zy)y
specifies 6m. However due to the fact that the site is very flat we will
Z is defined as the horizontal distance per meter of the side slope MOE
y is the height and water level of the trapezoid for a 100 year storm it is
Foot Clearance
Unknown: Y
2.5:1m Side
Slope
6m Base (MOE
2003)
Figure 4.3 - Swale
R=(B+Zyy/(B+2*y1+Z20.5)^(23)
S - Channel Slope, after optimization the best slope to use given the site
water table depth, site elevation and resulted channel depth this
Now that all values are defined, solve for y in the following equation:
0=B+ZyyB+ZyyB+2*y1+Z20.523-Q*n/(1.49*S0.5)
Due to the fact that many channels were designed in this project a
Y5MDS=0.67m
Now that the water level is found, Figure 4.4 outlines the profile view of
the section
Figure 4.4 – Post Development Swale Elevation
Figure 3.08: Main Drainage Swale Cross sectional Dimensions in Meters
This design section will consider all runoff predicted to enter the site from
Secondary Drainage Areas B and C, refer to Figure 2.05. Figure 6.09 is an
illustrative diagram of the secondary drainage channels and swales of the
site which will route the runoff for up to a 100 year storm directly into the
Detroit River.
-The Major Drainage Culvert represented by P2-P7 will route runoff from
MajDS into the Major and Minor Drainage Swale MMDS. The culvert will be
placed under ground such that it does not mix with the runoff expected to
land on the main border crossing plaza site. The culvert will be underground
and incased with cement.
-The Major and Minor Drainage Swale represented by P1-P2 will route runoff
from MajDC and MinDS into the Detroit River.
Figure 6.09 Secondary Drainage Channel Layout
The line representing P6-P5-P4-P3-P2 will collect the water from Secondary
Drainage Area B and route it to point P2. Figure 6.10 is pre existing elevation
profile of Line P6-P5-P4-P3-P2. This line will represent the Minor Drainage
Swale MinDS
Figure 6.10: Pre existing elevation profile of Line P6-P5-P4-P3-P2, MinDS
The line representing P6-P7 will collect the water from Secondary Drainage
Area C and route it to point P7 which is the entrance of the major drainage
culvert MajDC. In addition to that, the line representing P7-P8-P9-P10-P11 will
collect the water from Secondary Drainage Area B and route it to point P7
which is the entrance of the major drainage culvert MajDC aswell.Figure 6.11
is the pre existing elevation profile of Line P6-P7-P8-P9-P10-P11 which will
represent the Major Drainage Swale MajDS.
The line representing P2-P7 will collect the water from MajDS and route it to
point P2 which is the entrance of the Major and Minor Drainage Swale MMDS.
Figure 3.12 is the pre existing elevation profile of Line P2-P7 which will
represent the Major Drainage Culvert MajDC.
The line representing P1-P2 will collect the water from MinDS and MajDC and
route it directly into the Detroit river. Figure 3.13 is the pre existing elevation
profile of Line P1-P2 which will represent the Major and Minor Drainage Swale
MMDS.
As described in the Main Channel Design, the Border crossing plaza area is
very flat, elevation is a primary design consideration. In the main channel
design section 5.2.1 the Ground Water Table was the elevation constraint,
however for the secondary drainage channels, the Detroit River water level is
the design constraint. The channel floor must be higher than the highest
Detroit water elevation. The highest water level report of the Detroit River is
175.00m. Thus the channel floor cannot be lower than 175.00m.
The manning equation parameters will be determined based the River Water
Level and slope elevation difference. The design begins by looking at the
longest path runoff will have to travel before reaching the river. By
investigating Figure 3.09 that path is obviously P11-P10-P9-P8-P7-P2-P1. By
combining the elevation profile of MMDS, MajDC and MajDS. Figure 3.14
Displays the P11-P10-P9-P8-P7-P2-P1 elevation profile.
Figure 3.14 Elevation Profile For P11-P10-P9-P8-P7-P2-P1.
Figure 3.14 clearly outlines there is a 3.30 meter difference between the
highest and the lowest point of the Secondary Drainage Channels. In design
it is important to consider that any swale design must have a minimum of a
30.5cm clearance. We will also use a 0.125% slope similarly to the Main
Channel Design. The elevation difference due to the slope at 0.125% is
2.16m. Thus the remaining elevation availability for the 100 year storm
water level in the swales and culvert is 83.25cm.The 0.125% slope was
obtained by optimization using the manning equation excel worksheet.
Displayed in the appendix.
The following section will explain the inputs of the Manning’s equation
3. 06.01 Minor Drainage Swale (MinDS):
The MinDS will route all the excess rainwater from Minor Secondary Drainage area
to MMDS at point P2. The Minor Secondary drainage area was determined to be
77642m2, with 15695m2 paved with concrete (C=0.95) and 619500m2 with grass
(C=0.47). The intensity of a 100 year storm is 75mm/h for 35 minutes. By using
Rational method (Q=CiA) the resulting flow is 2.3107m3/s. by using approached
outlined in Section 3. 05.03 inputs in the Manning’s equation are as follows:
Q=2.3107m3/s, n=0.03, S=0.125%,Z=2.5m, B=6m. After applying Manning’s
formula, we solve for y=0.50m
The MajDS will route all the excess rainwater from Major Secondary Drainage area
to MMDS, P7.The Major Secondary drainage area was determined to be 434983m2,
with 109285m2 paved with concrete (C=0.95) and 325698m2 with grass (C=0.47).
The intensity of a 100 year storm is 75mm/h for 35 minutes. By using Rationnal
method (Q=CiA) the resulting flow is 5.3521m3/s. by using approached outlined in
Section 3. 05.03 inputs in the Mannings equation are as follows:
Q=5.3521m3/s, n=0.03, S=0.125%,Z=2.5m, B=6m. After applying Manning’s
formula, we solve for y=0.79m
The Culvert will route all the excess rainwater from MajDS to the MMDS. The culvert
will be designed to go underneath the border crossing plaza’s roads and buildings it
will be incased in reinforced concrete with strength able to sustain the weight of the
largest truck multiplied by a safety factor of 3. The culvert will be trapezoidal as all
of our other channels are trapezoidal: The inputs of the Manning’s equation are as
follows: Q=5.3521m3/s, n=0.017 (for Sewer Concrete), S=0.125%, Z=2.5m, B=6m.
After applying Manning’s formula, we solve for y=0.52m
Figure 3.12 outlines the MajDC cross section
The Swale will route all the excess rainwater from surrounding sites, P2, to the
Detroit River. The flow value is simply the sum of the 100 peak flow for MinDS and
the MajDS which is Q=7.6628m3/s. The culvert will be trapezoidal as all of our other
channels are trapezoidal: The rest of the inputs of the Manning’s equation are as
follows: n=0.03 (for Grass) , S=0.125%,Z=2.5m, B=8.5m (minimum width given
elevation constraints). After applying Manning’s formula, we solve for y=0.68m
In Figure 3.10 we see that the total drainage area has been split into 3
main areas: Our site are, The Major Secondary Drainage Area and the
10
20
30
40
4.1
Rational method was used in determining for the peak flows of both
Qpeak = C*i*A
C - runoff coefficient
The drainage area to be used in the design should include all those
areas which will reasonable or naturally drain to the storm system. The
area term in the Rational Method formula represents the total area
tributary under consideration. For this proposed site, the drainage area
developed flows are C = 0.34 for 5 year event, and C = 0.47 for 100
composite runoff coefficient value of 0.5472 for 5 year and 0.7009 for
Runoff Coefficient
Description Area (m2) Area (ha)
5 year 100 year
the time required for flow to reach the pond from the most remote part
Tc = L / (3600 * V)
V – velocity (ft/s)
The velocity can be estimated by knowing the land use and the slope
4.3.1Design Criteria
The rational method was used in the determining pre- and post-
storage volumes.
40
4.1
The tributary area of the pond will be 63.9 hectares of which 33.2
900mm diameter piped splitter storm sewer and via an overland flow
placed within the 875mm outlet pipe. The pond bottom will be graded
events. The pond invert (174.7 m) is above the level of the local water
table (173.5 m), and the side slope gradient has been reduced to 4:1 to
flows. The pre-developed flows are 2.7759 m3/s and 6.2564 m3/s for 5
year and 100 year storm events respectively with an existing runoff
coefficient of 0.34 for 5 year and 0.47 for 100 year storm events and a
4.4675 m3/s and 9.3305 m3/s for 5 year and 100 year storm events
coefficient of 0.5472 for 5 year and 0.7009 for 100 year storm events
Design Parameters
Pre-development Post-development
Items
5 yr 100 yr 5 yr 100 yr
Runoff
0.34 0.47 0.5472 0.7009
Coefficient
The maximum water level during the 1:100 storm event will be
4.1Design Criteria
Based on the above information, and with reference to Table 3.2 in the
Appendix
Data Collection
The data information was gathered from MNR, DRIC draft environmental
The subsurface conditions in the Windsor area are characterized by flat-lying soils
including:
• Native deposits of sand and silt
Beneath the existing pavement structures, topsoil and / or surficial fill materials,
granular materials consisting of sand and gravel, sands and silty sands were
surface in the clayey silt and silty clay materials. The silty clay, clayey silt, sand
and gravel and sands are considered to be slightly erodible and the silty sands are
Qpre = Cpre * I * A
Qpost = Cpost * I * A
Post-
development
Peak Flow, Qpost
Storage
Pre-
Required,
development
S
Peak Flow, Qpre
Time
Tbase = 2tc or 2.67 tc
Area : 52.97 ha
Coefficient: 0.5 (assumption)
Tc : 10 mins
Intensity: 161.5 mm/hr
Qpre100 = 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.5 * 161.5 = 11.88 m3 /sec
Post-development (100 years)
Area Coefficient
Commercial Buildings: 1.66 ha 0.95
Paved Area: 33.67 ha 0.90
Landscape Area: 17.64 ha 0.25
5 years storm
Area : 52.97 ha
Coefficient: 0.5 (assumption)
Tc : 10 mins
Intensity: 102.8 mm/hr
Qpre5 = 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.5 * 102.8 = 7.563 m3 /sec
Qpost5= 1/360 * 52.97 * 0.6851 * 102.8 = 10.363 m3/sec
Orifice
Qo = c * A * sqrt(2 * g * H)
The smallest diameter orifice to ensure that clogging does not occur in a
stormwater system is 75 mm. The preferred minimum orifice size is 100mm where
the effects of freezing are a concern. 5 year storm was used to control the size of
the orifice. Therefore,
Qo = Qpre5
Pond Design
Water table: 3 m below surface
Length to width ratio: 4 to 1
Permanent Pool Depth: Max. depth 2.5m mean depth: 1 – 2 m
Active Storage Depth: Water Quality and erosion control max 1.0m total
2m
Figure 5.03: Ground water table is at 173.00m. The MOE 2003 guideline
specifies that a 0.50m clearance is required between the ground water table
and the pond floor. The pond floor is thus at an elevation of 173.50m. The
175.00m elevation was determined as the lowest channel floor elevation since
the pond water surface must be lower than the swale floor. The predevelopment
ground elevations the pond is 176.00m.The current ground conditions at the
swale entrance is 178.72m
In this design section we will consider the runoff predicted to enter our site from
neighboring lands. Figure 3.04 and 3.05 demonstrate that there is a considerable
amount of runoff that will find itself onto our site due to the pre existing drainage
pattern. Because we cannot interfere with the natural drainage pattern this area
and so we must let the water pass through our site. However there are no quality
requirements, meaning that water does not need to be processed by us to meet
provincial quality standards. So we will simply route the water flow from
surrounding sites directly into the Detroit River because we have assumed that it is
the neighbor’s responsibility to process their own water for quality.
In Figure 3.10 we see that the total drainage area has been split into 3 main areas:
The Plaza site area, The Major Secondary Drainage Area and the Minor Secondary
Drainage. Ultimately the water from outlined secondary drainage area will be routed
directly into the river through the large Major and Minor Drainage Swale (MMDS).
The Minor Drainage Swale (MinDS) will have a slope of 0.20% and lead directly in to
the MMDS. The Major Drainage Swale (MajDS) will have two design components the
design of the grassed Major Drainage Swale leading up to the Major which will have
a 0.02% slope towards the culvert entrance, and the Major Drainage Culvert
(MajDC) which will lead directly into the MMDS.In design of the following 4 channels
we are using a 100year peak flos as the guiding design parameter.