FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENT CALCULATIONS

BUILDING A, 255 KANATA AVENUE, OTTAWA, ON - SITE SERVICING AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT

Appendix A Fire Flow Requirement Calculations January 19, 2017

A.1

FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENT CALCULATIONS

Kanata Entertainment Holdings Inc. 1604-00991/20 Milestones Restaurant + Block YYD 2012-06-25

Estimated Water Demand per City of Ottawa Design Guidelines (July 2010)

COMMERCIAL WATER DEMAND

0.576ha Commercial Development

Average Daily Demand:

s

L

s

d

d

L

dha

LhaQ dailyavg 19.0

400,86

116128000,28576.0_

Maximum Daily Demand:

s

L

s

d

d

L

d

LQQ dailyavgdaily 28.0

400,86

1241925.1161285.1_max_

Peak Hourly:

s

L

s

d

d

LQQ dailyhourlypeak 50.0

400,86

18.1241928.1max__

A preliminary figure of 13,000 L/min can be used for assessing fire flow demand.

FUS Fire Flow Calculations

Stantec Project #: 160401159

Project Name: Building A, 255 Kanata Avenue Fire Flow Calculation #: 1

Date: June 8, 2015 Building Type/Description/Name: Future Office Building

Data input by: Ana M. Paerez, P. Eng.

Table A: Fire Underwriters Survey Determination of Required Fire Flow - Long Method

Step Task Term Options

Multiplier

Associated

with Option

Choose:Value

UsedUnit

Total

Fire

Flow

(L/min)

Wood Frame 1.5

Ordinary construction 1

Non-combustible construction 0.8

Fire resistive construction (< 2 hrs) 0.7

Fire resistive construction (> 2 hrs) 0.6

Single Family 1

Townhouse - indicate # of units 3

Other (Comm, Ind, etc.) 1

2.2 # of Storeys 2 2 Storeys

1,880

Square Feet (ft2) 0.09290304

Square Metres (m2) 1

Hectares (ha) 10000

4

Obtain Required

Fire Flow without

Reductions

13,000

5Apply Factors

Affecting Burning

Non-combustible -0.25

Limited combustible -0.15

Combustible 0

Free burning 0.15

Rapid burning 0.25

Complete Automatic Sprinkler

Protection -0.3

None 0

North Side 30.1 to 45.0m 0.05

East Side 30.1 to 45.0m 0.05

South Side 10.1 to 20.0m 0.15

West Side 30.1 to 45.0m 0.05

13,000

217

2.75

2,145

Note: The most current FUS document should be referenced before design to ensure that the above figures are consistent with the intent of the Guideline

Calculations Based on 1999 Publication "Water Supply for Public

Fire Protection " by Fire Underwriters' Survey (FUS)

1

Choose Frame Used

for Construction of

Unit

Framing Material

Coefficient related

to type of

construction (C) Ordinary construction 1 m

Area in

Square

Meters (m2)

Measurement

UnitsSquare Metres (m2)

2

Choose Type of

Housing (if TH,

Enter Number of

Units Per TH Block)

Floor Space Area

Type of Housing Other (Comm, Ind, etc.) 1 Units

Number of Floors/ Storeys in the Unit (do not include basement):

3Enter Ground Floor

Area of One Unit

Enter Ground Floor Area (A) of One Unit Only :

3,760

Required Fire Flow( without reductions or increases per FUS) (F = 220 * C * √A)

Round to nearest 1000L/min

Reductions/Increases Due to Factors Affecting Burning

5.1

Choose

Combustibility of

Building Contents

Occupancy

content hazard

reduction or

surcharge

Combustible 0 N/A 13,000

-3,900

5.3

Choose Separation

Distance Between

Units

Exposure Distance

Between Units0.3 m 3,900

5.2

Choose Reduction

Due to Presence of

Sprinklers

Sprinkler

reduction

Complete Automatic

Sprinkler Protection-0.3 N/A

6

Obtain Required

Fire Flow, Duration

& Volume

Total Required Fire Flow, rounded to nearest 1000 L/min, with max/min limits applied:

Total Required Fire Flow (above) in L/s:

Required Duration of Fire Flow (hrs)

Required Volume of Fire Flow (m3

)

Legend

Drop down menu - choose option, or enter value.

No Information, No input required.

Date: 6/8/2015

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

OFFICE

W:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\water\STANTEC_FUS_FIREFLOW_CALCULATOR_20150604_amp.xlsx

SUBDIVISION:

DATE:

REVISION:

FILE NUMBERS: 1604-00991 DESIGNED BY: mjs

CHECKED BY: al

Average daily Peak hour

Elevation Demand Head Elevation Demand Head

m LPS m m psi kPa m LPS m m psi kPa

Junc 2 97.14 0.00 164.1 66.96 95 655 Junc 2 97.14 0.00 155.8 58.66 83 572

Junc 3 97.25 0.00 164.1 66.85 95 655 Junc 3 97.25 0.00 155.8 58.55 83 572

Junc 4 97.25 0.00 164.1 66.85 95 655 Junc 4 97.25 0.00 155.8 58.55 83 572

Junc 5 97.22 0.00 164.1 66.88 95 655 Junc 5 97.22 0.00 155.8 58.58 83 572

Junc 6 97.18 0.00 164.1 66.92 95 655 Junc 6 97.18 0.00 155.8 58.62 83 572

Junc 10 97.46 0.00 164.1 66.64 95 655 Junc 10 97.46 0.00 155.8 58.34 83 572

Junc 11 98.05 0.14 164.1 66.05 94 648 Junc 11 98.05 0.36 155.8 57.75 82 565

Junc 12 98.05 0.05 164.1 66.05 94 648 Junc 12 98.05 0.14 155.8 57.75 82 565

Junc 13 97.56 0.00 164.1 66.54 94 648 Junc 13 97.56 0.00 155.8 58.24 83 572

Junc 14 97.83 0.00 164.1 66.27 94 648 Junc 14 97.83 0.00 155.8 57.97 82 565

Resvr 1 164.10 -0.19 164.1 0.0 0 0 Resvr 1 155.80 -0.50 155.8 0.00 0 0

Max day & FF pressure check

FF=13000L/min

Elevation Demand Head Elevation Demand Head

m LPS m m psi kPa m LPS m m psi kPa

Junc 2 97.14 0.00 150.6 53.47 76 524 Junc 2 97.14 0.00 164.1 66.96 95 655

Junc 3 97.25 0.00 138.9 41.66 59 407 Junc 3 97.25 0.00 164.1 66.85 95 655

Junc 4 97.25 0.00 138.9 41.66 59 407 Junc 4 97.25 0.00 164.1 66.85 95 655

Junc 5 97.22 0.00 138.4 41.21 59 407 Junc 5 97.22 0.00 164.1 66.88 95 655

Junc 6 97.18 0.00 136.9 39.68 56 386 Junc 6 97.18 0.00 164.1 66.92 95 655

Junc 10 97.46 0.00 133.2 35.73 51 352 Junc 10 97.46 0.00 164.1 66.64 95 655

Junc 11 98.05 0.20 131.5 33.46 48 331 Junc 11 98.05 0.00 164.1 66.05 94 648

Junc 12 98.05 0.08 133.2 35.14 50 345 Junc 12 98.05 0.00 164.1 66.05 94 648

Junc 13 97.56 0.00 131.5 33.95 48 331 Junc 13 97.56 0.00 164.1 66.54 94 648

Junc 14 97.83 217.00 128.7 30.83 44 303 Junc 14 97.83 0.00 164.1 66.27 94 648

Resvr 1 153.90 -217.28 153.9 0.00 0 0 Resvr 1 164.1 0.00 164.1 0.00 0 0

Pressure

Pressure Node ID

July 23, 2012

Node ID Pressure

Node ID

Node ID Pressure

EPANET HYDRAULIC

MODELLING RESULTS

Ultimate Conditions

Kanata Centrum

Milestones and Block YYD

Hydraulic Analysis

1 of 1 EPANET Results Ultimate.xls


Appendix B Sanitary Sewer Design Sheet January 19, 2017

B.1

SANITARY SEWER DESIGN SHEET

SUBDIVISION:

4.0 350 L/p/day 0.60 m/s

DATE: 2.0 0.60 L/s/ha 3.00 m/s

REVISION: 2.4 0.40 L/s/ha 0.013

DESIGNED BY: FILE NUMBER: 1604-01159 1.5 0.60 L/s/ha BEDDING CLASS B

CHECKED BY: 3.4 0.28 L/s/ha MINIMUM COVER 2.50 m

2.8

1.8

C+I+I

AREA ID FROM TO AREA POP. PEAK PEAK AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. AREA ACCU. PEAK TOTAL ACCU. INFILT. TOTAL LENGTH DIA MATERIAL CLASS SLOPE CAP. CAP. V

NUMBER M.H. M.H. SINGLE TOWN APT. AREA POP. FACT. FLOW AREA AREA AREA AREA FLOW AREA AREA FLOW FLOW (FULL) PEAK FLOW (FULL) (ACT.)

(ha) (ha) (l/s) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (L/s) (ha) (ha) (L/s) (L/s) (m) (mm) (%) (l/s) (%) (m/s) (m/s)

1, 2 STUB 3 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 4.00 0.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.13 0.18 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.27 2.3 200 PVC SDR-35 1.00 33.31 0.82 1.05 0.28

3 STUB 3 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 4.00 0.00 0.06 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.02 0.07 8.4 150 PVC SDR-35 1.00 15.78 0.45 0.87 0.19

4 3 2 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.10 0.49 0.14 0.37 21.4 250 PVC SDR-35 1.00 60.40 0.61 1.22 0.305 2 2A 0.00 0 0 0 0 0.00 0 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.27 0.23 0.04 0.53 0.15 0.38 8.6 250 PVC SDR-35 1.00 60.40 0.63 1.22 0.30

UNITS

INDUSTRIAL

INSTITUTIONAL

INFILTRATION

CUMULATIVE

DT

July 27, 2016 PEAKING FACTOR (INDUSTRIAL):

AMP PEAKING FACTOR (COMM., INST.):

RESIDENTIAL AREA AND POPULATION COMM INDUST INFILTRATIONINSTIT GREEN / UNUSED

DESIGN PARAMETERS

VEL.

PERSONS / SINGLE UNIT

MAX PEAK FACTOR (RES.)=

PERSONS / TOWNHOME

PERSONS / APARTMENT

PIPE

AVG. DAILY FLOW / PERSON

COMMERCIALMIN PEAK FACTOR (RES.)=

SANITARY SEWERBUILDING A, 255 KANATA AVENUE DESIGN SHEET

(City of Ottawa) MINIMUM VELOCITY

MAXIMUM VELOCITY

MANNINGS n

LOCATION

October 30, 2012

1 of 1 SAN_20150604_amp.xlsm


Appendix C Storm Sewer Design Sheet January 19, 2017

C.1

STORM SEWER DESIGN SHEET

DATE: 1:5 yr 1:10 yr

REVISION DATE: a = 998.071 1174.184 0.013 BDESIGNED BY: b = 6.053 6.014 2.00 mCHECKED BY: c = 0.814 0.816 10 min

AREA ID FROM TO AREA AREA AREA C ACCUM. A x C ACCUM. ACCUM. A x C ACCUM. T of C I5-YEAR I10-YEAR QROOF ACCUM. QACT QICD ACCUM. LENGTH PIPE MATERIAL CLASS SLOPE QCAP QACT VEL. VEL. TIME OF

NUMBER M.H. M.H. (5-YEAR) (10-YEAR) (ROOF) AREA (5YR) (5-YEAR) AxC (5YR) AREA (10YR) (10-YEAR) AxC (10YR) (NOTE 1) QROOF (CIA/360) (NOTE 2) QICD SIZE (FULL) QCAP (FULL) (ACT) FLOW

(ha) (ha) (ha) (-) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (ha) (min) (mm/h) (mm/h) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m) (mm) (-) (-) % (L/s) (-) (m/s) (m/s) (min)

Areas 4-5 STM Stub STM 101 0.04 0.00 0.20 0.78 0.04 0.031 0.031 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.00 104.19 122.14 13.2 13.2 22.2 0.0 0.0 12.3 200 PVC SDR-35 1.00 33.3 0.67 1.05 0.98 0.2110.21

Area 2 STM Stub STM 101 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.90 0.00 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.00 104.19 122.14 5.2 5.2 5.2 0.0 0.0 10.0 200 PVC SDR-35 1.00 33.3 0.16 1.05 0.64 0.2610.26

STM 101 EX 1200mm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.000 0.031 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.26 102.83 120.54 0.0 18.4 27.3 0.0 0.0 15.3 300 PVC SDR-35 1.00 96.2 0.28 1.37 0.99 0.2610.52

Areas 11-13, Existing Phases EX STM MH3 EX CBMH4 0.18 0.00 0.10 0.73 0.22 0.131 0.162 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.02 57.85 67.65 8.7 27.1 1288.7 1235.6 1235.6 21.5 1200 CONCRETE 65-D 0.65 3279.3 0.39 2.81 2.24 0.16Areas 3, 9 EX CBMH4 EX CBMH5 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.65 0.366 0.528 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.18 57.62 67.38 0.0 27.1 1347.2 0.0 1235.6 38.3 1200 CONCRETE 65-D 0.13 1466.5 0.92 1.26 1.29 0.49

Area 7 EX CBMH5 EX TEE 0.38 0.00 0.00 0.85 1.03 0.323 0.851 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.67 56.94 66.58 0.0 27.1 1397.3 0.0 1235.6 20.1 1200 CONCRETE 65-D 0.16 1627.0 0.86 1.39 1.41 0.24Area 10 EX TEE EX MH6 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.90 1.31 0.252 1.103 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.91 56.61 66.19 0.0 27.1 1436.1 0.0 1235.6 22.4 1200 CONCRETE 65-D 0.16 1627.0 0.88 1.39 1.42 0.26

28.18

Area 8 EX CB7 EX MH6 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.20 0.170 0.170 0.000 0.000 0.000 10.00 104.19 122.14 0.0 0.0 49.2 0.0 0.0 19.9 300 PVC SDR-35 1.00 96.2 0.51 1.37 1.18 0.2810.28

Area 6 EX CB7 EX MH6 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.25 1.55 0.010 1.283 0.000 0.000 0.000 28.18 56.26 65.78 0.0 0.0 1436.1 0.0 1235.6 22.6 1200 CONCRETE 65-D 0.31 2264.7 0.63 1.94 1.79 0.2128.39

Note: Slope for pipe run from EX CB7 to EX MH6 determined using value from drawing submitted with previous report by Cumming & Cockburn Ltd.Note 2: Value from CCL storm design sheet "Area from Phase III"

TIME OF ENTRY

BEDDING CLASS = MJS FILE NUMBER: 1604-01159 MINIMUM COVER:

DT

(As per City of Ottawa Guidelines, 2004

24-Jul-2012 (City of Ottawa)26-Jul-2016 MANNING'S n =

Building A, 255 Kanata AvenueSTORM SEWER DESIGN PARAMETERS

DESIGN SHEET I = a / (t+b)c

LOCATION DRAINAGE AREA PIPE SELECTION


Appendix D Stormwater Management Calculations January 19, 2017

D.1

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS

Stormwater Management Calculations

File No: 160401159

Project: BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUEDate: 03-Jun-15 SWM Approach:

Post-development to 5 year flows, C=0.57

Post-Development Site Conditions:

Overall Runoff Coefficient for Site and Sub-Catchment Areas

Area Runoff Overall(ha) Coefficient Runoff

Catchment Type ID / Description "A" "C" Coefficient

Uncontrolled - Tributary 9 Hard 0.010 0.9 0.009Soft 0.000 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.01 0.009 0.90

Controlled - Tributary CB7 8 Hard 0.186 0.9 0.167Soft 0.014 0.2 0.003

Subtotal 0.20 0.17 0.85

Controlled - Tributary CBMH5 7 Hard 0.353 0.9 0.318Soft 0.027 0.2 0.005

Subtotal 0.38 0.323 0.85

Controlled - Tributary CBMH4 3 Hard 0.390 0.9 0.351Soft 0.030 0.2 0.006

Subtotal 0.42 0.357 0.85


Subtotal 0.06 0.0516 0.86


Subtotal 0.12 0.0792 0.66

Roof 12-EX_CIBC Hard 0.100 0.9 0.090Soft 0.000 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.10 0.09 0.90

Controlled - Tributary CB8 10 Hard 0.280 0.9 0.252Soft 0.000 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.28 0.252 0.90


Subtotal 0.04 0.0312 0.78

Uncontrolled - Non-Tributary 1 Hard 0.008 0.9 0.007Soft 0.002 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.01 0.0077 0.77

Roof 5- PROP_BLDG Hard 0.200 0.9 0.180Soft 0.000 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.2 0.18 0.90

Roof 2- Milestones Hard 0.060 0.9 0.054Soft 0.000 0.2 0.000

Subtotal 0.06 0.054 0.90

Total 1.880 1.605Overall Runoff Coefficient= C: 0.85

Total Roof Areas 0.360 haTotal Tributary Surface Areas (Controlled and Uncontrolled) 1.510 haTotal Tributary Area to Outlet 1.870 ha

Total Uncontrolled Areas (Non-Tributary) 0.010 ha

Total Site 1.880 ha

Sub-catchmentArea

Runoff Coefficient Table

"A x C"

Date: 27/7/2016, 9:41 AMStantec Consulting Ltd.

anl_swm_MRM_2016-07-26_dt.xlsm, Area SummaryW:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\SWM\


Project #160401159, BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUE Project #160401159, BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUEModified Rational Method Calculatons for Storage Modified Rational Method Calculatons for Storage

5 yr Intensity I = a/(t + b)ca = 998.071 t (min) I (mm/hr) 100 yr Intensity I = a/(t + b)c

a = 1735.688 t (min) I (mm/hr)City of Ottawa b = 6.053 5 141.18 City of Ottawa b = 6.014 5 242.70

c = 0.814 10 104.19 c = 0.820 10 178.5615 83.56 15 142.8920 70.25 20 119.9525 60.90 25 103.8530 53.93 30 91.8735 48.52 35 82.5840 44.18 40 75.1545 40.63 45 69.0550 37.65 50 63.9555 35.12 55 59.6260 32.94 60 55.89

Predevelopment Target Release from Overall Site

Subdrainage Area: Predevelopment Tributary Area to OutletArea (ha): 1.8300

C: 0.57

Typical Time of Concentration

tc I (5 yr) Qtarget(min) (mm/hr) (L/s)

20 70.25 203.7

5 YEAR Modified Rational Method for Entire Site 100 YEAR Modified Rational Method for Entire Site

Subdrainage Area: 9 Uncontrolled - Tributary Subdrainage Area: 9 Uncontrolled - TributaryArea (ha): 0.01 Area (ha): 0.01

C: 0.90 C: 1.00

tc l (5 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored tc l (100 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored(min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3) (min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3)

5 141.18 3.53 3.53 0.00 0.00 10 178.56 4.96 4.96 0.00 0.0010 104.19 2.61 2.61 0.00 0.00 20 119.95 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.0015 83.56 2.09 2.09 0.00 0.00 30 91.87 2.55 2.55 0.00 0.0020 70.25 1.76 1.76 0.00 0.00 40 75.15 2.09 2.09 0.00 0.0025 60.90 1.52 1.52 0.00 0.00 50 63.95 1.78 1.78 0.00 0.0030 53.93 1.35 1.35 0.00 0.00 60 55.89 1.55 1.55 0.00 0.0035 48.52 1.21 1.21 0.00 0.00 70 49.79 1.38 1.38 0.00 0.0040 44.18 1.11 1.11 0.00 0.00 80 44.99 1.25 1.25 0.00 0.0045 40.63 1.02 1.02 0.00 0.00 90 41.11 1.14 1.14 0.00 0.0050 37.65 0.94 0.94 0.00 0.00 100 37.90 1.05 1.05 0.00 0.0055 35.12 0.88 0.88 0.00 0.00 110 35.20 0.98 0.98 0.00 0.0060 32.94 0.82 0.82 0.00 0.00 120 32.89 0.91 0.91 0.00 0.00

Subdrainage Area: 8 Controlled - Tributary CB7 Subdrainage Area: 8 Controlled - Tributary CB7Area (ha): 0.20 Area (ha): 0.20

C: 0.85 C: 1.00


5 141.18 66.72 16.91 49.81 14.94 10 178.56 99.28 17.50 81.78 49.0710 104.19 49.24 16.91 32.33 19.40 20 119.95 66.69 17.50 49.19 59.0315 83.56 39.49 16.91 22.58 20.32 30 91.87 51.08 17.50 33.58 60.4420 70.25 33.20 16.91 16.29 19.55 40 75.15 41.78 17.50 24.28 58.2825 60.90 28.78 16.91 11.87 17.81 50 63.95 35.56 17.50 18.06 54.1830 53.93 25.49 16.91 8.58 15.44 60 55.89 31.08 17.50 13.58 48.8835 48.52 22.93 16.91 6.02 12.64 70 49.79 27.68 17.50 10.18 42.7740 44.18 20.88 16.91 3.97 9.53 80 44.99 25.01 17.50 7.52 36.0845 40.63 19.20 16.91 2.29 6.19 90 41.11 22.86 17.50 5.36 28.9450 37.65 17.79 16.91 0.89 2.66 100 37.90 21.07 17.50 3.58 21.4555 35.12 16.60 16.91 0.00 0.00 110 35.20 19.57 17.50 2.07 13.6960 32.94 15.57 16.91 0.00 0.00 120 32.89 18.29 17.50 0.79 5.69

Storage: Surface Storage Above CB Storage: Surface Storage Above CB

Orifice Equation:= CdA(2gh)^0.5 Where C = 0.61 Orifice Equation: Q = CdA(2gh)^0.5 Where C = 0.61Orifice Diameter: 80.00 mm Orifice Diameter: 80.00 mm

Invert Elevation 95.60 m Invert Elevation 95.60 mT/G Elevation 97.00 m T/G Elevation 97.00 m

Max Ponding Depth 0.19 m Max Ponding Depth 0.30 mDownstream W/L 0.00 m Downstream W/L 0.00 m

Stage Head Discharge Vreq Stage Head Discharge Vreq(m) (L/s) (cu. m) (m) (L/s) (cu. m)

5-year Water Level 97.19 1.55 16.91 20.32 100-year Water Level 97.30 1.66 17.50 60.44

Date: 27/7/2016Stantec Consulting Ltd. Page 2 of 8

anl_swm_MRM_2016-07-26_dt.xlsm, Modified RMW:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\SWM\



Subdrainage Area: 7 Controlled - Tributary CBMH5 Subdrainage Area: 7 Controlled - Tributary CBMH5Area (ha): 0.38 Area (ha): 0.38

C: 0.85 C: 1.00


5 141.18 126.77 16.64 110.13 33.04 10 178.56 188.63 21.61 167.02 100.2110 104.19 93.56 16.64 76.92 46.15 20 119.95 126.72 21.61 105.10 126.1215 83.56 75.03 16.64 58.39 52.55 30 91.87 97.05 21.61 75.44 135.7920 70.25 63.08 16.64 46.44 55.73 40 75.15 79.38 21.61 57.77 138.6525 60.90 54.68 16.64 38.04 57.07 50 63.95 67.56 21.61 45.95 137.8530 53.93 48.42 16.64 31.79 57.22 60 55.89 59.05 21.61 37.43 134.7635 48.52 43.57 16.64 26.93 56.55 70 49.79 52.60 21.61 30.99 130.1440 44.18 39.67 16.64 23.04 55.29 80 44.99 47.53 21.61 25.92 124.4045 40.63 36.48 16.64 19.84 53.58 90 41.11 43.43 21.61 21.82 117.8150 37.65 33.81 16.64 17.17 51.52 100 37.90 40.04 21.61 18.43 110.5755 35.12 31.54 16.64 14.90 49.17 110 35.20 37.19 21.61 15.58 102.8060 32.94 29.58 16.64 12.94 46.60 120 32.89 34.75 21.61 13.14 94.59







Subdrainage Area: 3 Controlled - Tributary CBMH4 Subdrainage Area: 3 Controlled - Tributary CBMH4Area (ha): 0.42 Area (ha): 0.42

C: 0.85 C: 1.00


5 141.18 140.11 12.19 127.92 38.38 10 178.56 208.49 13.08 195.40 117.2410 104.19 103.41 12.19 91.22 54.73 20 119.95 140.05 13.08 126.97 152.3715 83.56 82.93 12.19 70.74 63.66 30 91.87 107.27 13.08 94.18 169.5320 70.25 69.72 12.19 57.53 69.04 40 75.15 87.74 13.08 74.66 179.1825 60.90 60.44 12.19 48.25 72.37 50 63.95 74.67 13.08 61.59 184.7730 53.93 53.52 12.19 41.33 74.39 60 55.89 65.26 13.08 52.18 187.8535 48.52 48.15 12.19 35.96 75.52 70 49.79 58.13 13.08 45.05 189.2240 44.18 43.85 12.19 31.66 75.99 80 44.99 52.53 13.08 39.45 189.3645 40.63 40.32 12.19 28.13 75.96 90 41.11 48.00 13.08 34.92 188.5750 37.65 37.37 12.19 25.18 75.54 100 37.90 44.26 13.08 31.17 187.0455 35.12 34.86 12.19 22.67 74.80 110 35.20 41.10 13.08 28.02 184.9460 32.94 32.70 12.19 20.50 73.82 120 32.89 38.41 13.08 25.33 182.35








C: 0.86 C: 1.00


5 141.18 20.25 20.25 0.00 0.00 10 178.56 29.78 29.78 0.00 0.0010 104.19 14.95 14.95 0.00 0.00 20 119.95 20.01 20.01 0.00 0.0015 83.56 11.99 11.99 0.00 0.00 30 91.87 15.32 15.32 0.00 0.0020 70.25 10.08 10.08 0.00 0.00 40 75.15 12.53 12.53 0.00 0.0025 60.90 8.74 8.74 0.00 0.00 50 63.95 10.67 10.67 0.00 0.0030 53.93 7.74 7.74 0.00 0.00 60 55.89 9.32 9.32 0.00 0.0035 48.52 6.96 6.96 0.00 0.00 70 49.79 8.30 8.30 0.00 0.0040 44.18 6.34 6.34 0.00 0.00 80 44.99 7.50 7.50 0.00 0.0045 40.63 5.83 5.83 0.00 0.00 90 41.11 6.86 6.86 0.00 0.0050 37.65 5.40 5.40 0.00 0.00 100 37.90 6.32 6.32 0.00 0.0055 35.12 5.04 5.04 0.00 0.00 110 35.20 5.87 5.87 0.00 0.0060 32.94 4.73 4.73 0.00 0.00 120 32.89 5.49 5.49 0.00 0.00


C: 0.66 C: 0.83


5 141.18 31.08 31.08 0.00 0.00 10 178.56 49.14 49.14 0.00 0.0010 104.19 22.94 22.94 0.00 0.00 20 119.95 33.01 33.01 0.00 0.0015 83.56 18.40 18.40 0.00 0.00 30 91.87 25.28 25.28 0.00 0.0020 70.25 15.47 15.47 0.00 0.00 40 75.15 20.68 20.68 0.00 0.0025 60.90 13.41 13.41 0.00 0.00 50 63.95 17.60 17.60 0.00 0.0030 53.93 11.87 11.87 0.00 0.00 60 55.89 15.38 15.38 0.00 0.0035 48.52 10.68 10.68 0.00 0.00 70 49.79 13.70 13.70 0.00 0.0040 44.18 9.73 9.73 0.00 0.00 80 44.99 12.38 12.38 0.00 0.0045 40.63 8.95 8.95 0.00 0.00 90 41.11 11.31 11.31 0.00 0.0050 37.65 8.29 8.29 0.00 0.00 100 37.90 10.43 10.43 0.00 0.0055 35.12 7.73 7.73 0.00 0.00 110 35.20 9.69 9.69 0.00 0.0060 32.94 7.25 7.25 0.00 0.00 120 32.89 9.05 9.05 0.00 0.00





Subdrainage Area: 12-EX_CIBC Roof Subdrainage Area: 12-EX_CIBC RoofArea (ha): 0.10 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm Area (ha): 0.10 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm

C: 0.90 C: 1.00

tc l (5 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored Depth tc l (100 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored Depth(min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3) (mm) (min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3) (mm)

5 141.18 35.32 6.11 29.21 8.76 79.6 0.00 10 178.56 49.64 8.22 41.42 24.85 107.0 0.00

10 104.19 26.07 6.59 19.48 11.69 85.8 0.00 20 119.95 33.35 8.62 24.72 29.67 112.3 0.00

15 83.56 20.91 6.76 14.15 12.73 88.0 0.00 30 91.87 25.54 8.68 16.86 30.35 113.0 0.00

20 70.25 17.58 6.79 10.78 12.94 88.5 0.00 40 75.15 20.89 8.61 12.28 29.48 112.1 0.00

25 60.90 15.24 6.76 8.48 12.72 88.0 0.00 50 63.95 17.78 8.48 9.30 27.91 110.4 0.00

30 53.93 13.49 6.68 6.81 12.26 87.0 0.00 60 55.89 15.54 8.32 7.22 26.00 108.3 0.00

35 48.52 12.14 6.59 5.55 11.66 85.8 0.00 70 49.79 13.84 8.14 5.70 23.93 106.0 0.00

40 44.18 11.05 6.48 4.58 10.99 84.3 0.00 80 44.99 12.51 7.97 4.54 21.80 103.7 0.00

45 40.63 10.17 6.36 3.81 10.27 82.8 0.00 90 41.11 11.43 7.79 3.64 19.66 101.4 0.00

50 37.65 9.42 6.24 3.18 9.54 81.3 0.00 100 37.90 10.54 7.58 2.96 17.75 98.7 0.00

55 35.12 8.79 6.12 2.67 8.80 79.7 0.00 110 35.20 9.79 7.33 2.46 16.22 95.4 0.00

60 32.94 8.24 6.00 2.24 8.07 78.1 0.00 120 32.89 9.14 7.09 2.05 14.77 92.4 0.00

Storage: Roof Storage Storage: Roof Storage

Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge(m) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check (m) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check

5-year Water Level 0.09 0.09 6.79 12.94 81.29 0.00 100-year Water Level 0.11 0.11 8.68 30.35 81.29 0.00

Subdrainage Area: 10 Controlled - Tributary CB8 Subdrainage Area: 10 Controlled - Tributary CB8Area (ha): 0.28 Area (ha): 0.28

C: 0.90 C: 1.00


5 141.18 98.90 15.25 83.65 25.10 10 178.56 138.99 15.76 123.23 73.9410 104.19 72.99 15.25 57.74 34.65 20 119.95 93.37 15.76 77.61 93.1315 83.56 58.54 15.25 43.29 38.96 30 91.87 71.51 15.76 55.75 100.3620 70.25 49.22 15.25 33.96 40.76 40 75.15 58.49 15.76 42.74 102.5725 60.90 42.66 15.25 27.41 41.11 50 63.95 49.78 15.76 34.02 102.0730 53.93 37.78 15.25 22.53 40.55 60 55.89 43.51 15.76 27.75 99.9035 48.52 33.99 15.25 18.74 39.35 70 49.79 38.76 15.76 23.00 96.6040 44.18 30.95 15.25 15.70 37.69 80 44.99 35.02 15.76 19.26 92.4745 40.63 28.46 15.25 13.21 35.67 90 41.11 32.00 15.76 16.24 87.7250 37.65 26.38 15.25 11.13 33.38 100 37.90 29.50 15.76 13.75 82.4855 35.12 24.61 15.25 9.35 30.87 110 35.20 27.40 15.76 11.64 76.8560 32.94 23.08 15.25 7.83 28.18 120 32.89 25.61 15.76 9.85 70.91








C: 0.78 C: 0.98


5 141.18 12.25 12.25 10 178.56 19.36 19.36 0.0010 104.19 9.04 9.04 20 119.95 13.01 13.01 0.0015 83.56 7.25 7.25 30 91.87 9.96 9.96 0.0020 70.25 6.09 6.09 40 75.15 8.15 8.15 0.0025 60.90 5.28 5.28 50 63.95 6.93 6.93 0.0030 53.93 4.68 4.68 60 55.89 6.06 6.06 0.0035 48.52 4.21 4.21 70 49.79 5.40 5.40 0.0040 44.18 3.83 3.83 80 44.99 4.88 4.88 0.0045 40.63 3.52 3.52 90 41.11 4.46 4.46 0.0050 37.65 3.27 3.27 100 37.90 4.11 4.11 0.0055 35.12 3.05 3.05 110 35.20 3.82 3.82 0.0060 32.94 2.86 2.86 120 32.89 3.57 3.57 0.00

Subdrainage Area: 1 Uncontrolled - Non-Tributary Subdrainage Area: 1 Uncontrolled - Non-TributaryArea (ha): 0.01 Area (ha): 0.01

C: 0.77 C: 0.96


5 141.18 3.02 3.02 10 178.56 4.78 4.7810 104.19 2.23 2.23 20 119.95 3.21 3.2115 83.56 1.79 1.79 30 91.87 2.46 2.4620 70.25 1.50 1.50 40 75.15 2.01 2.0125 60.90 1.30 1.30 50 63.95 1.71 1.7130 53.93 1.15 1.15 60 55.89 1.50 1.5035 48.52 1.04 1.04 70 49.79 1.33 1.3340 44.18 0.95 0.95 80 44.99 1.20 1.2045 40.63 0.87 0.87 90 41.11 1.10 1.1050 37.65 0.81 0.81 100 37.90 1.01 1.0155 35.12 0.75 0.75 110 35.20 0.94 0.9460 32.94 0.71 0.71 120 32.89 0.88 0.88





Subdrainage Area: 5- PROP_BLDG Roof Subdrainage Area: 5- PROP_BLDG RoofArea (ha): 0.20 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm Area (ha): 0.20 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm

C: 0.90 C: 1.00


5 141.18 70.65 10.46 60.19 18.06 10 178.56 99.28 13.17 86.11 51.6610 104.19 52.14 10.46 41.68 25.01 20 119.95 66.69 13.17 53.52 64.2215 83.56 41.81 10.46 31.35 28.22 30 91.87 51.08 13.17 37.91 68.2320 70.25 35.15 10.46 24.69 29.63 40 75.15 41.78 13.17 28.61 68.6625 60.90 30.47 10.46 20.01 30.02 50 63.95 35.56 13.17 22.39 67.1630 53.93 26.99 10.46 16.52 29.74 60 55.89 31.08 13.17 17.90 64.4535 48.52 24.28 10.46 13.82 29.02 70 49.79 27.68 13.17 14.51 60.9440 44.18 22.11 10.46 11.65 27.96 80 44.99 25.01 13.17 11.84 56.8445 40.63 20.33 10.46 9.87 26.65 90 41.11 22.86 13.17 9.68 52.3050 37.65 18.84 10.46 8.38 25.14 100 37.90 21.07 13.17 7.90 47.4055 35.12 17.58 10.46 7.12 23.48 110 35.20 19.57 13.17 6.40 42.2360 32.94 16.48 10.46 6.02 21.69 120 32.89 18.29 13.17 5.12 36.84


Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge(m) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check (m) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check


Subdrainage Area: 2- Milestones Roof Subdrainage Area: 2- Milestones RoofArea (ha): 0.06 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm Area (ha): 0.06 Maximum Storage Depth: 150 mm

C: 0.90 C: 1.00

tc l (5 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored Depth tc l (100 yr) Qactual Qrelease Qstored Vstored Depth(min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3) (mm) (min) (mm/hr) (L/s) (L/s) (L/s) (m^3) (mm)

5 141.18 21.19 3.67 17.52 5.26 79.7 0.00 10 178.56 29.78 4.94 24.85 14.91 107.2 0.00

10 104.19 15.64 3.96 11.68 7.01 86.0 0.00 20 119.95 20.01 5.18 14.83 17.79 112.4 0.00

15 83.56 12.54 4.06 8.48 7.63 88.2 0.00 30 91.87 15.32 5.21 10.11 18.20 113.1 0.00

20 70.25 10.55 4.08 6.46 7.76 88.6 0.00 40 75.15 12.53 5.17 7.37 17.68 112.2 0.00

25 60.90 9.14 4.06 5.08 7.62 88.1 0.00 50 63.95 10.67 5.09 5.58 16.73 110.5 0.00

30 53.93 8.10 4.02 4.08 7.34 87.1 0.00 60 55.89 9.32 4.99 4.33 15.58 108.4 0.00

35 48.52 7.28 3.96 3.33 6.99 85.9 0.00 70 49.79 8.30 4.89 3.41 14.34 106.1 0.00

40 44.18 6.63 3.89 2.74 6.58 84.4 0.00 80 44.99 7.50 4.78 2.72 13.06 103.8 0.00

45 40.63 6.10 3.82 2.28 6.15 82.9 0.00 90 41.11 6.86 4.68 2.18 11.78 101.5 0.00

50 37.65 5.65 3.75 1.90 5.71 81.3 0.00 100 37.90 6.32 4.55 1.77 10.62 98.8 0.00

55 35.12 5.27 3.68 1.60 5.27 79.8 0.00 110 35.20 5.87 4.40 1.47 9.70 95.5 0.00

60 32.94 4.95 3.60 1.34 4.83 78.2 0.00 120 32.89 5.49 4.26 1.23 8.83 92.4 0.00


Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge Depth Head Discharge Vreq Vavail Discharge(mm) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check (mm) (m) (L/s) (cu. m) (cu. m) Check


SUMMARY TO OUTLET Surface SUMMARY TO OUTLET SurfaceVrequired Vavailable* Vrequired Vavailable*

Tributary Area 1.870 ha 195 209 m3 Tributary Area 1.870 ha 491 524 m3

Total 5yr Flow to Sewer 131.9 L/s Total 100yr Flow to Sewer 198.3 L/sRoof Roof

Non-Tributary Area 0.01 ha Vrequired Vavailable* Non-Tributary Area 0.010 ha Vrequired Vavailable*Total 5yr Flow Uncontrolled 2.2 L/s 50.71 272.46 m3 Total 100yr Flow Uncontrolled 4.8 L/s 117.21 272.46 m3

Total Area 1.880 ha Total Area 1.880 haTotal 5yr Flow 134.1 L/s Total 100yr Flow 203.0 L/s

Target 203.7 L/s Target 203.7 L/s



Roof Drain Design Calculation Sheet

Project #160401159, BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUERoof Drain Design Sheet, Proposed Building Area 5Standard Zurn Model Z-105-5 Control-Flo Single Notch Roof Drain

Total Total

Elevation Discharge Rate Outlet Discharge Storage Elevation Area Water Depth Volume Time Vol Detention(m) (cu.m/s) (cu.m/s) (cu. m) (m) (sq. m) Increment Accumulated (m) (cu.m) (sec) (cu.m) Time (hr)

0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.0000.025 0.0004 0.0027 0 0.025 39 0 0 0.025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0

0.050 0.0008 0.0054 3 0.050 156 3 3 0.050 2.6 477.6 2.6 0.13267

0.075 0.0012 0.0081 12 0.075 350 9 12 0.075 11.3 1078.9 8.7 0.43235

0.100 0.0015 0.0108 32 0.100 622 21 32 0.100 31.9 1922.0 20.7 0.96625

0.125 0.0019 0.0134 73 0.125 972 40 73 0.125 72.3 3006.6 40.4 1.801430.150 0.0023 0.0161 143 0.150 1400 70 143 0.150 142.2 4332.5 69.9 3.00491

Rooftop Storage SummaryFrom Zurn Drain Catalogue

Total Building Area (sq.m) 2000 Head (m) L/min L/s Notch Rating

Assume Available Roof Area (sq. 70% 1400 0.051 45.5 0.00076 232

Roof Imperviousness 0.99Roof Drain Requirement (sq.m/Notch) 232Number of Roof Notches* 7Max. Allowable Depth of Roof Ponding (m) 0.15 * As per Ontario Building Code section OBC 7.4.10.4.(2)(c).Max. Allowable Storage (cu.m) 143Estimated 100 Year Drawdown Time (h) 1.7

* Note: Number of drains can be reduced if multiple-notch drain used.

Calculation Results 5yr 100yr AvailableQresult (cu.m/s) 0.010 0.013 - 13.17333837Depth (m) 0.097 0.123 0.150Volume (cu.m) 30.0 68.7 142.5Draintime (hrs) 0.9 1.7

Rating Curve Volume EstimationVolume (cu. m)

Drawdown Estimate

Date: 27/7/2016Stantec Consulting Ltd.

anl_swm_MRM_2016-07-26_dt.xlsm, PROP_BLDGW:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\SWM\


Project #160401159, BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUERoof Drain Design Sheet, Area MilestonesStandard Zurn Model Z-105-5 Control-Flo Single Notch Roof Drain

Total Total


0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.0000.025 0.0004 0.0012 0 0.025 13 0 0 0.025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0

0.050 0.0008 0.0023 1 0.050 53 1 1 0.050 0.9 375.0 0.9 0.10415

0.075 0.0012 0.0035 4 0.075 120 3 4 0.075 3.8 853.6 3.0 0.34126

0.100 0.0015 0.0046 11 0.100 213 7 11 0.100 10.9 1526.9 7.0 0.76541

0.125 0.0019 0.0058 25 0.125 333 14 25 0.125 24.6 2393.9 13.8 1.430380.150 0.0023 0.0069 49 0.150 480 24 49 0.150 48.5 3454.1 23.9 2.38987




Roof Imperviousness 0.99Roof Drain Requirement (sq.m/Notch) 232Number of Roof Notches* 3Max. Allowable Depth of Roof Ponding (m) 0.15 * As per Ontario Building Code section OBC 7.4.10.4.(2)(c).Max. Allowable Storage (cu.m) 49Estimated 100 Year Drawdown Time (h) 1.1


Calculation Results 5yr 100yr AvailableQresult (cu.m/s) 0.004 0.005 -Depth (m) 0.089 0.113 0.150Volume (cu.m) 7.8 18.2 48.6Draintime (hrs) 0.6 1.1


Drawdown Estimate


anl_swm_MRM_2016-07-26_dt.xlsm, MilestonesW:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\SWM\


Project #160401159, BUILDING A - 255 KANATA AVENUERoof Drain Design Sheet, Area EX_CIBCStandard Zurn Model Z-105-5 Control-Flo Single Notch Roof Drain

Total Total


0.000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.000 0 0 0 0.0000.025 0.0004 0.0019 0 0.025 22 0 0 0.025 0.0 0.0 0.0 0

0.050 0.0008 0.0038 2 0.050 89 1 2 0.050 1.5 379.3 1.5 0.10536

0.075 0.0012 0.0058 7 0.075 200 5 7 0.075 6.4 859.4 5.0 0.34407

0.100 0.0015 0.0077 18 0.100 356 12 18 0.100 18.2 1533.4 11.8 0.77003

0.125 0.0019 0.0096 41 0.125 556 23 41 0.125 41.2 2400.8 23.0 1.436930.150 0.0023 0.0115 81 0.150 800 40 81 0.150 81.1 3461.4 39.9 2.39843




Roof Imperviousness 0.99Roof Drain Requirement (sq.m/Notch) 232Number of Roof Notches* 5 Adjusted Manually to Match Previous ConditionsMax. Allowable Depth of Roof Ponding (m) 0.15 * As per Ontario Building Code section OBC 7.4.10.4.(2)(c).Max. Allowable Storage (cu.m) 81Estimated 100 Year Drawdown Time (h) 1.1


Calculation Results 5yr 100yr AvailableQresult (cu.m/s) 0.007 0.009 -Depth (m) 0.088 0.113 0.150Volume (cu.m) 12.9 30.4 81.3Draintime (hrs) 0.6 1.1


Drawdown Estimate


anl_swm_MRM_2016-07-26_dt.xlsm, EX_CIBCW:\active\160401159_Solutions Ottawa\design\analysis\SWM\

dthiffault

Rectangle

dthiffault

Rectangle

1

Cooper, Janice

From: Whittaker, Damien <[email protected]>

Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 2:41 PM

To: Cody, Neal

Subject: RE: 255-445 Kanata Avenue, City Criteria

Attachments: SWM plan.pdf

Neal, Please find below SWM criteria for the above listed site. Part of the lands were designed for a runoff coefficient of 0.9 and a part of the lands were designed with a runoff coefficient of 0.8- please see the attached plan. Areas with a symbol with two numbers indicate an area (ha) and a runoff coefficient below. Areas with a symbol with only one number in the circle are of the area (ha) with a runoff coefficient of 0.8. The pre-development time of concentration is 20 minutes. Post-development flows should not exceed the 5-year flow from the development on the attached plan. An ICD was proposed downstream of the proposal as shown on the attached plan. The diameter of the orifice should be checked to confirm that it is 210 mm. Regards, Damien Whittaker, P.Eng. Project Manager Development Review, Suburban Services - West 110 Laurier Avenue West, 4th Floor 613-580-2424 x16968 [email protected]

From: Cody, Neal [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: June 25, 2012 1:05 PM

To: Whittaker, Damien

Subject: 255-445 Kanata Avenue, City Criteria

Hi there Damien, Hope you’re doing well. We’ve been asked by a client to begin taking a look at a site design for 255-445 Kanata Avenue. Could you please provide the SWM criteria that we would be required to meet in preparing the design? Also, please find attached the expected water demands for the site. We would appreciate it if you can forward it to the water resources group so that we can get a set of boundary conditions for the watermain system. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to give a me a call. Thanks, Neal Neal Cody, P.Eng, LEED Green Assoc.

Water Resources Engineer

Stantec

1505 Laperriere Avenue

Ottawa ON K1Z 7T1

Ph: (613) 724-4380

Fx: (613) 722-2799

[email protected]

October 31, 2012

cc w:\active\160400991_kanata milestones\design\report\servicing\2012-10-03\rpt-2012-10-03_servicing-mjs_submission2.docx 5.1

SERVICING BRIEF, KANATA CENTRUM MILESTONE’S, OTTAWA, ON

5.0 Storm Servicing and Stormwater Management

Pre-development conditions at the site are such that the majority of the stormwater runoff from the site area (0.576 ha) drains to an existing storm manhole at the southeastern corner of the site. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development will be directed to the existing storm sewer that runs through the existing parking lot. As illustrated on Drawing EX-REMV, the existing storm sewers onsite consist of 1200mm diameter concrete pipes and catchbasin manholes. Site investigation identified existing inlet control devices (ICDs) on some of these existing catchbasins and catchbasin manholes, as shown in Table 5-1, and on Drawing SD-1 EX or Drawing 500. Within the boundaries of the proposed site, there is an existing catchbasin on the eastern end of the parking lot that also ties in to the existing sewers, and is included in the storm sewer design sheet (see Appendix B). The storm sewer design sheet and stormwater analysis include existing sewers from STM MH3 to STM MH6 since the proposed site works will result in changes to some of the drainage and ponding areas tributary to this section of storm sewers.

Table 5-1: Summary of Existing ICDs

Structure ID

Location inside

structure

Area ID

ICD Type ICD Size Max release

rate (L/s)

EX CBMH4 Top 6 Horizontal

Plate 8in diameter 54.9

EX CBMH5 Top 7 Horizontal

Plate 6in diameter 42.0

EX CB7 Northern conduit 9 On pipe 100x100mm 28.3

EX CB8 Southern conduit 5 On pipe 60x60mm 8.5

The 5-year target release rate for the site was determined by using the method outlined in the previous report submitted by Cumming Cockburn Ltd. A total tributary site area (see Drawings SD-2 INT or SD-3 ULT) of 1.83 hectares at a predevelopment runoff coefficient of 0.57 was used to calculate the target rate of 204 L/s. It should be noted that this release rate was calculated at a time of concentration of 20 minutes, as per the previous report.

The overall post-development runoff coefficient for the area is 0.85 . The proposed design uses a time of concentration of 10 minutes in determining peak runoff rates, as required by current City guidelines.

The following stormwater management criteria have been provided through consultation with City of Ottawa staff:

• As per the standards of the City, flow restrictions to meet the 5 year target flows at the runoff coefficient used in the previous design (C=0.57, see Appendix E) are required.

Control-Flo...Today’s Successful Answer to More

THE ZURN “CONTROL-FLO CONCEPT” Originally, Zurn introduced the scientifically-advanced “Control-Flo” drainage principle for dead-level roofs. Today, after thousands of successful applications in mod-ern, large dead-level roof areas, Zurn engineers have adapted the comprehensive “Control-Flo” data to sloped roof areas. WHAT IS “CONTROL-FLO”? It is an advanced method of removing rain water off dead-level or sloped roofs. As contrasted with conventional drainage practices, which attempt to drain off storm water as quickly as it falls on the roof’s surface, “Control-Flo” drains the roof at a controlled rate. Excess water accu-mulates on the roof under controlled conditions...then drains off at a lower rate after a storm abates. CUTS DRAINAGE COSTS Fewer roof drains, smaller diameter piping, smaller sewer sizes, and lower installation costs are possible with a “Control-Flo” drainage system because roof areas are utilized as temporary storage reservoirs. REDUCES PROBABILITY OF STORM DAMAGE Lightens load on combination sewers by reducing rate of water drained from roof tops during severe storms thereby reducing probability of flooded sewers, and consequent backflow into basements and other low areas. THANKS TO EXCLUSIVE ZURN “AQUA-WEIR” ACTION Key to successful “Control-Flo” drainage is a unique sci-entifically-designed weir containing accurately calibrated notches with sides formed by parabolic curves which pro-vide flow rates directly proportional to the head. Shape and size of notches are based on predetermined flow rates, and all factors involved in roof drainage to assure permanent regulation of drainage flow rates for specific geographic locations and rainfall intensities.

DEFINITION _________________________________________ DEAD LEVEL ROOFS

DIAGRAM “A” A dead-level roof for purposes of applying the Zurn “Control-Flo” drainage principle is one which has been designed for zero slope across its entire surface. Measurements shown are for maximum distances.

_________________________________________ SLOPED ROOFS

DIAGRAM “B” A sloped roof is one designed commonly with a shallow slope. The Zurn “Control-Flo” drainage system can be applied to any slope which results in a total rise up to 152mm (6”). The total rise of a roof as calculated for “Control-Flo” application is defined as the vertical increase in height in inches, from the low point or valley of a sloping roof (A) to the top of the sloping section (B). (Example: a roof that slopes 3mm (1/8”) per foot having a 7.25m (24’) span would have a rise of 7.25m x 3mm or 76mm (24’ x 1/8” or 3”)). Measurements shown are for maximum distances.

Dimensions and other measurements given in metric and imperial forms.

(Plan View)

(Section View)

15.25m (50’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

15.25m (50’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

15.25m (50’)

15.25m (50’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

Page 1

Economical Roof Drainage Installations

SPECIFICATION DATA ENGINEERING SPECIFICATION: ZURN Z-105 "Control-Flo" roof drain for dead -level or sloped roof construction, Dura-Coated cast iron body. "Control-Flo" weir shall be linear functioning with integral membrane flashing clamp/gravel guard and Poly-Dome. All data shall be verified proportional to flow rates.

ROOF DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Basic roofing design should incorporate protection that will prevent roof overloading by installing adequate over-flow scuppers in parapet walls. GENERAL INFORMATION The “Control-Flo” roof drainage data is tabulated for four areas (232.25m2 (2500 sq. ft.), 464.502m2 (5000 sq. ft.), 696.75m2 (7500 sq. ft.), 929m2 (10,000 sq. ft.) notch areas ratings) for each locality. For each notch area rat-ing the maximum discharge in L.P.M. (G.P.M.) - draindown in hours, and maximum water depth at the drain in inches for a dead level roof — 51mm (2 inch) rise — 102mm (4 inch) rise and 152mm (6 inch) rise—are tabulated. The rise is the total change in elevation from the valley to the peak. Values for areas, rise or combina-tion thereof other than those listed, can be arrived at by extrapolation. All data listed is based on the fifty-year return frequency storm. In other words the maximum conditions as listed will occur on the average of once every fifty years.

_________________________________________ GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS On sloping roofs, we recommend a design depth referred to as an equivalent depth. An equivalent depth is the depth of water attained at the drains that results in the same roof stresses as those realized on a dead-level roof. In all cases this equivalent depth is almost equal to that attained by using the same notch area rating for the different rises to 152mm (6”). With the same depth of water at the drain the roof stresses will decrease with increasing total rise. Therefore, it would be possible to have a depth in excess of 152mm (6”) at the drain on a sloping roof without exceeding stresses normally encountered in a 152mm (6”) depth on a dead-level roof. However, it is recommended that scuppers be placed to limit the maximum water depth on any roof to 152mm (6”) to prevent the overflow of the weirs on the drains and consequent overloading of drain piping. In the few cases where the data shows a flow rate in excess of 136 L.P.M. (30 G.P.M.) if all drains and drain lines are sized according to recommendations, and the one storm in fifty years occurs, the only consequence will be a brief flow through the scuppers or over-flow drains.

NOTE: The tabulated “Control-Flo” data enables the individual engineer to select his own design limiting condition. The limiting condition can be draindown time, roof load factor, or maximum water depth at the drain. If draindown time is the limiting factor because of possible freezing conditions, it must be recognized that the maximum time listed will occur on the average of once every 50 years and would most likely be during a heavy summer thunder storm. Average winter drain-down times would be much shorter in duration than those listed.

NOTE: An equivalent depth is that depth of water at-tained at the drains at the lowest line or valley of the roof with all other conditions such as notch area and rainfall intensity being equal. For Toronto, Ontario a notch area rating of 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) results in a 74mm (2.9 inch) depth on a dead level roof for a 50-year storm. For the same notch area and conditions, equivalent depths for a 51mm (2”), 102mm (4”) and 152mm (6”) rise respectively on a sloped roof would be 86mm (3.4”), 104mm (4.1”) and 124mm (4.9”). Roof stresses will be approximately equal in all cases.

Page 2

Control-Flo Drain Selection Is Quick and Easy...

The exclusive Zurn “Selecta-Drain” Chart (pages 8—11) tabulates selection data for 34 localities in Canada. Proper use of this chart constitutes your best assurance of sure, safe, economical application of Zurn “Control-Flo” systems for your specific geographical area. If the “Selecta-Drain Chart does not cover your specific design criteria, contact Zurn Industries Limited, Mississauga, Ontario, for additional data for your locality. Listed below is additional information pertinent to proper engineering of the “Control-Flo” system. ROOF USED AS TEMPORARY RETENTION The key to economical “Control-Flo” is the utilization of large roof areas to temporarily store the maximum amount of water without overloading average roofs or creating excessive draindown time during periods of heavy rainfall. The data shown in the “Selecta-Drain” Chart enables the engineer to select notch area ratings from 232.25 m2 (2,500 ft.2) to 929m2 (10,000 ft.2) and to accurately predict all other design factors such as maximum roof load, L.P.M. (G.P.M.) discharge, draindown time and water depth at the drain. Obviously, as design factors permit the notch area rating to increase the resulting money saved in being able to use small leaders and drain lines will also increase. ROOF LOADING AND RUN-OFF RATES The four values listed in the “Selecta-Drain” Chart for notch area ratings for different localities will normally span the range of good design. If areas per notch below 232.25m2 (2,500 ft.2) are used considerable economy of the “Control-Flo” concept is being lost. The area per notch is limited to 929m2 (10,000 ft.2) to keep the drain-down time within reasonable limits. Extensive studies show that stresses due to water load on a sloping roof for any fixed set of conditions are very nearly the same as those on a dead-level roof. A sloping roof tends to con-centrate more water in the valleys and increase the water depth at this point. The greater depth around the drain leads to a faster run-off rate, particularly a faster early run-off rate. As a result, the total volume of water stored on the roof is less, and the total load on the sloping roof is less. By using the same area on the sloping roof as on the dead-level roof the increase in roof stresses due to increased water depth in the valleys is offset by the de-crease in the total load due to less water stored. The net result of the maximum roof stress is approximately the same for any single span rise and fixed set of conditions. A fixed set of conditions, would be the same notch area, the same frequency store, and the same locality. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR STRUCTURAL SAFETY: Normal practice of roof design is based on 18kg (40 lbs.) per 929 cm2 ( sq ft.). (Subject to local codes and by-laws.) Thus it is extremely important that design is in accordance with normal load factors so deflection will be slight enough in any bay to pre-vent progressive deflection which could cause water depths to load the roof beyond its design limits.

ADDITIONAL NOTCH RATINGS The ‘Selecta-Drain” Chart along with Tables I and II en-ables the engineer to select “Control-Flo” Drains and drain pipe sizes for most Canadian applications. These calcu-lations are computed for a proportional flow weir that is sized to give a flow of 23 L.P.M. (5 G.P.M.) per inch of head. The 23 L.P.M. (5 G.P.M.) per inch of head notch opening is selected as the bases of design as it offers the most economical installation as applied to actual rainfall experienced in Canada. Should you require design criteria for locations outside of Canada or for special project applications please contact Zurn Industries Limited, Mississauga, Ontario. LEADER AND DRAIN PIPE SIZING Since all data in the “Selecta-Drain” Chart is based on the 50-year-storm it is possible to exceed the water depth listed in these charts if a 100-year or 1000-year storm would occur. Therefore, for good design it is recom-mended that scuppers or other methods be used to limit water depth to the design depth and tables I and II be used to size the leaders and drain pipes. If the roof is capable of supporting more water than the design depth it is permissible to locate the scuppers or other overflow means at a height that will allow a greater water depth on the roof. However, in this case the leader and drain pipes should be sized to handle the higher flow rates possible based on a flow rate of 23 L.P.M. (5 G.P.M.) per inch of depth at the drain. PROPER DRAIN LOCATION The following good design practice is recommended for selecting the proper number of “Control-Flo” drains for a given area. On dead-level roofs, drains should be lo-cated no further than 15.25m (50 feet) from edge of roof and no further than 30.50m (100 feet) between drains. See diagram “A” page 2. On sloping roofs, drains should be located in the valleys at a distance no greater than 15.25m (50 feet) from each end of the valleys and no further than 30.50m (100 feet) between drains. See dia-gram “B” page 2. Compliance with these recommenda-tions will assure good run off regardless of wind direction.

Page 3

Saves Specification Time, Assures Proper Application QUICK, EASY SELECTION Using the “Selecta-Drain” Chart (pages 9—13) in combination with the steps and examples appearing below, should save you countless hours in engineering specification time. This vast compilation of data is related to the proper selection of drains for 34 cities. All cities in alphabetical order by province. If a specific city does not appear in the tabulation, chooses the city nearest your area and select the proper drain using these factors. 3 EASY STEPS… AND 3 TYPICAL EXAMPLES FOR APPLICATION OF SURE, SCIENTIFIC CONTROL OF DRAINAGE FROM DEAD-LEVEL AND SLOPING ROOFS WITH THE ZURN CONCEPT. NOTE: Where roof area to be drained is adjacent to one or more vertical walls projecting above the roof, then a percentage of the of the wall(s) must be added to the roof area in determining total roof area to be drained.

TORONTO, ONTARIO DEAD-LEVEL ROOF 102mm (4 INCH) SLOPE 152mm (6 INCH) SLOPE

1

Determine total roof area or indi-vidual areas when roof is divided by expansion joints or peaks in the case of sloping roof.

Roof Area: 56.52m x 152.40m = 8918.40m2 (192ft x 500ft = 96,000 sq. ft.) (See Z105 layout bottom of this page.)

3 Individual Roof Areas: 19.50m x 152.40m = 2972.80m2 (64ft x 500ft = 32,000 sq. ft.) Valleys 152.40m (500ft) long 3 x 2972.80 = 8918.40m2 (3 x 32,000 = 96,000 sq. ft.)

2 Individual Roof Areas: 29.87m x 152.40m = 4552m2 (98ft x 500ft = 49,000 sq. ft.) Valleys 152.40m (500ft) long 2 x 4552 = 9104m2 (2 x 49,000 = 98,000 sq. ft.)

2

Divide roof area or individual areas by Zurn Notch Area Rating selected to obtain the total num-ber of notches required.

Zurn Notch Area Rating selected for Toronto = 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) from “Selecta-Drain Chart, page 11. Total Roof Area = 8918.40m2 (96,000 sq. ft.) Entire roof. 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) notch area = 19.2 notches—USE 20.

Zurn Notch Area Rating selected for Toronto = 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) from “Selecta-Drain Chart, page 11. Total Roof Area = 2972.80m2 (32,000 sq. ft.) Each area. 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) notch area = 6.4 notches—USE 7 PER AREA.

Zurn Notch Area Rating selected for Toronto = 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) from “Selecta-Drain Chart, page 11. Total Roof Area = 4552m2 (49,000 sq. ft.) Each area. 464.50m2 (5,000 sq. ft.) notch area = 9.8 notches—USE 10 PER AREA.

3

Determine total number of drains required by not exceeding maxi-mum spacing dimensions in the preceding instructions. See Diagrams “A” or “B”, page 2. Divide total number of notches required to determine the number of notches per drain. Note maximum water depth at drain and use this dimension to determine scupper height. Maximum scupper height to be used is 152mm (6”). Use this flow rate to size leaders and drain lines.

*10 drains required. All drains must have two notches each for a total of 20 notches. Flow rate is 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) per notch. Size leaders for 2 notch weirs for a flow rate of 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) 50 mm (two inch) pipe size leaders re-quired. Maximum water depth and scupper height is 74mm (2.9“). Requires 19 hours drain-down time maximum. For drain, vertical and horizontal pipe sizing data see Tables I and II on page 6 and 7.

**5 drains per area required located in the valleys 15.25m (50ft.) from each end with 3 in the middle at 30.50m (100ft.) spacings. Two drains on ends with two notches—3 drains in middle on notch each for a total of 7 notches. Maximum flow rate 93 L.P.M. (20.5 G.P.M.) per notch. Leader size 50mm (2”) for single notch weirs—75mm (3”) notch weirs. Maximum water depth and scupper height is 104mm (4.1”). Requires 11 hours draindown time maximum. For drain, vertical and horizontal pipe sizing data see Tables I and II on page 6 and 7.

**5 drains per area required located in the valleys 15.25m (50ft.) from each end with 3 in the middle at 30.50m (100ft.) spacing in the middle. 10 notches are required therefore all drains must have two notches. Flow rate is 111 L.P.M. (24.5 G.P.M.) per notch. Size all leaders for 2 notch weirs. 75mm (3”) pipe size required. Maxi-mum water depth and scupper height is 124mm (4.9”). Requires 9 hours draindown time maximum. For drain, vertical and horizontal pipe sizing data see Tables I and II on page 6 and 7.

*See Diagram “A” page 2 for recommended drain placement. **See Diagram “B” page 2 for recommended drain placement.

152.40m (500’)

CONVENTIONAL — “UNCONTROLLED” — RUN OFF “CONTROL-FLO” — RUN OFF

DEAD LEVEL ROOF 6mm (1/4”) PER FT. SLOPE STORM DRAIN

150mm (6”)

58.52m (192’)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

450mm (18”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

375mm (15”)

375mm (15”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

200mm (8”)

300mm (12”)

250mm (10”)

15.25m (50’)

28m (92’)

15.25m (50’)

15.25m (50’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

15.25m (50’)

58.52m (192’)

150mm (6”)

15.25m (50’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

30.50m (100’)

15.25m (50’)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

152.40m (500’)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”)

50mm (2”) 15.25m

(50’)

15.25m (50’)

28m (92’)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

75mm (3”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

150mm (6”)

100mm (4”)

Page 4

Select The Proper Vertical Drain Leaders

ROOF DRAINAGE DATA The flow rate for any design condition can be easily read from the data contained on the following pages; the tabulations shown below (and on the opposite page) can be used to simplify selection of drain line sizes. TABLE 1 - SUGGESTED RELATION OF DRAIN OUTLET AND VERTICAL LEADER SIZE TO ZURN CONTROL-FLO ROOF DRAINS (BASED ON NATIONAL PLUMBING CODE ASA-A40.8 DATA ON VERTICAL LEADERS).

*Maximum flow obtainable from 1 notch with 152mm (6”) water depth at drain. Table 1 should be used to select vertical drain leaders which at the same time establishes the drain outlet size. This table illustrates the minimum flow per notch in L.P.M. (G.P.M.) Since the Z-105 drain is available with a minimum of one and a maximum of six notches, calculations have already been a made and are listed in this table for any quantity of weir notch openings established in your design. It was determined ten drains with two notches each weir would be required in the Dead-Level Roof example on page 5. A 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) discharge per notch flow rate was also established. Once this design criteria has been determined it will be the key to the proper selection of all drain outlet sizes, vertical and horizontal storm drain sizes in Table I and II. Enter the column “Number of Notches in Drain”, Table I, read down the column to the figure 2 which indicates two notches in weir, then read across until you reach a figure equal to or closest figure in excess of 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) You will find fifteen in the column under 50mm (2”) which represents the pipe size. Therefore all drain outlets and vertical leaders are 50mm (2”) size. Let us digress for a moment assuming a specific structure requires a total of six drains each containing a weir with a different number of notches. One with 1, one with 2, etc. Table 1 discloses the pipe size for one notch is 50mm (2”), two notch is 50mm (2”), three notch is 75mm (3”), four notch is 75mm (3”), five notch is 75mm (3”) and six notch is 75mm (3”) as they all equal or closely exceed the 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) design. NOTE: Although pipe size calculations should be based on accumulated flow rate, local by-laws should be referred to for minimum pipe size requirements and roof drain spacing.

TABLE II should be used to select horizontal storm drain piping. Use the same flow rate 66 L.P.M. (14.5 G.P.M.) used to establish the vertical leaders to size the storm drainage system and main storm drain. Let us assume the ten drains each with two notch weirs were actually on the roof in two separate lines of five drains each and joined at a common point before leaving the building. Since Table II includes 3mm (1/8”), 6mm (1/4”) and 13mm (1/2”) per foot slope, let us use 6mm (1/4”) as our basis for selection which will take us to the centre section. Starting with the first of five drains we enter the extreme left column in Table II and read down to the figure 2 since this drain has two notches in weir, read across horizontally and the size of first section of horizontal storm drain is 75mm (3”) between 1st and 2nd drain, return to left hand column proceed reading down until you reach figure 4 then read across horizontally and the pipe size will be 100mm (4”) between 2nd and 3rd drain, 100mm (4”) between 3rd and 4th and 125mm (5”) (if available) between 4th and 5th. If not available use 150mm (6”). (You may be tempted to use 100mm (4”) since the capacity is close. We recommend you go to the larger size.) Pipe size leaving 5th drain would be 150mm (6”). The same sizing would hold true for the second line of five drains. Since both columns of five drains each are being joined together before leaving the building there will be total of twenty notches discharging into the main building storm sewer. Enter left hand column Table II, read down until you reach the figure twenty, then read across horizontally to the 6mm (1/4”) per 305mm (1’) slope column and you will see a 150mm (6”) storm drain will handle the job adequately. The same procedure should be followed for sloped roof installations. The above method of sizing was done to better acquaint you with Table II and its use. The more economical and practical way of laying out and installing this same job is illustrated in the control-flo layout shown on bottom of page 5. NOTE: Although pipe size calculations should be based on accumulated flow rates, local by-laws should be referred to for minimum pipe size requirements and roof drain spacing.

No. of Notches in Drain

Max. Flow per Notch in L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Pipe Size

1 136* (30*)

— —

2 68 (15)

136* (30*)

—

3 45 (10)

136* (30*)

—

4 — 105 (23)

136* (30*)

5 — 82 (18)

136* (30*)

6 — 68 (15)

136* (30*)

50mm (2”)

75mm (3”)

100mm (4”)

Page 5

Select Proper Horizontal Storm Drain Piping

Table II — SUGGESTED RELATION OF HORIZONTAL STORM DRAIN SIZE TO ZURN CONTROL-FLO ROOF DRAINAGE

Total No. of Notches Discharging to Storm Drain

MAX. FLOW PER NOTCH IN L.P.M. (G.P.M.) MAX. FLOW PER NOTCH IN L.P.M. (G.P.M.) MAX. FLOW PER NOTCH IN L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Storm Drain Size 3mm (1/8”) per 305mm (1’) Slope Storm Drain Size 6mm (1/4”) per 305mm (1’) Slope

75 (3”)

100 (4”)

125 (5”)

150 (6”)

200 (8”)

250 (10”)

300 (12”)

375 (15”)

75 (3”)

100 (4”)

125 (5”)

150 (6”)

200 (8”)

250 (10”)

300 (12”)

75 (3”)

100 (4”)

125 (5”)

150 (6”)

200 (8”)

250 (10”)

300 (12”)

1 136* (30*)

— — — — — — — 136* (30*)

— — — — — — 136* (30*)

— — — — — —

2 77

(17) 136* (30*)

— — — — — — 109 (24)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 136* (30*)

— — — — — —

3 50

(11) 118 (26)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 73 (16)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — —

4 36 (8)

86 (19)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 55 (12)

127 (28)

136* (30*)

— — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

— — — — —

5 — 65

(15) 127* (28*)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — 59 (13)

136* (30*)

— — — — —

6 — 59

(13) 105 (23)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 82 (18)

136* (30*)

— — — — 50 (11)

118 (26)

136* (30*)

— — — —

7 — 50

(11) 91

(20) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 73 (16)

127 (28)

136* (30*)

— — — — 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — —

8 — — 77

(17) 127 (28)

136* (30*)

— — — — 64 (14)

114 (25)

136* (30*)

— — — — 86 (19)

136* (30*)

— — — —

9 — — 68

(15) 114 (25)

136* (30*)

— — — — 55 (12)

100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

— — — —

10 — — 64

(14) 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 91 (20)

136* (30*)

— — — — 68 (15)

123 (27)

136* (30*)

— — —

11 — — 55

(12) 91

(20) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 82 (18)

132 (29)

136* (30*)

— — — 64 (14)

114 (25)

136* (30*)

— — —

12 — — — 82

(18) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 73 (16)

118 (26)

136* (30*)

— — — 59 (13)

105 (23)

136* (30*)

— — —

13 — — — 77

(17) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 68 (15)

109 (24)

136* (30*)

— — — 55 (12)

95 (21)

136* (30*)

— — —

14 — — — 73

(16) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 64 (14)

100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — 86 (19)

136* (30*)

— — —

15 — — — 68

(15) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 59 (13)

95 (21)

136* (30*)

— — — — 82 (18)

132 (29)

136* (30*)

— —

16 — — — 64

(14) 136* (30*)

— — — — — — 91 (20)

136* (30*)

— — — — 77 (17)

123 (27)

136* (30*)

— —

17 — — — 59

(13) 127 (28)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 82 (18)

136* (30*)

— — — — 73 (16)

118 (26)

136* (30*)

— —

18 — — — 55

(12) 118 (26)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

— — — — 68 (15)

109 (24)

136* (30*)

— —

19 — — — — 114

(25) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 73 (16)

136* (30*)

— — — — 64 (14)

105 (23)

136* (30*)

— —

20 — — — — 109

(24) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 68 (15)

136* (30*)

— — — — 59 (13)

100 (22)

136* (30*)

— —

23 — — — — 91

(20) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 64 (14)

132 (29)

136* (30*)

— — — 55 (12)

86 (19)

136* (30*)

— —

25 — — — — 86

(19) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 59 (13)

123 (27)

136* (30*)

— — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

— —

30 — — — — 73

(16) 127 (28)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — 64 (14)

136* (30*)

— —

35 — — — — 59

(13) 109 (24)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 86 (19)

136* (30*)

— — — — 55 (12)

123 (27)

136* (30*)

—

40 — — — — 55

(12) 95

(21) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 105 (23)

136* (30*)

—

45 — — — — — 86

(19) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 68 (15)

123 (27)

136* (30*)

— — — — 95 (21)

136* (30*)

—

50 — — — — — 77

(17) 123 (27)

136* (30*)

— — — — 59 (13)

109 (24)

136* (30*)

— — — — 86 (19)

136* (30*)

—

55 — — — — — 68

(15) 114 (25)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 100 (22)

136* (30*)

— — — — 77 (17)

136* (30*)

—

60 — — — — — 64

(14) 105 (23)

136* (30*)

— — — — — 91 (20)

136* (30*)

— — — — 68 (15)

127 (28)

136* (30*)

70 — — — — — 55

(12) 91

(20) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 77 (17)

127 (28)

— — — — 59 (13)

109 (24)

136* (30*)

Storm Drain Size 13mm (1/2”) per 305mm (1’) Slope

65 — — — — — 59

(13) 95

(21) 136* (30*)

— — — — — 82 (18)

136* (30*)

— — — — 64 (14)

118 (26)

136* (30*)

*Maximum flow obtainable from 1 notch with 152mm (6”) water depth at drain.

Select Proper Horizontal Storm Drain Piping

TABLE III - TO BE USED WHEN ROOF STORM WATER RUN OFF AND OTHER SURFACE WATER RUN OFF IS BEING CONSOLIDATED INTO ONE COMMON MAIN HORIZONTAL STORM SEWER. Flow capacity of vertical leaders litres per minute (gallons per minute)

†In some areas 125mm (5”) drainage pipe may not be available. Flow capacity of horizontal storm sewers litres per minute (gallons per minute).

Note: Although pipe size calculations should be based on accumulated flow rate, local by-laws should be referred to for minimum pipe size requirements and roof drain spacing.

SCUPPER AND OVERFLOW DRAINS Roofing members and understructures, weakened by seepage and rot resulting from improper drainage and roof construction can give away under the weight of rapidly accumulated water during flash storms. Thus, it is recommended, and often required by building codes, to install scuppers and overflow drains in parapet-type roofs. Properly selected and sized scuppers and overflow drains are vital to a well-engineered drainage system to prevent excessive loading, erosion, seepage and rotting.

Pipe Size Maximum Capacity

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

50mm (2”) 136 (30)

75mm (3”) 409 (90)

100mm (4”) 864 (190)

†125mm (5”) 1582 (348)

150mm (6”) 2550 (561)

Pipe Size 3mm (1/8”) 6mm (1/4”) 13mm (1/2”)

75mm (3”) 163 (36) 232 (51) 327 (72)

100mm (4”) 355 (78) 505 (111) 714 (157)

†125mm (5”) 646 (142) 914 (201) 1291 (284)

150mm (6”) 1050 (231) 1487 (327) 2100 (462)

200mm (8”) 2264 (498) 3205 (705) 4528 (996)

250mm (10”) 4100 (902) 5796 (1275) 8201 (1804)

300mm (12”) 6669 (1467) 9437 (2076) 13338 (2934)

375mm (15”) 12120 (2666) 17157 (3774) 24239 (5332)

Slope per 305mm (1’0”)

Page 7

Selecta-Drain Chart

LOCATION

SQUARE METRE

(SQUARE FOOT)

ROOF LOAD

FACTOR KGS. (LBS.)

TOTAL ROOF SLOPE

DEAD LEVEL 51mm (2”) RISE 102mm (4”) RISE 152mm (6”) RISE

NOTCH AREA

RATING

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.

mm (in.) Water Depth

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


Calgary, Alberta

232 (2,500)

4.7 (10.4)

45.5 (10)

7 51 (2)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

72.5 (16)

4 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

3.2 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

66 (14.5)

14

73.5 (2.9)

82 (18)

9 91.5 (3.6)

97.5 (21.5)

7.5 109 (4.3)

697 (7,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

28 68.5 (2.7)

72.5 (16)

22 81.5 (3.2)

88.5 (19.5)

15 99

(3.9) 104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

929 (10,000)

6.8 (15.1)

66 (14.5)

38 73.5 (2.9)

77.5 (17)

31 86.5 (3.4)

93 (20.5)

22 104 (4.1)

109 (24)

17 122 (4.8)

232 (2,500)

4.5 (9.9)

43 (9.5)

7 48.5 (1.9)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

72.5 (16)

4 81.5 (3.2)

82 (18)

3 91.5 (3.6)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

14.5 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

9.5 94

(3.7) 97.5

(21.5) 7.5

109 (4.3)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.5)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 24

84 (3.3)

97.5 (21.5)

16 104 (4.1)

107 (23.5)

12 119.5 (4.7)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

38 76

(3.0) 79.5

(17.5) 32

89 (3.5)

100 (22)

22 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

18 127 (5.0)

Penticton, British Columbia

232 (2,500)

3.8 (8.3)

36.5 (8)

6 40.5 (1.6)

38.5 (8.5)

4 43

(1.7) 52.5

(11.5) 3

58.5 (2.3)

61.5 (13.5)

2.3 68.5 (2.7)

465 (5,000)

4.0 (8.8)

38.5 (8.5)

13 43

(1.7) 41 (9)

9 45.5 (1.8)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

5 76 (3)

697 (7,500)

4.2 (9.3)

41 (9)

21 45.5 (1.8)

43 (9.5)

14.5 48.5 (1.9)

61.5 (13.5)

10.5 68.5 (2.7)

72.5 (16)

8 81.5 (3.2)

929 (10,000)

4.2 (9.3)

41 (9)

27 45.5 (1.8)

45.5 (10)

20 51 (2)

63.5 (14)

14 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 11

84 (3.3)

Vancouver, British Columbia

232 (2,500)

3.3 (7.3)

32 (7)

5.5 35.5 (1.4)

38.5 (8.5)

4 43

(1.7) 47.5

(10.5) 2.8

53.5 (2.1)

57 (12.5)

2 63.5 (2.5)

465 (5,000)

4.0 (8.8)

38.5 (8.5)

13 43

(1.7) 45.5 (10)

10 51 (2)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

5 76 (3)

697 (7,500)

4.5 (9.9)

43 (9.5)

22 48.5 (1.9)

50 (11)

17 56

(2.2) 63.5 (14)

11 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 8.5

84 (3.3)

929 (10,000)

4.9 (10.9)

47.5 (10.5)

30 53.5 (2.1)

54.5 (12)

24 61

(2.4) 68

(15) 15

76 (3)

79.5 (17.5)

12 89

(3.5)

Victoria, British Columbia

232 (2,500)

3.3 (7.3)

32 (7)

5.5 35.5 (1.4)

38.5 (8.5)

4 43

(1.7) 43

(9.5) 2.5

48.5 (1.9)

54.5 (12)

2 61

(2.4)

465 (5,000)

4.0 (8.8)

38.5 (8.5)

13 43

(1.7) 45.5 (10)

10 51 (2)

54.5 (12)

6 61

(2.4) 68

(15) 5

76 (3)

697 (7,500)

4.5 (9.9)

43 (9.5)

22 48.5 (1.9)

50 (11)

16 56

(2.2) 59

(13) 10

66 (2.6)

75 (16.5)

8 84

(3.3)

929 (10,000)

4.7 (10.4)

45.5 (10)

30 51 (2)

54.5 (12)

23 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

14 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 12

89 (3.5)

Brandon, Manitoba

232 (2,500)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

8 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

7 76 (3)

82 (18)

4.5 91.5 (3.6)

92.5 (21)

3.5 106.5 (4.2)

465 (5,000)

7.3 (16.1)

73 (16)

20 81.5 (3.2)

84 (18.5)

17 94

(3.7) 97.5

(21.5) 11

109 (4.3)

113.5 (25)

8.5 127 (5)

697 (7,500)

8.3 (18.2)

79.5 (17.5)

32 89

(3.5) 93

(20.5) 27

104 (4.1)

107 (23.5)

19 119.5 (4.7)

125 (27.5)

15 139.5 (5.5)

929 (10,000)

9.0 (19.8)

86.5 (19)

43 96.5 (3.8)

100 (22)

38 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

26 127 (5.0)

132 (29)

21 147.5 (5.8)

Winnipeg, Manitoba

232 (2,500)

4.7 (10.4)

45.5 (10)

7 51 (2)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

75 (16.5)

4 84

(3.3) 86.5 (19)

3.2 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

15 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

10 94

(3.7) 100 (22)

7.5 112 (4.4)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.5)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 24

84 (3.3)

93 (20.5)

16 104 (4.1)

107 (23.5)

12 119.5 (4.7)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

39 76 (3)

82 (18)

32 91.5 (3.6)

97.5 (21.5)

22 109 (4.3)

113.5 (25)

17 127 (5.0)

Campbellton, New Brunswick

232 (2,500)

6.4 (14)

62 (13.5)

9 68.5 (2.7)

70.5 (15.5)

7 78.5 (3.1)

79.5 (17.5)

4.5 89

(3.5) 91

(20) 3.5

101.5 (4.0)

465 (5,000)

9.0 (19.8)

86.5 (19)

22 96.5 (3.8)

91 (20)

18 101.5

(4) 102.5 (22.5)

12 115 (4.5)

113.5 (25)

9 127 (5.0)

697 (7,500)

10.4 (22.9)

100 (22)

35 112 (4.4)

102.5 (22.5)

28 114.5 (4.5)

118 (26)

20 132 (5.2)

132 (29)

15 147.5 (5.8)

929 (10,000)

11.3 (25)

109 (24)

47 122 (4.8)

111.5 (24.5)

40 124.5 (4.9)

127.5 (28)

29 142 (5.6)

141 (31)

22 157.5 (6.2)

Edmonton, Alberta

Selecta-Drain Chart

LOCATION

SQUARE METRE

(SQUARE FOOT)

ROOF LOAD

FACTOR KGS. (LBS.)

TOTAL ROOF SLOPE


NOTCH AREA

RATING

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


Chatham, New Brunswick

232 (2,500)

4.5 (9.9)

43 (9.5)

7 48.5 (1.9)

52.5 (11.5)

5.5 58.5 (2.3)

63.5 (14)

3.5 71

(2.8) 77.5 (17)

2.9 86.5 (3.4)

465 (5,000)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

16 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

13 71

(2.8) 77.5 (17)

9 86.5 (3.4)

91 (20)

7 101.5 (4.0)

697 (7,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

27 68.5 (2.7)

68 (15)

22 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

14 94

(3.7) 102.5 (22.5)

12 114.5 (4.5)

929 (10,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

37 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 30

84 (3.3)

91 (20)

20 101.5 (4.0)

107 (23.5)

16 119.5 (4.7)

232 (2,500)

4.3 (9.4)

41 (9)

7 45.5 (1.8)

54.5 (12)

6 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

3.5 71

(2.8) 72.5 (16)

2.7 81.5 (3.2)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

14 76 (3)

82 (18)

9 91.5 (3.6)

93 (20.5)

7 104 (4.1)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 24

89 (3.5)

93 (20.5)

16 104 (4.1)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

929 (10,000)

7.5 (16.6)

73.5 (16)

39 81.5 (3.2)

84 (18.5)

34 94

(3.7) 100 (22)

23 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

17 127 (5.0)

Saint John, New Brunswick

232 (2,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

8 61

(2.4) 57

(12.5) 6

63.5 (2.5)

75 (16.5)

4 84

(3.3) 86.5 (19)

3 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

7.5 (16.6)

72.5 (16)

20 81.5 (3.2)

79.5 (17.5)

16 89

(3.5) 95.5 (21)

11 106.5 (4.2)

104.5 (23)

8 117 (4.6)

697 (7,500)

8.7 (19.2)

84 (18.5)

32 94

(3.7) 93

(20.5) 27

104 (4.1)

107 (23.5)

19 119.5 (4.7)

118 (26)

13.5 132 (5.2)

929 (10,000)

9.7 (21.3)

93 (20.5)

44 104 (4.1)

104.5 (23)

38 117 (4.6)

113.5 (25)

27 127 (5.0)

127.5 (28)

20 142 (5.6)

Gander, Newfound-land

232 (2,500)

3.5 (7.8)

34 (7.5)

5.5 38

(1.5) 45.5 (10)

5 51

(2.0) 57

(12.5) 3.5

63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

2.5 76

(3.0)

465 (5,000)

4.7 (10.4)

45.5 (10)

15 51

(2.0) 57

(12.5) 12

63.5 (2.5)

72.5 (16)

8 81.5 (3.2)

82 (18)

6.5 91.5 (3.6)

697 (7,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

25 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

21 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 13.5

89 (3.5)

93 (20.5)

11 104 (4.1)

929 (10,000)

6.1 (13.5)

59 (13)

35 66

(2.6) 70.5

(15.5) 29

78.5 (3.1)

84 (18.5)

19 94

(3.7) 100 (22)

15 112 (4.4)

St. Andrews, Newfound-land

232 (2,500)

3.5 (7.8)

34 (7.5)

5.5 38

(1.5) 45.5 (10)

5 51

(2.0) 59

(13) 3.5

66 (2.6)

63.5 (14)

2.5 71

(2.8)

465 (5,000)

5.2 (11.4)

47.5 (10.5)

15 53.5 (2.1)

59 (13)

13 66

(2.6) 72.5 (16)

8 81.5 (3.2)

79.5 (17.5)

6 89

(3.5)

697 (7,500)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

26 63.5 (2.5)

66 (14.5)

21 73.5 (2.9)

82 (18)

14 91.5 (3.6)

88.5 (19.5)

10 99

(3.9)

929 (10,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

36 71

(2.8) 72.5 (16)

30 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

20 96.5 (3.8)

95.5 (21)

14.5 106.5 (4.2)

St. John’s, Newfound-land

232 (2,500)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

8 63.5 (2.6)

68 (15)

7 76

(3.0) 77.5 (17)

4.5 86.5 (3.4)

86.5 (19)

3.2 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

8.5 (18.7)

82 (18)

21 91.5 (3.6)

91 (20)

18 101 (4.0)

100 (22)

11 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

9 127 (5.0)

697 (7,500)

10.6 (23.4)

102.5 (22.5)

34 114.5 (4.5)

109 (24)

29 122 (4.8)

122.5 (27)

21 137 (5.4)

132 (29)

15 147.5 (5.8)

929 (10,000)

11.8 (26)

113.5 (25)

48 127 (5.0)

129.5 (28.5)

43 145 (5.7)

143 (31.5)

33 160 (6.3)

150 (33)

24 167.5 (6.6)

Torbay, Newfound-land

232 (2,500)

4.9 (10.9)

47.5 (10.5)

7.5 53.5 (2.1)

61.5 (13.5)

6.5 68.5 (2.7)

75 (16.5)

4 84

(3.3) 84

(18.5) 3

94 (3.7)

465 (5,000)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

18 68.5 (2.7)

75 (16.5)

15.5 84

(3.3) 88.5

(19.5) 10

99 (3.9)

102.5 (22.5)

8 114.5 (4.5)

697 (7,500)

7.3 (16.1)

70.5 (15.5)

29 78.5 (3.1)

84 (18.5)

25 94

(3.7) 100 (22)

17.5 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

13 127 (5)

929 (10,000)

8.0 (17.7)

77.5 (17)

40 86.5 (3.4)

88.5 (19.5)

34 99

(3.9) 107

(23.5) 24

119.5 (4.7)

122.5 (27)

19 137 (5.4)

Halifax, Nova Scotia

232 (2,500)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

8 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

7 76

(3.0) 77.5 (17)

4.5 86.5 (3.4)

86.5 (19)

3.2 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

8.5 (18.7)

82 (18)

21 91.5 (3.6)

91 (20)

18 101.5 (4.0)

100 (22)

11 112 (4.4)

113.5 (25)

9 127 (5.0)

697 (7,500)

10.6 (23.4)

102.5 (22.5)

34 114.5 (4.5)

109 (24)

29 122 (4.8)

122.5 (27)

21 137 (5.4)

132 (29)

15 147.5 (5.8)

929 (10,000)

11.8 (26)

113.5 (25)

48 127 (5.0)

129.5 (28.5)

43 145 (5.7)

143 (31.5)

33 160 (6.3)

150 (33)

24 167.5 (6.6)

Moncton, New Brunswick

Selecta-Drain Chart

LOCATION

SQUARE METRE

(SQUARE FOOT)

ROOF LOAD

FACTOR KGS. (LBS.)

TOTAL ROOF SLOPE


NOTCH AREA

RATING

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


Sydney, Nova Scotia

232 (2,500)

4.3 (9.4)

41 (9)

6.5 45.5 (1.8)

45.5 (10)

5 51

(2.0) 57

(12.5) 3.5

6.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

2.5 76 (3)

465 (5,000)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

16 61

(2.4) 59

(13) 13

66 (2.6)

75 (16.5)

8 84

(3.3) 84

(18.5) 6.5

94 (3.7)

697 (7,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

28 68.5 (2.7)

68 (15)

22 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

14 94

(3.7) 97.5

(21.5) 11

109 (4.3)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

38 76 (3)

75 (16.5)

30 84

(3.3) 91

(20) 20

101.5 (4)

104.5 (23)

16 117 (4.6)

232 (2,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

9 68.5 (2.7)

70.5 (15.5)

7.5 78.5 (3.1)

82 (18)

4.5 91.5 (3.6)

91 (20)

3.5 101.5

(4)

465 (5,000)

8.3 (18.2)

79.5 (17.5)

21 89

(3.5) 88.5

(19.5) 18

99 (3.9)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

116 (25.5)

9 129.5 (5.1)

697 (7,500)

9.4 (20.8)

91 (20)

34 101.5

(4) 102.5 (22.5)

29 114.5 (4.5)

118 (26)

21 132 (5.2)

132 (29)

15 147.5 (5.8)

929 (10,000)

10.4 (22.9)

100 (22)

45 112 (4.4)

109 (24)

41 122 (4.8)

129.5 (28.5)

29 145 (5.7)

141 (31)

22 157.5 (6.2)

Thunder Bay, Ontario

232 (2,500)

4.9 (10.9)

47.5 (10.5)

7.5 53.5 (2.1)

61.5 (13.5)

6.5 68.5 (2.7)

75 (16.5)

4 84

(3.3) 88.5

(19.5) 3.5

91.5 (3.6)

465 (5,000)

6.1 (13.5)

59 (13)

18 66

(2.6) 72.5 (16)

15 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

9.5 96.5 (3.8)

102.5 (22.5)

7.5 114.5 (4.5)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 77.5 (17)

24 86.5 (3.4)

93 (20.5)

16 104 (4.1)

109 (24)

13 122 (4.8)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

38 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

33 94

(3.7) 97.5

(21.5) 22

109 (4.3)

116 (25.5)

18 129.5 (5.1)

Guelph, Ontario

232 (2,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

8 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

7 71

(2.8) 86.5 (19)

5 96.5 (3.8)

100 (22)

3.7 112 (4.4)

465 (5,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

19 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 15.5

84 (3.3)

97.5 (21.5)

11 109 (4.3)

116 (25.5)

9 129.5 (5.1)

697 (7,500)

7.3 (16.1)

70.5 (15.5)

29 78.5 (3.1)

82 (18)

25 91.5 (3.6)

104.5 (23)

18 117 (4.6)

125 (27.5)

14 139.5 (5.5)

929 (10,000)

8.0 (17.7)

77.5 (17)

40 86.5 (3.4)

84 (18.5)

34 94

(3.7) 109 (24)

26 122 (4.8)

132 (29)

20 147.5 (5.8)

Hamilton, Ontario

232 (2,500)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

8.5 63.5 (2.5)

72.5 (16)

7.5 81.5 (3.2)

93 (20.5)

5 104 (4.1)

109 (24)

4 122 (4.8)

465 (5,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

19 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 16

89 (3.5)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

122.5 (27)

9 137 (5.4)

697 (7,500)

6.8 (15.1)

66 (14.5)

28 73.5 (2.9)

84 (18.5)

26 94

(3.7) 111.5 (24.5)

20 124.5 (4.9)

127.5 (28)

15 142 (5.6)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

39 76 (3)

86.5 (19)

34 96.5 (3.8)

116 (25.5)

27 129.5 (5.1)

134 (29.5)

21 150 (5.9)

Kingston, Ontario

232 (2,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

9 68.5 (2.7)

77.5 (17)

8 86.5 (3.4)

91 (20)

5 101.5

(4) 109 (24)

4 122 (4.8)

465 (5,000)

7.5 (16.6)

72.5 (16)

20 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

18 96.5 (3.8)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

122.5 (27)

9.5 137 (5.4)

697 (7,500)

8.5 (18.7)

82 (18)

31 91.5 (3.6)

93 (20.5)

28 104 (4.1)

111.5 (24.5)

20 124.5 (4.9)

132 (29)

15 147.5 (5.8)

929 (10,000)

8.7 (19.2)

86.5 (19)

42 96.5 (3.8)

97.5 (21.5)

38 109 (4.3)

116 (25.5)

27 129.5 (5.1)

68 (15)

21 152.5

(6)

London, Ontario

232 (2,500)

6.1 (13.5)

59 (13)

8.5 66

(2.6) 72.5 (16)

7.5 81.5 (3.2)

88.5 (19.5)

5 99

(3.9) 107

(23.5) 4

119.5 (4.7)

465 (5,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

20 76 (3)

84 (18.5)

17 94

(3.7) 102.5 (22.5)

12 114.5 (4.5)

122.5 (27)

9.5 137 (5.4)

697 (7,500)

8.0 (17.7)

77.5 (17)

30 86.5 (3.4)

88.5 (19.5)

27 99

(3.9) 109 (24)

19 122 (4.8)

129.5 (28.5)

15 145 (5.7)

929 (10,000)

8.5 (18.7)

82 (18)

41 91.5 (3.6)

91 (20)

36 101.5

(4) 113.5 (25)

27 127 (5)

134 (29.5)

21 150 (5.9)

North Bay, Ontario

232 (2,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

8 61

(2.4) 68

(15) 7

76 (3)

86.5 (19)

5 96.5 (3.8)

100 (22)

3.8 112 (4.4)

465 (5,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

19 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 16

89 (3.5)

97.5 (21.5)

11 109 (4.3)

113.5 (25)

9 127 (5)

697 (7,500)

7.5 (16.6)

72.5 (16)

30 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

26 96.5 (3.8)

107 (23.5)

19 119.5 (4.7)

122.5 (27)

14 137 (5.4)

929 (10,000)

8.3 (18.2)

77.5 (17)

40 86.5 (3.4)

93 (20.5)

36 104 (4.1)

111.5 (24.5)

26 124.5 (4.9)

127.5 (28)

20 142 (5.6)

Yarmouth, Nova Scotia

Selecta-Drain Chart

LOCATION

SQUARE METRE

(SQUARE FOOT)

ROOF LOAD

FACTOR KGS. (LBS.)

TOTAL ROOF SLOPE


NOTCH AREA

RATING

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


Ottawa, Ontario

232 (2,500)

4.7 (10.4)

45.5 (10)

7 51 (2)

59 (13)

6.5 66

(2.6) 77.5 (17)

4.5 86.5 (3.4)

86.5 (19)

3.2 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

14 76 (3)

86.5 (19)

10 96.5 (3.8)

100 (22)

7.5 112 (4.4)

697 (7,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

27 68.5 (2.7)

75 (16.5)

23 84

(3.3) 93

(20.5) 16

104 (4.1)

107 (23.5)

12 119.5 (4.7)

929 (10,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

36 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 32

89 (3.5)

97.5 (21.5)

22 109 (4.3)

113.5 (25)

18 127 (5)

232 (2,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

8 61

(2.4) 68

(15) 7

76 (3.0)

86.5 (19)

5 96.5 (3.8)

104.5 (23)

4 117 (4.6)

465 (5,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

19 71

(2.8) 77.5 (17)

16 86.5 (3.4)

97.5 (21.5)

11 109 (4.3)

118 (26)

9 132 (5.2)

697 (7,500)

7.1 (16.6)

68 (15)

29 76

(3.0) 82

(18) 26

91.5 (3.6)

102.5 (22.5)

18 114.5 (4.5)

125 (27.5)

15 139.5 (5.5)

929 (10,000)

7.5 (16.6)

72.5 (16)

40 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

34 96.5 (3.8)

107 (23.5)

24 119.5 (4.7)

132 (29)

20 147.5 (5.8)

Timmins, Ontario

232 (2,500)

4.3 (9.4)

41 (9)

7 45.5 (1.8)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

72.5 (16)

4 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

3.3 96.5 (3.8)

465 (5,000)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

16 61

(2.4) 63.5 (14)

14 71

(2.8) 82

(18) 9

91.5 (3.6)

97.5 (21.5)

7.5 109 (4.3)

697 (7,500)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

27 68.5 (2.7)

70.5 (15.5)

22 78.5 (3.1)

86.5 (19)

15 96.5 (3.8)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

929 (10,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

36 71

(2.8) 72.5 (16)

30 81.5 (3.2)

91 (20)

21 101.5 (4.0)

109 (24)

17 122 (4.8)

Toronto, Ontario

232 (2,500)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

8 61

(2.4) 66

(14.5) 7

73.5 (2.9)

82 (18)

4.5 91.5 (3.6)

97.5 (21.5)

3.5 109 (4.3)

465 (5,000)

6.8 (15.1)

66 (14.5)

19 73.5 (2.9)

77.5 (17)

16 86.5 (3.4)

93 (20.5)

11 104 (4.1)

111.5 (24.5)

9 124.5 (4.9)

697 (7,500)

8.0 (17.7)

77.5 (17)

30 86.5 (3.4)

84 (18.5)

26 94

(3.7) 100 (22)

18 112 (4.4)

120.5 (26.5)

14 134.5 (5.3)

929 (10,000)

8.7 (19.2)

82 (18)

42 91.5 (3.6)

86.5 (19)

34 96.5 (3.8)

104.5 (23)

24 117 (4.6)

127.5 (28)

20 142 (5.6)

Windsor, Ontario

232 (2,500)

6.1 (13.5)

59 (13)

8.5 66

(2.6) 70.5

(15.5) 7.5

78.5 (3.1)

84 (18.5)

4.5 94

(3.7) 107

(23.5) 4

119.5 (4.7)

465 (5,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

20 76

(3.0) 79.5

(17.5) 16

89 (3.5)

97.5 (21.5)

11 109 (4.3)

118 (26)

9 132 (5.2)

697 (7,500)

8.0 (17.7)

77.5 (17)

30 86.5 (3.4)

86.5 (19)

26 96.5 (3.8)

107 (23.5)

18 119.5 (4.7)

125 (27.5)

15 139.5 (5.5)

929 (10,000)

8.7 (19.2)

82 (18)

42 91.5 (3.6)

91 (20)

36 101.5 (4.0)

113.5 (25)

26 127 (5.0)

129.5 (28.5)

20 145 (5.7)

Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island

232 (2,500)

4.9 (10.9)

47.5 (10.5)

7.5 53.5 (2.1)

57 (12.5)

6 63.5 (2.5)

68 (15)

3.8 76

(3.0) 79.5

(17.5) 3

89 (3.5)

465 (5,000)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

19 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 15.5

84 (3.3)

88.5 (19.5)

10 99

(3.9) 100 (22)

7.5 112 (4.4)

697 (7,500)

7.8 (17.2)

75 (16.5)

31 84

(3.3) 86.5 (19)

26 96.5 (3.8)

102.5 (22.5)

18 114.5 (4.5)

113.5 (25)

13 127 (5.0)

929 (10,000)

8.7 (19.2)

84 (18.5)

42 94

(3.7) 97.5

(21.5) 37

106.5 (4.2)

111.5 (24.5)

26 124.5 (4.9)

125 (27.5)

20 139.5 (5.5)

Montreal, Quebec

232 (2,500)

5.2 (11.4)

50 (11)

7.5 56

(2.2) 61.5

(13.5) 7

68.5 (2.7)

79.5 (17.5)

4.5 89

(3.5) 97.5

(21.5) 3.5

109 (4.36)

465 (5,000)

5.9 (13)

57 (12.5)

17 63.5 (2.5)

70.5 (15.5)

15 78.5 (3.1)

88.5 (19.5)

10 99

(3.9) 109 (24)

8 122 (4.8)

697 (7,500)

6.1 (13.5)

59 (13)

27 66

(2.6) 72.5 (16)

23 81.5 (3.2)

93 (20.5)

16 104 (4.1)

113.5 (25)

13 127 (5.0)

929 (10,000)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

36 68.5 (2.7)

77.5 (17)

31 86.5 (3.4)

95.5 (21)

22 106.5 (4.2)

120.5 (26.5)

19 134.5 (5.3)

Quebec City, Quebec

232 (2,500)

5.4 (12)

52.5 (11.5)

8 58.5 (2.3)

63.5 (14)

7 71

(2.8) 79.5

(17.5) 4.5

89 (3.5)

97.5 (21.5)

3.5 109 (4.3)

465 (5,000)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

18 68.5 (2.7)

70.5 (15.5)

15 78.5 (3.1)

84 (18.5)

10 94

(3.7) 104.5 (23)

8 117 (4.6)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 72.5 (16)

23 81.5 (3.2)

86.5 (19)

15 96.5 (3.8)

107 (23.5)

12 119.5 (4.7)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

37 76

(3.0) 77.5 (17)

31 86.5 (3.4)

88.5 (19.5)

20 99

(3.9) 109 (24)

17 122 (4.8)

St. Thomas, Ontario

Selecta-Drain Chart

LOCATION

SQUARE METRE

(SQUARE FOOT)

ROOF LOAD

FACTOR KGS. (LBS.)

TOTAL ROOF SLOPE


NOTCH AREA

RATING

L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


L.P.M. (G.P.M.)

Discharge

Draindown Time Hrs.


Regina, Saskatchewan

232 (2,500)

4.5 (9.9)

43 (9.5)

7 48.5 (1.9)

54.5 (12)

6 61

(2.4) 72.5 (16)

4 81.5 (3.2)

79.5 (17.5)

3 89

(3.5)

465 (5,000)

6.4 (14)

61.5 (13.5)

18 68.5 (2.7)

68 (15)

14 76

(3.0) 86.5 (19)

10 96.5 (3.8)

97.5 (21.5)

7.5 109 (4.3)

697 (7,500)

7.3 (16.1)

70.5 (15.5)

29 78.5 (3.1)

77.5 (17)

24 86.5 (3.4)

100 (22)

17 112 (4.4)

109 (24)

12 122 (4.8)

929 (10,000)

8.3 (18.2)

79.5 (17.5)

40 89

(3.5) 82

(18) 32

91.5 (3.6)

104.5 (23)

24 117 (4.6)

118 (26)

18 132 (5.2)

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan

232 (2,500)

4.0 (8.8)

38.5 (8.5)

6 43

(1.7) 57

(12.5) 6

63.5 (2.5)

66 (14.5)

3.8 73.5 (2.9)

77.5 (17)

2.8 86.5 (3.4)

465 (5,000)

5.7 (12.5)

54.5 (12)

16 61

(2.4) 68

(15) 14.5

76 (3.0)

82 (18)

9 91.5 (3.6)

95.5 (21)

7 106.5 (4.2)

697 (7,500)

6.6 (14.6)

63.5 (14)

28 71

(2.8) 75

(16.5) 24

84 (3.3)

91 (20)

16 101.5 (4.0)

104.5 (23)

12 117 (4.6)

929 (10,000)

7.1 (15.6)

68 (15)

38 76

(3.0) 82

(18) 32

91.5 (3.6)

97.5 (21.5)

22 109 (4.3)

113.5 (25)

18 127 (5.0)

Page 12

ZURN INDUSTRIES LIMITED3544 NASHUA DRIVE · MISSISSAUGA, ONT L4V 1L2PHONE: 905/405-8272 · FAX: 905/405-1292

©2010 Zurn Industries, LLC Form 81-31, Rev. 9/10

CA

NA

DA

www.zurn.com


Appendix E Geotechnical Investigation Excerpts January 19, 2017

E.1

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION EXCERPTS

Ottawa Kingston North Bay

patersongroup Consulting Engineers

154 Colonnade Road SouthOttawa, Ontario

Canada, K2E 7J5Tel: (613) 226-7381Fax: (613) 226-6344

Geotechnical EngineeringEnvironmental Engineering

HydrogeologyGeological Engineering

Materials TestingBuilding Science

www.patersongroup.ca

May 22, 2012

File: PG1808-REP.03

Kanata Entertainment Holdings Inc.

c/o PenEquity Realty Corporation

10 Dundas Street East, Suite 1002

Toronto, Ontario

M5B 2G9

Attention: Mr. Calvin McCourt

Director of Planning

Subject: Updated Geotechnical Investigation

Proposed Milestones Restaurant and

Future 2 Storey Retail/Office Block YYD

Kanata Centrum Development

Main Street and Kanata Avenue - Ottawa

Dear Sir,

Please find enclosed an electronic copy of Report PG1808-3 regarding the updated

geotechnical investigation conducted by Paterson Group at the aforementioned location.

Hard copies will be sent to you under separate cover.

We trust that this submission is to your satisfaction.

Sincerely,

Paterson Group Inc.

Andrew J. Tovell, P.Eng.

GeotechnicalEngineering

EnvironmentalEngineering

Hydrogeology

GeologicalEngineering

Materials Testing

Building Science

Paterson Group Inc.Consulting Engineers28 Concourse Gate - Unit 1Ottawa (Nepean), OntarioCanada K2E 7T7

Tel: (613) 226-7381Fax: (613) 226-6344www.patersongroup.ca

patersongroup

Updated Geotechnical Investigation

Proposed Milestones Restaurant and

Future 2 Storey Retail/Office Block YYD

Kanata Centrum Development

Main Street and Kanata Avenue

Ottawa, Ontario

Prepared For

Kanata Entertainment Holdings Inc.

c/o PenEquity Realty Corporation

May 22, 2012

Report PG1808-3

paterson Geotechnical InvestigationOttawa Kingston North Bay Proposed Milestones Restaurant and Future Block YYD

Main Street and Kanata Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario

Report: PG1808-3

May 22, 2012 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

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

2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

3.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

3.1 Field Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

3.2 Field Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3.3 Laboratory Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

4.0 OBSERVATIONS

4.1 Background Concerning Site Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

4.2 Subsurface Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4.3 Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Geotechnical Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

5.2 Site Grading and Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

5.3 Foundation Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5.4 Design for Earthquakes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5.5 Slab-on-Grade Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

5.6 Pavement Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

6.0 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRECAUTIONS

6.1 Protection of Footings Against Frost Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

6.2 Foundation Wall Drainage and Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

6.3 Excavation Side Slopes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

6.4 Pipe Bedding and Backfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

6.5 Groundwater Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

6.6 Winter Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

7.0 MATERIALS TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES PROGRAM . . . 17

8.0 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18



Report: PG1808-3

May 22, 2012 Page ii

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 Soil Profile and Test Data Sheets

Symbols and Terms

Appendix 2 Figure 1 - Key Plan

Drawing PG1808-2 - Test Hole Location Plan



Report: PG1808-3May 22, 2012 Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Paterson Group Inc. (Paterson) was originally commissioned by Kanata Entertainment

Holdings Inc., c/o PenEquity Realty Corporation, to conduct a geotechnical

investigation for a proposed building, to be located at the southeast corner of Main

Street and Kanata Avenue, on Block YYD, in the Kanata Centrum Centre, in the City

of Ottawa, Ontario (refer to Figure 1 - Key Plan in Appendix 2 of this report).

This report has been updated from our previous Report Nos PG1808-1, dated January

19, 2009, and PG1808-2, dated May 17, 2010, to incorporate the details of the current

development application for the one (1) storey Milestones Restaurant, as well as a

future two (2) storey office/retail building on Block YYD. These building locations are

shown on the current Test Hole Location Plan, Drawing No. PG1808-2, in Appendix 2.

The objectives of the investigation were to:

‘ determine the subsurface conditions at this site at representative locations by

means of boreholes.

‘ Provide geotechnical recommendations for the design of the proposed

development including construction considerations which may affect the design.

The following updated report has been prepared specifically and solely for the

aforementioned project which is described herein. It contains our findings and includes

geotechnical recommendations pertaining to the design and construction of the subject

development as they are understood at the time of writing this report.

The geotechnical investigation was performed in general accordance with the terms of

reference in our original fee estimate, File No. P5692-PRO.01, dated August 11, 2008.

An additional borehole had been added to the originally proposed six (6) boreholes to

provide additional subsurface information for evaluation of two options for the

orientation of the building footprint at that time. As such, the entire development site

had been investigated and the site coverage is sufficient for current needs. This report

has been updated for the current and future buildings configuration and grading.

2.0 PROPOSED PROJECT

It is our understanding that the current development, Milestones Restaurant will consist

of a one (1) storey basementless slab-on-grade restaurant building, with a gross floor

area (GFA) of 598 square metres. The proposed finished floor elevation (FFE) of the

building will be set at 98.20 m, which is 0.7±m above the ground level of the existing

parking lot at the subject site.




Future development, also discussed in this report, will consist of a two (2) storey

basementless slab-on-grade building, Block YYD, with first floor retail and second floor

offices, and a gross floor area (GFA) of 1,331 square metres. The proposed finished

floor elevation (FFE) of the Block YYD building will also be set at 98.20 m.

3.0 METHOD OF INVESTIGATION

3.1 Field Investigation

The field program for the investigation was carried out on December 19 and 22, 2008.

At that time, seven (7) boreholes were advanced to a maximum depth of 6.9 m. The

borehole locations were distributed in a manner to provide general coverage of the

proposed development site. The approximate locations of the boreholes, with respect

to the proposed and future building footprints, is shown on Drawing PG1808-2 - Test

Hole Location Plan, included in Appendix 2.

The boreholes were put down using track and truck mounted auger drill rigs, each

operated by a two-person crew. All fieldwork was conducted under the full-time

supervision of our personnel under the direction of a senior engineer. The drilling

procedure consisted of augering to the required depths at the selected locations, and

sampling and testing the overburden. Core sampling of boulders and the bedrock was

also undertaken in two (2) boreholes.

Sampling and In Situ Testing

Samples of the overburden (fill) were recovered using a 50 mm diameter split-spoon

sampler or from the auger flights. The split-spoon and auger samples were classified

on site and placed in sealed plastic bags. All samples were transported to our

laboratory. The depths at which the split-spoon and auger samples were recovered

from the boreholes are shown as SS and AU, respectively, on the Soil Profile and Test

Data sheets in Appendix 1.

The Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted in conjunction with the recovery

of the split-spoon samples. The SPT results are recorded as “N” values on the Soil

Profile and Test Data sheets. The “N” value is the number of blows required to drive

the split-spoon sampler 300 mm into the soil after a 150 mm initial penetration using

a 63.5 kg hammer falling from a height of 760 mm.

A core barrel and diamond drilling techniques were used in BHs 2 and 4 to recover

samples of boulders in the fill and the underlying bedrock. The core samples were




classified on site, placed in hard cardboard core boxes and transported to our

laboratory. The depths at which rock core samples were recovered from the boreholes

are shown as RC on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets in Appendix 1.

A recovery value and a Rock Quality Designation (RQD) value were calculated for each

drilled section (core run) of the bedrock portion of the core and are shown on the

borehole logs. Only the recovery value is of significance with the boulders. The

recovery value is the ratio, in percentage, of the length of the sample recovered over

the length of the drilled section (core run). The RQD value is the ratio, in percentage,

of the total length of intact rock pieces longer than 100 mm in one core run over the

length of the core run. These values are indicative of the quality of the bedrock.

The subsurface conditions observed in the boreholes were recorded in detail in the

field. The soil profiles are presented on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets in

Appendix 1 of this report.

Groundwater

Flexible polyethylene standpipes were installed in all boreholes to permit monitoring of

the groundwater levels subsequent to the completion of the sampling program.

Sample Storage

All samples were stored in our laboratory for a minimum period of one month after

issuance of the previous report. The samples have been discarded as of the writing

of this updated report.

3.2 Field Survey

The borehole locations were selected, determined in the field, and surveyed by

Paterson. The locations of the boreholes and the ground surface elevations at the

boreholes are presented on Drawing PG1808-2 - Test Hole Location Plan, in

Appendix 2.

The ground surface elevation at each borehole location was referenced to a temporary

bench mark (TBM), consisting of the top spindle of the fire hydrant located at the

southwest corner of Main Street and Collector A (the first street parallel to and south

of Kanata Avenue). Available information indicates the elevation of the TBM is

98.44 m, referenced to Geodetic datum. The approximate location of the TBM is

shown on Drawing PG1808 -2 - Test Hole Location Plan in Appendix 2. This TBM

should be independently verified for accuracy if it is to be re-used for the project.




3.3 Laboratory Testing

Soil and rock samples that were recovered from the subject site were visually

examined in our laboratory to review the results of the field logging.

4.0 OBSERVATIONS

4.1 Background Concerning Site Conditions

The subject site is located on the south side of Kanata Avenue (assuming Kanata

Avenue runs east-west at this location) and to the east of (Kanata Centrum) Main

Street. Future plans call for Kanata Avenue to be a four-lane road. Presently only the

two most northerly lanes have been constructed. These lanes are at a higher elevation

than the existing grade on the site, as well as the finished grade of the adjacent existing

parking lot areas. When the two closer lanes are constructed, they will be at a lower

level than the existing lanes, but will still be above the level of the subject site.

The subject site consists of an asphalt-surfaced parking area. The existing overburden

materials at the site consist of fill materials, primarily blast rock fill. The pre-

development native overburden soils consisted of deposits of organic peat overlying

sandstone bedrock directly. As part of site works undertaken during the development

of Kanata Centrum, the peat deposits were removed by a site works contractor and

replaced with compacted inorganic fill materials, largely blast-rock fill.

Prior to the undertaking of the site works to remove and replace the peat, a

geotechnical investigation had been conducted by John D. Paterson and Associates

Limited (JDPA), as detailed in their Report No. G8045-1, dated October 29, 2001.

Information from that investigation has not been included in this report, as the peat

overburden soils have subsequently been removed and replaced. Inferred bedrock

surface levels from that investigation appear to be consistent with the levels inferred

as part of the current investigation.

Technical representatives from JDPA conducted occasional field review site visits

during the course of the site preparation work. Based on the field review program it is

expected that the only areas where the peat may not have been completely removed

are narrow strips along Kanata Avenue and the east side of Main Street, due to limits

on encroachment beyond the property lines and/or the presence of existing buried

services. It is our understanding that a hydro service line was pre-existing on the east

side of Main Street prior to the peat replacement, which required the replacement work

to be limited along the west side of the subject site.




The fill primarily consists of a combination of “Precambrian” blast-rock fill and

sandstone blast-rock fill. The parent rock of the “Precambrian” blast-rock is granitic in

nature and very hard and, as such, this material tends to be coarse and angular in

composition. The sandstone has a layered and weaker structure, and tends to be

more workable, as it breaks into smaller particles as fine as gravel and sand sizes.

The Precambrian blast-rock originates from developments to the northwest of the

subject site, whereas the sandstone is generally from the area of the development.

Based on the findings from the drilling program, it is apparent that the coarser rock is

predominantly the former and the finer rock is predominantly the latter.

The blast-rock was blinded (mixed) with finer inorganic fill and the larger rock fragments

were broken up by hoe-ramming when JDPA was observing the site works contractor’s

placement operations. However, we suspect that there may have been oversize blast-

rock fragments buried when JDPA were absent from the site. As previously noted, the

extent of the fill around the north and south perimeters of the site are also somewhat

suspect, and will be confirmed during construction.

The bedrock surface underlying the peat was observed at that time to be somewhat

uneven, with the low areas being at about el. 91.9± m and the higher areas being at

about 93.4± m. The findings of our current investigation, as described in subsequent

sections of this report, are consistent with these previous observations. It is therefore

expected that the thickness of the fill is of the order of 4 to 6 metres below the existing

parking lot surface level at the subject site, at approximately el. 97.5± m.

The greater part of the subject site is currently asphalt covered and used as a parking

lot. It is relatively flat, at about el. 97.5± m and some 1 to 2 m below the level of the

existing lanes of Kanata Avenue, which slope downward from west to east. The site

is nearly at grade, however, with the shopping centre Collector A roadway along the

southerly boundary. The west and north perimeters are grass-covered and slope

upward gently to the adjacent higher road levels on those sides.

4.2 Subsurface Profile

Overburden

The upper part of the profile at BHs 2, 3, 4 and 6 consists of an asphalt pavement

structure, nominally consisting of 100 mm of asphaltic concrete pavement over

approximately 800 mm of combined granular base and subbase materials. BHs 1, 5

and 7 were located within grassed boulevard areas around the perimeter of the existing

parking and the upper fill material consists of clayey silt/silty clay with sand and gravel.




Most of the overburden profile consists of coarse fill materials, including cobbles to

large boulders of Precambrian imported blast-rock and local sandstone blast rock.

Cobbles and gravel from the same blasting operations are present as part of the matrix

material mixed with inorganic clayey silt/silty clay, sand and gravel. Some evidence of

the previously existing organic materials was found, namely peaty matrix material

encountered in the blast-rock fill at BHs 5 and 7, as noted on the borehole logs.

During the drilling of the boreholes, practical refusal to auger penetration was

experienced both at shallow depths and at greater depths. The shallow refusals were

inferred to be on boulders in the blast-rock and the holes were moved slightly and re-

drilled to pass the obstruction. Deeper refusals could be on boulders in the fill or on

bedrock. At BH 2, core drilling confirmed that the auger refusal had occurred on the

bedrock surface. At BH 4, core drilling indicated that the auger refusal had occurred

on a Precambrian boulder, and the coring continued through the boulder to bedrock.

The greater portion of the fill materials were placed and spread in a semi-controlled

manner with some compactive effort applied. However, it should be expected that the

characteristics of the fill can vary between locations. As previously noted, JDPA

conducted a program of intermittent field review site visits during the placing and

compacting of the blast-rock fill.

The results of the Standard Penetration in situ testing program conducted during the

investigation indicate that the fill materials have a compactness condition of between

loose and very dense, and are generally compact. However, due to the coarse nature

of the fill, SPT results were frequently elevated because the split-spoon sampler

encountered cobble and boulder sized particles within the fill.

The site works contractor had been instructed to keep control on the size of boulders

in the blast rock fill materials. The intention was to limit coarse rock and boulders in

the blast-rock fill to between 0.4 and 0.6 metres in maximum dimension. Any larger

rock fragments and boulders were to be broken up or removed from the site. However,

it should be expected that large boulders could be encountered in the fill deposits.

The void spaces within the coarse blast rock fill materials are inferred to be

incompletely filled with finer materials and the blast-rock is inferred to be open-graded.

The recent boreholes had to be filled with additional material, indicating that the

quantity of the matrix (i.e. void in-filling) of the rock fill is insufficient to completely fill the

void spaces in the coarse blast-rock. These open-graded zones will require treatment

during construction. Specific details of the soil profile at each test hole location are

presented on the Soil Profile and Test Data sheets in Appendix 1.




Bedrock

Bedrock, consisting of sandstone of the Nepean Formation, was cored at BHs 2 and 4.

At BH 2, core drilling confirmed that practical auger refusal had occurred on the

bedrock surface. After practical auger refusal in BH 4, the core was drilled through

boulders of Precambrian granitic rock (fill) and then the sandstone bedrock was

encountered and cored.

The Nepean Formation, which has been encountered over much of the adjacent

development area, is characterized by horizontal bedding planes, at variable intervals

of depth. The surface of the bedrock was observed to be friable (i.e. weak and

crumbly) to weathered.

4.3 Groundwater

A standpipe was installed in each of the seven (7) boreholes. The groundwater (GWL)

observations from December 29, 2008, are presented in Table 1. Several of the

standpipes were observed to be blocked at the time of reading, possibly due to caving

of the coarse blast-rock fill. It should be noted that the groundwater levels are subject

to seasonal fluctuations. Therefore, the groundwater levels could be different at the

time of construction.

Table 1 - Summary of Groundwater Level Readings on December 29, 2008

Borehole

Number

Ground

Elevation, m

Groundwater Levels, mRemarks

Depth Elevation

BH 1 98.39 N/A N/A Blocked and dry at 2.3 m

BH 2 97.56 3.25 94.31

BH 3 97.44 N/A N/A Surface water at ground

BH 4 97.55 N/A N/A Blocked and dry at 2.8 m

BH 5 97.78 N/A N/A BH dry to full 4.38 m depth

BH 6 97.29 N/A N/A BH dry to full 3.63 m depth

BH 7 98.25 4.35 93.90

Note: The ground surface elevations at the borehole locations were referenced to a temporary

benchmark (TBM), consisting of the top spindle of a fire hydrant located at the south west

corner of Main Street and Collector A. The TBM has an elevation of 98.44 m (approximate

geodetic datum).




5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Geotechnical Assessment

It is our understanding that the current Milestones Restaurant development will consist

of a one (1) storey basementless slab-on-grade restaurant building. The Milestones

building footprint is proposed to occupy a plan area 598 square metres. The future

building (Block YYD) is to consist of a two (2) storey basementless slab-on-grade

office/retail building. The Block YYD building footprint is proposed to occupy a plan

area 1331 square metres. The finished floor elevation (FFE) of both the current and

future buildings has been established at 98.20 m.

It is recommended that the footings for the proposed structures be founded on

engineered granular fill over a proof rolled and “blinded” inorganic blast-rock fill

subgrade medium, as detailed under subsection 5.2. The purpose of placing the

engineered granular fill is two-fold. The coarse blast rock will be “blinded” with finer

material to fill open potential void spaces in the fill, and then a strong geosynthetic

separation layer will be installed to upgrade the blast-rock subgrade. The placing of

a layer compacted granular fill will distribute the variable characteristics of the existing

blast-rock fill and provide more uniform settlement (serviceability) performance.

As part of the site preparation work, it is recommended that test pits be put down

through the blast-rock, around the perimeter of the subject building footprint, to assess

whether there is adequate lateral extent of the blast-rock fill deposits. If the lateral

extent is deficient, additional excavation and fill placement will be required beyond the

applicable side(s) of the existing blast-rock.

As part of the site preparation throughout each building footprint, proof-rolling of the

remnant pavement materials and/or the blast-rock fill subgrade is recommended, with

subexcavation of any soft areas and replacement with inorganic remnant granular

pavement materials or well-blinded blast rock to the subgrade level. “Blinding” of the

surface of the blast-rock portions with finer granular fill and installation of a strong

geosynthetic separation layer will be recommended on the assumption that the fill is

open-graded.

The above and other considerations are further discussed in the following report

sections.




5.2 Site Grading and Preparation

Stripping Depth

Soft fill material, topsoil and deleterious material should be removed from within the

building perimeter. Asphaltic concrete is required to be removed from the site and

disposed of properly, such as at an asphalt paving plant, where it can be recycled.

Fill Placement

Fill used for grading beneath the proposed building, unless otherwise specified, should

consist of clean imported granular fill, such as Ontario Provincial Standard

Specifications (OPSS) Granular A or Granular B Type II. The fill should be tested and

approved prior to delivery to the site. It should be placed in uniform lifts no greater than

300 mm thick and compacted using suitable vibratory compaction equipment for the

lift thickness. Fill placed beneath the building area should be compacted to at least

98% of its standard Proctor maximum dry density (SPMDD) value.

The remnant granular fill from the parking lot pavement should be a suitable subgrade

on which to backfill for the slab-on-grade. The surface of this fill should be thoroughly

proof rolled under the observation of the geotechnical consultant prior to the placing

of new granular base materials. Because of the presence of the open-graded blast-

rock fill underlying the pavement materials, the trenches for sub-slab services, such as

plumbing lines that penetrate to the blast-rock should be well-blinded with fine granular

materials, and/or should be lined with a medium strength non-woven geotextile, such

as Terrafix 360R, or equivalent, prior to placing the bedding for the services.

As detailed in section 5.3, the footings for the structure will be founded on OPSS

Granular B Type II placed over a precompacted blast-rock fill subgrade. The

engineered fill zone is required to be a minimum of 0.4 m thick, depending on the

design bearing resistance values, and extend to at least 0.6 m (or 1.5 times the

engineered fill thickness, if greater than 0.4 m) beyond all edges of the supported

footings. The subgrade surface for the engineered fill layer should be “blinded” with

crushed stone, such as Granular B Type II material, in conjunction with vibratory

compaction to fill the voids in the blast-rock.

Following the blinding and vibratory precompaction of the subgrade surfaces, a

medium strength non-woven geotextile, such as Terrafix 360R, or equivalent, should

be placed over the entire prepared subgrade (including the above-noted lateral extent

beyond the footing perimeter), followed by Terrafix TBX1500 biaxial geogrid. The

geotextile and geogrid will ensure that the overlying Granular B Type II layer will be

permanently separated from migrating into the open-graded blast-rock.




The geogrid material should be stretched out to remove slack and kept in place by

small piles of fill during the careful placing of the Granular B Type II. The minimum

overlap between geogrid sheets is 0.5 m. Care should be taken to dump the fill

vertically, and cover entire areas, prior to spreading out the fill surface, in order to avoid

dislodging the geogrid and/or creating folds or gaps as part of the filling operations.

The geogrid should be free of slack to function optimally. The Granular B Type II can

then be compacted in the normal manner. Paterson can provide further guidance on

placing techniques as part of the field review process.

If soft areas or “flexing” develops during compaction in any area, the area should be

subexcavated to a suitable level, the lower level proof rolled, and then suitable site

excavated material used to re-establish the subgrade level. If applicable, geosynthetic

layers should be replaced as part of these operations. Where suitable site excavated

material is not available, Granular B Type II should be used to fill the subexcavated

area. If the Granular B Type II is used, the sides of the subexcavation should be

tapered at 3H:1V, or shallower, to reduce the differential subgrade effects between the

granular fill and existing fill materials.

Other than as noted above, non-specified existing fill along with site-excavated soil can

be used as general landscaping fill where settlement of the ground surface is of minor

concern. These materials should be spread in thin lifts and at least compacted by the

tracks of the spreading equipment to minimize voids. If these materials are to be used

to build up the subgrade level for areas to be paved, they should be compacted in thin

lifts to a minimum density of 95% of their respective SPMDD. Non-specified existing

fill and site-excavated soils are not suitable for use as backfill against foundation walls.

5.3 Foundation Design

Footing Levels

For purposes of discussion, typically exterior footings in the Ottawa Area are taken to

be founded at about 1.6 metres below the finished floor level (depending on exterior

grade) to accommodate 1.5 m of soil cover for frost protection. Interior footings can be

founded at about 1.0 m below the floor level, as minimum soil cover is not required, but

these levels will be set by the structural engineer.

The FFE of the subject building will have a finished ground floor level of el. 98.20 m.

As such, the approximate typical footing levels for the building would be as follows:

Exterior Footing Level: Elevation 96.60 m

Interior Footing Level: Elevation 97.20 m (or lower)




Engineered Granular Fill

It is recommended that footings be founded on an engineered granular fill bearing

medium, consisting of a minimum of 0.4 metres of OPSS Granular B Type II (50 mm

minus) crushed stone placed and compacted to a minimum of 98% of SPMDD, over

a precompacted inorganic fill subgrade. Open-graded blast-rock fill subgrades are also

required to be blinded with granular material and provided with a two-component

geosynthetic layer, consisting of a non-woven geotextile (Terrafix 360R, or equivalent)

and a Terrafix TBX1500 geogrid, as described under section 5.2.

The 0.4 m thick engineered OPSS Granular B Type II fill bearing medium can be taken

to have a factored bearing resistance at ultimate limit states (ULS) value of 200 kPa,

incorporating a geotechnical resistance factor of 0.5, and a bearing resistance at

serviceability limit states (SLS) value of 120 kPa.

Greater bearing resistance can be achieved by providing a thicker engineered fill layer.

A 0.6 m thick engineered OPSS Granular B Type II fill bearing medium can be taken

to have a factored bearing resistance at ULS value of 250 kPa, incorporating a

geotechnical resistance factor of 0.5, and a bearing resistance at SLS value of

150 kPa.

The engineered granular fill is required to extend laterally, a dimension at least

equivalent to 1.5 times the engineered fill layer thickness, beyond all footing edges.

This lateral extent will be 0.6 m for the basic 0.4 m thick Granular B Type II layer and

0.9 m for the 0.6 m thick layer. The subgrade treatment of blinding and geosynthetics

is recommended for the full width of the subgrade (i.e. footing width plus 1.2 to 1.8 m).

Geosynthetic layers should be lapped at least 0.5 m at joints between sheets.

Settlement

The above SLS bearing values assume that potential total settlements of 25 mm and/or

differential settlement between adjacent footings, both founded on an engineered fill

bearing medium, of 20 mm, are tolerable/serviceable to the proposed structures.

Transition point treatment may be required where subgrade conditions change and/or

deeper engineered granular fill is required (i.e. subexcavated areas). The need for,

and slope of, transitions will have to be evaluated in the field with respect to the

sharpness of the transition. Transition point treatment will generally consist of sloping

up or tapering the edges of the deeper granular fill at 3H:1V, or shallower to the 0.4 or

0.6 m engineered fill thickness. Blinding granulars and the geosynthetic layers will be

recommended at the interface between the blast-rock fill and the graded granular fill.




Required Lateral Support to Bearing Media

Sufficient lateral support is provided to an engineered granular fill bearing medium

when a plane extending down and out from the bottom edge of the footing at 1.5H:1V

passes only through engineered granular fill, underlain at 0.4 m depth or greater, by

inorganic (blast-rock) fill of the same or higher capacity as the bearing medium.

5.4 Design for Earthquakes

The proposed site can be taken to have a seismic site response Class C, as defined

in the Ontario Building Code 2006 (OBC 2006; Table 4.1.8.4.A) for foundations

considered at this site.

The soils underlying the site are not susceptible to seismic liquefaction.

5.5 Slab-on-Grade Construction

Either one, or a combination, of the proof rolled remnant pavement granulars and/or the

proof rolled (and “blinded” where required) blast rock fill surface will be considered to

be acceptable subgrade media on which to commence backfilling for floor slab

construction.

Any soft areas should be removed and backfilled with appropriate backfill material prior

to placing any fill. OPSS Granular B Type II, with a maximum particle size of 50 mm,

is recommended for backfilling below the floor slab. It is recommended that the upper

200 mm of sub-floor fill consists of OPSS Granular A crushed stone for slab on grade

construction. All backfill material within the footprint of the proposed building should be

placed in maximum 300 mm thick loose layers and compacted to at least 98% of its

SPMDD.

5.6 Pavement Structure

Pavement Design

Car only parking areas and access lanes are anticipated at this site. The proposed

pavement structures are presented in Tables 2 and 3, on the following page.

If soft spots develop in the subgrade during compaction or due to construction traffic,

the affected areas should be excavated and replaced with OPSS Granular B Type II

material.




Table 2 - Recommended Pavement Structure - Car Only Parking Areas

Thickness (mm) Material Description

50 Wear Course - HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete

150 BASE - OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone

300 SUBBASE - OPSS Granular B Type II

SUBGRADE - Either proof rolled inorganic fill, or OPSS Granular B

Type I or II material placed over proof rolled inorganic fill.

Table 3 - Recommended Pavement Structure - Access Lanes and Heavy Truck Parking Areas

Thickness (mm) Material Description

40 Wear Course - HL-3 or Superpave 12.5 Asphaltic Concrete

50 Binder Course - HL-8 or Superpave 19.0 Asphaltic Concrete

150 BASE - OPSS Granular A Crushed Stone

375 SUBBASE - OPSS Granular B Type II

SUBGRADE - Either proof rolled inorganic fill, or OPSS Granular B

Type I or II material placed over proof rolled inorganic fill

The pavement granular base and subbase should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick

lifts and compacted to a minimum of 100% of the material’s SPMDD using suitable

vibratory equipment.

Performance-graded (PG) 58-34 asphaltic cement should be used for this project.

If the existing pavement structure is to be reinstated after the construction of the

proposed building, the following guidelines should be adhered to during pavement

reinstatement.

As a general guideline, the pavement structure should be reinstated by matching the

new pavement layers to the existing ones. Stepped joints should be provided in the

asphaltic concrete layers to provide more resistance to reflective cracking at the joint.

Care should also be taken to reinstate the subgrade by matching the existing subgrade

to minimize the potential for differential frost heaving.




Paving Stone Areas

In hard surfaced areas where paving stone will be used, and will be loaded by vehicle

traffic, or be part of the fire lane, a base layer (150 mm thick) of OPSS Granular A over

a 300 mm layer of OPSS Granular B Type II is recommended.

6.0 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRECAUTIONS

6.1 Protection of Footings Against Frost Action

Perimeter footings of heated structures are required to be insulated against the

deleterious effects of frost action. A minimum of 1.5 m of soil cover alone, or a

minimum of 0.6 m of soil cover, in conjunction with foundation insulation, should be

provided in this regard.

Exterior unheated footings, such as those for isolated exterior piers, are more prone to

deleterious movement associated with frost action than the exterior walls of the

structure proper and require additional protection, such as soil cover of 2.1 m or a

combination of soil cover and foundation insulation.

6.2 Foundation Wall Drainage and Backfill

It is routinely recommended by this firm that a perimeter foundation drainage system

be provided for proposed structures. Such systems should consist of a 150 mm

diameter "flexodrain" pipe, placed at the footing level around the exterior perimeter of

the structure and surrounded by a 150 mm thick filter of 10 mm clear crushed stone.

The pipe should have a positive outlet such as a gravity connection to the storm sewer.

Perimeter drainage systems have not been provided for the existing Kanata Centrum

City Walk structures and may be omitted for the proposed structures, provided no

basements are to be constructed. This is an acceptable practice, as the site has

depressed groundwater conditions, provided that appropriate backfilling procedures are

followed to prevent the potential for adfreezing frost action.

Backfill against the sides of the foundation walls should consist of free-draining, non

frost susceptible granular materials. The greater part of the existing fill materials are

frost susceptible and, therefore, are not recommended for this purpose and imported

materials, such as clean sand or OPSS Granular B Type I should be used. As an

alternative, a geocomposite drainage membrane, such as System Platon, can be used

in conjunction with the native fill.




Where asphalt paving, concrete slabs-on-grade, or other hard landscaping will be

located on the foundation wall backfill, it should be compacted in thin lifts to at least

95% of its SPMDD.

6.3 Excavation Side Slopes

The side slopes of excavations in the soil and fill overburden materials should either be

cut back at acceptable slopes or should be retained by shoring systems from the start

of the excavation until the structure is backfilled. It is expected that sufficient room will

be available to permit the building excavations to be undertaken by open-cut methods

(i.e. unsupported excavations).

The excavation side slopes above the groundwater level extending to a maximum depth

of 3 m should be cut back at 1H:1V or flatter. A flatter slope would be required for

excavation below groundwater level. The subsoil at this site is considered to be mainly

Type 2 and 3 soil according to the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Regulations

for Construction Projects. Note that the blast-rock fill can be relatively open-graded and

excavating below the groundwater level in this material would be expected to result in

rapid groundwater influx into the excavation.

Excavated soil should not be stockpiled directly at the top of excavations and heavy

equipment should be kept away from the excavation sides.

Slopes in excess of 3 m in height should be periodically inspected by the geotechnical

consultant in order to detect if the slopes are exhibiting signs of distress.

It is recommended that a trench box be used at all times to protect personnel working

in trenches with steep or vertical sides. It is expected that services will be installed by

“cut and cover” methods and excavations will not be left open for extended periods of

time.

6.4 Pipe Bedding and Backfill

Bedding and backfill materials should be in accordance with the most recent Material

Specifications & Standard Detail Drawings from the Department of Public Works and

Services, Infrastructure Services Branch of the City of Ottawa (7th edition, March 31,

2008). Trench details should be as per Drawing Nos. W17, S6 and S7.

At least 150 mm of OPSS Granular A should be used for bedding for sewer pipes when

placed on soil subgrade. Considering the presence of the coarse blast rock fill, a

thicker bedding, such as 300 mm and/or placement of a non-woven geotextile (Terrafix

360R or equivalent) between the bedding and the blast-rock may be more appropriate.




The bedding material should extend to the spring line of the pipe. Cover material, from

the spring line to at least 300 mm above the obvert of the pipe should consist of OPSS

Granular A (concrete or PSM PVC pipes) or sand (concrete pipe). The bedding and

cover materials should be placed in maximum 225 mm thick lifts compacted to a

minimum of 95% of the material’s SPMDD.

At least 150 mm of OPSS Granular A should be used for bedding for water pipes.

Considering the presence of the coarse blast rock fill, a thicker bedding, such as

300 mm and/or placement of a non-woven geotextile between the bedding and the

blast-rock may be more appropriate. The bedding material, which should extend to at

least 300 mm above the obvert of the pipe, should consist of OPSS Granular A or

Granular M. The bedding and cover materials should be placed in maximum 225 mm

thick lifts compacted to a minimum of 95% of the material’s SPMDD.

Where hard surface areas are considered above the trench backfill, the trench backfill

material within the frost zone (about 1.8 m below finished grade) should match the soils

exposed at the trench walls to reduce the potential differential frost heaving. The trench

backfill should be placed in maximum 300 mm thick loose lifts and compacted to a

minimum of 95% of the material’s SPMDD.

6.5 Groundwater Control

Although groundwater is not expected to be a serious problem during construction of

the foundations, the contractor should be prepared to direct water away from all bearing

surfaces and subgrades, regardless of the source, to prevent disturbance to the

founding and/or subgrade media and to allow for proper inspections to be conducted.

It should be noted that the blast-rock fill can be relatively open-graded and excavating

below the groundwater level in this material, such as for services installation, would be

expected to result in rapid groundwater influx into the excavation.

6.6 Winter Construction

In the event of footings being constructed during the winter months, founding media are

required to be protected from freezing temperatures by the use of straw, propane

heaters or other suitable means. In this regard, the base of the excavation should be

insulated from below freezing temperatures immediately upon exposure, until the time

that footings have sufficient soil cover to prevent freezing of the subsoils, and heat is

provided to the structures.




The placing of fill materials during cold weather also requires the implementation of a

strict procedure of bringing unfrozen materials to the site, placing and compacting them

prior to their freezing and protecting the surface from freezing until the following lift is

to be placed. All materials are to be placed and compacted after being delivered and

are not to be stockpiled and allowed to freeze prior to being placed.

7.0 MATERIALS TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES PROGRAM

It is a requirement for the foundation design data provided herein to be applicable that

a materials testing and observation services program, including the following aspects,

be performed by the geotechnical consultant.

‘ Observation of all bearing surfaces prior to the placement of concrete.

‘ Sampling and testing of the concrete and fill materials used.

‘ Periodic observation of the condition of unsupported excavation side slopes in

excess of 3 m in height, if applicable.

‘ Observation of all subgrades prior to backfilling and follow-up field density tests

to determine the level of compaction achieved.

‘ Observation of the blinding operations for the blast-rock fill including the placing

of the geosynthetic (geotextile and geogrid) layers.

‘ Sampling and testing of the bituminous concrete including mix design reviews.

A report confirming that these works have been conducted in general accordance with

our recommendations could be issued, upon request, following the completion of a

satisfactory materials testing and observation program by the geotechnical consultant.




8.0 STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS

The recommendations provided in this report are in accordance with our present

understanding of the project. We request permission to review our recommendations

when the drawings and specifications are completed.

A soils investigation is a limited sampling of a site. Should any conditions at the site be

encountered which differ from those at the test locations, we request immediate

notification to permit reassessment of our recommendations.

The recommendations provided herein should only be used by the design professionals

associated with this project. They are not intended for contractors bidding on or

undertaking the work. The latter should evaluate the factual information provided in this

report and determine its suitability and completeness for their intended construction

schedule and methods. Additional testing may be required for their purposes.

The present report applies only to the projects described in this document. Use of this

report for purposes other than those described herein or by person(s) or entities other

than Kanata Entertainment Holdings Inc. and/or PenEquity Realty Corporation, Cara

(under contract agreements terms with PenEquity), or their agents, is not authorized

without review by Paterson for the applicability of our recommendations to the

alternative use of the report.

Paterson Group Inc.

Andrew J. Tovell, P.Eng.

Report Distribution:

‘ Kanata Entertainment Holdings Inc. c/o PenEquity Realty Corporation (3 copies)

‘ IBI Group (1 copy by email)

‘ Paterson Group (1 copy)

APPENDIX 1

SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA SHEETS

SYMBOLS AND TERMS

patersongroup

FILL: Granite and sandstone blastrock containing matrix of sand andclayey silt with some gravel. Compactopen graded structure.

Remoulded

DATE

Water Content %

SOIL DESCRIPTION

Kanata Centrum - Milestones & Block YYD, Kanata Ave.

HOLE NO.

GROUND SURFACE

Geotechnical Investigation

Shear Strength (kPa)

FILE NO.

RECOVERY

N VALUE

20 40 60 80 100

13mm TOPSOIL

FILL: Brown clayey silt/silty clay withsand and gravel

98.39

97.39

96.39

95.39

94.39

42

50+

16

50+

11

36

End of Borehole

Practical refusal to augering @ 4.52mdepth

(Standpipe blocked @ 2.3m and dry -Dec. 29/08)

42

6

4.52

0.60

SS

SS

SS

SS 17

AU

20

5

4

3

2

1

50

Pen. Resist. Blows/0.3m

SS

STRATA PLOT

%

TYPE

SOIL PROFILE AND TEST DATA

50 mm Dia. ConeELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

SAMPLEDEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7J5

CME 55 Power Auger

(m)

Consulting

(m)

BH 1

TBM - Top spindle of fire hydrant, southwest corner of Main Street and Collector A.Geodetic elevation = 98.44m.

REMARKS

BORINGS BY

DATUM

Engineers

Pie

zo

me

ter

20 40 60 80

NUMBER

PG1808

December 19, 2008

Co

nstr

uctio

n

or RQD

Undisturbed

5.26

End of Borehole

(GWL @ 3.25m-Dec. 29/08)

BEDROCK: Weathered sandstone


Large auger drop between 3.3 and3.8m depth indicating void in fill

FILL: Crushed stone with sand

6.25

0.94

0.10

RC

RC

SS

SS

SS

SS

Asphaltic concrete

RECOVERY

N VALUE

20 40 60 80 100

DATE


GROUND SURFACE

Water Content %

Remoulded

patersongroup

AU

SS

17

20

50+

55

10

64

982

1

57

6

5

4

3

29

1

SS

80

50

42

17

58

33

42

65

2

50 mm Dia. Cone

%

TYPE

Pie

zo

me

ter

FILE NO.


(m)

PG1808

20 40 60 80

Engineers

ELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

STRATA PLOT SAMPLE

DEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

SOIL DESCRIPTION


REMARKSHOLE NO.

DATUM


CME 75 Power Auger


BORINGS BY

97.56

96.56

95.56

94.56

93.56

92.56

91.56



December 22, 2008

Co

nstr

uctio

n

or RQD

Consulting

(m)

BH 2

NUMBER

Undisturbed

Water Content %

Remoulded

patersongroupKanata Centrum - Milestones & Block YYD, Kanata Ave.

End of Borehole


(Surface water @ ground surface -Dec. 29/09 - not GWL)


FILL: Crushed stone with sand

Asphaltic concrete

4.65

0.90

HOLE NO.


97.44

96.44

95.44

94.44

93.44

SOIL DESCRIPTION


FILE NO.

RECOVERY

20 40 60 80 100

DATE


SS

GROUND SURFACE

0.10

49

11

47

62

4442

33

4

SS

SS

SS

SS

AU

7 50+

5

SS

3

2

1

67

58

50

50

6


STRATA PLOT

%

TYPE

PG1808

N VALUE

50 mm Dia. Cone


(m)ELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

SAMPLEDEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

Consulting

CME 55 Power Auger

20 40 60 80

REMARKS

(m)

BORINGS BY


DATUM

Engineers

December 19, 2008

Pie

zo

me

ter

Co

nstr

uctio

n

or RQD

Undisturbed

NUMBER

BH 3

6.93

SS

End of Borehole

(Standpipe blocked @ 2.8m depthand dry - Dec. 29/08)

BEDROCK: Friable to weatheredsandstone


Cored through granitic boulders from3.5m to 5.4m depth

Asphaltic concrete

5.41

0.90

0.10

RC

RC

RC

RC


FILL: Crushed stone, some sand

GROUND SURFACE

FILE NO.

RECOVERY

N VALUE

20 40 60 80 100

DATE

SS

Water Content %

Remoulded

patersongroupGeotechnical Investigation

SS

11

31

45

43

582SS

AU

4

3

2

1

5 50+

3

1

76

52

58

53

32

50

50

4

%

TYPE

STRATA PLOT

SOIL DESCRIPTION 50 mm Dia. Cone


(m)

PG1808

20 40 60 80

Engineers


ELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

SAMPLEDEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

CME 75 Power Auger

REMARKS

97.55

96.55

95.55

94.55

93.55

92.55

91.55


DATUM


HOLE NO.


Pie

zo

me

ter

December 22, 2008BORINGS BY

Co

nstr

uctio

n

Consulting

(m)

or RQD

BH 4

NUMBER

Undisturbed

Water Content %

Remoulded

patersongroup

End of Borehole


(BH dry to 4.38m depth - Dec. 29/08)


Blast rock matrix peaty between 3.8and 4.6m depth. Wood encountered3.0 to 3.2m depth. Void in matrixencountered 4.3 to 4.5m depth.

FILL: Brown clayey silt/silty clay withsand, organic matter

25mm Topsoil

4.65


HOLE NO.


97.78

96.78

95.78

94.78

93.78

SOIL DESCRIPTION

FILE NO.

SS

RECOVERY

N VALUE

20 40 60 80 100

DATE


GROUND SURFACE

50+

37

50+

30

26

361.07

254


SS

SS

SS

SS

AU

7

50

5

293

2

1

100

33

62

SS

6


STRATA PLOT

%

TYPE

PG1808

50 mm Dia. Cone


(m)ELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

SAMPLEDEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

BORINGS BY

(m)

Consulting

CME 55 Power Auger

20 40 60 80


DATUM

REMARKS

Engineers

Pie

zo

me

ter

December 19, 2008

Co

nstr

uctio

n

or RQD

Undisturbed

NUMBER

BH 5

Remoulded


Water Content %

20 40 60 80 100

patersongroupKanata Centrum - Milestones & Block YYD, Kanata Ave.

GROUND SURFACE

DATE

SOIL DESCRIPTION


FILE NO.

RECOVERY

N VALUE

End of Borehole


(BH dry to 3.63m depth - Dec. 29/08)


29

67

41

18

43

57

1

SSFILL: Granite and sandstone blastrock containing matrix of sand andclayey silt with some gravel. Compactopen graded structure.

FILL: Crushed stone, some sand

Asphaltic concrete

3.61

0.89

0.10

25SS

73

SS

AU

5

4

3

2

HOLE NO.

SS

STRATA PLOT

%

TYPE


97.29

96.29

95.29

94.29

DATUM

50 mm Dia. ConeELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

SAMPLEDEPTH

0

1

2

3


BH 6

(m)(m)

NUMBER

Consulting

CME 55 Power Auger


REMARKS

BORINGS BY

PG1808

Pie

zo

me

ter

Engineers

20 40 60 80

Undisturbed

December 19, 2008

Co

nstr

uctio

n

or RQD

98.25

97.25

96.25

95.25

94.25

93.25

92.25

Remoulded

Water Content %

End of Borehole

DCPT refusal @ 6.70m depth

(GWL @ 4.35m-Dec. 29/08)


Peaty matrix encountered between4.65 and 5.6m depth in conjunctionwith voids.

Augers deflected on boulder @ 6.1mdepth. Augering terminated and conedriven to practical refusal.

13mm Topsoil

FILL: Clayey silt/silty clay with sandand gravel

6.70

0.69

SS

SS

SOIL DESCRIPTION


FILE NO.

RECOVERY

N VALUE

patersongroup

DATE

SS


GROUND SURFACE

12

12

10

50+

15

7

SS

423

20 40 60 80 100

SS

SS

AU

8

7

6

1

4

332

1

25

25

33

17

36

SS 5


%

TYPE

Engineers

50 mm Dia. Cone


(m)

PG1808

20 40 60 80

ELEV.

Ottawa, Ontario

STRATA PLOT SAMPLE

DEPTH

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

CME 55 Power Auger


REMARKS

BORINGS BY


DATUM


HOLE NO.

Co

nstr

uctio

n

Consulting

December 19, 2008

Pie

zo

me

ter

NUMBER

(m)

BH 7

Undisturbed

or RQD

SYMBOLS AND TERMS

SOIL DESCRIPTION Behavioural properties, such as structure and strength, take precedence over particle gradation in

describing soils. Terminology describing soil structure are as follows:

Desiccated - having visible signs of weathering by oxidation of clay

minerals, shrinkage cracks, etc.

Fissured - having cracks, and hence a blocky structure.

Varved - composed of regular alternating layers of silt and clay.

Stratified - composed of alternating layers of different soil types, e.g. silt

and sand or silt and clay.

Well-Graded - Having wide range in grain sizes and substantial amounts of

all intermediate particle sizes (see Grain Size Distribution).

Uniformly-Graded - Predominantly of one grain size (see Grain Size Distribution).

The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesionless soils is the relative density, usually

inferred from the results of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) ‘N’ value. The SPT N value is the

number of blows of a 63.5 kg hammer, falling 760 mm, required to drive a 51 mm O.D. split spoon

sampler 300 mm into the soil after an initial penetration of 150 mm.

Relative Density ‘N’ Value Relative Density %

Very Loose <4 <15

Loose 4-10 15-35

Compact 10-30 35-65

Dense 30-50 65-85

Very Dense >50 >85

The standard terminology to describe the strength of cohesive soils is the consistency, which is based on

the undisturbed undrained shear strength as measured by the in situ or laboratory vane tests,

penetrometer tests, unconfined compression tests, or occasionally by Standard Penetration Tests.

Consistency Undrained Shear Strength (kPa) ‘N’ Value

Very Soft <12 <2

Soft 12-25 2-4

Firm 25-50 4-8

Stiff

Very Stiff

50-100

100-200

8-15

15-30

Hard >200 >30

SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued)

SOIL DESCRIPTION (continued) Cohesive soils can also be classified according to their “sensitivity”. The sensitivity is the ratio between

the undisturbed undrained shear strength and the remoulded undrained shear strength of the soil.

Terminology used for describing soil strata based upon texture, or the proportion of individual particle

sizes present is provided on the Textural Soil Classification Chart at the end of this information package.

ROCK DESCRIPTION The structural description of the bedrock mass is based on the Rock Quality Designation (RQD).

The RQD classification is based on a modified core recovery percentage in which all pieces of sound core

over 100 mm long are counted as recovery. The smaller pieces are considered to be a result of closely-

spaced discontinuities (resulting from shearing, jointing, faulting, or weathering) in the rock mass and are

not counted. RQD is ideally determined from NXL size core. However, it can be used on smaller core

sizes, such as BX, if the bulk of the fractures caused by drilling stresses (called “mechanical breaks”) are

easily distinguishable from the normal in situ fractures.

RQD % ROCK QUALITY

90-100 Excellent, intact, very sound

75-90 Good, massive, moderately jointed or sound

50-75 Fair, blocky and seamy, fractured

25-50 Poor, shattered and very seamy or blocky, severely fractured

0-25 Very poor, crushed, very severely fractured

SAMPLE TYPES

SS - Split spoon sample (obtained in conjunction with the performing of the Standard

Penetration Test (SPT))

TW - Thin wall tube or Shelby tube

PS - Piston sample

AU - Auger sample or bulk sample

WS - Wash sample

RC - Rock core sample (Core bit size AXT, BXL, etc.). Rock core samples are

obtained with the use of standard diamond drilling bits.

SYMBOLS AND TERMS (continued)

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

MC% - Natural moisture content or water content of sample, %

LL - Liquid Limit, % (water content above which soil behaves as a liquid)

PL - Plastic limit, % (water content above which soil behaves plastically)

PI - Plasticity index, % (difference between LL and PL)

Dxx - Grain size which xx% of the soil, by weight, is of finer grain sizes

These grain size descriptions are not used below 0.075 mm grain size

D10 - Grain size at which 10% of the soil is finer (effective grain size)

D60 - Grain size at which 60% of the soil is finer

Cc - Concavity coefficient = (D30)2 / (D10 x D60)

Cu - Uniformity coefficient = D60 / D10

Cc and Cu are used to assess the grading of sands and gravels:

Well-graded gravels have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 4

Well-graded sands have: 1 < Cc < 3 and Cu > 6

Sands and gravels not meeting the above requirements are poorly-graded or uniformly-graded.

Cc and Cu are not applicable for the description of soils with more than 10% silt and clay

(more than 10% finer than 0.075 mm or the #200 sieve)

CONSOLIDATION TEST

p’o - Present effective overburden pressure at sample depth

p’c - Preconsolidation pressure of (maximum past pressure on) sample

Ccr - Recompression index (in effect at pressures below p’c)

Cc - Compression index (in effect at pressures above p’c)

OC Ratio Overconsolidaton ratio = p’c / p’o

Void Ratio Initial sample void ratio = volume of voids / volume of solids

Wo - Initial water content (at start of consolidation test)

PERMEABILITY TEST

k - Coefficient of permeability or hydraulic conductivity is a measure of the ability of

water to flow through the sample. The value of k is measured at a specified unit

weight for (remoulded) cohesionless soil samples, because its value will vary

with the unit weight or density of the sample during the test.

APPENDIX 2

FIGURE 1 - KEY PLAN

DRAWING PG1808-2

TEST HOLE LOCATION PLAN

Date post:	18-Dec-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	11 times
Download:	1 times

FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENT CALCULATIONS

Documents