via via CCTA File /6 Train Avenue West and 70 Yonge Street South, Springwater Natural Hazard Study

Similar documents
10/8/ W01. Daniel Catiglione First Gulf Corporation 3751 Victoria Park Avenue Toronto, ON M1W 3Z4

UPPER COSUMNES RIVER FLOOD MAPPING

YELLOWSTONE RIVER FLOOD STUDY REPORT TEXT

Dealing with Zone A Flood Zones. Topics of Discussion. What is a Zone A Floodplain?

AASHTO Extreme Weather Events Symposium Vermont s Road and Rivers - Managing for the Future

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DISTRICT 3-0

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NESTUCCA RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

LOMR SUBMITTAL LOWER NEHALEM RIVER TILLAMOOK COUNTY, OREGON

Fluvial Geomorphic Guidelines

Defining the Limit of Regulated Areas. C.1 Defining the River or Stream Flood Hazard 138. C.2 Defining the River or Stream Erosion Hazard 139

Applying GIS to Hydraulic Analysis

Beaver Creek Corridor Design and Analysis. By: Alex Previte

HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS MUSKEG RIVER BRIDGE

APPLICATION OF HEC-RAS MODEL FOR ESTIMATING CHANGES IN WATERCOURSE GEOMETRY DURING FLOODS

ONTARIO REGULATION 156/06. made under the CONSERVATION AUTHORITIES ACT

APPLIED FLUVIAL GEOMORPHOLOGY

Vermont Stream Geomorphic Assessment. Appendix E. River Corridor Delineation Process. VT Agency of Natural Resources. April, E0 - April, 2004

Grant 0299-NEP: Water Resources Project Preparatory Facility

LONG POINT REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY

Calibration of Manning s Friction Factor for Rivers in Iraq Using Hydraulic Model (Al-Kufa River as Case study)

ENVG/SC 10110L-20110L PLANET EARTH LABORATORY. Laboratory #9: Surface Hydrology & Map Scale

Thank you to all of our 2015 sponsors: Media Partner

Sixteen Mile Creek Tributaries Meander Belt Width Assessment November 2009

patersongroup Consulting Engineers April 20, 2010 File: PG1887-LET.01R Novatech Engineering Consultants Suite 200, 240 Michael Cowpland Drive

Development of a Fluvial Erosion Hazard Mitigation Program for Indiana

Technical Memorandum. To: From: Copies: Date: 10/19/2017. Subject: Project No.: Greg Laird, Courtney Moore. Kevin Pilgrim and Travis Stroth

December 11, 2006 File:

ASFPM - Rapid Floodplain Mapping

Vegetation effects on river hydraulics. Johannes J. (Joe) DeVries David Ford Consulting Engineers, Inc. Sacramento, CA

OBJECTIVES. Fluvial Geomorphology? STREAM CLASSIFICATION & RIVER ASSESSMENT

Edward R. Sajecki Commissioner of Planning and Building. Conservation Authority Regulations and Mapping

Fluvial Geomorphology

Extreme Phenomena in Dobrogea - Floods and Droughts

ARMSTRONG COUNTY, PA

Dam Break Analysis Using HEC-RAS and HEC-GeoRAS A Case Study of Ajwa Reservoir

REMOTE SENSING AND GEOSPATIAL APPLICATIONS FOR WATERSHED DELINEATION

Lecture 10: River Channels

3.11 Floodplains Existing Conditions

Evaluation of Scour Depth around Bridge Piers with Various Geometrical Shapes

This report was prepared by Klohn Crippen Consultants Ltd. for Alberta Transportation Central Region under Contract No. CE053/2000.

The Use of Higher-Resolution Satellite Imagery, LiDAR and Drones in River Applications:

1. PROJECT BACKGROUND. July 18, Alberta Infrastructure & Transportation Central Region #401, Street Red Deer, Alberta T4N 6K8

Out with the Old, In with the New: Implementing the Results of the Iowa Rapid Floodplain Modeling Project

Swift Creek Sediment Management Action Plan (SCSMAP)

TSEGI WASH 50% DESIGN REPORT

VOLUME 3 OF 3 FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO AND INCORPORATED AREAS COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER COMMUNITY NAME NUMBER

A STUDY OF LOCAL SCOUR AT BRIDGE PIERS OF EL-MINIA

Field Methods to Determine/ Verify Bankfull Elevation, XS Area & Discharge

Zone A Modeling (What Makes A Equal Approximate, Adequate, or Awesome)

FLOOD RISK MAPPING AND ANALYSIS OF THE M ZAB VALLEY, ALGERIA

Why Stabilizing the Stream As-Is is Not Enough

Distinct landscape features with important biologic, hydrologic, geomorphic, and biogeochemical functions.

HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC REPORT FOR SR. 0522, SECTION 5BN ALONG BLACKLOG CREEK CROMWELL TOWNSHIP HUNTINGDON COUNTY. Prepared for:

Countermeasure Calculations and Design

CE 394K.3 GIS in Water Resources Midterm Quiz Fall There are 5 questions on this exam. Please do all 5. They are of equal credit.

Extra Credit Assignment (Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 10)

Science Arena Publications Specialty Journal of Agricultural Sciences Available online at , Vol, 2 (2): 27-36

SAN JACINTO RIVER / BAUTISTA CREEK LEVEE SYSTEM RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NLD ID #

ADDRESSING GEOMORPHIC AND HYDRAULIC CONTROLS IN OFF-CHANNEL HABITAT DESIGN

Tom Ballestero University of New Hampshire. 1 May 2013

Local Flood Hazards. Click here for Real-time River Information

Frequently Asked Questions about River Corridors

WITNESS STATEMENT. John Parish, P.Geo. ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD. Case No. PL File No. PL Prepared for:

WITNESS STATEMENT DANIEL MAN, P.ENG.

Hydraulic and Sediment Transport Modeling Strategy

Dam Break Analysis of Idukki Dam using HEC RAS

JACINTO. Sediment Transport and Scour Analysis San Jacinto River, Stage 4 North and South Levees SAN ENGINEERING STUDY. Prepared for: Prepared by:

Semester Project Final Report. Logan River Flood Plain Analysis Using ArcGIS, HEC-GeoRAS, and HEC-RAS

FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER

Chapter 5 CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION

Delimiting Freedom Space for Rivers Using GIS and Remote Sensing:

The last three sections of the main body of this report consist of:

Accounting for increased flow resistance due to lateral momentum loss in restoration designs using 2-stage channels

D. MATHEMATICAL MODEL AND SIMULATION

Required Documents. Title: Number: AEP Administration 2017 No. 1. Provincial Wetlands and Water Boundaries Section. Effective Date: September 1, 2017

Exhibit A Description of Services Section 37 Floodplain Storage Design

Groundwater Investigation SOUTHGATE GRAVEL PIT Part of Lot 15, Concession 15 (formerly Township of Proton), Township of Southgate.

Pequabuck River Flooding Study and Flood Mitigation Plan The City of Bristol and Towns of Plainville and Plymouth, CT

Floodplain Modeling and Mapping Using The Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Hec-RAS/Hec-GeoRAS Applications. Case of Edirne, Turkey.

LOCATED IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PREPARED FOR S.J.R.W.M.D. AND F.W.C.D. DECEMBER, 2003 Updated 2007 Updated May 2014 PREPARED BY

FUTURE MEANDER BEND MIGRATION AND FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS NEAR RIVER MILES 241 TO 235, SACRAMENTO RIVER

Hydro-engineers.ch HEC-RAS ANALAYSIS. River: L Aïre Mesfin Tewolde. Hydro-engineers.ch 23 oct. 2017

Determining the Suitable Sediment extraction Locations of Existing Sand and Gravel Mines on Boshar River in Iran using HEC-RAS Modeling

STREAM RESTORATION AWRA Summer Specialty Conference, GIS and Water Resources IX

HYDROLOGIC AND WATER RESOURCES EVALUATIONS FOR SG. LUI WATERSHED

REZONING GUIDE. Zone Map Amendment (Rezoning) - Application. Rezoning Application Page 1 of 3. Return completed form to

Ways To Identify Background Verses Accelerated Erosion

Mapping of Future Coastal Hazards. for Southern California. January 7th, David Revell, Ph.D. E.

3/3/2013. The hydro cycle water returns from the sea. All "toilet to tap." Introduction to Environmental Geology, 5e

Muhammad Rezaul Haider (A ). Date of Submission: Course No.: CEE 6440, Fall 2016.

Urfe Creek Geomorphic Assessment William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue City of Pickering Regional Municipality of Durham

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL HYDROLOGY The Electronic Journal of the International Association for Environmental Hydrology VOLUME

MODELING OF LOCAL SCOUR AROUND AL-KUFA BRIDGE PIERS Saleh I. Khassaf, Saja Sadeq Shakir

Year 6. Geography. Revision

Vulnerability of Flood Hazard in Selected Ayeyarwady Delta Region, Myanmar

GREENE COUNTY, PA. Revised Preliminary DFIRM Mapping FEMA. Kevin Donnelly, P.E., CFM GG3, Greenhorne & O Mara, Inc. April 10, 2013

Working with Natural Stream Systems

January 12, 2006 File:

Spreadsheet Tools for Quantifying the Costs and Benefits of Two-Stage Channels

Avoiding Geohazards in the Mid-Atlantic Highlands by Using Natural Stream Principles

Transcription:

January 16, 217 via via email (vsimpson@ipsconsulting.com) CCTA File 416428 Vanessa Simpson, B.ID, M.PL. Junior Planner/ Planning Technician Innovative Planning Solutions 1 Dunlop Street East, Suite 21 Barrie, Ontario L4M 1B2 Re: /6 Train Avenue West and 7 Yonge Street South, Springwater Natural Hazard Study Dear Vanessa: C. C. Tatham & Associates Ltd. (CCTA) has been retained by Innovative Planning Solutions on behalf of Louis Nitsopoulos to complete a natural hazard study for & 6 Train Avenue West and 7 Yonge Street South, in the Township of Springwater. The majority of the subject site is located in an area regulated by the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority (NVCA), as the Wye River defines the southern property line of Train Avenue West and 7 Yonge Street South, and bisects 6 Train Avenue West. The purpose of this natural hazard study is to determine the limits of the flood and erosion hazards associated with the Wye River, in order to define the developable area on the subject site. This study has been prepared in support of future site plan application. Existing Conditions The area of the three lots totals to 4.47 ha. The Wye River defines the southern property line of Train Avenue West and 7 Yonge Street South, and bisects 6 Train Avenue West. The Wye River flows northerly across the subject site, eventually draining into Georgian Bay in Midland. In November 216, Rudy Mak Surveyors completed a detailed topographic survey of the subject site. Guidelines & Background Documents The natural hazard analysis was completed recognizing applicable Provincial and Conservation Authority guidelines on hydrologic and hydraulic analysis and design standards for watercourse crossings as follows:

Technical Guide - River and Stream Systems: Flooding Hazard Limit (Provincial Policy Statement 3.1), Ministry of Natural Resources (21); and NVCA Natural Hazards Technical Guide, NVCA (December 213). Existing Condition Hydraulic Analysis As noted above, the Wye River defines the southern property line of Train Avenue West and 7 Yonge Street South, and bisects 6 Train Avenue West. The HEC-RAS hydraulic modelling software was used to determine the existing condition Regulatory flood elevation across the site. NVCA s Generic Regulation HEC-RAS model was used as a starting point for the analysis. Existing cross sections 7266.97 and 6988.712 were updated to reflect the detailed topographic survey of the site. Four additional cross sections (7173.96, 781.34, 693, and 6817.4) were created to better reflect the detailed topographic survey data. The cross sections used in the hydraulic analysis are shown on the enclosed Drawing FLD-1. A Manning s roughness coefficient n of. was selected for the main channel based on a winding channel with some weeds and stones. A roughness coefficient of was selected from Table 3-1 of the HEC-RAS Reference Manual for the right and left overbank areas based on the presence of light brush and trees under summer conditions. The existing conditions Regulatory flood elevations in the vicinity of the site are shown on the attached Drawing FLD-1. The results of the HEC-RAS hydraulic model are summarized in Table 1, with full results provided in Attachment A. For the purpose of this study, the NVCA Regulatory peak flow provided in their HEC-RAS model has been used to determine the floodplain limits. Table 1: HEC-RAS Hydraulic Model Water Surface Elevations River Reach Cross Section ID Existing Condition Regulatory Flood WYE 7266.97.69 WYE 7173.96.1 WYE 781.34.38 WYE 6988.712.3 WYE 693.31 WYE 6817.4.28 WYE 6731.83.26 The Regulatory flood elevations obtained from the HEC-RAS model were used to delineate a Regulatory flood line that is shown on Drawing FLD-1. Vanessa Simpson, B.ID, M.PL. Innovative Planning Solutions Page 2 of 3 January 16, 217

The meander belt width has also been delineated on Drawing FLD-1. In accordance with the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Natural Hazard Technical Guide, an allowance of twenty-times bankfull width was applied from the meander axis of the Wye River to estimate the meander belt width. This results in a setback of 163.6 m across the subject site. Conclusion Based on the Regulatory flood elevation across the site, approximately 2.47 ha of the total 4.47 ha site is considered to be developable. It should be noted that based on our preliminary meander belt hazard assessment, which provides a conservative estimate of the meander belt extent, a large majority of the subject property is located within the meander belt. We anticipate that the meander belt width could be reduced through additional study completed by a fluvial geomorphologist. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, C. C. Tatham & Associates Ltd. Yours truly, C.C. Tatham & Associates Ltd. Nicole Foris, B.A.Sc., EIT Intern Engineer ALK/NHF:klc Amanda Kellett, B.Sc.Eng, P.Eng. Project Manager T:\216 PROJECTS\416428 - & 6 Train Ave. & 7 Yonge St. S - Natural Hazard Study\Documents\Letters\L - NVCA1 - &6 Train Ave West & 7 Yonge St - Natural Hazard Study Brief.doc Vanessa Simpson, B.ID, M.PL. Innovative Planning Solutions Page 3 of 3 January 16, 217

HEC-RAS Plan: CCTA Ex. River: WYE Reach: 3 Profile: PF 1 Reach River Sta Profile Q Total Min Ch El W.S. Elev Crit W.S. E.G. Elev E.G. Slope Vel Chnl Flow Area Top Width Froude # Chl (m3/s) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m/m) (m/s) (m2) (m) 3 9647.64 PF 1 86.8.98.7.77.1263.66 13.61 7.6.16 3 9482.38 PF 1 86.8.78.9.6.818.41.69 173.96.12 3 9237. PF 1 86.8.24.38.39.887.47 183.99 128.9.13 3 8977.28 PF 1 86.8.22.12.13.1186.41.61 229.24.14 3 8718.663 PF 1 86.8.97.8.86.91.33 29.84 31..12 3 8488.146 PF 1 86.8.97.68.68.649.3 29. 318.8.1 3 8263.116 PF 1 86.8.7.38.39.393.46 19.29 427.79.22 3 7984.32 PF 1 86.8.6.2.26.168.24 36.63 2.3.6 3 78.71 PF 1 86.8.4.24.24.7.1 62.67 266.41.3 3 7681.367 PF 1 11.26.38.23.23.78.24 46.27 14.81.4 3 748.24 PF 1 11.26.11.14.19.1679.94 116.91 44.7.19 3 7417.737 PF 1 11.26.11..1313.8 137.23 7.19.17 3 7348.84 PF 1 11.26.1.44.2.4.2.8 11.43.11 3 7296.78 Bridge 3 7266.97 PF 1 11.26.67.69.7.73.996 1.34 171.34 12.67.23 3 7173.96 PF 1 11.26.7.1.9.177 1.78 124.32 81.77.31 3 781.34 PF 1 11.26.2.38.43.976 1.43 149.3 72.91.24 3 6988.712 PF 1 11.26.36.3.36.32.86 236.1 11.1.1 3 693 PF 1 11.26.38.31.33.33.73 221.9 92.8.13 3 6817.4 PF 1 11.26.39.28.3.394.91 216.8 86.8.16 3 6731.83 PF 1 11.26.41.26.27.297.43 28.23 91.71 3 6483.4 PF 1 11.26.37.18.19.386.44 249.44 12.98.9 3 6.694 PF 1 11.26.37..99.6.7.49 223.6 14.86.11 3 989.19 PF 1 11.26 27.64.86..87.146.44 247.81 27.12.1 3 96.739 Bridge 3 938.798 PF 1 11.26 27.3.96.99.236.76 144.2 9.86.19 3 767.39 PF 1 11.26 27.7.71.71.123.3 311.32 426.94.13 3 487.46 PF 1 11.26 27..36.37.1247.42 262.69 281.3.14 3 238.646 PF 1 11.26 27..2.3.1496.41 269.92 346.1.1 3 4983.343 PF 1 11.26 26.9.73.74.94.32 339.41 421.28.12 3 473.22 PF 1 11.26 26.82.47.48.1218.34 32.81 47.2.13 3 4487.286 PF 1 11.26 26.3.33.33.47.11441 1.67 6.84 263.4 1.7 3 423.437 PF 1 11.26 26.7 27.7 27.7.111.32 339.28 47.64.12 3 39.111 PF 1 11.26 2.3 27.17 27.18.199.43 2.96 377.13.17 3 3867.462 PF 1 11.26 2. 26.9 26.47 26.96.364.47 232.71 462.61.21

216 WYE 3 Left Levee Right Levee 26 24 1 2 3 4 6 Main Channel Distance (m)

RS = 7266.97 Updated by CCTA per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 21. Ineff 1 1 2 2 3 3 RS = 7173.96 New CCTA XS per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 216). 1 1 2 2 3 3

216 RS = 781.34 New CCTA XS per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 216). 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 RS = 6988.712 Updated by CCTA per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 21. 1 1 2 2 3 3 4

216 RS = 693 New CCTA XS per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 216). 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 216 RS = 6817.4 New CCTA XS per Lot 6 Concession 8 Survey (Rudy Mak, Nov 216). 1 1 2 2 3

216 RS = 6731.83 1 2 3 4