2015 north grenville potable water and wastewater master plan update · 2018-12-16 · sign-off...

2015 North Grenville Potable

Water and Wastewater Master

Plan Update

Prepared for:

Municipality of North Grenville

Prepared by:

Stantec Consulting Ltd.

400-1331 Clyde Avenue

Ottawa, ON

K2C 3G4

January 22, 2016

Sign-off Sheet

This document entitled 2015 North Grenville Potable Water and Wastewater Master Plan Update

was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. for the account of Municipality of North Grenville. The

material in it reflects Stantec’s best judgment in light of the information available to it at the time of

preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions made

based on it, are the responsibilities of such third parties. Stantec Consulting Ltd. accepts no

responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions

based on this report.

Prepared by

(Signature)

Megan Young, Engineer Intern

Reviewed by

(Signature)

Kevin Alemany, MA.Sc., P.Eng.

2015 NORTH GRENVILLE POTABLE WATER AND WASTEWATER MASTER PLAN UPDATE

sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx i

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... I

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................1.1

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 1.1

1.2 OVERVIEW OF STUDY AREA .......................................................................................... 1.1

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS ..................................................................2.1

2.1 SCOPE OF WATER MASTER PLAN ................................................................................. 2.1

2.2 CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MASTER PLANNING ............................. 2.1

2.3 PUBLIC CONSULTATION ................................................................................................. 2.3

3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...............................................................................................3.1

3.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................................... 3.1 3.1.1 Soils ................................................................................................................ 3.1 3.1.2 Topography .................................................................................................. 3.1 3.1.3 Vegetation & Wildlife .................................................................................. 3.1 3.1.4 Kemptville Creek Watershed ..................................................................... 3.2 3.1.5 Rideau River ................................................................................................. 3.3 3.1.6 Water Crossings ............................................................................................ 3.3 3.1.7 Environmentally Significant Areas ............................................................. 3.3 3.1.8 Sites with Archaeological or Heritage Potential ..................................... 3.3

3.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT ............................................................................ 3.4 3.2.1 Population .................................................................................................... 3.4 3.2.2 Land Use and Planning - Official Plan ...................................................... 3.5

4.0 DESIGN PARAMETERS ..................................................................................................4.1

4.1 POPULATION AND GROWTH......................................................................................... 4.1

4.2 POTABLE WATER DESIGN PARAMETERS ....................................................................... 4.2 4.2.1 Historical Demands...................................................................................... 4.2 4.2.2 Design Flow ................................................................................................... 4.2 4.2.3 Fire Flow Requirements ............................................................................... 4.3 4.2.4 Source Capacity Requirements ................................................................ 4.4 4.2.5 Storage Requirements ................................................................................ 4.5 4.2.6 Pumping Requirements .............................................................................. 4.6

4.3 WASTEWATER DESIGN PARAMETERS ............................................................................ 4.8 4.3.1 Historical Flows ............................................................................................. 4.8 4.3.2 Sanitary Sewage Design Flows - Average Daily Flows (ADF)............... 4.13 4.3.3 Sanitary Sewage Design Flows - Peak Day Flows (PDF) ....................... 4.14 4.3.4 Sanitary Sewage Pump Station Requirements ...................................... 4.14

5.0 POTABLE WATER AND WASTEWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ALTERNATIVES .....................5.1

5.1 POTABLE WATER SOURCE ALTERNATIVES .................................................................... 5.1

5.2 POTABLE WATER STORAGE ALTERNATIVES .................................................................. 5.8

5.3 POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION ALTERNATIVES ............................................................ 5.9


sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx ii

5.4 WASTEWATER COLLECTION ALTERNATIVES ............................................................... 5.13 5.4.1 Regions Surrounded by Existing Development ...................................... 5.14 5.4.2 North West Quadrant ................................................................................ 5.15 5.4.3 East Quadrant ............................................................................................ 5.25

5.5 WASTEWATER PUMPING STATION ALTERNATIVES ..................................................... 5.31 5.5.1 North West Quadrant ................................................................................ 5.31 5.5.2 East Quadrant ............................................................................................ 5.31 5.5.3 Central Region – Bridge Street Pumping Station Forcemain ............... 5.32

5.6 WASTEWATER TREATMENT & DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES ............................................ 5.33 5.6.1 Phosphorus Offsetting ............................................................................... 5.33 5.6.2 Tertiary Treatment ...................................................................................... 5.34 5.6.3 2010 ESR Recommendations ................................................................... 5.34 5.6.4 BioMag Technology Update .................................................................... 5.36 5.6.5 2015 Master Plan Update Recommendation ........................................ 5.37

6.0 COST ESTIMATES & TIMING .........................................................................................6.1

6.1 TIMING OF INFRASTRUCTURE ......................................................................................... 6.2

6.2 EA SCHEDULE .................................................................................................................. 6.3

7.0 RECOMMENDED SOLUTIONS ......................................................................................7.1

8.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................8.1

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1: Historical & Projected Serviced Population ......................................................... 3.4 Table 4-1: Projected Residential Serviced Populations ........................................................ 4.1 Table 4-2: Historic Water Consumption – North Grenville Municipal Water Supply ......... 4.2 Table 4-3: Estimated Potable Water Demands ..................................................................... 4.3 Table 4-4: Require Fireflow as per MOE Standards ............................................................... 4.4 Table 4-5: Existing Well and Pump Capacities ....................................................................... 4.5 Table 4-6: At Grade Reservoir Storage Capacity ................................................................. 4.6 Table 4-7: Storage Requirements Using MOE Formula A+B+C ............................................ 4.6 Table 4-8: Rated Capacities of Existing High Lift Pumps ...................................................... 4.7 Table 4-9: Historical Flow Monitoring Data ............................................................................. 4.9 Table 4-10: Future Projected ADF and PDF .......................................................................... 4.10 Table 4-11: Provincial Quality Monitoring Network Phosphorus Concentrations

(RVCA, 2015) ......................................................................................................... 4.12 Table 4-12: Effluent Phosphorus Loading using effluent objective of 0.15Mg/L ............. 4.12 Table 5-1: Source Capacity Expansion Requirements ......................................................... 5.5 Table 5-2: Future Storage Expansion Requirements.............................................................. 5.8 Table 5-3: Northwest Quadrant Sewer Layout Alternatives Economic Comparison ..... 5.24 Table 5-4: East Quadrant Sewer Layout Alternatives Economic Comparison ................ 5.30 Table 5-5 Preliminary Preferred Design Concept Summary .............................................. 5.36 Table 6-1: Summary of Estimated Capital Costs for New Infrastructure (2014 dollars) .... 6.2 Table 6-2: Required EA Studies ................................................................................................ 6.3


sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx iii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: Kemptville Urban Service Area ............................................................................. 1.2 Figure 2-1: Municipal EA Planning and Design Process........................................................ 2.2 Figure 3-1: Wetland and Direct Fish Habitats in the Northwest Quadrant ........................ 3.2 Figure 4-1: Historical and Projected ADF and PDF .............................................................. 4.11 Figure 4-2: Historical and Projected ADF per Capita ......................................................... 4.14 Figure 5-1: Proposed Well Locations (Finley, 2013)................................................................ 5.2 Figure 5-2: Northwest Quadrant New Well Location ............................................................ 5.3 Figure 5-3: East Quadrant New Well Location ....................................................................... 5.4 Figure 5-4: Potable Water Supply Needs ................................................................................ 5.6 Figure 5-5: Source Locations .................................................................................................... 5.7 Figure 5-6: Proposed Watermain System Layout (2005 Master Plan) ............................... 5.10 Figure 5-7: Northwest Quadrant Proposed Watermain Layout......................................... 5.11 Figure 5-8: East Quadrant Proposed Watermain Layout ................................................... 5.12 Figure 5-9: Proposed Sanitary Sewer System Layout (2005 Master Plan) ......................... 5.13 Figure 5-10: Central Region Development Areas ............................................................... 5.14 Figure 5-11: North West Quadrant Land Use ....................................................................... 5.16 Figure 5-12: North West Quadrant Development Phasing and Wastewater Facilities .. 5.17 Figure 5-13: North West Quadrant Sanitary Sewer Alignment ........................................... 5.18 Figure 5-14: Northwest Quadrant Servicing Alternative 1 .................................................. 5.20 Figure 5-15: Northwest Quadrant Servicing Alternative 2 .................................................. 5.21 Figure 5-16: Northwest Quadrant Servicing Alternative 3 .................................................. 5.22 Figure 5-17: Northwest Quadrant Servicing Alternative 4 .................................................. 5.23 Figure 5-18: East Quadrant Land Use .................................................................................... 5.25 Figure 5-19: East Quadrant Development Phasing and Wastewater Facilities .............. 5.26 Figure 5-20: East Quadrant Initial Pipe Layout ..................................................................... 5.27 Figure 5-21: East Quadrant Servicing Alternative 1 ............................................................ 5.29 Figure 5-22: East Quadrant Servicing Alternative 2 ............................................................ 5.30

LIST OF APPENDICES

PUBLIC CONSULTATION ............................................................................ A.1 APPENDIX A

REVIEW AGENCY AND STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION .......................... B.1 APPENDIX BB.1 Review Agencies & Stakeholder Contact List ........................................................... B.2 B.2 Criteria for evaluating potential for built heritage resources and cultural

heritage landscapes checklist..................................................................................... B.4 B.3 Archaeological potential evaluation checklist ........................................................ B.6

COSTING ................................................................................................... C.1 APPENDIX C


sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx i

Executive Summary

The Municipality of North Grenville engaged the services of Stantec Consulting Ltd. in the

development of a Water and Wastewater Master Plan Update to evaluate servicing alternatives

to accommodate anticipated development. The Master Plan identifies major components of

the potable water and wastewater infrastructure including source water, storage, distribution,

collection and treatment. The report addresses the potable water and wastewater needs of

areas anticipated to be developed within the existing Town boundaries as well as future

development projected to occur outside the existing urban area. The Municipality provided

growth projections which show the existing population of 5000 persons expanding to 15,152

persons by the build-out year of 2034 - representing a tripling of the existing serviced population.

Land uses have been designated to development areas within the Town boundary to

accommodate this growth. It should be noted that studies on the heritage and archaeological

potential of each area as well as updated wetland mapping should be examined prior to the

development of each region. The report currently shows wetland mapping from 2009. The

Master Plan was prepared in accordance with Phase 1 and 2 requirements of the Municipal

Engineers Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Process.

Two new source water wells, one in the East Quadrant and one in the Northwest Quadrant, were

previously identified in planning studies and are under various stages of implementation. With

one of those wells set to be commissioned shortly, the existing water source capacity is

expected to meet the anticipated peak daily need in 2015 and the second in 2018. At-grade

storage is also planned to be provided on the sites of the new groundwater sources. Following

the commissioning of the new well in 2015, it is recommended that the Municipality consider

reviewing the opportunity to rerate the existing wells to maximize the existing well capacities. An

allowance of an additional 300m3/d is assumed for the additional source capacity attributed to

rerating however this has to be confirmed through hydrogeological studies.

Each new well proposed is assumed to provide an increase of 2000m3/d in firm well supply and

1370m3 in additional storage. Using similar well capacities for each future well, four additional

increases in source and storage capacity would be required to meet the demands of the

anticipated service populations in 2034. These increases are projected to be required in the

years 2024, 2029, and 2033. These wells are not expected to be built within existing Town urban

boundaries as the capture zone boundaries of the existing wells extend to the Town limits. New

transmission watermains will be required for the servicing of both the East and West Quadrant

and are to be developed as required.

A certain level of uncertainty is present with the expansion of municipal wells into the

neighbouring rural setting. The Municipality is encouraged to carry out an assessment of costs

associated with a future surface water supply from the Rideau River versus the expansion of the

existing groundwater system into the rural area. Following the construction of the proposed wells

in 2015, 2017 and 2018, the next source water milestone is 2024 – the source water study should

be carried out as soon as possible as the information will be required to meet the 2024 milestone.


sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx ii

The additional high lift pumping requirements and additional reservoir storage requirements

needed to meet existing and future needs have been identified. In the interim, two new ground

water pumping stations complete with storage reservoirs are deemed the preferred alternative

to meet the existing and short term growth. However, based on the significant growth now

anticipated for the community, increased fire flow, increased susceptibility to power outages,

and the rising costs of electricity provide viable reasons for the Municipality to consider the

option of constructing an elevated storage facility.

Beyond the recommended interim storage alternatives, the Municipality is recommended to

carry out an energy cost analysis of the reservoir storage and high lift pumping scenario versus a

system with an elevated storage tank. It is recommended that this assessment is carried out in

the near future, well ahead of the 2024 source water expansion milestone.

A preferred wastewater servicing concept has been identified to service the growth areas and

consists of gravity sewers, forcemains and pump stations. All wastewater from the new

development areas is to be conveyed via forcemain to the existing wastewater treatment plant.

Although significant reduction in wastewater production per capita has occurred since the last

Master Plan in 2005, the anticipated high growth rate in coming years requires a significant

expansion to the wastewater treatment facilities. Although a full plant expansion is not required

until 2027, the design process is recommended to begin in 2024.

It is recommended that processes to reduce the total phosphorus levels be implemented as

soon as possible, to minimize the potential for aesthetic deterioration of the Rideau River. The

Rideau Valley Conservation Authority has suggested that, given the rising levels of total

phosphorus from uncontrolled sources throughout the watercourse, the output from the

wastewater treatment plant should be limited to the average contribution monitored to occur

between the years 2001 and 2014. This limit in contribution is intended to maintain the

phosphorus concentration in the Rideau River below 0.3 mg/L.

A layout of the transmission watermains and trunk sanitary sewer mains is provided in the Master

Plan. The proposed alignments for both transmission mains ensure the anticipated identified

development areas can be effectively serviced, while maximizing the redundancy and looping

provided.

A plot of land has been apportioned for the creation of a new wastewater pump station to

service the Northwest Quadrant. The creation of a new twinned forcemain to transmit the

wastewater from this pump station to the wastewater treatment plant will be required eventually

and is shown to travel along the existing Veterans Way road. The pump station in the East

quadrant will require expansion to the existing wet well and modifications to the pumps to

accommodate the additional flow anticipated to be produced by new development. A new

forcemain larger in size to accommodate the new flow is required and should follow the same

path to the wastewater treatment plant as the existing forcemain (i.e. twinned). The existing

forcemain will provide redundancy for the pumping station.


sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx iii

The estimated total capital cost for all infrastructure expected to be required for development

up the year 2034 is $86.4M (in 2014 dollars). This value may be reduced with the potential

elimination of the equalization storage project. The interim cost to support existing needs in the

near future is estimated at $16.4M (in 2014 dollars).


Introduction

December 11, 2015

sl \\cd1218-f02\01-634\active\1634_01237\planning\report\rpt_ng_w&ww_mp_final_2016jan22.docx 1.1

1.0 Introduction

The Municipality of North Grenville has retained Stantec Consulting Ltd. to update the 2005

Servicing Master Plan (SMP) to determine the major potable water and wastewater

infrastructure necessary for development of the Kemptville Urban Service Area. This document was prepared to meet the requirements of Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Engineer’s Class EA

Master planning process. The first phase of the Master Plan is to define the problem and identify

opportunities. The main objective of a Phase 2 EA is to identify and evaluate alternative

solutions that will accommodate the proposed growth of North Grenville.

1.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The purpose of the Water and Wastewater (W&WW) Master Plan Update (MPU) is to establish a

framework to address the water and sewer infrastructure requirements for the Kemptville Urban

Services Area, as identified in the most recent North Grenville Official Plan. For growth to occur,

the Municipality needs to address current potable water source, storage and distribution

limitations in addition to sewage collection, pumping, treatment and disposal limitations. The

purpose of this study is to produce an MPU that improves and extends services, identifies

required capacity for both water supply and sewage treatment, and provides a prioritized

action plan for infrastructure investment.

This 2015 MP update:

Assesses the Municipality’s existing water and wastewater infrastructure;

Updates the constraints and opportunities to the provision of efficient and effective

infrastructure services for the planning timeline;

Provides a document which can be used to identify and prioritize capital water and

wastewater investments; and

Provides a document for use by local developers to validate business cases for the

potential development of their lands within the Municipality’s boundary.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF STUDY AREA

The Kemptville Urban Service Area refers to an area in the Municipality identified as the former

Town of Kemptville that is serviced by municipal water and wastewater services. This area

represents the majority of residential, commercial and business growth in North Grenville. The

Kemptville Urban Service Area functions as the primary urban density residential area for the

Municipality and serves as the retail, cultural, service and employment center. The land is

classified into 3 phases based on the expected timeline of development. In Figure 1-1 below

green represents currently developed land (or land expected to develop first), yellow is the

second phase of development, and red is the final phase of development. It should be noted

that the provided Wetland mapping is from 2009 and so updated wetland mapping should be

referenced prior to the initiation of any development.


Introduction

December 11, 2015


Figure 1-1: Kemptville Urban Service Area


Environmental Assessment Process

December 11, 2015


2.0 Environmental Assessment Process

2.1 SCOPE OF WATER MASTER PLAN

The Master Plan provides a framework to which future infrastructure requirements can be

assessed and evaluated. The Municipal Class EA process identifies four approaches which can

be followed to complete the Master Planning process. The intent of this Master Plan is to follow

Approach #1 as outlined in the June 2011 Municipal Class EA document. This approach entails

the preparation of a Master Plan that is prepared at the conclusion of and satisfies the

requirements of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Municipal Class EA process. Phase 1 of the Class EA

process identifies the problems or deficiencies in the system. Phase 2 identifies the alternative

solutions to address the problems and establish the preferred solution. This Master Plan provides

a basis for future investigations in the later Phases of the Class EA process for specific Schedule B

and Schedule C projects identified. Further and more detailed investigation would be required

to fulfill the Class EA requirements of those projects. Prior to the selection of the preferred

alternatives, the Master Plan Update will be made available to the public for comment, as

public consultation is a requirement of the Class EA process.

2.2 CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND MASTER PLANNING

The June 2000 Municipal Class EA document describes the inter-relationship between the Master

Planning Process and the Class EA. The Master Plan process must incorporate the principles of

the Class EA and must include public consultation to ensure its validity. However, following

completion of the Master Plan, the Class EA process will still be required for individual projects.

With an appropriate Master Plan, the EA requirements for these individual projects will be

minimized. The purpose of the Master Plan is therefore to support the further requirements of

these EAs, and the work undertaken in the Master Plan can be used as part of the EA, regardless

of the EA Schedule. Figure 2-1 outlines the various steps in the Class EA process.



December 11, 2015


Figure 2-1: Municipal EA Planning and Design Process



December 11, 2015


2.3 PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Following council’s review and acceptance of the findings of the draft report, the 1st mandatory

public contact was made. A notice, to provide information regarding the draft Master Plan

Update and to invite public input, was posted in the local newspapers and was sent to review

agencies and stakeholders.

The Municipality scheduled an Open House for the Master Plan Update on June 9th 2015. Details

of the Open House were also advertised in the newspaper and published on the Municipality’s

website. Members of the general public were invited to the Open House to review findings of

the draft Water and Wastewater Master Plan Update. A copy of the draft Master Plan Update

was placed on file at the Municipal Office for public viewing. The Open House attendance

sheet and public comments received are published in Appendix A.

Review agencies and stakeholders were invited to provide comments and input in the planning

process. Appendix B provides the list of review agencies and stakeholders to be contacted

along with any correspondence from those groups.

Following the notice of 1st mandatory public contact on June 9th 2015, after a review period of 7

months, a notice of completion will be issued fulfilling the 2nd mandatory public contact of a

phase 2 Class EA. Interested persons will be provided a final opportunity to provide written

comment to the Municipality within 30 days of issuance of the Notice of Completion. If concerns

arise regarding this project, which cannot be resolved in discussion with the Municipality, a

person or part may request that the Minister of Environment make an order for the project to

complete with Part II of the Environmental Assessment Act (referred to as a Part II Order), which

addresses individual environment assessments. Requests must be received by the Minister within

30 calendar days of the issuance of the Notice of Completion. A copy of the request must also

be sent to the Town Engineer. If there is no requests received within 30 days, the Master Plan

Update will be considered finalized. The notice of completion is published in Appendix A.


Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


3.0 Existing Conditions

3.1 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

As part of the 2005 Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process, an inventory of the

natural environment and a review of the geotechnical constraints were completed for the

Urban Service Area. The following section provides a summary of the natural environment

findings. Any projects listed in this MPU requiring additional EA work may require more discreet

inventories of the natural environment specific to their project locations and would be carried

out accordingly as required.

3.1.1 Soils

The study area consists primarily of glacial till deposits, offshore marine clay deposits, and near

shore fine to medium sand deposits. Further, the thickness of the overburden deposits is in the

range of approximately 2m and 12m with an average depth of 6m. Additionally, the presence

of minor bedrock outcrops within the study area is to be noted. The majority of the study area

contains glacial deposits. In the central and western region of the study area, there are localized

areas of drumlinized glacial till which consists of numerous cobbles and boulders in a sandy silt to

clay matrix. East of Kemptville, offshore marine deposits are found in localized areas. These

deposits consist of clay, silty clay and silt, possible locally overlain by thin sand layers. The

northern portion of the study area is underlain by near shore fine to medium grained sand

deposits.

3.1.2 Topography

Within the study area, the topography ranges from an elevation of 85 m to 95m. The lowest lying

areas are found along Kemptville Creek. The elevation in the East Quadrant ranges from 85 to

90m.The elevation gradually increases towards the west, with elevations of 90 to 95m in the West

Quadrant. Areas north of the study area are also relatively low and flat with an elevation at 90m.

West of the study area, there are a few localized areas of elevations of 100m.

3.1.3 Vegetation & Wildlife

A portion of the proposed development area in the Northwest Quadrant was identified by the

Ministry of Natural Resources as containing a wetland. A study was completed by Niblet

Environmental Associates LTD. which identified the size and location of this wetland. The wetland

was found to have a total area of 75 hectares and its location is shown in Figure 3-1 below. A

direct fish habitat study was completed on the wetland area as well. Areas with potential

aquatic species sensitivities are identified in Figure 3-1 below as well. Site specific species at risk

evaluations are to be completed as part of the development process for each land area within

the development region.


Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


Figure 3-1: Wetland and Direct Fish Habitats in the Northwest Quadrant

A portion of the Northeast quadrant was also identified as containing wetland area as seen on

Rideau Valley Conservation Authority 2015 mapping. Wetland mapping from the North Grenville

Official Plan (2009) was used in this report as updated mapping showing this wetland was not

available. The location of this wetland area may limit the capacity of the land for future

development, and further analysis will have to be completed on a site by site basis to determine

the suitability of land for development. This report accounts for the servicing of these lands

assuming full development is able to take place.

3.1.4 Kemptville Creek Watershed

The study area lies in the Kemptville Creek watershed and covers an area of 458 km2. The

watershed has a flat topography and relatively low flows and volumes. The Kemptville Creek

runs north up to the Rideau River and is the second largest tributary to the Rideau River. The

creek is approximately 63 km long and has two tributaries, which are located south of the study

area: Barnes Creek and the North Branch. The water quality of Kemptville Creek within and


Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


downstream of the former Town of Kemptville is reported to be degraded. Bacteria and

phosphorus levels regularly exceed the provincial water quality objectives (Kemptville Creek

Watershed Management Plan, 1999, Rideau Valley Conservation Authority).

3.1.5 Rideau River

At the point of confluence with Kemptville Creek, the Rideau River is part of the Lower Rideau

Watershed, and has a drainage area of 800 km2. The Rideau River is 95 km long and starts near

Smiths Falls at Upper Rideau Lake, and flows northward to Ottawa where it meets the Ottawa

River. In the Kemptville area (between Burrits Rapids and Kars), fish are abundant and diverse

due to suitable areas for spawning. This section of the river has large cattail beds and plenty of

bays and inlets.

3.1.6 Water Crossings

Waterways and their associated fish habitat within the Municipality are designated as natural

features. The Rideau River runs north of the study area, while Kemptville Creek bisects the Town

of Kemptville and joins with the Rideau River in the north. At the point of confluence with

Kemptville Creek, the Rideau River has a drainage area of 409 km2. Lower flows in the summer

were reported to be less than 3.0m3/s. In comparison, Kemptville Creek has recorded flows less

than 0.1m3/s in the summer. Lower flow rates limit the ability for watercourses to assimilate

pollution loadings (Wastewater Treatment Environmental Assessment Report, November 1986,

Gore & Storrie Limited). Approximately 20m south of the County Road 43 Bridge, a small wetland

pocket within the creek is present. A stream assessment-monitoring site located 800m upstream

of the proposed forcemain crossing was established by the Rideau Valley Conservation

Authority. At this site, the water quality is considered to be fair. A warm water fish community

was also identified at this site. Another water crossing that is identified is located at Van Buren

Street and Barnes Creek (a tributary to the Kemptville Creek). There are other existing low-lying

regions in the Northwest quadrant of North Grenville in the proposed development areas. A

notable portion of this region spans on both sides of Somerville Road, South of County Road 43

and North of County Road 18.

3.1.7 Environmentally Significant Areas

The Ministry of Natural Resources has a system of identifying and encouraging protection of

environmentally significant areas through its ANSI (Areas of Natural and/or Scientific Interest)

program. ANSIs can be considered to have provincial, regional, or local significance. They

identify areas that are of natural (life science) or geological (earth science) interest. Based on

mapping provided by the Ministry of Natural Resources, there are no ANSI areas within the study

area.

3.1.8 Sites with Archaeological or Heritage Potential

The Criteria for Evaluating Potential for Built Heritage Resources and Cultural Heritage

Landscapes checklist was completed for the development areas. This item is attached in


Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


Appendix B.2. Several heritage resources were identified within the areas proposed for

development. Therefore additional studies will need to be completed on a site by site basis as

development proceeds to identify areas containing built heritage resources or cultural heritage

landscapes. Mapping of locations identified as having Heritage potential is provided in

Appendix B.2.

The Archeological Potential Evaluation checklist was completed for the proposed development

area and is provided in Appendix B.3. This analysis identified several registered archaeological

sites and confirmed the regions potential archaeological significance. It is recommended that a

Stage 1 archaeological assessment be completed at the time of development for all areas.

Where archaeological significance potential is observed further assessment will be required. It

should also be noted that two archaeological assessments have been completed in the area,

and so development area included in these completed analyses will not require a secondary

analysis. More information is provided in Appendix B.3.

3.2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT

3.2.1 Population

Kemptville’s population, as per 2006 census data, was approximated at 3550 persons in 2005.

Service population estimates for future years were formed based on meter records and average

household size data. This method was used to estimate populations up to the year 2014, as can

be seen in Table 3-1 below. The 2014 population is estimated at 5000 persons. This represents a

total population growth rate of approximately 3.9% per annum over the preceding 10 years.

A 20-year average growth rate of 5.7% per annum has been suggested by the Municipality of

North Grenville for the next 20 years. Table 3-1 below provides the extrapolated population

estimates up to the build-out period of 2034. The final build-out population is estimated at 15,152

persons. These populations were used to estimate the per capita consumption and production

rates for future years.

Table 3-1: Historical & Projected Serviced Population

Year Historical & Projected

Serviced Population

Source

2005 3,550 2006 Census

2006 3,727 Interpolated







Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


Year Historical & Projected

Serviced Population

Source



2014 5,000 Extracted from Data

2015 5,285 Extrapolated




















3.2.2 Land Use and Planning - Official Plan

New development in the Kemptville Urban Service Area is encouraged to take place adjacent

to the existing build-up area. There are three regions within existing Kemptville Town limit that are

anticipated to be developed in the next 20 years. For the purposes of this study development

regions have been divided into three categories: Areas within existing development, the

Northwest quadrant and the East Quadrant.


Existing Conditions

December 11, 2015


Three phases of development have been identified and all development areas have been

categorized within these phases according to their anticipated development timeline. A

diagram showing the land phasing designations for the development areas is provided

Figure 1-1 in this report.

Land use within the existing serviced area and development areas has been categorized under

one of the seven following designations: residential, downtown commercial, highway

commercial, economic enterprise, industrial, parks and open space or agriculture. Particular

areas have also received secondary designations of agriculture, rural, rural residential,

environmental hazards and constraints and natural heritage. Diagrams showing the

development areas land designations are provided in Figure 5-11 and Figure 5-18 in this report.

Density and growth parameters were identified in the North Grenville 2010 Official Plan. The

residential development is anticipated to occur at a minimum density of 15 units per gross

hectare and a maximum density of 33 units per gross hectare. The maximum density of 33 units

per hectare was utilized for all planning purposes in this report.

It should be noted that the Northern portion of residential development in the East Quadrant

contains a portion of unevaluated wetland, which may limit the amount of development able

to occur on the land. An analysis should be completed closer to the time this land is to be

developed to determine the actual density and growth parameters that should be applied. The

current analysis accounts for all land being developed, which is a conservative approach for

design. The mapping available for this report did not include this portion of wetland, thus

updated mapping must be referred to evaluate this.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


4.0 Design Parameters

4.1 POPULATION AND GROWTH

The serviced population of North Grenville is projected to grow from the 2014 population of

5000 persons at a rate of 5.7% per year until 2034 to a final build-out population of 15,152

persons.

The build-out populations for each development area were determined using the land use

designation and density parameters provided in the Municipality of North Grenville Design

Standards and 2010 Official Plan. For residential use land, a housing density of 33 units per

hectare was used with an expected population density of 2.5 persons per unit. For commercial

areas, a floor area per hectare ratio of 0.4 was assumed. For institutional land, a population of

500 students was assumed for a new elementary school projected to be built.

The build-out populations for each area were summed according to the land use phasing to

determine the population growth anticipated in each phase. The 2014 population estimate of

5000 persons was subtracted from the anticipated buildout population to determine the

anticipated total capacity of growth areas. This buildout population was used along with the

phase population estimates to determine the quantity of each phase expected to be

developed by 2034. This results in 100% of the phase I development and 50% of the phase 2

development to meet the build out projection of 15,152 persons. These percentages were

used to determine the population anticipated to be developed in each region as summarized

below in Table 4-1 below. This estimate was used to determine the anticipated scheduling for

required infrastructure works.

Table 4-1: Projected Residential Serviced Populations

Growth Area Projected Serviced Population

Within former Town Limits

(includes existing services) 5000 persons

Central Region 2546 persons

East Quadrant 2419 persons

Norwest Quadrant 5186 persons

Build out (2034) Total 15,152 persons


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


4.2 POTABLE WATER DESIGN PARAMETERS

4.2.1 Historical Demands

The historic potable water demands presented in Table 4-2 for the years 1993 to 2004 were

obtained from the 1997 Water Optimization Study (1993-1996) and from the Municipality’s

quarterly water quality reports (2002-2004). Potable water demands for the years 2005 to 2013

were obtained from service population estimates, meter records and average household size

data. A relatively linear decrease in unit demands throughout the monitoring period is shown

in Table 4-2 below.

Table 4-2: Historic Water Consumption – North Grenville Municipal Water Supply

Year AVDY (m3/d) AVDY1 (Lpcd) MXDY (m3/d)

1993 1706 660 2548

1994 1861 696 3417

1995 1861 673 3446

1996 1703 597 3284

-

2002 1488 442 3135

2003 1548 452 3441

2004 1581 453 3254

2005 1508 425 3,247

2006 1462 392 3,148

2007 1525 290 3,283

2008 1840 448 3,962

2009 2111 490 4,545

2010 1860 411 4,005

2011 1712 360 3,686

2012 1540 309 3,316

2013 1503 287 3,236 1 Per capita usage determined using populations in Table 3-1: Historical & Projected

Serviced Population.

4.2.2 Design Flow

The Ontario Ministry of Environment’s (MOE) Guidelines for the Design of Water Distribution

Systems states that for design purposes, existing reliable records for average day, maximum

day and peak rates should be used wherever possible.

Historically, Kemptville has experienced very high mixed-use AVDY flows. Mixed-use flows

include residential, institutional, commercial and industrial users along with an allowance for

leakage. In the 1997 Water System Optimization Study, leakage accounted for up to 28% of

the water usage in North Grenville. The Municipality has since taken steps to reduce leakage

and water wasting. Table 4-2 was used to determine the highest average day per capita flow


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


of 360Lpcd for the last three years (2011-2013). This is a significant decrease from the three

years preceding 2011 (2008-2010), where the highest average per capita flow was calculated

at 490Lpcd.

For planning purposes a mixed-use flow rate of 360 Lpcd was used for the well capacity

analyses, and will be used in the determination of demands up to 2034. It is noted that this flow

rate allows for a level of ICI growth that is currently within the Urban Service Area and includes

capacity for facilities such as schools, local businesses and limited industry; it also includes an

allowance for unaccounted for water.

The design for new watermain systems have demands applied as per the specific land use, as

outlined in Section 4.1. For residential land a housing density of 33 units per hectare was used

with an expected population density of 2.5 persons per unit. A flow per capita of 325 Lpcd was

assumed as per the design guidelines for strictly residential areas. For commercial areas a

water demand of 4 litres per day per meter squared of floor area was assumed with an

assumed floor area per hectare ratio of 0.4. For institutional land, a population of 500 students

was assumed for the elementary school to be built. A flow of 100 L/d/student was assumed for

demand. It is noted that special provisions will have to be considered for industrial

developments that wish to use more water than is being allocated.

The total estimated potable water demands for 2034 development in each region is

summarized in Table 4-3 below.

Table 4-3: Estimated Potable Water Demands

Mixed Use

Population

(persons)

AVDY

Demand

(m3/d)

MXDY

Demand

(m3/d)

Existing Services 5,000 1,800 3,875

Central Region Growth 2,546 917 1,973

East Quadrant Growth 2,491 871 1,875

Northwest Quadrant

Growth 5,186 1,867 4,022

Total 2034: 15,152 5,455 11,744

4.2.3 Fire Flow Requirements

A population based equation derived from section 8.4.2 of the MOE Design Guidelines for

Drinking Water Systems (Ministry of the Environment, 2008) was used to determine the required

fireflow. This guideline also dictates a minimum residual pressure of 140 kPa must be

maintained at all times during fireflow. According to the North Grenville Design Guidelines, this


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


fireflow must be achieved in conjunction with maximum day demands. The required fireflow

capacity for each year of proposed development is provided in Table 4-4 below. It can be

noted that the MOE fire flow increases from 2 to 3 hours based on the projected population

expansion.

Table 4-4: Require Fireflow as per MOE Standards

Year Population

(persons)

MOE Fireflow

Demand (L/s)

MOE Fireflow

(Hours)

2014 5,000 138 2.0

2015 5,285 142 2.0

2016 5,586 146 2.0

2017 5,905 150 2.0

2018 6,241 155 3.0

2019 6,597 159 3.0

2020 6,973 163 3.0

2021 7,370 168 3.0

2022 7,791 173 3.0

2023 8,235 177 3.0

2024 8,704 182 3.0

2025 9,200 188 3.0

2026 9,725 193 3.0

2027 10,279 198 3.0

2028 10,865 204 3.0

2029 11,484 209 3.0

2030 12,139 215 3.0

2031 12,831 221 3.0

2032 13,562 227 3.0

2033 14,335 234 3.0

2034 15,152 240 3.0

4.2.4 Source Capacity Requirements

The Province of Ontario is a member of the Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River Board of State

Public Health & Environmental Manager’s Water Supply Committee which publishes the “10

State Standards”. The Province of Ontario has been a member of this committee since 1978

and recognizes the requirements of these Standards. The 2003 & 2012 versions of the 10 State

Standards state in Section 3.2.1.1 Source Capacity:

“The total developed groundwater source capacity, unless otherwise

specified by the reviewing authority, shall equal or exceed the design

maximum day demand with the largest producing well out of service”.

Previously, the standards were less onerous in that the 1997 version of the 10 State Standards

stated in Section 3.2.1.1 Source Capacity:


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


“The total developed groundwater source capacity shall equal or exceed the design

maximum day demand and equal or exceed the design average day demand with

the largest producing well out of service.”

The existing source capacities are presented in Table 4-5 below. The existing firm capacity of

2,618m3/d is not sufficient to meet the 2014 MXDY demand of 3,875m3/d. The existing firm

capacity is however sufficient to meet the 2014 AVDY demand of 1,800m3/d and the existing

total capacity of 4,579m3/d is sufficient to meet the existing 2014 demand of 3,875m3/d.

In summary, the existing system meets the intent of the previous 1997 10 State Standards but

does not meet the requirements of the revised 2003/2012 standards. Going forward, to provide

a higher level of service and system redundancy and to be up to date with the most recent

standard, the Master Plan Update will follow the latest 10 State Standards objective for firm

capacity.

The 2034 firm capacity for source water is 11,744m3/d based on the projections in Table 4-3.

An additional 9,126m3/d of firm source capacity is needed to meet the 20-year projection and

is equivalent to five (5) new 2,000m3/d wells.

Table 4-5: Existing Well and Pump Capacities

Well

Daily Allowable Bulk

Capacity

(m3/d)

Van Buren 1309

Alfred 2 1,961

Kernahan 1,309

Total Capacity: 4,579

Firm Capacity: 2,618

2014 MXDY Required: 3,875

2014 Firm Capacity Surplus/Deficit: -1,257

2034 MXDY Required: 11,744

2034 Firm Capacity Surplus/Deficit: -9,126

4.2.5 Storage Requirements

Storage reservoirs located at each of the pumping stations provide the necessary storage for

equalization, emergency and fire.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


Table 4-6: At Grade Reservoir Storage Capacity below summarizes the existing storage

capacities of the reservoirs. The total effective storage capacity of the reservoirs (including the

latest Kernahan Reservoir upgrade) is 3154m3.

Table 4-6: At Grade Reservoir Storage Capacity

Reservoir Storage Volume

Location Total Effective

Alfred Pumping Station 929 m3 801 m3

Van Buren Pumping Station 929 m3 880 m3

Kernahan Pumping Station 900 m3 900 m3

Equinelle Reservoir 573 m3 573 m3

Total existing storage 3,154 m3

The MOE Design Guidelines outline the method for determining the storage requirements for a

municipal water distribution system. This storage calculation formula has three components;

fire (A), maximum day (B) and emergency (C). Table 4-7 presents the storage requirements for

the projected residential population and demands noted in Table 4-3. It is noted per the 2008

MOE design guideline Section 8.4.1Chemical Disinfection Contact & Water Treatment Plant

Storage:

“Any volume required to provide chemical disinfection contact time is not available for

storage and should not be included in storage calculations.”

To meet the MOE storage requirements, additional storage is required for both present and

future demand. If a portion of the storage reservoirs are used for contact time disinfection

purposes, the additional storage requirement increases accordingly by the amount needed

for contact time – it is recommended that the Municipality review its current contact time

requirements to determine the available storage for balancing, fire and emergency needs.

Table 4-7: Storage Requirements Using MOE Formula A+B+C

Residential

Population

Fire

(L/s)

Duration

(hrs)

MXDY1

(m3/d)

A

(m3)

B

(m3)

C

(m3)

Total

Storage

Req’d (m3)

Additional

Storage

Req’d* (m3)

5,000 138 2 4258 997 1,065 515 2,577 0

8,704 182 3 6,746 1,687 914 4,571 4,571 1417

15,152 240 3 11,744 2,596 2,936 1,383 6,915 3761

*Additional volume for Contact Time disinfection to be considered in future storage needs.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


4.2.6 Pumping Requirements

Water is pumped into the distribution system from the reservoirs using high lift pumps. Each

existing pumping station currently has two domestic pumps and one fire pump. Table 4-8

below summarizes the rated capacities of each high lift pump. To meet the high lift pumping

requirements, the pump stations have to satisfy two high demand conditions; peak hour

demands and maximum day plus fireflow demands.

Table 4-8: Rated Capacities of Existing High Lift Pumps

Pumping

Station Pump # Type

Rated Capacity

All Pumps Domestic

Pumps

Fire

Pumps

TDH

(L/s) (m3/d) (m3/d) (m)

Van Buren

Pump #1 Domestic 15.0 1296 48.8

Pump #2 Domestic 11.4 985 42.7

Pump #3* Fire 37.8 3266 71.0

Alfred

Pump #1 Domestic 12.0 1037 48.8

Pump #2 Domestic 18.9 1633 48.8

Pump #3 Fire - Electric 38.0 3283 70.0

Kernahan

Pump #1 Domestic 13.0 1123 56.8

Pump #2 Domestic 20.0 1728 56.0

Pump #3 Fire 50.0 4320 70.0

Existing Total High Lift Pumping Capacity: 7,802 10,869

Existing Firm High Lift Pumping Capacity: 6,074 9,400*

2014 PKHR Demand: 5,813

2014 Firm Domestic Pumping Capacity Surplus/Deficit: +261

2014 Fireflow Demand: 15,837

2014 Firm Fire Pumping Capacity Surplus/Deficit: -6,437

*Assumes fire pumps at Van Buren and Alfred in operation with Kernahan Domestic #1.

The 2014 peak hour demand for the North Grenville water distribution system is estimated at

5,813m3/d. The total existing domestic pumping capacity of 7,802m3/d is able to meet this

peak demand. With the largest pump out of service (i.e. firm capacity of 6,074m3/d) the

system has a surplus of 261m3/d of firm pumping under 2014 peak hour demands.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


The 2014 maximum day plus fire flow demand is 15,837m3/d. Although the total pumping

capacity of all pumps exceeds 17,000m3/d, the Total Dynamic Head (TDH) range of the fire

pumps versus the domestic pumps do not allow them to operate concurrently (or at least not

efficiently to their design capacity). The existing total flow capacity with 3 fire pumps in use is

10,869m3/d. If we allow the Van Buren and Alfred fire pumps to operate concurrently with the

Kernahan domestic pumps (i.e. the largest pump out of service being the new Kernahan Fire

Pump), the total available firm pumping for fire conditions is less than 9,400m3/d. This represents

a deficit of 6,437m3/d to meet the design objective for existing maximum day fire flow.

The anticipated 2034 peak daily demand of 17,616m3/d will require an additional 11,542m3/d

of domestic pumping to meet requirements .

Similarly, the anticipated 2034 maximum day fire flow demand of 32,514m3/d will require an

additional 23,114m3/d of high lift pumping capacity.

4.3 WASTEWATER DESIGN PARAMETERS

4.3.1 Historical Flows

The existing wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is a mechanical process with continuous

discharge of treated effluent to the Rideau River. In addition to secondary treatment through

an activated sludge process, the plant provides tertiary nutrient removal followed by

ultraviolet disinfection. Commissioned in 1993, the Kemptville WWTP is designed for an

average day flow of 4510m3/d and a peak flow of 11,370m3/d. The design population for this

facility was 5000 persons or 1667 households. The design flow also included an allowance for

industrial and commercial development.

Table 4-9 provides the historical flow rates through the Kemptville WWTP for the years 1991 to

2013 with some years omitted where data was not available. As shown in the data provided,

there has been a decrease in wastewater treatment influent total flow from 1990 to present.

The decrease in total flow has corresponded with an increase in total population. Thus the

average daily flow per capita has seen a significant decrease in the preceding 25 years.

In correspondence with the Municipality, it was noted that during the late 1990’s a camera

and flushing program was initiated to identify problem areas in the sewage collection system.

The problem areas that were found (approximately 5 km) were replaced or relined in the late

1990’s to reduce infiltration. This initiative appears to have had a significant impact whereby

additional wastewater treatment capacity can be released for future development. The ADF

reached its maximum value in 2008 of 2654 m3/d, after which values began to decline. It is

suspected that the pipe optimization methods implemented around 2008 caused the

significant reduction in flow.

The peak daily flow (PDF) for 2001 to 2007 was also provided by the Municipality. These values

had an average peaking factor of 2.6 as compared to the average daily flows. This average

peaking factor was used in conjunction with the known ADF to estimate the peak design flow


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


from 2007 to 2013. The PDF has thus shown a parallel decrease to the ADF since 2008. The most

recent monitoring data from 2013 shows an ADF of 2034 m3/d and a PDF of 5291 m3/d. The

ADF per capita has been steadily declining from 646 L/c/d in 2008 to 388 L/c/d in 2013.

The above described flow values are summarized in Table 4-9. The estimated PDF values from

2007 onward are in bold italics in the table below.

Table 4-9: Historical Flow Monitoring Data

Year

Historical Average

Day Flows

(m3/d)

Historical Average

Day Flows/Capita

(L/c/d)

Historical & Projected

Peak Day Flows

(m3/d)

Peak

Design Flow

Factor

1991 1781 - - -

1992 1900 - - -

1993 2100 - - -

Data not provided for 1994-1998

1999 2621 840 - -

2000 2383 742 - -

2001 1843 558 6099 3.3 2002 1646 489 3070 1.9 2003 1794 524 4850 2.7 2004 2052 588 5594 2.7 2005 2243 632 7942 3.5 2006 2340 628 6881 2.9 2007 2243 573 8204 3.7 2008 2654 646 6,900 2.6 2009 1965 456 4,935 2.5 2010 2165 478 4,581 2.1 2011 2090 440 6,300 3.0 2012 1636 328 4,365 2.7 2013 2035 388 4,539 2.2

*Note: Bold italic peak design flow values are projected from the average design flow

*1991-1993 data from 2004 URC by Novatech, 1999-2003 data from OCWA PAR, and other

data provided by the Municipality of North Grenville.

The recent years’ historical flow data was used to estimate future ADFs and PDFs. An ADF per

capita estimate of 400L/c/d is applied with the population projections from Table 4-1. A

peaking factor of 2.6 was applied to all future wastewater flow estimations to obtain the peak

daily flow. These calculations result in an expected ADF of 6061m3/d and PDF of 15,758m3/d in

2034. The total flow expected for each population increase is provided in Table 4-10 below.

The timing of upgrades includes consideration for a trigger once the required capacity

reaches 90% of the existing capacity. This allows a factor of safety with respect to design in

case flows exceed the anticipated maximum, or if the construction process for expansion is

delayed. The recommended construction period, to ensure completion of the project prior to


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


it being required, is shown in bold for each required development. The first expansion

represents a doubling of the existing plant capacity required and is shown in 2027, with

construction starting in 2024. A second expansion is not required within the 20 year design

period based on projected growth and demands. The ADF and PDF values are based on a

projected population. These values are subject to change as they are development driven.

Table 4-10: Future Projected ADF and PDF

Year

Projected

Population

(persons)

ADF

(m3/d)

ADF Design Capacity

(m3/d)

PDF

(m3/d)

PDF Design Capacity

(m3/d)

Proposed Deficit/Surplus Proposed Deficit/Surplus

2014 5,000 2,000 4,510 2,510 5,200 11,370 6,170

2015 5,285 2,114 4,510 2,396 5,496 11,370 5,874

2016 5,586 2,234 4,510 2,276 5,810 11,370 5,560

2017 5,905 2,362 4,510 2,148 6,141 11,370 5,229

2018 6,241 2,496 4,510 2,014 6,491 11,370 4,879

2019 6,597 2,639 4,510 1,871 6,861 11,370 4,509

2020 6,973 2,789 4,510 1,721 7,252 11,370 4,118

2021 7,370 2,948 4,510 1,562 7,665 11,370 3,705

2022 7,791 3,116 4,510 1,394 8,102 11,370 3,268

2023 8,235 3,294 4,510 1,216 8,564 11,370 2,806

2024 8,704 3,482 4,510 1,028 9,052 11,370 2,318

2025 9,200 3,680 4,510 830 9,568 11,370 1,802

2026 9,725 3,890 4,510 620 10,114 11,370 1,256

2027 10,279 4,112 9,020 4,908 10,690 21,600 10,910

2028 10,865 4,346 9,020 4,674 11,299 21,600 10,301

2029 11,484 4,594 9,020 4,426 11,943 21,600 9,657

2030 12,139 4,855 9,020 4,165 12,624 21,600 8,976

2031 12,831 5,132 9,020 3,888 13,344 21,600 8,256

2032 13,562 5,425 9,020 3,595 14,104 21,600 7,496

2033 14,335 5,734 9,020 3,286 14,908 21,600 6,692

2034 15,152 6,061 9,020 2,959 15,758 21,600 5,842

The anticipated ADF and PDF, as well as the current and anticipated wastewater treatment

plant capacities are summarized in Figure 4-1 below. As previously noted an expansion is

shown in the year 2027.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


Figure 4-1: Historical and Projected ADF and PDF

The above mentioned reduction in flow postpones the requirement for wastewater treatment

plant expansion previously anticipated to be required in 2015, to 2027. This can be seen visually

in Figure 4-1: Historical and Projected ADF and PDF above. North Grenville is encouraged to

continue advocating for lower water usage and to continue their efforts to decrease

infiltration into the wastewater system. These measures have made a significant reduction in

total inflow, and if continued are expected to significant impact timelines for required

treatment capacity upgrades. It should be noted that these estimates are based on projected

values. Flow monitoring should be completed periodically to confirm actual flows.

The last five years of results indicate that phosphorus effluent averaged on a yearly basis 0.059,

0.058, 0.068, 0.083 and 0.122 mg/L for the years 2010 through 2014 respectively. Results for 2014

showed a spike in phosphorus that was likely due to tertiary filter bypass events. The total

phosphorus concentration in the Rideau River was extracted and averaged for the years 2001-

2014 at the three Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network monitoring stations closest to the

effluent release of the wastewater treatment plant. The results show a total phosphorus

concentration in the Rideau River near the Provincial Water Quality Objective maximum of

0.03mg/l as seen below in Table 4-11. To preserve water quality, it is recommended that there

be no increase to the total phosphorus loading from the average seen between the years

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2004 2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034

Flo

w (

m3

/d)

Year

North Grenville Wastewater Treatment Needs

ADF Historical & Projected ADF Design Capacity

PDF Historical & Projected PDF Design Capacity


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


2001 to 2014. This average value was calculated to be 0.33 mg/l. This concentration results is a

total phosphorus loading 1.1 kg/d less than the specified maximum allowance of 1.4 kg/d for

the treatment plant.

Table 4-11: Provincial Quality Monitoring Network Phosphorus Concentrations (RVCA, 2015)

Station Name Station ID Average Total Phosphorus

Concentration

(mg/l)

Andrewsville Bridge & Rideau River 1803303502 0.022

Highway 43 & Kemptville Creek 18003302902 0.029

Roger Stevens Drive & Rideau River 1803302902 0.028

Based on these results, if the existing plant’s treatment capabilities were reassessed and an

achievable effluent objective of 0.15mg/L was used, the results in Table 4-12 indicate that the

existing treatment technology is not sufficient to meet the phosphorus loading requirements.

The immediate implementation of a phosphorus offsetting program is recommended to

reduce the impact of non-point sources on the Rideau River. Continued efforts to reduce

infiltration and inflow into the system and efforts to mitigate the bypass of tertiary filtration in

the future will assist in limiting the peak phosphorus loadings observed. The use of a higher level

of phosphorus treatment may be required for the wastewater treatment plant in the future,

dependent on the effectiveness of the above mentioned strategies.

Table 4-12: Effluent Phosphorus Loading using effluent objective of 0.15Mg/L

Year Projected

Population

(persons)

ADF

(m3/d)

Anticipated Total

Phosphorus

Loading

(kg/d)

Exceedance over

0.33 kg/d Loading

(kg/d)

Exceedance over

1.4 kg/d Loading

(Kg/d)

2001 3,300 1,843 0.28 0.03 -1.12 2002 3,363 1,646 0.25 -0.05 -1.15 2003 3,425 1,794 0.27 -0.08 -1.13 2004 3,488 2,052 0.31 -0.06 -1.09 2005 3,550 2,243 0.34 -0.02 -1.06 2006 3,711 2,340 0.35 0.01 -1.05 2007 3,872 2,243 0.34 0.02 -1.06 2008 4,033 2,654 0.40 0.01 -1.00 2009 4,194 1,965 0.29 0.07 -1.11 2001 3,300 1,843 0.28 -0.04 -1.12

AVERAGE 0.33 1.09 2010 4,528 2,165 0.32 -0.02 -1.08 2011 4,753 2,090 0.31 -0.08 -1.09 2012 4,990 1,636 0.25 -0.02 -1.15 2013 5,239 2,035 0.31 -0.03 -1.09 2014 5,500 2,475 0.37 -0.01 -1.03 2015 5,813 2,616 0.39 0.01 -1.01


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


2016 6,145 2,765 0.41 0.02 -0.99 2017 6,495 2,923 0.44 0.04 -0.96 2018 6,865 3,089 0.46 0.07 -0.94 2019 7,257 3,266 0.49 0.09 -0.91 2020 7,670 3,452 0.52 0.11 -0.88 2021 8,108 3,648 0.55 0.14 -0.85 2022 8,570 3,856 0.58 0.16 -0.82 2023 9,058 4,076 0.61 0.19 -0.79 2024 9,574 4,308 0.65 0.22 -0.75 2025 10,120 4,554 0.68 0.25 -0.72 2026 10,697 4,814 0.72 0.29 -0.68 2027 11,307 5,088 0.76 0.32 -0.64 2028 11,951 5,378 0.81 0.36 -0.59 2029 12,632 5,685 0.85 0.40 -0.55 2030 13,352 6,009 0.90 0.44 -0.50 2031 14,114 6,351 0.95 0.48 -0.45 2032 14,918 6,713 1.01 0.53 -0.39 2033 15,768 7,096 1.06 0.58 -0.34 2034 16,667 7,500 1.13 0.03 -0.27

With respect to monthly compliance limits, 58 of the 60 months between 2010 and 2014

achieved 0.15mg/L or less for the average effluent water phosphorus. June and July 2014

achieved 0.27 and 0.23mg/L respectively. It is understood that this is potentially related to a

tertiary filter bypass. If the effluent requirement was reduced to 0.15mg/L, these two months

would have been “non-compliance” events. The reason for these spikes in monthly

phosphorus concentrations needs to be fully understood prior to the plant being rerated.

4.3.2 Sanitary Sewage Design Flows - Average Daily Flows (ADF)

In determining the uncommitted reserve capacity of the Wastewater Pollution Control Plant,

the historical records of 14 preceding years were analyzed and the ADF per capita has shown

a decreasing trend. These findings were used to estimate a future ADF per capita rate of

400L/C/D. The observed historical ADF and future projections for ADF are shown in Figure 4-2

below.


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


Figure 4-2: Historical and Projected ADF per Capita

4.3.3 Sanitary Sewage Design Flows - Peak Day Flows (PDF)

Similar to the ADF, the operational records of preceding years were reviewed to determine the

peak day flow (PDF) to be used for design purposes. The average peak factor for the seven

years of peak flow monitoring data provided were used to find an average peaking factor of

2.6 as compared to the ADF. This produces an anticipated build-out PDF of 15,758m3/d by

2034.

4.3.4 Sanitary Sewage Pump Station Requirements

Due to the flat topography of the study area, pump stations are required to transport the

wastewater from the proposed development areas to the treatment plant. The pumping

station requirements for the East and West quadrants were determined using its corresponding

equivalent population and subsequently determining the average and peak design flows for

each quadrant.

The 2034 build-out population pumping requirements were determined using 100% of phase 1

designated flow, and 50% of the designated flow from phase 2. An expansion to

accommodate an additional 60 L/s of flow to the existing East quadrant pump station and wet

well will be required. A future expansion will be required for phase III development as well.

A new pump station will be required to adequately service the Northern portions of East

quadrant development. The capacity for the remaining 50% of phase II development is to be

300

320

340

360

380

400

420

440

460

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

AD

F (L

/c/d

)

Year

Historical and Projected ADF per Capita

Historical ADF Projected ADF


Design Parameters

December 11, 2015


accommodated in this new pump station. This pumping requirement of this area should be

reevaluated closer to the time of development; the value will be dependent on the portion of

land within this region identified as developable for residential construction.

A new pump station, wet well and forcemain for the West Quadrant capable of meeting a

total peak flow of 220 L/s will be required as development of this land proceeds. The 2034

build-out which includes 100% of phase I flow and 50% of phase II flow requires approximately

50 L/s of this flow.


Potable Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Alternatives

December 11, 2015


5.0 Potable Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Alternatives

5.1 POTABLE WATER SOURCE ALTERNATIVES

There were three wells present at the time of the 2005 Master Plan: Van Buren, Alfred 1 and

Kernahan. The 2005 expected flows could be met by these wells but source capacity was

identified as a limiting factor for the future. Four alternatives were provided to address the

source capacity restrictions. The expected 2005 master plan build-out demands were

anticipated to be able to be met with groundwater available in the area and so alternatives

using surface as a source were not considered.

The maximization of existing well capacity was considered but it was determined the firm

capacity still would not meet the average daily demand requirement. The option of

expanding the existing wells to increase well capacity was also examined. This alternative

produced an increased risk for water quality issues in terms of turbidity and pollutant capturing

zones. The expansion of the existing wells has not been ruled out however and a

hydrogeological study to further understand the extent of the risks involved needs to be

completed. The installation of new wells at existing sites was considered, but it was determined

this could create interference between aquifers. The final alternative considered was the

installation of a new well at a new site. This option provided the additional redundancy

required for system expansion and so was determined to be the preferred alternative.

Potential locations for the new well site were outlined in the 2013 Master Plan Update

completed by the Municipality of North Grenville. These locations are outlined in light blue

circles in Figure 5-1 below.



December 11, 2015


Figure 5-1: Proposed Well Locations (Finley, 2013)

Exact plots of land for well locations have since been identified and obtained by the

Municipality. A well location to service the Northwest quadrant is identified in Figure 5-2 below.

The well is represented with a purple reservoir symbol circled in purple. This well is expected to

produce an additional firm well supply of 2,000m3/d.



December 11, 2015


Figure 5-2: Northwest Quadrant New Well Location

The well location for the East quadrant has also been identified and is outlined in Figure 5-3

below. The well is represented with a purple reservoir symbol circled in purple. This well is also

expected to produce an additional firm well supply of 2,000m3/d.



December 11, 2015


Figure 5-3: East Quadrant New Well Location

These wells are expected to supply an additional total source capacity of 4,000m3/d. In 2015,

an allowance for an increase in existing firm well capacity of 300m3/d was included. This

allowance assumes a hydrogeological study is carried out on the existing three wells and

determines that the rated capacities could be increased. The original 2005 Master Plan

identified this alternative as a solution to obtain more capacity out of existing infrastructure

and was supported by historical data suggesting that addition well capacity may exist. The

capacity increase from the two new wells and a proposed well upgrade of 300m3/d is

expected to meet demand requirements until the year 2024, which has a projected serviced

population of 8,704 persons. After 2024, until the build-out period of 2034 an additional source

capacity of 6,000m3/d is required. This corresponds to a build-out population of 15,152 persons.

The required capacity increases with the respective anticipated timeline are summarized in

Table 5-1 below. Each point where a source expansion is required is shown in bold in the table

below. At each of these points the capacity is shown to increase by 2,000m3/d.



December 11, 2015


Table 5-1: Source Capacity Expansion Requirements

Year Population

(persons)

Required Firm

Capacity

(m3/d)

Available

Firm Capacity

(m3/d)

Expansion

Firm Capacity

(m3/d)

Surplus(+)/ Deficit(-)

Firm Well Capacity

(m3/d)

2014 5,000 3,875 2,618 -1,257 2015 5,285 4,096 4,618 2,000 522 2016 5,586 4,330 4,618 288 2017 5,905 4,577 4,918 300 341 2018 6,241 4,837 6,918 2,000 2,080 2019 6,597 5,113 6,918 1,805 2020 6,973 5,405 6,918 1,513 2021 7,370 5,713 6,918 1,205 2022 7,791 6,038 6,918 880 2023 8,235 6,383 6,918 535 2024 8,704 6,746 8,918 2,000 2,172 2025 9,200 7,131 8,918 1,787 2026 9,725 7,537 8,918 1,381 2027 10,279 7,967 8,918 951 2028 10,865 8,421 8,918 497 2029 11,484 8,901 10,918 2,000 2,017 2030 12,139 9,408 10,918 1,510 2031 12,831 9,945 10,918 973 2032 13,562 10,512 10,918 406 2033 14,335 11,111 12,918 2,000 1,807 2034 15,152 11,744 12,918 1,174

The above table is expressed graphically in Figure 5-4 below.



December 11, 2015


Figure 5-4: Potable Water Supply Needs

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Dem

and

(m

3/d

)

Year

Potable Water Supply Needs

MXDY Demand (m3/d) Existing Firm Well Capacity Upgrade 1 (2000m3/d firm)

Rerating Existing Wells Upgrade 2 (2000m3/d firm) Upgrade 3 (2000m3/d firm)

Upgrade 4 (2000m3/d firm) Upgrade 5 (2000m3/d firm)



December 11, 2015


Every well has a capture zone which it is supplied from, shown by the light blue shaded circle

surrounding each dark blue octagonal source in the diagram below. The source water is

drawn from the groundwater within the capture zone. The 3 existing wells and 2 new proposed

wells capture zones cover the existing and to be developed area, as can be seen in

Figure 5-5. New source options to provide the additional 6,000m3/d will need to be examined

and the location will have to be determined. The creation of new wells outside the existing

development boundaries may provide the additional source capacity required but will have

additional pumping requirements to deliver the water from the well site to the service area.

Given the anticipated increase in population and demand past the year

2015 north grenville potable water and wastewater master plan update · 2018-12-16 · sign-off...

Documents