Line 20: |
Line 20: |
|
| |
|
| ==Background Research== | | ==Background Research== |
| | TRCA conducted [[modeling]] to evaluate different stormwater management measures (LID and Ponds) in mitigating impacts of development on the peak flow and runoff volume. |
| | A sub-catchment in Humber River was selected that has an area of 35.71 ha. |
| | The existing land use in the sub-catchment is agriculture and the proposed future land use is employment land with 91% total imperviousness. |
|
| |
|
| TRCA undertook modeling excises to evaluate effectiveness of different stormwater management measures (LID and Ponds) in mitigating impacts of development on the peak flow and runoff volume. A sub-catchment in Humber River was selected that has an area of 35.71 ha. The existing land use in the sub-catchment is agriculture and the proposed future land use is employment land with 91% total imperviousness.
| |
| Hydrological model run were carried out by integrating different stormwater management measures (LID and SWM Pond) for 2-year and 100-year 6-hr AES design storms. | | Hydrological model run were carried out by integrating different stormwater management measures (LID and SWM Pond) for 2-year and 100-year 6-hr AES design storms. |
| | |
| Scenarios evaluated include: | | Scenarios evaluated include: |
| #LID measures that provide 25 mm on-site retention | | #LID measures that provide 25 mm on-site retention |
| #SWM pond to control post-development peak flows to pre-development peak flows. | | #SWM pond to control post-development peak flows to pre-development peak flows. |
| #Combination of scenario 1 and scenario 2 | | #Combination of scenario 1 and scenario 2 |
| | |
| Runoff volume and peak flow reductions were calculated. | | Runoff volume and peak flow reductions were calculated. |
|
| |
|
| ===Peak Flow=== | | ===Peak Flow=== |
| 25 mm on-site retention using LID measures can reduce post-development peak flows generated from 2 to 5 year design storms by over 26%, whereas for 50 and 100 year design storms it reduces only 4% and 1% respectively. This shows that LID will not reduce significantly the post-development peak flows generated from major storms. | | *The 25 mm on-site retention using LID measures reduced post-development peak flows generated from 2 to 5 year design storms by over 26%, |
| | *For 50 and 100 year design storms it reduces only 4% and 1% respectively. |
| | |
| | This shows that LID will not reduce significantly the post-development peak flows generated from major storms. |
| | In order to meet flood control requirements, LID need to be augmented by some flood storage measures such as dry/park ponds, underground storage. |
| | |
| ===Runoff Volume=== | | ===Runoff Volume=== |
| 25 mm on-site retention using LID measures can reduce post-development runoff volume generated from 2 to 5 year design storms by over 52 %, whereas for 50 and 100 year design storms it reduces only 33% and 30% respectively. This shows that the post-development runoff volume generated from major storms going to receiving features can be reduced considerably by implementing LID to retain 25 mm. | | *The 25 mm on-site retention using LID measures can reduce post-development runoff volume generated from 2 to 5 year design storms by over 52 %, |
| Finally, LID as standalone cannot control post-development peak flows to pre-development peak flows under major storm events.
| | *For 50 and 100 year design storms it reduces only 33% and 30% respectively. |
| Therefore, in order to meet flood control requirements, LID need to be augmented by some flood storage measures such as dry/park ponds, underground storage.
| | |
| | This shows that the post-development runoff volume generated from major storms going to receiving features can be reduced considerably by implementing LID to retain 25 mm. |
|
| |
|
| ==Literature Review== | | ==Literature Review== |