Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
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
1|Page
highway systems, such that traffic flow within Detroit and Windsor is
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
2|Page
outlined in the 2003 Ministry of the Environment storm water
management guideline.
3|Page
2 Site Description
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
4|Page
Figure 2.1 - Plaza Site Outlined
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).
5|Page
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
6|Page
2.2 Existing Soil and Groundwater Condition
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.
7|Page
2.3 Topography and Surface Water Drainage
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
8|Page
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.
9|Page
Figure 2.3 outlines smaller drainage areas. These areas are
Figure 2.3, the water from total drainage area will naturally flow into
10 | P a g e
The objective of this project is to create a storm water management
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:
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
the Preliminary report, this area (68.9 ha) will include a main channel
11 | P a g e
which will divert all rain water into the main ponds. The ponds the runoff
These secondary areas represent the drainage areas outside the project
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
12 | P a g e
under the roads can compromise the structural integrity of any driving
landslides. For the safety of drivers these large driving surfaces cannot
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
13 | P a g e
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.
The principle concern for large sites with a high imperiousness and
pollutants (oil, gasoline, coolant, etc), roadside grit and garbage (gravel,
year design flow and be controlled for all storm events up to and
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
upstream areas.
14 | P a g e
The stormwater management plan consists of creating a two-cell facility
in the green spaces south of the proposed plaza and a linear open
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
15 | P a g e
4 Main Channel Design
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
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.
16 | P a g e
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
17 | P a g e
Figure 4.1 - Channel and pond configuration
18 | P a g e
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
19 | P a g e
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 based
20 | P a g e
The Main Drainage Channel is designed to route all of the runoff from
section will roughly describe the post development runoff pattern. From
Figure 2.4 runoff from Drainage area B and C will flow into Main
channels routing all excess runoff from drainage area B and C directly
into the Detroit River, the excess runoff will not need to be considered in
this section.
the Main Drainage Swale. This terrain will force runoff landing on
21 | P a g e
4.4 Channel Design using Manning’s equation
Now that the elevation profile for the main swale is known, a swale
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
22 | P a g e
Where n is the roughness coefficient, A is the cross sectional area of the
Q - 100 year Post Development flow m3/s. For the proposed site area it is
9.3305m3/s
channels
A - MOE 2003 STMWTR Guideline specifies that the swale will need a
A=(B+Zy)y
specifies 6m. However due to the fact that the site is very flat we will
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
23 | P a g Slope
e
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
24 | P a g e
25 | P a g e
Figure 4.5- Main Drainage Swale Cross sectional Dimensions in Meters
Figure 4.4 – Post Development Swale Elevation
4.5 Main Drainage Swale Conclusion
a 5 year and a 100 year storm rainfall capacity. All excess rain rater from
natural slope gravity. The runoff flowing in the Main Drainage Swale will
26 | P a g e
5 End of Pipe Extended Detention Facilities
(Quantity and Quality Control)
Overview
A two-cell facility which separates water quality and erosion control from
quantity control will be discussed in this section. The quality control cell was
designed as an artificial wet pond, and the quantity control cell was designed
as a dry detention area to receive flows only when quality pond filled.
• Quantity/Flood Control
levels for the lands draining to the facility for 5 to 100 year design
development levels.
• Erosion Control
incorporated.
• Water Quality
27 | P a g e
Storage was based on the 2003 SWMP Manual requirements for
erosion control.
10
20
30
40
50
5.1
Appendix 2
Rational method was used in determining for the peak flows of both pre-
28 | P a g e
i = Average rainfall intensity (mm/hr) for a duration equal to the
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
with a further 1.7 ha of building area. The remaining 33.2 ha of the site
runoff coefficient value of 0.5472 for 5 year and 0.7009 for 100 year
29 | P a g e
potential compared to existing conditions. The final drainage area
Table 5.1 – Drainage Areas, Land Covers and Runoff Coefficients for
Post-development
Runoff Coefficient
Description Area (m2) Area (ha)
5 year 100 year
30 | P a g e
31 | P a g e
Figure 5.1 – Layout of the Canadian Plaza
Source: Detroit River International Crossing Study Website
5.1.4 Rainfall Intensity and Time of Concentration
concentration is the time required for flow to reach the pond from the
most remote part of the drainage area. Upland method was used for
to the velocity.
Tc = L / (3600 * V)
32 | P a g e
L = hydraulic flow length (ft)
V = velocity (ft/s)
The velocity can be estimated by knowing the land use and the slope
(see Figure 5.2). From the figure, the velocity is estimated to be 2.75
33 | P a g e
Figure 5.2 – Velocities for upland method of estimating tc
Source: U.S Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service
1986
curve (IDF curve) with specified time of concentration. The IDF curve
this time is 46 mm/hr and 75 mm/hr for 5 year and 100 year storm
event respectively.
34 | P a g e
Figure 5.3 – Intensity Duration-Frequency Curve (IDF Curves) - City
of Windsor
Source: Environment Canada – Atmospheric Environment Services
40
4.1
35 | P a g e
5.1.5 Design Details of Proposed Pond
tributary area of the pond will be 63.9 hectares of which 33.2 hectares
will be covered by grass. Drainage will enter the pond via a 12m × 9m
overland flow swale (see Figure 5.5). The outfall from the channel to
5.25 m width × 0.4 m height weir placed within the embankment. The
ponding during low flow run-off events. The pond invert (175.2m) at the
outlet is above the level of the local water table (173.5 m), and the side
slope gradient has been reduced to 4:1 to ensure slope stability during
erosion. The 2 m pool benches are important for safety reasons and
The proposed pond was calculated into the 5 and 100 year post-
flows. The pre-developed flows are 2.7759 m3/s and 6.2564 m3/s for 5
year and 100 year storm events respectively with an existing runoff
coefficient of 0.34 for 5 year and 0.47 for 100 year storm events and a
36 | P a g e
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
5 yr 100 yr 5 yr 100 yr
Design Parameters
37 | P a g e
Peak Flows (m3/s)
Storm
Storage Volume (m3) Pre- Post-
Events
development development
Summary
The maximum water level during the 1:100 storm event will be
38 | P a g e
39 | P a g e
Figure 5.4 – Layout of the ponds and channels
Figure 5.5 – Cross-Section of Overflow Swale – to Quantity Pond
A flow splitter or flow diversion structure was used to direct the first
fraction of runoff (commonly called the “first flush”) into the quality
pond, while bypassing excess flows from 100 year event around the
detention/quantity pond.
Runoff water is conveyed to the quality pond via the main open channel.
Once the main open channel reaches its 5 year water capacity, water
backs up in the channel and into the flow splitter itself. When the water
40 | P a g e
overflow swale and enters to the quantity pond. The bypass is created
storm event – 176.42m). Using this method, the flow will only start to
bypass the weir once the channel has conveyed the design runoff
41 | P a g e
Figure 5.6a – Plan View of Flow Diversion Structure
42 | P a g e
43 | P a g e
Figure 5.6b – Cross-Section of Flow Diversion Structure
1.1 Water Quality Control
44 | P a g e
Based on the above information, and with reference to Table 3.2 in the
solids and oils. The detailed design of OGS will not be discussed in the
report.
Like the quantity pond, the drainage will enter the pond via a 12m × 9m
× 1.5m flow diversion structure and via an overland flow swale (see
Figure 5.8). The outfall from the channel to the pond shall be modified
quantity pond. The pond bottom will also be graded at 0.23% to reduce
the possibility of ponding during low flow run-off events. The pond
invert at the outlet is 173.9 and the side slope gradient has been
The maximum water level during the 5 year storm event will be
45 | P a g e
175.42m and its storage is 13418.08 m3. Detailed calculations can be
found in Appendix 2.
46 | P a g e
Figure 5.9 – Cross-Section of Quality and Quantity Ponds
Other Considerations
• The end-of-pipe facility should be designed with a sediment forebay to
47 | P a g e
suspended material to the pond outlet. The forebay dimensions should
bench, the safety bench and side slopes or within shallow areas of the
pool itself
48 | P a g e
6 Secondary Drainage Channels
runoff draining around the border crossing plaza site due to the pre
and law, new construction cannot interfere with the natural flow pattern of
neighboring sites. Although runoff must pass through the border crossing
site, the runoff does not need to be processed and meet provincial quality
standards.
This design section will consider all runoff predicted to enter the site from
site which will route the runoff for up to a 100 year storm directly into the
Detroit River.
route runoff from Secondary Drainage Area C into the Major Drainage
Culvert MajDC.
49 | P a g e
3. 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
thickness.
4. The Major and Minor Drainage Swale represented by P1-P2 will route
50 | P a g e
Figure 6.2 - Secondary Drainage Channel Outline
Secondary Drainage Area B and route it to point P2. Figure 6.3 is pre
51 | P a g e
Figure 6.3 - Pre existing elevation profile of Line P6-P5-P4-P3-P2, MinDS
The line representing P6-P7 will collect the water from Secondary
52 | P a g e
culvert MajDC as well. Figure 6.4 the pre existing elevation profile of
53 | P a g e
MajDS.
54 | P a g e
Figure 6.4 - Pre existing elevation profile of Line P6-P7-P8-P9-P10-P11, MajD
The line representing P2-P7 will collect the water from MajDS and route
Swale MMDS. Figure 6.5 is pre existing elevation profile of Line P2-P7
55 | P a g e
Figure 6.5 - Pre existing elevation profile of Line P2-P7, MajDC
The line representing P1-P2 will collect the water from MinDS and MajDC
and route it directly into the Detroit River. Figure 6.6 is the pre existing
elevation profile of Line P1-P2 which will represent the Major and Minor
56 | P a g e
Figure 6.6 - Pre existing elevation profile of Line P1-P2, MMDS
As described in the Main Channel Design, the Border crossing plaza area
channel design section 4.2.1 the Ground Water Table was the elevation
57 | P a g e
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
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
Figure 6.7 clearly outlines there is a 3.30 meter difference between the
58 | P a g e
design it is important to consider that any swale design must have a
Main Channel Design used this slope. The elevation difference due to the
the 100 year storm water level in the swales and culvert is 83.25cm. The
59 | P a g e
6.3 Secondary Drainage Channels Design using Manning’s
equation
The following section will explain the inputs of the Manning’s equation
The MinDS will route all the excess rainwater from Minor Secondary
Drainage area to MMDS at point P2. The Minor Secondary drainage area
(C=0.95) and 619500m2 with grass (C=0.47). The intensity of a 100 year
60 | P a g e
Figure 6.9 is the Post Development MinDS Elevation Profile
The MajDS will route all the excess rainwater from Major Secondary
Drainage area to MMDS, P7. The Major Secondary drainage area was
(C=0.95) and 325698m2 with grass (C=0.47). The intensity of a 100 year
for y=0.79m
61 | P a g e
Figure 6.10 outlines the MajDS cross section:
62 | P a g e
Major Drainage Culvert (MajDC)
The Culvert will route all the excess rainwater from MajDS to the MMDS.
factor of 3. The culvert will be trapezoidal as all of our other channels are
63 | P a g e
Figure 6.13- Post Development MajDC Elevation Profile
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
64 | P a g e
Figure 6.14- MMDS cross section
channels system has a 100 years rainfall capacity. All excess rain rater
from surrounding areas B and C will be routed into the Detroit River by
65 | P a g e
natural slope gravity. According to profile drawings: Figure 6.9, Figure
that the development of this site will not result in adverse effects to the
conceptual SWM strategy and measures outlined in this report will ensure
that the natural habitat of the area is not disturbed in the long term and
that the sediment transported on site does not leave the site but rather is
66 | P a g e