Loading...
2013-01-07_Supplemental Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour supplémentairer. City of Saint John Common Council Meeting SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA Monday, January 7, 2013 5:00 pm Council Chamber Si vous avez besoin des services en francais pour une reunion de Conseil Communal, veuillez contacter le bureau de la greffiere communale au 658 -2862. Pages 9. Public Hearings - 7:00 p.m. 9.2 Proposed Amendment to the Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law 9.2.1 City Manager: Proposed Heritage Conservation Areas By -Law 1 - 2 Amendment 12 -14 Bentley Street 9.5 Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 1875 & 1925 Bayside Dr 9.5.2 Proposed New Gravel Pits Assessment 1781 -1925 Bayside Drive 3-79 9.5.3 Pits and Quarries Handout I : • 9.6 Proposed Zoning By -Law Amendment 2112 Bayside Dr 9.6.2 Proposed New Quarry Assessment 2112 Bayside Drive 90-154 17. Committee of the Whole 17.1 Board of Trustees to Administer Shared Risk Pension (Deputy Rinehart) 155-179 Powered By; ['� � �]E- 1 The City of Saint John S6ance du conseil communal Le lundi 7 janvier 2013 Lieu: Salle du conseil communal Ordre du jour suppl6mentaire 9.2.1 Directeur g6n&ral : Projet de modification de ParrW relatif aux secteurs sauvegard6s du patrimoine, 12 -14, rue Bentley 9.5.2 Evaluation des projets de nouvelles gravieres, 1781 -1925, promenade Bayside 9.5.3 Document a distribuer sur les gravieres et sablieres 9.6.2 Evaluation du projet d'une nouvelle sabliere, 2112, promenade Bayside 17.1 Le Conseil d'administration se chargera d'administrer le r6gime de retraite a risque partag6 (mairesse suppl6ante Rinehart). 9, 2 ` I REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL M &C -2012 -294 November 29, 2012 His Worship Mayor Mel Norton and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Heritage Conservation Areas By -law Amendment 12 -14 Bentley Street BACKGROUND: At its meeting on September 19, 2012, the Heritage Development Board considered an application from Ian Stead (on behalf of Adam Stephen) for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install aluminum siding on the rear of the building at the above -noted address, which is part of the Douglas Avenue Heritage Conservation Area. The Board denied the request for the use of aluminum siding but did approve the replacement of the existing wood siding with cement board siding, subject to a number of conditions. City of Saint John The applicant, who did not attend the Board's September 19`h meeting, was not satisfied with the Board's decision and requested a further meeting with the Board to discuss his application, which took place on October 30, 2012. After considering the matter, the Board advised the property -owner to write a letter requesting to be formally removed from heritage designation. Mr. Stephen's letter was subsequently submitted to and considered by the Board at its November 14, 2012 meeting, at which time the Board adopted the following resolution: "Recommend to Common Council that the property 12 -14 Bentley Street be removed from heritage designation and that other heritage properties that are part of a streetscape or an entire area not be considered. " ANALYSIS: The removal of a property from heritage designation requires an amendment to the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -law. The process to consider such M&C -2012 -294 .2- an amendment, as set out in the Heritage Conservation Act, is similar to that for a street closure, including the holding of an advertised public hearing. Council should be aware that removing a property from a heritage area has been requested in the past but staff can find no evidence to suggest that any previous request has ever been approved. This request arises from the refusal of the Heritage Development Board to permit the installation of aluminum siding on a rear wall of the subject structure. The Board is of the view that removing the property from the designated heritage area is preferable to the alternative of granting a Certificate of Appropriateness that permits the use of the aluminum material that the applicant wishes to install. The decision with respect to the type of siding to be used is exclusively the authority of the Board. Although staff would prefer that some flexibility be demonstrated in these types of situations, neither Common Council nor staff have any ability to intervene given the construction of the Heritage Conservation Act and the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -law. Council should also be aware that the City does not have an application fee for a request to remove a property from a designated heritage area. There are costs that must be paid by the municipality. The required newspaper advertising as well as any necessary translation of the advertisement and By -law will have to be absorbed from the Heritage Division budget. It is anticipated that these costs will be approximately $1,700. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council schedule a public hearing date of Monday, January 7, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber to consider an amendment to the Saint John Heritage Conservation Areas By -law, which would remove the property at 12 -14 Bentley Street from the Douglas Avenue Heritage Conservation Area, and that the necessary advertising be authorized in this regard. Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development &atrick Woods, CGA City Manager 2 November 29, 2012 E3BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. 40 Ashburn Lake Road tali 506B R U N S Y I C K PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB fax: 506.696.915 8 Engineering & Consulting Inc. E2L 4E3 reception @brunsvickengineering.ca PROPOSED NEW GRAVEL PITS ASSESSMENT 1781 -1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB submitted to BARSA VENTIRES & THOMAS CONSTRUCTION by BRUNSWICK ENGINEERING & CONSULTING INC. 4 FILE 2005.39 — R01 JANUARY 2013 HST 1 82470 0884 RT0001 BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. January 7, 2013 40 Ashburn Lake Road tel: 506.696.9155 PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB fax: 506.696.9158 E2L 4E3 reception @brunsvAckengineering.ca File: 2005.39 - R01 Barsa Ventures 1701 Red Head Road Saint John, NB Attention: Kemal Debly RE: PROPOSfjD NEW GRAVEL PITS ASSESSMENT, 9781— 1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK Please find enclosed our assessment and report on the above noted project. If any further information or clarification is required, please contact the undersigned h Pair? o � o �i7 Step7higif0erry, P. Eng. _ '" � Enclosures 5 HST # 82470 0884 RT0001 PROPOSED NEW GRAVEL PITS ASSESSMENT 9789 — 9925 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae COVERING LETTER ......................................................................................... ..............................i TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... ............................... ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ............................... 1 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS .............................................................................. ............................... 1 3.0 GROUNDWATER STUDY ................................................................... ............................... 1 4.0 STORMWATER RUNOFF ................................................................... ............................... 2 5.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE .................................................................... ............................... 4 6.0 DUST CONTROL ................................................................................. ............................... 5 7.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... ..............................6 APPENDICES A Site Plan & Cross Sections B Craig Hydrogeological Inc. Report C Stormwater Model Data PROPOSED NEW GRAVEL PITS ASSESSMENT 1781— 1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK 1.0 INTRODUCTION Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. was retained by Barsa Ventures and Thomas Construction to conduct an assessment of the proposed pits located at 1781 —1925 Bayside Drive in Saint John, NB. The Barsa Ventures property can be identified by PID 55188353 and the Thomas property can be identified by PID 00416644. The assessment for the proposed new pits consisted of four main parts; noise, dust, stormwater runoff and the impact on the ground water down gradient of the proposed sites. 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS The subject properties are located at 1781 —1925 Bayside Drive in the east side of Saint John, NB. More specifically, the subject properties are located on the east side of Bayside Drive between the cross streets of Old Black River Road and Hewitt Road. The subject properties are bounded by Bayside Drive to the west, the existing Thomas Construction Pit to the north, the Brunswick Pipeline to the east and a vacant heavily wooded property to the south. The current site conditions for the subject properties are heavily wooded and vegetated with the natural slope of the land running form the south to the north / northwest. Site plans and sections are in Appendix A. 3.0 GROUNDWATER STUDY As part of the site assessment, a study was completed on the groundwater conditions in the area and the potential impacts this proposed gravel pit could have on the groundwater both at the site and down gradient at the wells of the residences. To aid in the study, Brunswick Engineering retained the services of Craig Hydrogeological Inc. A copy of the report submitted by Craig Hydrogeological Inc. is appended in Appendix B. Brunswick Engineenng & Consulting Inc. 7 Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — R01 1781— 1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 2 To summarize the findings from Craig Hydrogeological; The nearest private well is located approximately 670 metres from the subject properties. The residences within 600 metres of the subject properties are on a community well which is located outside the 600 metres radius. The stripping of the vegetation will increase the infiltration and thus add to the groundwater. The subject properties are separated from the residences by Beyea Brook which will form a hydraulic divide. Given the vertical difference (25 metres) between the residences and the finished proposed pit floor, it is not possible for the pit to dewater the aquifer zone of the wells. Based on the findings from Craig Hydrogeological and our own research and analysis, we believe given the site conditions, topography and proposed development that there will not be negative impacts on the existing groundwater supplies. 4.0 STORMWA TER RUNOFF As part of the assessments for the new gravel pits, a stormwater runoff investigation was completed. As part of the investigation, pre - development and post development models were created using storm event data published by Environment Canada and using the City of Saint John Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual, accepted industry standards and practices and good engineering judgment. To determine the pre - development runoff flows, Lidar survey was obtained and the data was used in conjunction with existing survey data available from the province to generate existing contours which was used to model the storm water. Existing infrastructure and surface conditions were all identified and confirmed in the field by Brunswick Engineering staff. The post - development runoff flow modeling was based on the design grades, proposed infrastructure all the while using similar storm events as the pre - development. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — ROl 1781 —1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 3 The software used to model this project was HydroCAD version 10.0. To properly model this site, the SCS TR -20 method was used for modeling the runoff, the routing (channels/ ditches) was modeled using a method called Storage- Indication plus Translation. This method for modeling the runoff routing simply takes the geometrical properties of the channel and the physical attributes to determine the in and outflows as well as any possible storage. For modelling the site, a rainfall event with a duration of 24 hours and a return period of 100 years was used. The results of the models show that there will be a net increase in the amount of runoff generated on the sites; however the sedimentation ponds can be sized accordingly to reduce the excess runoff and satisfy the requirement of no net increase to leave the site. Given the fact that there are two separate properties owned by two different parties, the stormwater study was broken out for each property. Therefore, each owner will have to implement their own stormwater management infrastructure. This infrastructure will include but not be limited to culverts, ditches, check dams, and a sedimentation /stormwater pond. Preliminary numbers show that Thomas Construction will need a pond approximately 70m X 30m and Barsa Ventures will require a pond 30m X 30m. Stormwater model printouts have been appended in Appendix C and a summary of the results are in the table below. Location Pre- Post Post Development Development Development with Pond (m3 /S) (m3 /S) (m3 /S) Thomas Proposed Pit 0.8159 1.6045 0.8096 Barsa Proposed Pit 0.4307 0.8464 0.4183 The results from the stormwater modelling show that the pre - development and post development stormwater requirements can be satisfied. The above modelling has been created in a conservative manner and does not take into account infiltration into the ground. To quantify the amount of infiltration, field testing would be required and should be completed in the absence of frost and ice. With further field investigations the pond sizes and requirements could be reduced from those reported here. This stormwater investigation is an abbreviated investigation, with a more detailed report being completed should the project be approved. Brunswick Engineenng & Consulting Inc. Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — R01 1781 — 1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB M 5.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE With any type of development, construction noise is inevitable and high levels are usually considered undesirable. For the proposed pits, there will be heavy equipment and truck traffic associated with the operations. The anticipated construction equipment and their published noise levels were taken and modelled, taking the topography and site conditions into account. On the subject properties, the western boundary (nearest the residences) will have a buffer which will remain vegetated and will act as a noise screen and there will be no lines of sight from the operations to the residences. Also, the land between the subject properties and the residences is considered "soft" and will aid in the attenuation of sound, as vegetation absorbs sound waves where as "hard" surfaces reflect sound waves. Using a conservative noise level of 105 dBA at the subject properties (source), and having the nearest residence (receptor) is 450+ metres the noise level at the receptor will have been attenuated to a level below 60 dBA which is comparable to a perceived noise level of having an window mounted air conditioner running in a room. This would be a worst case scenario at the nearest residence, as the sound will diminish with distance. Other aspects which will help attenuate the sound would be wind direction. Published by NAV Canada, at the Saint John airport the predominant wind direction in the summer months is out of the south / south west. Less than 10% of the time the wind will prevail out of a direction that will be directed towards the residents. The wind direction and attenuation have not been included in the calculations for the construction noise levels, which will make the anticipated noise levels shown in the table below conservative. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — R01 1781 — 1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 1 1 Z m 0 CL d m m J m Z 5 Pit Operations - Noise Levels lu- )0 _ _ P_R Operation I -� ,0 Hearing Protection Required i -- - -- - - -- - Chainsaw @ 15m i - - - -i - - - -- io_ f Pickup T_ ruck @ 15m -- - - - - -! Depart ment Store --------- -- - - -- -- � i I ;0 Room / AC in Window 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 Distance from Quarry (m) As shown in the table above, the construction noise levels decrease with distance, to a point that industry considers acceptable for a residential area. Lines of sight and wind direction can be viewed on the plan and sections in Appendix A. 6.0 DUST CONTROL Given the proposed activities associated with the subject properties, dust will be generated at some point throughout the operation life of the sites. To help minimize fugitive dust from leaving the site, measures will have to be implemented as follows: All traffic on site must observe a speed limit of 25km /hr or less Water trucks must be available on dry days to keep access roads free from dust, as a majority of dust generated on a site like these would be on the access roads, and not at the excavation as the excavated material will have a natural moisture content of 5% or higher which will prevent dust from being generated. Maintain the vegetated buffers as the vegetation will help collect some fugitive dust. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — R01 1781— 1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB R As stated with the noise attenuation, the wind direction predominately prevails from directions which will direct any fugitive dust away from the residences. 7.0 CONCLUSIONS The proposed new gravel pits located at 1781 — 1925 Bayside Drive, can be established and operated at a level which will have no adverse affect on the neighbouring residences. If the proper procedures are followed and buffer zones are maintained, the operation of the gravel pits can be feasible to the owners without compromising the groundwater, air quality or noise levels currently in the area. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed New Gravel Pit 2005.39 — R01 1781 -1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB APPENDIX A Site Plan & Sections 13 N 'o o I / I 1:1 SAFE � ^ SLOPE / � I / I I / � I / EzISTIxC CRADE I � I I I I I EX. REES I � — — — — --------- 3.m 1 /2:1 SAFE SLOPE E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) / / KEY PLAN: 1?<t 12 0 0 +200 PROVEaTr E %CAV n nON / / / ON 110 110 I00 / I 100 / I 90 90 / I � I I 6o 80 gr or I I EXISYWC GRADE 70 / 60 E %. RESIDENCE (APPRO %.) / / I EX. RESIDENCE (APPRO %.) EL. 53.Om OIL 40 a9auce O�M461[Ci tt) xNOYA. PNO! I'M= 69p 6 ai NpXCRO MGI SHILL Ipl UG9, M, �IMII IIIRII 30 rtwzma n eeBao1 omtufic a me.rc Pc 30 R[6Bbt TO 40 0 SAM 10 to 0 0 0 100 00 300 400 51 600 00 900 1000 1100 1200 1 1400 1500 1600 f oo 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 27DO 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 0 N0. ATE —A- IM ODIT. 120 120 TYPICAL SEECOTIO DEBLY RESOURCES 110 11 SAINT JOHN, NEW MINSMCK ONNT W. k 2005 loo oD P60.ECT. 90 90 PIT APPLICATION & STUDY 80 1875 -1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB rnlc BAY Of FUNDY TO BLACK RIVER ROAD '° '° SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +000 TO STA. 0 +100 60 60 BRUNSWICK s0 Engineering & Consulting Inc. 50 <0 Asnbum L6A4 ROaO. PO BOA 1CBS. SaIr6Jann, N6 E2L PE0 R ,e 1; 506.696.915516: 506.6959156 ,X 40 40 4A 30 — 30 W 20 ZO rc9vi0 BY: I%L66x fir, oco¢o 9r. 10 SRP PROJECT NO KYJ DAR (YM/N11/ID) SAP f 66 But rs Xm 81' 10 2005.39 2012/12/21 AMIST y R PLat� SCAIL HORIZONTAL: 1:5000 VERTICAL: 1:500 0 0 100 200 3DD 400 500 600 700 Wo 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1 {00 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 2500 2600 2700 2800 0 SC11[:1:5000 YEINC 100 50 0 100 200 700 9EET 1%.4BER 15 2 9EL 2 , 3 u N 'o o I / I 1:1 SAFE � ^ SLOPE / � I / I I / � I / EzISTIxC CRADE I � I I I I I EX. REES I � — — — — --------- 3.m 1 /2:1 SAFE SLOPE E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) / / E %CAV n nON / / / E %. RESIDENCE (APPRO %.) / EX. RESIDENCE (APPRO %.) N 'o o I / I 1:1 SAFE � ^ SLOPE / � I / I I / � I / EzISTIxC CRADE I � I I I I I EX. REES I � — — — — --------- 3.m 1 /2:1 SAFE SLOPE E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) / / E %CAV n nON / / PROPERTY z BOUNDARY PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc EXCAVATON BOUNOV2r RrY E CAVAnON Z EXISTING GRADE ■ y ExCAVAn I f s 8 I / 4——.11111 I � t EOx�WG I I/ L EL. 53.Om o 0,P" � EXCAVAn W � I J 3 SECTION FROM FAY STREET S 0 100 20090 / I TO SITE LIMIT 2:1 SAFE 120 EL. 53.Om ROPE TO 110 nD / I 0 +600 I 00 100 110 110 / I � / I i 00 00 � I 90 90 90 I I 90 80 W � I VNE 2:1 ROPE 80 70 70 60 EL 53.Om / / E %. RESIDE 1 70 >o s0 600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 20060 110 110 0+400 60 tA' 60 100 00 50 0° IF 90 90 OFAAYER pYal6 AGAR 1p �PgOVN flMl X, C016181CIIX - W.11x6 — Q9915 40 +D aaA0.mc�•KUm w lArsO.nwl .Arl[. Tw e,°A — rwit9 1xai�.c"0:K 80 80 R 190: 30 b 7Z 70 70 0 jr 20 20 SIAM 60 60 V& 1,900 1.800 1.700 1.600 1.000 1.400 1.3W 1.200 1.100 1.000 0.900 0.600 0.)00 x600 0.500 Ma00 0.]00 0 200 00 pn 0.000 0 N0. PAR rrr,71A1 OESfAPn.1 50600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200'0 OART: 110 110 0 +200 DEBLY RESOURCES loo 100 SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWCK CLIENT AID. F. SODS 90 9p much. PIT APPLICATION 6o & STUDY 1875 -1925 8AYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, N8 70 70 Ito 110 1+000 m` GRADE SOUTH TO NORTH 6D 60 100 '� SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +000 TO STA. 1 +200 y 90 90 9 600 90 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 2005° 90 BRUNSWICK 0 +000 Engineering & Consulting Inc. o TYPICAL 60 600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 80 n SECTION 00 110 40Mhho Lako RW6,POUIIO45,SA A M.NSE2L4E- 3 80 110 NI: 506.656.91551u. 506.6869168 0 +800 = 6Ew 70 70 100 f00 120 120 1 +200 _ a 60 60 90 90 110 mas0 50 80 80 f00 OE40YD er: DRAM m: °Roan fir: SRP KYJ SRP AM[CL N0: DA2 (—/ -/W) A 116 BN1 rs N01 MMMEMEMM070 nR q 2005.39 2012/12/21 25 RL� a0 -- - -- - -- a0 70 -- -- _ 90 .600 500 400 ORON7a 9:Nf: HORPoZONTAL'1:5000 VERTICAL:1:500 - DO -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 2-600 -500 -a00 -300 -200 -100 R AiLLO 1:SOW f[1RC 100 50 0 100 200 300 $r i 9Q11AAHR 3 16 MT r. 3 a 3 g G1 PROPERTY z BOUNDARY PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc EXCAVATON BOUNOV2r RrY E CAVAnON Z EXISTING GRADE ■ y ExCAVAn I f s 8 I / 4——.11111 I � t EOx�WG I I/ L EL. 53.Om o I � EXCAVAn W � I J 3 I I I -200 S 0 100 20090 PROPERTY z PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc 0 BOUNOV2r RrY E CAVAnON GRADE EXISTING GRADE ■ y ExCAVAn I f s 8 I / 4——.11111 I I I/ L EL. 53.Om EX6'TING PROPERTY z PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc BOUNDARY BOUNOV2r RrY GRADE ■ y ExCAVAn no s I / 80UNDN21' I EX6'TING � EXCAVAn too GRADE g S I I -300 -200 S 0 100 20090 / I 2:1 SAFE EL. 53.Om PROPERTY EXCAVATION PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc BOUNDARY BOUNOV2r RrY GRADE ■ no s I / 80UNDN21' I � EXCAVAn too -300 -200 -100 0 100 20090 / I 2:1 SAFE ROPE / I I / I � / I i � I a I I � I VNE 2:1 ROPE EL 53.Om / / E %. RESIDE 1 tA' PROPERTY EXCAVATION PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc BOUNDARY BOUNOV2r GRADE ■ PROPERTY EXCAVATION PROP RIY vly EwsrlNc BOUNDARY BOUNOV2r GRADE no s I I � too -300 -200 -100 0 100 20090 APPENDIX B Craig Hydrogeological Inc. Report 17 CRAIG HYDROGEOLOGIC INC. Groundwater and Soil Contamination Groundwaael , i uwwiur, Resource Development Site Remediation Site Professional Groundwater Assessment Barsa Ventures Ltd. & Thomas Developments Ltd. Bayside Drive Pit January, 2013 Prepared For: Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Ltd. Attention: Mr. Stephen Perry, P. Eng. 40 Ashburn Lake Road Saint John, NB E2L 4E3 January 6, 2013 Craig HydroGeoLogic Inc. 140 Meadow Cove Road. Dipper Harbour, NB E5J 2S9 Telephone 506- 659 -3064 Fax 506 -659 -9002 Email dcraig @craighydrogeologic.ca http : / /www.cr3�hydrogeologic.ca/ GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT BARSA VENTURES LTD. & THOMAS DEVELOPMENTS LTD. BAYSIDE DRIVE PIT JANUARY, 2013 INTRODUCTION Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc., acting on behalf of Barsa Ventures Ltd. and Thomas Developments Ltd., retained Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. to conduct a groundwater assessment in order to evaluate the existing groundwater supplies in the general area of a proposed gravel pit expansion and to provide an assessment of the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed pit activities. The groundwater assessment is required as part of the evaluation process to obtain approval for the proposed gravel pit expansion. This report presents the findings of the groundwater assessment, and conclusions and recommendations based on that assessment. This report was prepared by Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. for the clients, Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc., Barsa Ventures Ltd. and Thomas Developments Ltd., and presents the results of an investigation of the existing groundwater supplies located in the general area of the proposed pit expansion as described in this report. In addition, an assessment of the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed pit expansion is provided. The report is based on the application of scientific principles and professional judgment to certain facts with resultant subjective interpretations. For example, but not limited to, interpolation between boreholes is an accepted industry practice, however, actual subsurface conditions may vary from that interpolated and such variation could impact observations, discussions, conclusions and recommendations in the report. Professional 19 2 judgments expressed herein are based on the facts currently available within the existing data, scope of work, budget and schedule. The material and information in the report reflects Craig Hydrogeologic Inc.'s best judgment in light of the information available at the time of report preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decision(s) to be made based on this report are the responsibility of the third party(ies). Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this report. SCOPE The scope of the groundwater assessment is as follows: 1. To conduct a groundwater assessment using available information in order to evaluate the existing groundwater supplies in the general area of a proposed gravel pit expansion, and; 2. To evaluate the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed pit activities, and, 3. To produce a report with the findings of the groundwater assessment and any recommendations that may be necessary to mitigate or minimize the potential for any negative impacts from the pit operation on the existing groundwater supplies. 20 3 SITE DESCRIPTION General The proposed gravel pit operation is located on PIDs 00416644 and 55188353. The general location of the proposed pit and the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1. The proposed pit is located at 1875 and 1925 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB. The existing land in the general area is highway transportation, gravel extraction, and undeveloped woodland. An existing gravel pit is located immediately north of the proposed pit expansion on PID 00339960. A site visit was conducted December 20, 2012. EXISTING GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES There is existing residential subdivision development located along Red Head Road as shown as smaller residential lots in Figure 1. The subdivision located at the confluence of Red Head Road and Hewitt Road, and accessed by Debly Avenue has private residential wells. All of the lots in this subdivision are located outside the 600 meter radius from the proposed pit operation as shown in Figure 1. The closest existing private lot and the connected private well is located approximately 670 meters from the proposed pit boundary. The lot sizes in this subdivision are variable, with an apparent average size of approximately 1500 M 2 (0.37 acres). Based on typical weather patterns in New Brunswick it takes about one acre of land to recharge sufficient groundwater to supply a typical single family home. It is not uncommon in older subdivisions with these sized lots which are serviced with private wells for a general lowering of the groundwater table to occur beneath the subdivision over the time since the subdivision was constructed. This can result in wells going dry and having to be progressively deepened as the water table drops. Similarly, many of the original homes were typically supplied with jet pumps which become ineffective as the water table drops and have to be replaced with modern submersible pumps having deeper pumping capabilities. 21 4 North of this subdivision along Red Head Road and accessed by Ocean Drive is the Harborview Subdivision. Some of the private residences within this subdivision are within the 600 meter radius from the proposed pit operation as shown in Figure 1; however, the homes in this subdivision are serviced with a community groundwater supply located outside the 600 meter radius. A groundwater protection study has been conducted for this community groundwater supply; however, at the present time, the groundwater protection areas have yet to be designated. Geology and Hydrogeology: The surficial soils are mapped as a veneer of till and gravel. Based on the well logs found for the nearby area, the overburden ranges in thickness from 0.3 to approximately 42.7 meters (1 to 140 feet) thickness. The overburden can be used for ground water supplies; however, it is the bedrock aquifer which provides the vast majority of groundwater supplies in the area. The bedrock in the immediate area is mapped as the Late Carboniferous age Balls Lake Formation, composed of conglomerate, sandstone and shale, which also forms the local bedrock aquifer. The bedrock is known to be relatively transmissive (readily conducts the flow of ground water). Based on common knowledge of the area, the bedrock aquifer has been successfully developed for private wells by a large number of individuals over the general area. The general conditions found in the aquifer are suitable for water supply development. Local well drillers with knowledge of the area confirmed the potential for water supply development in terms of private wells and did not identify any specific or unusual problems in the area. NB Environment Well Log Database: A search of the New Brunswick Department of Environment (NBDOE) well log database for a 500 meter radius around the proposed pit property (PID 00416644) yielded a total of 15 well logs. The well log search is conducted from the outer property boundary, not from the location of the proposed pit itself. Copies of the well logs are provided in Appendix 1 at the back of this report. A 22 5 summary of the information contained in the well logs is provided in Table 1 immediately below. Table 1: Summary of hydrogeologic information derived from search of NBDOE well log database based on a 500 meter search radius providing 15 well logs. Well Depth (feet) Estimated Yield (igpm) Depth to Bedrock (feet) Casing Length (feet) Median: 225 Median: 5 Median: 70 Median: 43 Average: 249.4 Average: 14.2 Average: 55.9 Average: 62.3 Minimum: 98 Minimum: 0.12 Minimum: 1 Minimum: 20 Maximum: 550 Maximum: 50 Maximum: 140 Maximum: 148 As can be seen from the above information in Table 1, the 15 well logs located within a 500 meter radius of the boundary of PID 00416644 have an average estimated yield of 14.2 igpm and a median yield of 5 igpm, which are in excess of the typical domestic well needs of approximately 3 igpm. Out of the 15 well logs, five wells had an estimated yield below the 3 igpm level with reported yields of 0.12, 0.3, 0.5, 1.25 and 2.5 igpm. The lowest yielding well (0.12 igpm) well had a depth of 550 feet, the deepest well in the dataset for this area.. A low yielding well can be encountered at any location within a bedrock aquifer. Typically, any low yield wells are simply deepened in order to increase in well storage in order to provide adequate water for domestic use. The data base also contained two 50 igpm wells with depths of 300 and 302 feet, these two wells are part of the community supply in the Harborview subdivision. Overall the results of the well log database search indicate two general groups of wells. There is a relatively low yield group having yields ranging from 0.12 to 3 igpm and there is a high yield group ranging from 10 to 50 igpm with only a few wells in between the two groups. Some of the low yielding wells have been deepened since they were constructed. 23 6 NB Environment Well Water Chemistry Database: The 500 meter radius search of the NBDOE well chemistry database provided results from a total of 10 wells located in the general area for which groundwater chemistry was available. The precise locations of the wells from which the ground water chemistry was obtained are not available due to right to privacy considerations for the property owners. The analytical results for the samples are provided in Table 2 which follows. In Table 2 any result that exceeds the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines ( CDWQG) is bolded and color shaded for ease of recognition. The groundwater chemistry data in Table 2 was collected and analyzed using the water analysis certificate provided by the well driller when the well is new. The water samples are usually collected by the homeowner shortly thereafter in order to provide confidence that they can use the water. As a result the well from which the water sample was collected typically has not had enough time or use for the water to clear sufficiently prior to the water sample being collected. The result of this is that the chemistry data in Table 2 may overestimate the long term turbidity and some trace metal concentrations as most wells will clear naturally with use and time. Out of the 10 chemistry records available, two wells exceeded the CDWQG for iron of 0.3 mg/L and three wells (including the previous two with the iron exceedence) also exceeded the CDWQG for manganese (0.05 mg /L). The guideline for iron and /or manganese is based on esthetic considerations, not health. Iron and /or manganese can cause staining of plumbing fixtures and laundry. Iron and/or manganese can usually be readily removed by commercial water softeners at the hardness observed in this water or by filters. The presence of iron and /or manganese in the groundwater from this aquifer is not unusual and is commonly the result of natural conditions. As these chemistry results are from new wells with high levels of turbidity, the results in the database may overestimate long term concentrations of iron and /or manganese. A total of four out of the 10 chemistry records available had elevated turbidity present in the samples. The elevated levels of turbidity may be related to the relative newness of the wells and they may not have had sufficient time, or use, to clear naturally. The water 24 7 CDWQG = Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guideline NBDOE Groundwater Chemistry Database Table 2 Parameter ALK_T (mg /L) Al (mg /L) As (pg /L) B (mg /L) Ba (mg /L) Br (mg /L) COND (NSIE /cm) Ca (mg /L) Cd (Ng /L) 141 0.05 1.5 0.01 0.434 0.1 338 44.7 0.5 78.3 0.025 1.5 0.01 0.074 0.1 204 22.6 0.5 92.7 0.025 1.5 0.03 0.084 0.1 244 25.2 0.5 122 0.26 1.6 0.008 0.153 1.153 371 53 0.3 199 0.025 4.62 0.01 0.261 0.101 444 43.3 0.5 210 0.025 1.65 0.2 0.73 0.1 762 62.6 0.5 98.7 0.025 1 0.2 0.203 0.1 243 28.8 0.5 64.9 0.028 2.36 0.01 0.13 0.1 190 23.5 0.5 207 0.025 2.98 0.022 0.44 0.1 514 35.1 0.5 206 0.025 2.72 0.036 0.359 0.187 464 50.7 0.5 Mean 142.0 0.051 2.1 0.054 0.287 0.1 377 39.0 0.5 CDWQG <250 <50 <10 <5.0 <1.0 <0.3 <5.0 Parameter CI (mg /L) Cr (Ng /L) Cu (Ng /L) E coli P/A (P /A) F (mg /L) Fe (mg /L) HARD (mg /L) K (mg /L) Mg (mg /L) 13.5 16 10 Ab 0.1 0.168 159 0.47 11.5 10.9 10 10 Ab 0.1 0.299 80.3 0.6 5.79 10.5 10 10 Ab 0.1 0.16 92.5 0.8 7.2 24.8 0 19 Ab 0.025 1.153 146.3 0.82 3.4 20.4 18 14 Pr 0.1 0.01 223.8 0.461 28.1 120 10 25 Ab 0.1 0.024 332.1 0.82 42.7 7.92 10 10 Ab 0.1 0.121 98.7 0.618 6.5 10.6 10 10 Ab 0.1 0.664 68.3 0.79 2.31 22.8 20 10 Ab 0.1 0.023 240 0.774 37.1 10.1 13 10 Ab 0.1 0.058 223 1.23 23.4 Mean 25.2 12 13 0.09 0.268 166.4 0.74 16.80 CDWQG <250 <50 <1000 <1.5 <0.3 25 CDWQG = Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guideline NBDOE Groundwater Chemistry Database Table 2 Parameter Mn (mg /L) NO2 (mg /L) NO3 (mg /L) NOX (mg /L) Na (mg /L) PH (pH) Pb (Ng /L) SO4 (mg /L) Sb (Ng /L) 1.5 Pr 10.4 1 0.72 0.05 0.05 0.05 4.97 7.93 1.1 5.33 1 9 0.021 0.05 0.54 0.59 8.27 8.18 1 9.37 1 0.005 0.05 1.1 1.1 13.4 8.38 1 9.59 1 Pr 0.178 0 1.8 1.8 15.7 8.17 3 14.8 0.6 1 0.005 0.05 0.52 0.57 8.48 7.98 1 11.8 1 21 0.01 0.05 0.23 0.28 19.3 8.08 1 12.2 1 0.01 0.05 1.07 1.12 10.5 8.14 1 9.4 1 Ab 0.882 0.05 0.05 0.05 8.49 7.89 1 5.08 1 1 0.036 0.066 0.192 0.257 10.2 8.05 1 14.2 1 <5000 0.0093 0.05 0.28 0.28 14.2 8.2 1 13.4 1 Mean 0.188 0.05 0.58 0.61 11.35 8.10 1.2 10.52 1 CDWQG <0.05 <10 <10 <10 <200 6.5 -8.5 <10 <500 Parameter Se (Ng /L) TC -P /A (P /A) TURB (NTU) TI (Ng /L) U (Ng /L) Zn (pg /L) TDS (mg /L) 1.5 Pr 10.4 1 1.6 5 166 1.5 Ab 5.15 1 0.5 9 108 1.5 Ab 0.93 1 0.5 5 128 Ab 2.8 0.5 8 15.4 Pr 0.2 1 6.76 11 235 1 Pr 0.1 1 18 1 Pr 0.8 1 21 1.5 Pr 4.1 1 0.5 5 92 2.2 Pr 0.2 1 16.3 21 246 1.5 Ab 0.2 1 5.58 16 238 Mean 3.0 2.5 1 4.5 12 173 CDWQG <1.0 <20 <5000 <500 26 samples in the database are provided from the water well testing certificates which are provided by the well driller immediately after the well has been drilled. As a result the vast majority of the analytical results come from new wells. Most new wells clear naturally with time and use. At levels in excess of 5 NTUs turbidity may become noticeable to consumers and therefore, objectionable. The turbidity may be the result of elevated concentrations of iron and or manganese or the presence of particulate in the water. In either case, turbidity can be treated by water softeners and/or particulate filters if necessary. NB Environment Microbiology Database: The NBDOE well chemistry database provided results from a total of 10 wells for E coli analysis. Out of the 10 wells there was one detection of E. coli. Water with E. coli present should not be used for cooking or drinking. A total of 10 wells had data for total coliforms with six detections of total coliforms. Total coliforms are natural soil bacteria and are commonly present in private well water systems, particularly associated with elevated turbidities. Such detections are usually easily treated by shock chlorination of the wells and associated plumbing systems. Again, the observed detections of total coliforms may be related to the relative newness of the wells. In general terms the groundwater chemistries found in the NBDOE database are not unusual for this area or for the rest of New Brunswick and reflect natural aquifer conditions. The groundwater represented by the general inorganic water quality analytical results presented in Table 3 represents good quality groundwater suitable for most common uses. 27 8 POTENTIAL ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED GRAVEL PIT EXPANSION OPERATION ON EXISTING GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES Site Location: The site is located as shown in Figure 1. The 600 meter radius around the proposed gravel pit expansion and the locations of existing private homes are also shown as the clusters or subdivisions composed of residential sized lots located west and southwest of the site. As discussed above, the subdivision located at the confluence of Red Head Road and Hewitt Road, and accessed by Debly Avenue has private residential wells. All of the lots in this subdivision are located outside the 600 meter radius from the proposed pit operation as shown in Figure 1. The closest existing private lot and private well is located approximately 670 meters from the proposed pit boundary. North of this subdivision along Red Head Road and accessed by Ocean Drive is the Harborview Subdivision. Some of the private residences within this subdivision are within the 600 meter radius from the proposed pit operation as shown in Figure 1; however, the homes in this subdivision are serviced with a community groundwater supply located outside the 600' meter radius. The operation of the gravel extraction pit will involve removal of the vegetation and soil and subsequent removal of the gravel. The activities in the current pit are above the top of the groundwater table based on direct observation. The pit expansion will be governed by the same depth restriction (maximum 10 meters below original ground surface). The result of this is that the operation of the proposed gravel pit expansion will have very limited impacts on the existing groundwater configuration. Removal of the vegetation and exposing the granular base will probably result in increased infiltration and recharge to groundwater. As shown in Figure 1 the proposed gravel pit and the Harborview Subdivision are separated by Beyea Brook. Beyea Brook will form a hydraulic divide for the shallow groundwater flow systems adjacent to it. Shallow groundwater arising from the area of the proposed gravel pit will discharge to Beyea Brook. 28 9 Based on the location of the proposed gravel pit expansion and the large distances to the existing residential development, it is unlikely that the existing groundwater supplies will be impacted by the proposed gravel pit expansion operations. Topoizraphy: The topography is shown in Figure 1 and topographic profiles are shown in Figures 2, and 3. In all cases the bottom of the gravel pit is higher than the elevations of the existing homes. Since the existing homes source their groundwater from wells which are drilled to lower elevations than the homes themselves, the proposed gravel pit cannot dewater the existing wells or reduce yields by removal of groundwater. Overall Potential for Dewatering: Based on the location and elevation of the gravel pit relative to the location and elevation of the existing homes in the area, the potential for the gravel pit activities having a significant dewatering impact on the groundwater table in the area of the homes is extremely remote. The gravel pit is too far away and is not situated at an elevation or location (relative to the existing homes) were such impacts are probable. The bottom of the proposed gravel pit is located about 25 meters above the ground surface in the area of the existing homes. It is simply not possible for the gravel pit to dewater aquifer zones which are lower than the bottom of the gravel pit itself. Predicted Groundwater Flow Directions: Based on local topography as shown in Figure 1, shallow groundwater recharging in the area of the proposed gravel pit would flow from the area of the gravel pit in a westerly direction to discharge to Beyea Brook. 29 10 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS There are a number of existing wells located in the area of the proposed gravel pit expansion operation. The proposed gravel pit expansion operation will be located at a sufficient distance and at a high elevation from the existing wells so that negative impacts on the existing groundwater supplies are extremely unlikely. Based on the above information, it is concluded that the potential for the subject gravel pit expansion operation to have significant impacts on the groundwater supplies located at the existing homes in the area is extremely unlikely. Relating to potential groundwater impact concerns it is recommended that the proposed gravel pit operation be approved. Report Prepared By: Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. Douglas Craig, M.Sc., P. Geo. Hydrogeologist, 30 11 �. 31 '7 DEBLY RESOURCES PIT APPUCATION & STUDY 1875-1925 BAYME DRIVE, SAINT JOHN. NO SITE PLAN BRUNSWICK \ ` 1-| uo 0 +200 � ° ,lo I w r � i w IXsMI oRw[ I w Is 1 1 — I 60 w m Mn.-Mm' 1D w o rm, x R[NSeN sranw o .un° IM 0 +100 ° Im Rao w ao Im w Ioo m m sw I ;4—. am 1 , � 1 i0 0 l x R[rsaiayESpaPndl _ o [ ° DEBLY RESOURCES SANE JOHN, NEW 8i0N41110C I I / I a °11"i0 0910' 1 PIT APPLICATION & STUDY 10 0 � I I 1875 -1525 SAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB BAY OF FUNDY TO BLACK RIVER ROAD SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +000 TO STA. 0 +100 I / - - - -- - - - - BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. a° to 5RP n RYJ R 5RP on. ° M l 11h11 rtal _ h]ORt : rt �w h amR w u. _ xRRR�� WAte MOId ONIAL 1:5000 l. 1:500 ASR Iw lOR �R 2 32 0 +200 0 +000 w 0+600 33 rMEM■ ■ ■` mompsmagm� IMMMF16071 Jim 0 MEN jrA7MM ME DEBLY RESOURCES SAINT JOHN, NEW KAR S= PIT APPLICATION & STUDY 1875 -1925 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB inc SOUTH TO NORTH SITE SECTIONS STA. O +DOO TO STA. 1 +200 BRUNSWICK EnBlnearin0 & Co WitrnD Inc. 3 Appendix 1 Well Logs 34 12 Debly PIT Bayside Drive 2013 500 meter radius Well Depth Feet 1(igpm) Estimated Yield Depth to Bedrock Casing Length Feet average 249.4 14.2 55.9 62.3 AVERAGE 225 1.25 1 20 550 0.12 3 20 125 20 83 85 302 50 38 43 300 50 103 105 175 10 140 148 110 10 99 100 152 5 8 20 146 5 2 20 250 50 81 300 0.3 70 98 5 94 98 183 2.5 108 111 300 0.5 2 20 525 4 7 20 Well Depth Feet Estimated Yield i m Depth to Bedrock Feet Casing Length Feet Median 225 5 70 43 Median average 249.4 14.2 55.9 62.3 AVERAGE max 550 50 140 148 max min 98 0.12 1 20 min count 15 35 uate pnntea Lu I L/ I zlzu 'illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well 08/27/2003 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft 4in Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Lop Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 0 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 1.25 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Tvpe 1200 Oft 1ft Brown Mud 1200 1ft 225ft Red and grey Slate Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 1200 50ft 1 igpm Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 225ft Bedrock Level 1ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 1200 60ft Septic Tank 1200 85ft Leach Field 1200 175ft Right of any Public Way Road Date printed 2012/12/20 rilled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 06/22/2004 ising Information Casing above ground 1ft 6in Drive Shoe Used? Yes 'll Loq Casing Type Diameter From End Slotted? 39 Steel 6inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 0.12 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 9289 Oft 3ft Brown Clay 9289 3ft 550ft Red and grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loci Depth Rate 9289 550ft 0.13 igpm Overall Well Depth 550ft Bedrock Level 3ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 37 Date printed 2012/12/20 rifled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 09/13/2005 (sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes III Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 151 Steel 6 inch Oft 85ft Aquifer TestNield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 50ft 20 igpm 1hr 50ft 20 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 12951 Oft 4ft Brown Topsoil 12951 4ft 83ft Grey Clay 12951 83ft 125ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 12951 90ft 4 igpm 12951 11 8f 16 igpm Overall Well Depth 125ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 12951 60ft Septic Tank 12951 8011 Leach Field 12951 83ft Right of any Public Way Road Date printed 2012/12/20 rilled by /ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed on- Drinking Water, Observation Other - Not Specified Rotary 01/18/2008 ising Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes III Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? )10 Steel 6 inch Oft 43ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 302ft 50 igpm 3hrs 01 min Oft 50 igpm No 0 igpm BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None Well Loq Grout Type From End 15910 Bentonite 35ft 42ft Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 1.0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 15910 Oft 20ft Brown Gravel 15910 20ft 25ft Brown Clay 15910 25ft 38ft Brown Sand and Gravel 15910 38ft 170ft Yellow Soft Rock 15910 170ft 302ft Red and grey Rock Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Lop Depth Rate 15910 5011 5 igpm 15910 100ft 10 igpm 15910 302ft 50 igpm Overall Well Depth 302ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 15910 40ft Right of any Public Way Road well Loq C:asinq I ype Ulameter rrom tna 5lottea'! 15910 Steel 6inch Oft 43ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 302ft 50 igpm 3hrs 01min Oft 50 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below tot) of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None Well Loq Grout Type From End 15910 Bentonite 35ft 42ft Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 1.0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Tvpe 15910 Oft 20ft Brown Gravel 15910 20ft 25ft Brown Clay 15910 25ft 38ft Brown Sand and Gravel 15910 38ft 170ft Yellow Soft Rock 15910 170ft 302ft Red and grey Rock Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 15910 50ft 5 igpm 15910 100ft 10 igpm 15910 302ft 50 igpm Overall Well Depth 302ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Lop Distance Setback From 15910 40ft Right of any Public Way Road Date printed 2012/12/20 -illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 02/06/2008 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft 4in Drive Shoe Used? YeE II Loq Casing Type Diameter From End Slotted? 13 Steel 6 inch Oft 105ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 300ft 50 igpm 3hrs 20min Oft 50 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below ton of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 15913 Oft 15ft Brown Sand and Gravel 15913 15ft 60ft Brown Clay and Sand 15913 60ft 78ft Brown Gravel 15913 78ft 103ft Brown Mud and Stones 15913 103ft 300ft Grey and purple Rock Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 15913 123ft 10 igpm 15913 1 8f 30 igpm 15913 200ft 10 igpm Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 300ft Bedrock Level 60ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 15913 25ft Right of any Public Way Road 41 Well LOq l:aslnq I ype Ulameter rrom tna 510tteq "! 15913 Steel 6 inch Oft 105ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 300ft 50 igpm 3hrs 20min Oft 50 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 15913 Oft 15ft Brown Sand and Gravel 15913 15ft 60ft Brown Clay and Sand 15913 60ft 78ft Brown Gravel 15913 78ft 103ft Brown Mud and Stones 15913 103ft 300ft Grey and purple Rock Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 15913 123ft 10 igpm 15913 138ft 30 igpm 15913 200ft 10 igpm Overall Well Depth 300ft Bedrock Level 60ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 15913 25ft Right of any Public Way Road 42 Date printed 2012/12/20 Iled by 'll Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 06/25/2009 ;ing Information Casing above ground 2ft Drive Shoe Used? Ye, Lop Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 10 Steel 6 inch Oft 148ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 175ft 10 igpm Ohr 30min 75ft 10 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 26790 Oft loft Brown Clay and Gravel 26790 1Oft 140ft Brown Clay 26790 140ft 175ft Red Conglomerate Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 26790 165ft 10 igpm Overall Well Depth 175ft Bedrock Level 140ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 26790 65ft Septic Tank 26790 75ft Leach Field 26790 150ft Right of any Public Way Road 43 Date printed 2012/12/20 Iled by 'll Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 11/19/2008 ;ing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Ye I Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 16 Steel 6 inch Oft 1 00f Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 60ft 10 igpm 1hr 15min 60f 10 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below toff of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig 100ft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 28316 Oft 3011 Brown Sand 28316 30ft 99ft Brown Clay 28316 99ft 110ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 28316 103ft 2 igpm 28316 106ft 8 igpm Overall Well Depth 11 Oft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 28316 70ft Right of any Public Way Road 44 Date printed 2012/12/20 illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 08/21/1995 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? YeE II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 36800 Steel 6inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 5 igpm No 0 igpm [BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Tvpe 90336800 Oft 8ft Brown Mud and Gravel 90336800 8ft 125ft Red Shale 90336800 125ft 152ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 90336800 60ft 1 igpm 90336800 138ft 4 igpm Overall Well Depth 152ft Bedrock Level 8ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 45 Date printed 2012/12/20 rifled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 10/20/1995 ising Information Casing above ground Oft Drive Shoe Used ?Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 65800 Steel 6inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 1 2f 5 igpm 1hr 30min 1 00f 5 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 1.0 ig 100ft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Tvpe 90465800 Oft 2ft Brown Soil 90465800 2ft 81ft Red Shale 90465800 81ft 102ft Grey Shale 90465800 102ft 119ft Red Shale 90465800 119ft 141ft Grey Shale 90465800 141ft 146ft Red Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 90465800 119ft 2 igpm 90465800 139ft 3 igpm Overall Well Depth 146ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 46 Date printed 2012/12/20 illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 07/18/1996 sing Information Casing above ground Oft Drive Shoe Used? Ye: I Loq Casing Tvpe Diameter From End Slotted? 54300 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 0.5 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Beiow too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Tvpe 90554300 Oft 4ft Brown Clay 90554300 4ft 25ft Red and grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 90554300 200ft 25 igpm 90554300 250ft 50 igpm Overall Well Depth 25ft Bedrock Level 4ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 47 Date printed 2012/12/20 illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic Deepened 11/12/1997 sing Information Casing above ground Oft Drive Shoe Used? YeE There is no casing information. Aquifer TestNield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 0 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 91079200 Oft 70ft Brown and white Soapstone 91079200 70ft 300ft Red and grey Conglomerate Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 91079200 250ft 0.3 igpm Overall Well Depth 300ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 48 Date printed 2012/12/20 'illed by 'ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 08/05/1998 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 94400 Steel 6 inch Oft 98ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 5 igpm No 0 igpm lBTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 91094400 Oft 94ft Brown Clay and Sand 91094400 94ft 98ft Red Broken Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 91094400 98ft 5 igpm Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 98ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. W Date printed 2012/12/20 illed by �II Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 10/23/2001 sing Information Casing above ground 2ft 1 in Drive Shoe Used? Ye! I Lop Casing Type Diameter From End Slotted? 55600 Steel 6 inch Oft 111ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 2.5 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 91555600 Oft 25ft Grey Sand and Gravel 91555600 25ft 97ft Brown Clay 91555600 97ft 108ft Brown Till 91555600 108f 183ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 91555600 117ft 1.5 igpm 91555600 171ft 1 igpm Overall Well Depth 183ft Bedrock Level 97ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. Date printed 2012/12/20 -illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed -inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 11/29/2000 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft 6in Drive Shoe Used? Yes 11 Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 02500 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 0.5 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Lo Well Loci From End Colour Rock Type 91902500 Oft 2ft Brown Clay 91902500 2ft 300ft Red and purple Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loci Depth Rate 91902500 250ft 0.5 igpm 91902500 300ft 0.5 igpm Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 300ft Bedrock Level 2ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 51 Date printed 2012/12/20 Tilled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 07/24/2000 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft 7in Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 44800 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 30ft 4 igpm 1hr 45min 30ft 4 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 92144800 Oft 7ft Grey Fill 92144800 7ft 405ft Pink Shale 92144800 405ft 418ft Grey Shale 92144800 418ft 426ft Red Shale 92144800 426ft 438ft Grey Shale 92144800 438ft 450ft Red Shale 92144800 450ft 505ft Grey Shale 92144800 505ft 525ft Red Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 92144800 300ft 0.5 igpm 92144800 515ft 3.5 igpm Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) 300ft Overall Well Depth 525ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 52 APPENDIX C Stormwater Model Data Vic? 2S PID5518 8 353 (SP) r_ 6P PID55188353 (Pond) Subcat; LR i Por1d` Link Routing Diagram for 20053901 _post _i Prepared by HP, Printed 117/2013 HydroCAD®10 -00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 54 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (selected nodes) Area CN Description (hectares) (s u bcatch me nt-n u m be rs) 12.2890 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (2S) 12.2890 61 TOTAL AREA 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (hectares) Group Numbers 0.0000 HSG A 12.2890 HSG B 2S 0.0000 HSG C 0.0000 HSG D 0.0000 Other 12.2890 TOTAL AREA 56 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG -A HSG -B HSG -C HSG -D Other Total Ground Subcatchm (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) Cover Numbers 0.0000 12.2890 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.2890 >75% Grass cover, Good 2 S 0.0000 12.2890 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 12.2890 TOTAL AREA 57 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line# Node In -Invert Out- Invert Length Slope n Diam/Width Height Inside -Fill Number (meters) (meters) (meters) (m /m) (mm) (mm) (mm) 1 6P 57.000 56.000 50.00 0.0200 0.011 305 0 0 2 6P 57.000 56.000 50.00 0.0200 0.011 305 0 0 • -11 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S 1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor -Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Runoff Area = 122,890.0 ml 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >27 mm Flow Length =727.0 m Tc =47.2 min CN =61 Runoff = 0.2621 m3 /s 3.325 MI Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) Peak Elev = 57.386 m Storage =0.366 MI Inflow= 0.2621 m3 /s 3.325 MI Outflow= 0.1875 m3 /s 3.202 MI Total Runoff Area = 12.2890 ha Runoff Volume = 3.325 MI Average Runoff Depth = 27 mm 100.00% Pervious = 12.2890 ha 0.00% Impervious = 0.0000 ha 59 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24-hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Runoff = 0.2621 m3 /s @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 3.325 MI, Depth> 27 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24-hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm Area (m2) CN Description 122,890.0 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 122,890.0 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /s) 24.5 100.0 0.0250 0.07 Sheet Flow, 0.18= Runoff Depth >27 mm E 0.16= Cultivated: Residue >20% n= 0.170 P2= 89 mm 3.0 61.0 0.0250 0.34 Shallow Concentrated Flow, CN =61 0.1 Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.6 76.0 0.0270 0.35 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.5 190.0 0.0530 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.6 178.0 0.0450 0.45 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.0 122.0 0.0980 0.67 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 47.2 727.0 Total Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Hydrograph Runoff 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) . R ozei-pis J 0.26= NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year ' 0.24- 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm 0.22: Runoff Area = 122,890.0 m2 0.2= Runoff Volume =3.325 MI 0.18= Runoff Depth >27 mm E 0.16= Flow Length =727.0 m 3 o.,a- Tc =47.2 min 0 0.12- CN =61 0.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) . R 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) Inflow Area = 12.2890 ha, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 27 mm for 5 -Year event Inflow = 0.2621 m3 /s @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 3.325 MI Outflow = 0.1875 m3 /s @ 13.07 hrs, Volume= 3.202 MI, Atten= 28 %, Lag= 25.8 min Primary = 0.1875 m3 /s @ 13.07 hrs, Volume= 3.202 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 57.386 m @ 13.07 hrs Surf.Area= 0.0999 ha Storage= 0.366 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 37.9 min calculated for 3.195 MI (96% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 21.0 min ( 998.4 - 977.4 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 2.328 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega- liters) (Mega - liters) 57.000 0.0900 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.1156 1.028 1.028 59.000 0.1444 1.300 2.328 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 0.073 m2 #2 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011, Flow Area= 0.073 m2 Primary OutFlow Max = 0.1875 m3 /s @ 13.07 hrs HW= 57.386 m (Free Discharge) 1:2=RCP-Round 1= RCPRound 12" (Inlet Controls 0.0937 m3 /s @ 1.28 m /s) 12" (Inlet Controls 0.0937 m3 /s @ 1.28 m /s) 61 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD ®10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 0.22- 0.2- F 0.18- E 0.16-. 3 0.14: 0 u. 0.12= 0.1- Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) hydrograph Inflow Area= 12.2890 h Peak Elev= 57.386 m Storage =0.366 MI 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1,77 15 16 T 18 76-76 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 62 7 Inflow _ Primary 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S9 100 -Year 900 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC page 10 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor- Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Runoff Area = 122,890.0 m2 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >77 mm Flow Length =727.0 m Tc =47.2 min CN =61 Runoff--0.8464 m3 /s 9.479 MI Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) Peak Elev= 58.463 m Storage =1.594 MI Inflow = 0.8464 m3 /s 9.479 MI Outflow = 0.4183 m3 /s 9.280 MI Total Runoff Area = 12.2890 ha Runoff Volume = 9.479 MI Average Runoff Depth = 77 mm 100.00% Pervious = 12.2890 ha 0.00% Impervious = 0.0000 ha 63 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Runoff = 0.8464 m3 /s @ 12.60 hrs, Volume= 9.479 MI, Depth> 77 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Area (m2) CN Description 122,890.0 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 122,890.0 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /S) 24.5 100.0 0.0250 0.07 Sheet Flow, 0.6- Runoff Depth >77 mm y 0.55: Cultivated: Residue >20% n= 0.170 P2= 89 mm 3.0 61.0 0.0250 0.34 Shallow Concentrated Flow, CN =61 0.35 Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.6 76.0 0.0270 0.35 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.5 190.0 0.0530 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.6 178.0 0.0450 0.45 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.0 122.0 0.0980 0.67 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 47.2 727.0 Total Subcatchment 2S: PID55188353 (SP) Hydrograph 0.9 -- � o_sasa rrt'rs�l o.as= NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year ' 0.8 - 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm 0.75= 0.7: Runoff Area =122,890.0 m2 0.65 Runoff Volume =9.479 MI 0.6- Runoff Depth >77 mm y 0.55: Flow Length =727.0 m E 0.5= Tc =47.2 min E 0.45' LL 0.4-. CN =61 0.35 0.15 0.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 64 Runoff 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 117/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) Inflow Area = 12.2890 ha, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 77 mm for 100 -Year event Inflow = 0.8464 m3 /s @ 12.60 hrs, Volume= 9.479 MI Outflow = 0.4183 m3 /s @ 13.35 hrs, Volume= 9.280 MI, Atten= 51 %, Lag= 44.8 min Primary = 0.4183 mils @ 13.35 hrs, Volume= 9.280 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 58.463 m @ 13.35 hrs Surf.Area= 0.1289 ha Storage= 1.594 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 42.7 min calculated for 9.280 Ml (98% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 32.2 min ( 961.3 - 929.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 2.328 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega- liters) (Mega- liters) 57.000 0.0900 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.1156 1.028 1.028 59.000 0.1444 1.300 2.328 Device Routinq Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 0.073 m2 #2 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m 156.000 m S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 n= 0.011, Flow Area= 0.073 m2 Primary OutFlow Max = 0.4183 m3 /s @ 13.35 hrs HW= 58.463 m (Free Discharge) 1: 1 =RCP _Round 12" (Barrel Controls 0.2091 m3 /s @ 2.86 m /s) 2= RCP_Round 12" (Barrel Controls 0.2091 m3 /s @ 2.86 m /s) DR 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24-hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD 810.00 s/n 07774 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Pond 6P: PID55188353 (Pond) Hydrograph °.9 0.8464 m' /s Inflow Area = 12.2890 ha ' 0.85 0 8 = Peak E lev= 58.463 m = 0.75= 0.7- Storage =1.594 MI 0.65= l: 0.6 H 0.55= 1 E 0.5 0.45-q o i o ai83 m•ls - I U: 0.4= 0.35= s C? 0.3; - 0.25- . „ - 0.15 0.1 t 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ti 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 '2''2'''2''3 24 Time (hours) ..� Inflow Primary 4 /I is PID0041 644 (LP) 5P PI D00416644 (Pond) (Subcat Reach Pon\ Ljnj(' Routing Diagram for 20053901_post Prepared by HP, Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC [71 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pace 2 Area Listing (selected nodes) Area CN Description (hectares) (subcatchment- numbers) 25.8528 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (1S) 25.8528 61 TOTAL AREA AN 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC page 3 Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (hectares) Group Numbers 0.0000 HSG A 25.8528 HSG B 1S 0.0000 HSG C 0.0000 HSG D 0.0000 Other 25.8528 TOTAL AREA & 20053901 _post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG -A HSG -B HSG -C HSG -D Other Total Ground Subcatchrr (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) Cover Numbers 0.0000 25.8528 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25.8528 0.0000 0.0000 70 0.0000 25.8528 >75% Grass cover, Good 1 S 0.0000 25.8528 TOTAL AREA 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line# Node In -Invert Out -Invert 0.0200 Number (meters) (meters) 1 5P 57.000 56.000 2 5P 57.000 56.000 3 5P 57.000 56.000 Length Slope r (meters) (m /m) 50.00 0.0200 0.011 50.00 0.0200 0.011 50.00 0.0200 0.011 71 Diam/Width Height Inside -Fill (mm) (mm) (mm) 381 0 0 305 0 0 305 0 0 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S 1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page , 6 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor- Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 1S: PID00416644 (LP) Runoff Area = 258,528.0 m2 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >27 mm Flow Length =944.0 m Tc =57.2 min CN =61 Runoff=0.4966 m3 /s 6.945 MI Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Peak Elev= 57.435 m Storage =0.819 MI Inflow = 0.4966 m3 /s 6.945 MI Outflow= 0.3563 m3 /s 6.656 MI Total Runoff Area = 25.8528 ha Runoff Volume = 6.945 MI Average Runoff Depth = 27 mm 100.00% Pervious = 25.8528 ha 0.00% Impervious = 0.0000 ha 72 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 07774 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 1S: PID00416644 (LP) Runoff = 0.4966 m3 /s @ 12.79 hrs, Volume= 6.945 MI, Depth> 27 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24-hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm Area (ml) CN Description 258,528.0 61 >75% Grass cover, Good HSG B 258,528.0 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /S) 26.8 100.0 0.0200 0.06 Sheet Flow, Cultivated: Residue >20% n= 0.170 P2= 89 mm 5.5 100.0 0.0200 0.30 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 5.8 176.0 0.0570 0.51 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 8.8 217.0 0.0370 0.41 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.9 164.0 0.1100 0.71 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.4 187.0 0.0530 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 57.2 944.0 Total Subcatchment 1S: PID00416644 (LP) riydrograph _. Runoff m' ] �, OAB66 o.s; NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year ! 0.45= 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm Runoff Area = 258,528.0 m2 0.4- Runoff Volume =6.945 MI 0.35 -. Runoff Depth >27 mm 0.3 = Flow Length =944.0 m 3 Tc =57.2 min 0 0.25 U. CN =61 0.1 0.05-1 1 ' 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 73 20053901_post N8 -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD@ 10.00 s/n 07774 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Inflow Area = 25.8528 ha, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 27 mm for 5 -Year event Inflow = 0.4966 m3 /s @ 12.79 hrs, Volume= 6.945 MI Outflow = 0.3563 m3 /s @ 13.32 hrs, Volume= 6.656 MI, Atten= 28 %, Lag= 31.6 min Primary = 0.3563 m3 /s @ 13.32 hrs, Volume= 6.656 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 57.435 m @ 13.32 hrs Surf.Area= 0.1964 ha Storage= 0.819 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 42.6 min calculated for 6.642 MI (96% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 24.0 min ( 1,007.2 - 983.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 4.368 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega- liters) (Mega- liters) 57.000 0.1800 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.2176 1.988 1.988 59.000 0.2584 2.380 4.368 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 381 mm Round RCP Round 15" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, #2 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m 156.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, #3 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.114 m2 Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.073 mZ Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.073 m2 Primary OutFlow Max = 0.3562 m3 /s @ 13.32 hrs HW= 57.435 m (Free Discharge) '=RCP Round 15" (Inlet Controls 0.1498 m3 /s @ 1.31 m /s) 2= RCP_Round 12" (Inlet Controls 0.1032 m3 /s @ 1.41 m /s) 3= RCP_Round 12" (Inlet Controls 0.1032 m3 /s @ 1.41 m /s) 74 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24-hr S 1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 0 r4 E � 0 0. u- 0.1 0.1 Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Hydrograph Inflow o.asss mgr` Primary Inflow Area = 25.8528 ha Peak Elev= 57.435 m Storage =0.819 MI _. D.356C1101s1.',, i r i i i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 75 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 900 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor- Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 1S: PID00416644(LP) RunoffArea= 258,528.0 ml 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >77 mm Flow Length =944.0 m Tc =57.2 min CN =61 Runoff= 1.6045 m3 /s 19.830 MI Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Peak Elev= 58.685 m Storage =3.573 MI Inflow= 1.6045 m3 /s 19.830 MI Outflow= 0.8096 m3 /s 19.355 MI Total Runoff Area = 25.8528 ha Runoff Volume = 19.830 MI Average Runoff Depth = 77 mm 100.00% Pervious = 25.8528 ha 0.00% Impervious = 0.0000 ha 76 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 900 -Year 900 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pape 11 Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: PID00416644 (LP) Runoff = 1.6045 m3 /s @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 19.830 MI, Depth> 77 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Area (M2) CN Description 258,528.0 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B 258,528.0 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /S) 26.8 100.0 0.0200 0.06 Sheet Flow, Cultivated: Residue >20% n=0.170 P2= 89 mm 5.5 100.0 0.0200 0.30 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 5.8 176.0 0.0570 0.51 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 8.8 217.0 0.0370 0.41 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 3.9 164.0 0.1100 0.71 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 6.4 187.0 0.0530 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 2.13 m/s 57.2 944.0 Total E 3 0 LL Subcatchment 1 S: PID00416644 (LP) Hydrorgraph -7soasisi� NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year ! 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Runoff Area = 258,528.0 m2 Runoff Volume= 19.830 MI Runoff Depth >77 mm Flow Length =944.0 m Tc =57.2 min CN =61 " is 10 14 lb lb It 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 77 Runoff 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Inflow Area = 25.8528 ha, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 77 mm for 100 -Year event Inflow = 1.6045 m3 /s @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 19.830 MI Outflow = 0.8096 m3 /s @ 13.62 hrs, Volume= 19.355 MI, Atten= 50 %, Lag= 52.7 min Primary = 0.8096 m3 /s @ 13.62 hrs, Volume= 19.355 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 58.685 m @ 13.62 hrs Surf.Area= 0.2455 ha Storage= 3.573 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 51.0 min calculated for 19.355 MI (98% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 39.1 min ( 974.6 - 935.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 4.368 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega - liters) (Mega- liters) 57.000 0.1800 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.2176 1.988 1.988 59.000 02584 2.380 4.368 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 381 mm Round RCP Round 15" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet I Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, #2 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, #3 Primary 57.000 m 305 mm Round RCP Round 12" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.114 m2 Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.073 m2 Ke= 0.500 S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 Flow Area= 0.073 m2 Primary OutFlow Max = 0.8095 m3 /s @ 13.62 hrs HW= 58.684 m (Free Discharge) 1 =RCP _Round 15" (Inlet Controls 0.3703 m3 /s @ 3.25 m /s) 2= RCP_Round 12" (Barrel Controls 0.2196 m3 /s @ 3.01 m /s) 3= RCP_Round 12" (Barrel Controls 0.2196 m3 /s @ 3.01 m /s) W 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S 1 900 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HvdroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 N 3 O LL Pond 5P: PID00416644 (Pond) Hydrograph Y O o r o a iu 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) W r-1 Inflow :'Primary 680 PITS AND QUARRIES (PQ) (1) Uses Any land, building or structure may be used for the purposes of, and for no other purpose than (a) The following uses: pit quarry - the excavation of sand, gravel, clay, shale, limestone, or other deposits; the removal of topsoil; (b) As a secondary use, screening of aggregates, crushing and washing of aggregates, storage of aggregates, topsoil and overburden, the parking and storage of trucks and heavy equipment, a caretaker's residence, offices, buildings, and weigh scales. (c) Subject to Section 3(b), an accessory building, structure or use incidental to a use, building or structure permitted in this section. (2) Prohibition of Excavation (a) Any excavation of material identified in situations in subsection (1) if it is undertaken for the purposes of sale or other commercial use, is prohibited until an excavation permit has been obtained. (3) Zone Standards Subject to (c)(iii) the minimum distances stipulated herein must be maintained between any excavation upon land with respect to which an excavation permit has been issued and the following situations: Situations (i) Residentially Zoned property or existing dwellings at the time of the appliction to re -zone for pit or quarry (ii) Other Zones (iii) Public water supply (iv) Public road (v) Property line of excavation site Minimum Minimum Minimum Distance From Distance Distance From a Quarry From a Pit Crusher 200 m 150m 200 m 50 m 30 m 50 m 600m 150 m 150 m 30 m 30 m 30 m 30m 30m 30m 122 * 680 PQ ZONE (3) (a) No building, structure or storage or repair area in connection with the excavation may be located within 30 metres in the case of a gravel pit, or 50 metres in the case of a quarry, of a public street or an adjacent zone other than an "I -1" Light Industrial, "1 -2" Heavy Industrial or "P -Q" Pits and Quarries Zone (b) Notwithstanding subparagrah 2(a)(iv), that no excavation take place within seven and one -half (7.5) metres at the ground line of the legs of a power transmission line tower, with a slope of not less than one and one -half (1' /z) metres horizontal to one (1) metre vertical away there from. (c) Access (i) Every private access shall be located a minimum of 30 metres from the property lines of the pit or quarry; (ii) Every private access shall be paved for the first 30 metres from its intersection with a public street; (iii) Where one or more residential dwellings exist within 150 metres of the private access, that portion of the private access must be paved unless; the dwelling or dwellings are owned by the owner of the pit or quarry served by the said private access or; there exists either a natural treed screen having a minimum depth of 30 metres and a minimum height of 4 metres, a natural topographic feature a minimum of 4 metres in height, or a man made landscaped berm having a minimum height of 4 metres, located between the said private access and the said residential dwelling or dwellings extending 25 m further on either side. (iv) Every private access created subsequent to the coming into force of this section and which has a length greater than 50 metres shall be constructed in a curved fashion so as to prevent direct visibility of the ecavation site and operation from the public street at its intersection with the private access; (v) Every private access to a pit or quarry shall have a gate at the entrance, within 20m of the public road. The gate shall be locked when the pit or quarry is not actively in operation. (d) Hours of Operation Excavation of land and related activities involving the use of heavy equipment and crushing equipment, shall only be carried on between the hours of 7:00 o'clock in the forenoon and 8:00 o'clock in the afternoon of each day, except on holidays as defined in the Provincial Interpretation Act when no excavation of land is permitted. 123 81 680 (3) (e) Screening PQ ZONE A treed buffer, at a minimum of 30 metres in depth and a minimum of 4 metres in height or a topograhic feature a minimum of 4 metres in height, shall surround the excavation site with the exception of an area for an approved access, If trees do not exist in quantities to adequately screen the visibility of the operation from a public road or adjacent residential properties, the applicant shall construct a treed and landscaped berm 4 metres in height to visually screen the excavation site and associated activities. The location of buffers, existing or proposed, shall be identified on the applicants site plan(s) and the treed buffer(s) shall be in place prior to the start of excavation of the aggregate resource. Onsite material may be used for constructing buffers and berms. (f) Site Rehabilitation The land with respect to which an excavation permit has been issued shall be rehabilitated in a progressive manner in accordance with subsection (11) hereof. (4) Excavation Permit Application A person seeking to obtain an excavation permit shall be the owner or agent of the land proposed to be excavated and shall make application in writing to the Building Inspector in a form prescribed by the Building Inspector, and such application signed by the applicant, shall, (a) record the name and address of the applicant and the location of the proposed excavation; (b) contain a statement indicating the purpose of the work to be carried on and the portion of land where excavation will commence or is in progress, the order of sequence for excavating the balance of the land and the intended use of the land after excavation has ceased; (c) contain a statement of the estimated volume of material in cubic metres proposed to be excavated during the term of the excavation permit; (d) include the owners express consent to the entry upon the land which is the subject of the application by the City of Saint John and anyone authorized by it including its servants, agents, employees and workmen, whether by foot or by vehicle together with the equipment to be used for the purpose of rehabilitating that land in accordance with the provisions of this By -law in the event the owner has failed to do so within the time limits stipulated herein; (e) state the estimated dates of commencement and duration of the excavation; (f) indicate the probable maximum depths and maximum slopes of the proposed excavation at the end of the term of the permit for which the application is made; 124 880 PQ ZONE (4) (g) indicate the ultimate depth, elevations and grades of the excavation shall be subject to any applicable requirements of the Building Inspector for future streets and water and sewer lines; (h) set out the controls and methods to be employed in preventing the emission of smoke, dust, odours, toxic materials, vibrations and noise; (i} all blasting to be monitored to ensure compliance by a professional engineer; (ii) all blasting to be designed, loaded, supervised and initiated by a Category I blaster as certified under the "Apprenticeship and Occupational Certification Act "; (iii) all blasting operations to conform to the latest version of the "General Regulation — Occupational Health and Safety Act" with particular attention to Parts; "XII- Explosives" and "XIV -Pits and Quarries ". (i) include one or more plans drawn to a scale of not less than 1 to 1000 by a professional engineer, landscape architect, land use planner and or, surveyor. These pian(s) shall show the phased development of a pit or quarry for a period of 1 -5 years and shall indicate; 0) the boundaries of the property with respect to which the application is made, and its relation to existing streets and other properties; (ii) existing topography at no more than 2 metre contour intervals, or spot elevations or cross sections with a vertical scale of 1 to 100, or a combination thereof, where 2 metre contour intervals are not available; (iii) location of existing natural watercourses and drainage areas as at the seasonal spring peak flow period; (iv) location of existing power transmission line towers and other structures; (v) an outline of the area to be excavated; (vi) the location of proposed water courses and drainage, including lakes, ponds and retention areas; (vii) the proposed location of any buildings, scale house, equipment, equipment storage area and equipment repair sheds or areas; (viii) the location of protective fencing if required by the Building Inspector; (ix) the location of entrances and exits to the site of the proposed excavation and gates (if any); (x) the location of traffic routes to and from the area to be excavated; 125 83 680 PQ ZONE (4) (i) (xi) the location and size of signs erected or proposed to be erected within the site of the proposed excavation and gates (if any); (xii) the depth of the existing water table; (xiii) the method of achieving a closed loop drainage system at the excavation area. If a closed loop system cannot be achieved, illustrate on site plans and have evidence that the Provincial or Federal approval authority, has approved an alternative drainage system; (xiv) the location of an existing or proposed water source for use in dust control measures subject to subparagraph (10)(e); (xv) the location of storage area(s) for hazardous materials as defined by the Provincial Hazardous Materials Act; (xvi) the location of storage areas for explosive materials; (xvii) the location of proposed treed berms and natural treed buffers to be retained for screening; (xviii) the location of storage areas for topsoil and overburden to be used in rehabilitation. (j) Where the application is for an excavation permit relating to a pit or quarry proposed to be opened subsequent to the coming into force of this sub - paragraph, a statement from a professional engineer or hydrologist identifying the depth of the existing water table at the location of the proposed excavation as well as his opinion respecting effect K any, of the proposed excavation upon that water table level on adjacent properties not owned by the applicant; (k) Where an application for an excavation permit relating to an existing pit or quarry site proposes to increase the depth of excavation on that site, a statement from a professional engineer or hydrologist identifying the depth of the existing water table at the location of the proposed excavation as well as his opinion respecting effect, if any, of the proposed excavation upon that water table level; (1) An application for an excavation permit shall be accompanied by one or more plans, other than those mentioned in paragraph 680(4)(i) drawn to a scale by the professionals mentioned in that paragraph, indicating the proposed method of rehabilitation of the excavation area according to the provisions of this By -law, and setting out; (i) the proposed grading at not more than 2 metre contour intervals or by cross - sections with a horizontal scale of 1 to 1000 and a vertical scale of 1 to 100 or any combination of these including the slopes for the end of the term for which the permit is being sought; 126 680 ,00-IM61i (4) (1) (ii) the location, quantity and type of trees, planting, hydro - seeding, or other ground cover materials to be used including the type and depth of soil to be used on the berms for the purposes of establishing vegetation; (iii) details of all items and features pertaining to improvement and preservation of the land, including any retaining walls; (iv) the estimated dates of commencement and completion of such rehabilitation, the portion of land on which it will commence and the order and the time schedule for rehabilitation of the balance of the site. (m) Each application for an excavation permit shall be accompanied by a fee.of $1,100. (5) Excavation Permit Subject to subsection (7) the Building Inspector shall issue an excavation permit where, (a) an application under this Section has been received and; (b) the applicant has deposited with the Building Inspector security in accordance with subsection (9), satisfactory to the Building Inspector and; (c) the proposed excavation and rehabilitation of the land for which an excavation permit has been sought have been approved by the Development Officer as conforming with all requirements of this By -law; and (d) the fee set out in subsection (4) has been paid, (6) (a) An excavation permit is valid from the date of its issuance until the earlier of: (i) December 3151 of the same year; or (ii) The date of the registration in the Saint John County Registry Office of a Deed conveying title to the land in question from the applicant. (b) In the event an excavation permit terminates due to the conveyance of the land in question, the Building Inspector shall issue, without fee, a new excavation permit for the remainder of the calendar year if the new owner delivers to the Building Inspector: (i) security in accordance with the requirements of subsection (9); and (ii) a written statement that in consideration of the Building Inspector's issuing an excavation permit the new owner consents to the entry upon the land in question by the City of Saint John and anyone authorized by it, including its servants, agents, employees and workmen, whether by foot or by vehicle together with the equipment to be used for the purpose of rehabilitating that land in accordance with the provisions of this section in the event the owner has failed to do so within the time limit stipulated herein. 127 660 PQ ZONE (7) An excavation permit shall, (a) be in the form prescribed by the Building Inspector; (b) be signed by the Building Inspector, (c) indicate the purpose of the work to be carried on; (d) set out any controls or measures which in the opinion of the Building Inspector shall be employed in the operation, including any conditions which may have been imposed by Common Council upon the re- zoning of the site. (8) No permit may be issued under subsection (6) if, (a) the proposed work would; (i) create a hazard to human life; (ii) endanger adjoining property, or (iii) adversely affect a public sewer, water main, watercourse or street; or (iv) not meet the conditions of use set out in the zones which permit the excavation use. (b) the land of the site is subject to geological instability or flood hazards to the extent that, in the opinion of the Building Inspector, no reasonable amount of corrective work could eliminate or sufficiently reduce the instability or hazard. {9) No excavation permit may be issued under subsection (6) until the applicant has deposited a sum of money or an Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit issued by a chartered Canadian financial institution in favour of the City, in an amount determined by the Building Inspector to be adequate to cover the estimated cost of rehabilitation of the land of the site in accordance with the terms and time limits stipulated herein. (10) Permit Conditions A permit under subsection (5) is subject to the following terms and conditions: (a) Slope of Wonting Face (i) The slope of the working face of the excavation, other than in a quarry, must not be steeper than one and one-quarter (1 %) metres horizontal to one (1) metre vertical for the full depth of the excavation; (ii) Subject to paragraph (10)(b) quarries are permitted to have a vertical working face; 128 86 680 PQ ZONE {10) {a) (iii) Any land which extends, projects or juts over or beyond the top, working face of the excavation shall be knocked down and left in such condition at the end of each working shift so as to prevent the danger of a fall by natural or other causes; (iv) Where an occasional operating condition results in a working face having a slope steeper than the one and one - quarter (1 %) metre horizontal to one (1) metre vertical prescribed under subparagraph (i), the owner of the land being excavated shall bring or have the slope brought to at least that prescribed within forty -eight (48) hours after notice to that effect from the Building Inspector. (b) Protection at Vertical Slopes Where the slope of the working face of a quarry is steeper than 1:1 (vertical: horizontal) and the vertical height of the working face is greater than 3 metres a combination of boulders and signage spaced along the perimeter of the slope will be required. The boulders shall be no smaller than 1 metre in size and spaced at maximum intervals of 2 metres. Signage warning of the danger shall be placed at 15 metre intervals, Fencing may be required for all or a portion of the site if in the opinion of the Building Inspector there is a greater chance that public safety is at risk. (c) Access Every private access serving a new or existing pit or quarry shall be maintained in a reasonably dust free condition by paving, watering, or use of calcium chloride and areas that are paved shall remain in a reasonably dust -free condition. (d) Water Table No excavation shall take place in a pit or quarry so as to lower the water table on land adjacent to that for which an excavation permit has been issued. The ultimate depth of the excavation must be able to sustain the intended long term uses of the land as indicated. (e) Water Source Every new or expanding pit or quarry must have an available natural or man made source of water on site, sufficient to meet the requirements of the Provincial Clean Environment Act, before excavation can take place. (f) Site Drainage All pits or quarries shall operate with a closed loop drainage system allowing no water to leave the un- rehabilitated portion of the excavation area, or in accordance with a drainage plan approved by the Provincial Department of the Environment and Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 129 �ffi 580 (10) (g) Property Lines PQ ZONE The owner shall have the property lines staked or marked as required by the Building Inspector. The owner shall, if requested by the Building Inspector, provide one or more reference benchmarks. (h) Topsoil Removal Topsoil stripped from the site shall be stockpiled on site in sufficient quantities for use as an organic material to provide for the complete re- vegetation of the disturbed areas of the site not including access roads. Removal of topsoil shall not extend beyond the excavation area as approved for the current year of the permit. (i) Clear Cutting Clear cutting of trees or other existing vegetation is not permitted to extend any further than the excavation area for the current year of the permit and access road as illustrated on the site plan. (11) Site Rehabilitation (a) The owner of the land must commence the rehabilitation of the excavation area not cater than six months after the earlier of any one of the following situations arising: the excavation or any portion thereof has reached its maximum allowable depth as well the minimum setback requirements set out in the subsections (3) and (10); or the abandonment of the pit or quarry. A pit or quarry is hereby deemed to have been abandoned when twelve (12) months pass following the date an excavation permit for the land was last valid; (iii) the section of the excavation site is not required for other purposes related to the operation; (iv) the obligation to commence rehabilitation hereunder arises as often as any of the situations identified in paragraph (a) occur with respect to the land for which an excavation permit has been issued. (b) Every portion of the excavation area disturbed for the purposes of excavation or associated activities, with the exception of the access road, shall be cleared of debris, sloped in accordance with this By -law, and vegetation established in accordance with the City's specifications for hydro - seeding. (c) In the case of a gravel pit, the slope of the working face of the excavation must be rehabilitated so that it is not steeper than three (3) metres horizontal to one (1) metre vertical for any portion of the depth of the excavation and be hydro- seeded. 680 PQ ZONE (11) (d) In the case of a quarry the working face of the excavation must be rehabilitated so that it is stepped with a vertical rise of not greater than 10 metres meeting a horizontal plateau of not less than 3 metres in width. The horizontal plateaus shall have vegetation established where possible in the opinion of the Building Inspector. A consistent slope of no less than (2) metres horizontal to (1) metre vertical also permitted. (e) The top of the rehabilitated slope of an excavation must not be located within the applicable minimum set back requirements as set out in Section (3). (f) When any one of the situations described in paragraph (a) arises, all equipment, buildings, and structures upon the land to which the excavation permit applies, and associated directly or indirectly with excavation other than fences required under subparagraph 680(10)(b) shall be removed and all stockpiles, sand, gravel, stone, rock, clay or similar material shall be removed or utilized in the rehabilitation of the land. (g) Adequate measures shall be taken to prevent surface water from damaging the face of the excavation or fill by the provision of berms, swales or other measures which satisfactorily resolve the problem. (h) Where a holder of an excavation permit fails to rehabilitate the excavation area in the manner and within the time limits required hereby, the Council may cause the required work to be done and to be paid for from the security deposit. (i) The rehabilitation required hereby must be completed not later than 12 months following the deadline for the commencement of rehabilitation established herein. (j) Rehabilitation of the portions identified in subsection (11)(a) must be completed no later than one year following its' commencement. (12) Enforcement In the event of a contravention or failure to comply with any provision of this section the Building Inspector may suspend or in the case of a continued violation, revoke the excavation permit, in writing, to be delivered by hand or by registered mail to the owner, and may, if the conditions leading to the suspension are subsequently corrected, reinstate the suspended permit or issue a permit if the conditions are corrected and all the requirements for the issuance of a permit have been satisfactorily met. Council may cause any work to be done and to be paid for from the security deposit. 131 :• ■ BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. BRUNSWICK 40 Ashburn Lake Road tel: 506,696.9 PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB fax: 506.696.91515 8 Engineering & Consulting Inc. E2L 4E3 reception @brunswickengineering.ca PROPOSED NEW QUARRY ASSESSMENT 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB submitted to BARSA VENTURES by BRUNSWICK ENGINEERING & CONSULTING INC. 91 FILE 2005.40 - R01 JANUARY 2013 HST # 82470 0884 RT0001 BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. January 7, 2013 Barsa Ventures 1701 Red Head Road Saint John, NB Attention: Kemal Debly 40 Ashburn Lake Road tel: 506.696,9155 PO Box 1045, Saint John, NB fax: 506.696.9158 E2L 4E3 reception3bruns ,.vickengineering.ca File: 2005.40 - R01 RE: PROPOSED NEW QUARRYASSESSMENT, 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK Please find enclosed our assessment and report on the above noted project. If any further information or clarification is required, please contact the undersigned Ste Perry, P. Eng. SRP Enclosures pROFESStp �a"eotNstvB ��^� -0 o� �G• 1 9PP- f9�Pers t �0, Date to dU NouveaugN�il�r� 4�t�UR lAnFdATP�G 92 HST # 82470 0884 RT0001 PROPOSED NEW QUARRY ASSESSMENT 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK TABLE OF CONTENTS COVERING LETTER ..... TABLE OF CONTENTS. Paqe 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ............................... 1 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS .............................................................................. ............................... 1 3.0 GROUNDWATER STUDY ................................................................... ............................... 1 4.0 STORMWATER RUNOFF ................................................................... ............................... 2 5.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE .................................................................... ............................... 3 6.0 DUST CONTROL ................................................................................. ............................... 5 7.0 BLASTING ............................................................................................. ..............................6 8.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................... ..............................8 APPENDICES A Site Plan & Cross Sections B Craig Hydrogeological Inc. Report C Stormwater Model Data PROPOSED NEW QUARRY ASSESSMENT 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK 1.0 INTRODUCTION Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. was retained by Barsa Ventures to conduct an assessment of the proposed quarry located at 2112 Bayside Drive in Saint John, NB. The assessment for the proposed new quarry consisted of five main parts; noise, dust, blasting, stormwater runoff and the impact on the ground water down gradient of the proposed sites. 2.0 SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located at 2112 Bayside Drive in the east side of Saint John, NB. More specifically, the subject property is located on the west side of Bayside Drive between the cross streets of Proud Road and Hewitt Road. The subject property is bounded by Bayside Drive to the east, an existing vacant wooded property to the north, a power line to the east and a vacant heavily wooded property to the south. The current site conditions for the subject properties are heavily wooded and vegetated; with the natural slope of the land running form the south to the north / northwest towards Bean Brook. Rock outcrops can be seen from Bayside Drive, and it is anticipated that overburden thickness will range from 0.3 to 1.5 metres from existing ground surface. Site plans and sections are in Appendix A. 3.0 GROUNDWATER STUDY As part of the site assessment, a study was completed on the groundwater conditions in the area and the potential impacts this proposed quarry could have on the groundwater both at the site and down gradient at the wells of the residences. To aid in the study, Brunswick Engineering retained the services of Craig Hydrogeological Inc. A copy of the report submitted by Craig Hydrogeological Inc. is appended in Appendix B. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 94 Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 2 To summarize the findings from Craig Hydrogeological; The nearest private well is located approximately 550 metres from the subject property; all other wells are in excess of 600 metres. Based on the available data from the Province of NB, 10 well logs were obtained and of the 10 only one well was developed in the overburden soils. The subject property is separated from the residences by Bean Brook which forms a hydraulic divide between the wells and quarry. Given the vertical difference (30 metres) between the residences and the finished proposed pit floor, it is not possible for the quarry operations to dewater the aquifer zone of the wells. Blasting can increase the fractures in the bedrock immediately adjacent to the site, which can in the short term lower the groundwater table, however the groundwater table will be recharged and return to its original elevation. This only happens within a maximum distance of 100 metres from the blasting site. Based on the findings from Craig Hydrogeological and our own research and analysis, we believe given the site conditions, topography and proposed development that there will not be negative impacts on the existing groundwater supplies. 4.0 STORMWA TER RUNOFF As part of the assessments for the new quarry, a stormwater runoff investigation was completed. As part of the investigation, pre - development and post development models were created using storm event data published by Environment Canada and using the City of Saint John Storm Drainage Design Criteria Manual, accepted industry standards and practices and good engineering judgment. To determine the pre - development runoff flows, Lidar survey was obtained and the data was used in conjunction with existing survey data available from the province to generate existing contours which was used to model the storm water. Existing infrastructure and surface conditions were all identified and confirmed in the field by Brunswick Engineering staff. The post - development runoff flow modeling was based on the design grades, proposed infrastructure all the while using similar storm events as the pre - development. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 96 Proposed Quarry 2005.40 - R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 3 The software used to model this project was HydroCAD version 10.0. To properly model this site, the SCS TR -20 method was used for modeling the runoff, the routing (channels/ ditches) was modeled using a method called Storage- Indication plus Translation. This method for modeling the runoff routing simply takes the geometrical properties of the channel and the physical attributes to determine the in and outflows as well as any possible storage. For modelling the site, a rainfall event with a duration of 24 hours and a return period of 100 years was used. The results of the models show that there will be a net increase in the amount of runoff generated on the sites; however the sedimentation ponds can be sized accordingly to reduce the excess runoff and satisfy the requirement of no net increase to leave the site. This infrastructure will include but not be limited to culverts, ditches, check dams, and a sedimentation/ stormwater pond. Preliminary numbers show that a pond approximately 210m2 in size will be required for a 1 00y return storm. Stormwater model printouts have been appended in Appendix C and a summary of the results are in the table below. Location Pre- Post Post Development Development Development with Pond (m3 /S) (m3 /S) (m3 /S) Barsa Proposed Quarry 0.3468 2.1738 0.3305 The results from the stormwater modelling show that the pre - development and post development stormwater requirements can be satisfied. This stormwater investigation is an abbreviated investigation, with a more detailed report being completed should the project be approved. 5.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE With any type of development, construction noise is inevitable and high levels are usually considered undesirable. For the proposed quarry, there will be heavy equipment, truck traffic, blasting and crushing spreads associated with the operations. The anticipated construction equipment and their published noise levels were taken and modelled, taking the topography, working face direction and site conditions into account. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB rd On the subject property, the eastern boundary (nearest the residence) will remain vegetated and is situated higher than the quarry, so the residence will not be exposed to any significant amount of noise. The residences to the northwest will have a more direct path for sound waves to follow as the top 5 metres of the quarry will be visible to some of the residences. Along the northern boundary, the heavily wooded buffer will have to be maintained and in some sections along the buffer a visual/ noise attenuating berm will have to be constructed. It is anticipated that this berm may have to be a high as 5 metres in places, however this can be easily created using the stripped overburden from the site. The land between the proposed quarry and the residences is considered "soft" and will aid in the attenuation of sound, as vegetation absorbs sound waves where as "hard" surfaces reflect sound waves. Using a conservative noise level of 115 dBA at the subject property (source), and having the nearest residence (receptor) within the line of sight is 750+ metres the noise level at the receptor will have been attenuated to a level below 60 dBA (with berms installed) which is comparable to a perceived noise level of having an window mounted air conditioner running in a room. This would be a worst case scenario at the nearest residence within the line of site, as the sound will diminish with distance. Other aspects which will help attenuate the sound would be wind direction. Published by NAV Canada, at the Saint John airport the predominant wind direction in the summer months is out of the south / south west. Less than 10% of the time the wind will prevail out of a direction that will be directed towards the residents. The wind direction and attenuation have not been included in the calculations for the construction noise levels, which will make the anticipated noise levels shown in the table below conservative. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 9% Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — RO1 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 120 110 100 m v 0 a 90 d io Z 80 J N O Z 70 60 50 6i Quarry Operations - Noise Levels 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 Distance from Quarry (m) As shown in the table above, the construction noise levels decrease with distance, to a point that industry considers acceptable for a residential area. Lines of sight and wind direction can be viewed on the plan and sections in Appendix A. 6.0 DUST CONTROL Given the proposed activities associated with the proposed quarry, dust will be instantaneously generated during blasts and will dissipate quite quickly as the air borne particles are usually larger than normally generated dust given the nature of the operation. The two main sources of dust being generated will be associated with crushing operations and trucking on site on gravel roads. With the crushing operation, the dust will be mostly confined to the work area, as the operation will be shielded from the wind near the ground surface by the rock face, wooded areas, and noise/ visual berms. Should fugitive dust become a nuisance, water nozzles can be installed where the manufactured material is coming off the conveyor belts and into small stockpiles. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. SA Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB - - — -- - -- — ; M_u_m_ a_n_Pa_in_ i hreshom - J- - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- Jet Plane Above � b 115m -- - ----------- 1 - - - - - -- - - - - - H_ earing Protection Required Chainsaw 15m _ Qua Operation _ _ - t Pickup Truck @ 15m - 7 Department Store 1_- - - - --- - - - -- I Room I AC in Window 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 Distance from Quarry (m) As shown in the table above, the construction noise levels decrease with distance, to a point that industry considers acceptable for a residential area. Lines of sight and wind direction can be viewed on the plan and sections in Appendix A. 6.0 DUST CONTROL Given the proposed activities associated with the proposed quarry, dust will be instantaneously generated during blasts and will dissipate quite quickly as the air borne particles are usually larger than normally generated dust given the nature of the operation. The two main sources of dust being generated will be associated with crushing operations and trucking on site on gravel roads. With the crushing operation, the dust will be mostly confined to the work area, as the operation will be shielded from the wind near the ground surface by the rock face, wooded areas, and noise/ visual berms. Should fugitive dust become a nuisance, water nozzles can be installed where the manufactured material is coming off the conveyor belts and into small stockpiles. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. SA Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB C During hot dry days, water may have to be applied to the driveways and access points of the quarry to minimize dust being generated from truck traffic. Also, traffic on site should be limited to 25km /hr to minimize dust from being generated. As stated with the noise attenuation, the wind direction predominately prevails from directions which will direct any fugitive dust away from the residences. 7.0 BLASTING As this is a quarry a certain amount of blasting will be required to development the site and establish access roads, ponds and ditches and a working rock face. It is anticipated that production blasting will be required up to a maximum of 10 times peryearwith each blast generating between 5000 and 10,000 tonnes of shot rock. The operating times for these blasts will be between 9am and 5pm, with all blasts following the blasters code of practice as per the Occupational Health & Safety Act and Regulations for the Province of New Brunswick. Prior to blasting activities commencing, the owner will obtain a certificate of approval (COA) from the Department of Environment and Local Government to carry out blasting activities. At this point a blasting plan will be created along with the blasting code of practise for review. As will be required by the COA, each and every blast must be monitored for ground vibrations and air blasts, with the results being forwarded to the Province. Also prior to blasting activities, pre -blast surveys will be completed on all residences and structures within a 600 metre radius of the site. A pre -blast survey includes the following details: An inspection of the interior and exterior of any residences and is video taped. The inspection includes identifying any pre- existing conditions that the resident may or may not be aware of. Any inspection of the foundation, walls, windows, doors etc. A water sample will be taken from the well and sent to an analytical laboratory for general chemistry, metals, and microbial analysis (general water quality). With blasting, the initial blasts will be required to gain access to the site and as such, the blasts will be an order of magnitude smaller than the production blasting, which will give us the opportunity to evaluate and calibrate the blasting design for the production blasts based on recorded and measured data. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 99 Proposed Quarry 2005.40 — RO1 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB 7 Throughout the blasting program, the results from each and every blast are reviewed and based on the data obtained; the blasting design can be adjusted should results begin to diverge on the maximum levels for ground vibration and air pressure. With the proposed quarry, the nearest residence to the proposed working face will be approximately 550 metres, and as shown in the table below the peak particle velocity at 550 metres is approximately 1.8mm /s which is below the limit of 12.5mm /s. 90 80 70 E 60 E Z' .0 50 m d 40 C m IL Y v 30 CL 20 10 0 Proposed Quarry Blasting Typical Blasting Weights Distance from Blast (metres) 000 In the table above the two curves represent a small blast loading rate (68kg /delay) and a big blast loading rate (136kg /delay). The big blast rate is governed by the volume of the hole and is a function of the depth and diameter of the hole. Since there is a limitation on this site of a maximum of a 10 metre cut, and the typical hole diameter is 0.1 metres, the maximum amount of explosives is 136kg in one hole. With each blast being made up of many holes, each hole has a delay of at least 8ms, and therefore acts independently and the vibrations are not compounded, but independent. Fly rock is not anticipated as being an issue with this site as the blasting will be with a open working face, and not confined as with trench blasting. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 18� Proposed Quarry 2005.40 - R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB Calculated PPV with 136kg charge/ delay - - t - - - - ° - - - - - - - - - Acceptable Upper - - - - - - - - -= - - - Limit PPV 12_5mm/s_ — - -- - - - - - - - - - - Calculated PPV with 68kg charge/ delay Distance from Blast (metres) 000 In the table above the two curves represent a small blast loading rate (68kg /delay) and a big blast loading rate (136kg /delay). The big blast rate is governed by the volume of the hole and is a function of the depth and diameter of the hole. Since there is a limitation on this site of a maximum of a 10 metre cut, and the typical hole diameter is 0.1 metres, the maximum amount of explosives is 136kg in one hole. With each blast being made up of many holes, each hole has a delay of at least 8ms, and therefore acts independently and the vibrations are not compounded, but independent. Fly rock is not anticipated as being an issue with this site as the blasting will be with a open working face, and not confined as with trench blasting. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. 18� Proposed Quarry 2005.40 - R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB Large amounts of fly rock is usually generated if there is no free face for the energy of the blast to release, as with a trench blast the easiest direction for the gas pressure generated from the chemical reaction would be up, and thus propelling rock upwards. With open face blasting, a small amount of fly rock should be anticipated but would be limited to the project site boundaries. Associated with blasting and ground vibrations would be the air pressure released as part of the chemical reaction of the blast. The air pressure from a blast is all so known as air blast or overpressure and is measured in dB. The limit for an air blast is 130 dB, typically a blast as outlined above will have 125 dB which is enough to rattle the windows, and however damage is highly unlikely. Damage is unlikely on air blast under 150 dB, general window damage will occur at 171 dB and structural damage is possible over 180 dB. With the fear of blasting near water supply wells, the actual amount of rock breakage/ fracturing is generally limited to 20 to 40 times the hole diameter or in this case 2 to 4 metres, with some minor cracking extending as far as 50 metres form the blast hole. Since the residences are all further than 500 metres horizontally and 25metres vertically, it is almost impossible for the blasting activities to affect the groundwater wells in any way. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS The proposed new quarry located at 2112 Bayside Drive, can be established and operated at a level which will have no adverse affect on the neighbouring residences. If the proper procedures are followed and buffer zones are maintained, the operation of the quarry can be carried out without compromising the groundwater, air quality or noise levels currently observed in the area. Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc. Proposed Quarry 2005.40 - R01 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB APPENDIX A Site Plan & Sections 102 c. v. xOHN I NO GRFO ENLY fT' OIREf 'A4n '. gum kr V � I `Ip ' \ 1 MAMS ♦ \ °yBOD \\ `\ \—' _ Bw+ BROOK J, X� ,c . DEBLY RESOURCES SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK .EXCAVATION \ ' - ' - I a[x1RFr.rzoos �,f k '� AREA \ _. PRMW QUARRY APPLICATION / \ •�' ,• '�' & STUDY '��' '•�/ ; , --�-°i 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB SITE PLAN BRUNSWICK aar of FUOY \ �l Engineering & Consulting Inc. aO Am Lexe Red. O R905.3WIM,N 62L 4E3 lel 508.696.91551a. 508.699.9158 / OE90m W. SRP ORAM P. KMJ OEOiO RC SRP / / ' _ Ar ✓ / \ + �% '�� / Pw= Nf! 2005.40 MR: (Y19Y/181/OJ) 2012/12/21 8 A6 EIA 5x01 Rp rm � OIOxAI SOME: HORIZONTAL: 1:40DO VERTICAL• N/A — 251 — RE STDENCE uC,` 6�. (TYP.) _ t I 511¢1 M.HR .f 1 or 4 � 103 0 IQY PURL E%. TREE EXISTING GPAOE EX A9AnON � 'o f 0 100 100 2:1 SAFE SLOPE GRADE E 0 +100 I I 1 2:1 SAFE SLOPE TYPICAL SECTION BO 90 I I I so EX. (APPROX.) BUILDING 60 EL. 80.Om E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) 0 70 70 60 60 � 1 0 1300 50 jv 1300 1100 1500 1600 1700 1800 ,0 /0 DKOAYFR Duns vntcl ro wsmva nem 10 oDarennl nrs Dina ND aaa rs tmonon eADrtcrto .� wu wl a us[D. xo9alrnD a R.DD .nal Jwrax RRIASYM BY BBNiAOi WIfIAMa f D)Ba.Mt K � HT�6 30 20 20 0 2011 M 0 RENSIONOESCRIPTION_0 51AM t0 10 0 2011 M 0 REIASION_DESCRIPTION 0 ". R -- a50/aw G �M1' 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 110 DEBLY RESOURCES 110 0 +050 SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWICK I'D 100 a[x, REF. r. 2005 PROECT: go '° QUARRY APPLICATION & STUDY SO so 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB nnE 70 BAY OF FUNDY TO BAYSIDE DRIVE 70 I A SITE SECTIONS 80 STA. 0 +050 TO STA. 0 +100 so 50 50 ; BRUNSWICK s Engineering & Consulting Inc. 4DASnaOm—R00D.POSo,I4:. S. J— NSEXIE0 ,0 ia1: 500.0 %.Bt551a.� 506.8909158 10 SEAL 30 30 b 20 20 9 t0 a5d8D BY: ORARI 8Y: 10[CRO er. t0 SRP KMJ ISRP PRI EC1 NO DA- (Yrr1'/Ir/001 / AR BAA IS 101 20D5.40 2012/12/21 Rom �, G ORDRa 0 0 100 200 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 0 HORIZONTAL: 1:5000 VERTICAL 1:500 n'^" 9CNE: 1:5000 WIFIC 100 50 0 100 200 3000p i 25 IAAHR 104 19*IT OF 94E1 , 2 OF , � 0 E%. TREE EXISTING GPAOE EX A9AnON � 'o f 0 2:1 SAFE SLOPE GRADE E I I 1 2:1 SAFE SLOPE I I I EX. (APPROX.) BUILDING EL. 80.Om E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) 0 m z 8 1 0 1300 1100 1200 1300 1100 1500 1600 1700 1800 0 0 EXISTING GRADE E %. RESIDENCE (APPROX.) 0 1 0 1300 1100 1500 16 f 00 1600 0 PROPERLY UN XCAVAl10N PROPERTY UN UN I I I CAVAn I I I KEY R AOPE�E I I tl tO E I L 2 SECTION FROM CANADA STREET • %�I 0 i I -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 TO SITE LIMIT m � 000 -900 -600 -700 -600 -500 -400 - -200 -i E %. TREE 00 I ,00 x I o El. BO.Om EL. 60.Om � -300 I I I - -]00 -600 -500 -400 -200 -100 S' EX. RE510ENC 00 90 � 60 EX. CRADE 000 -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -400 -100 0 JO 60 60 100 PROPERTY ,00 w 50 0 +100 UN Y TYPICAL SECTION CAVAT6)N .o 90 90 40 4:1 SAFE I SLOPE I 09UYER 80 I gp 50 50 �i �RCim p µpW �ql B[ UY➢➢epWU�d11Q�o i ai rIIG rtwAma m en.ea domJn,c A meAm 4c PE19OL 70 8 I I 70 ;s 14m.100 1 +000 0.900 0.600 D.700 0.600 0+500 0.400 0.300 0.]00 20 0.100 o.oW ox / I _o� I SOIL MM REIASION_DESCRIP71ON -0 60 EL. 60.Om e0 1ao f00 501A /Ex. TREE 0 +300 51�° BERM 0 2011 M 0 RENSION_OESCPoP710N 0 50 SO 90 90 RESIDENCE / G. w¢ ,.YYJ,r CESWIO, (EX. 0Ek1: 40 40 90 90 IT DEBLY RESOURCES SAINT JOHN, NEW BRUNSWCK 30 ]D 7o CWR REP. R 2005 PROJECT: 60 201 40 60 QUARRY APPLICATION °° 110 So 50 & STUDY 0+000 2112 BAYSIOE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB 100 100 401000 900 800 40 ORE: SOUTH TO NORTH SITE SECTIONS 90 90 ,� too 0 +200 STA. 0 +150 TO STA. 0 +250 90 60 90 90 BRUNSWICK Engineering & Consulting Inc. e 70 70 e0 B0 40 Amd . Lake ROe6. PO 60.1045. SWI JIM. NS E2L 40 3 W. 506.658.9155 Tav 506.6960158 IT 60 60 70 7U p 50 50 60 60 1 40 40 so 50 0E99E0 BC SRP wAm BC ro BY: K11J ISRP PROJECT KQ OAi ' (TTTYJ�W OO) 6116 BN 6 KOi 30 >0 40 411 2005.40 2012 12/2 1 n1sn 1016' _ ,OUT ROlINO SElJE 0160X11 9:Ut: — nORIZONTAL:1:5000 VERTICAL: 1:500 25- 4 9:ALE: 1:5006 WNC 101 300 00 0 40 301000 900 600 30 100 s0 0 100 200 300 r 9Qi MAT®! 106 4 SETT F 4 OF 4 G1 PROPERLY UN XCAVAl10N PROPERTY UN UN I I I CAVAn I I I I AOPE�E I I tl tO E I L 2 • %�I 0 i I -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -100 -100 m � 000 -900 -600 -700 -600 -500 -400 - -200 -i E %. TREE I x I o El. BO.Om EL. 60.Om � -300 I I I - -]00 -600 -500 -400 -200 -100 S' EX. RE510ENC � EX. CRADE 000 -900 -800 -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -400 -100 0 PROPERLY UN XCAVAl10N PROPERTY UN UN I I I CAVAn I I I I AOPE�E I I tl tO E I L 2 • %�I 0 i I -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -100 -100 m � 000 -900 -600 -700 -600 -500 -400 - -200 -i E cavnnoN XCAVAl10N PROPERTY UN UN I I I CAVAn I I I I AOPE�E I I }� E I L 2 • %�I i I -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -100 -100 m � / I I I E %. TREE I x I o El. BO.Om EL. 60.Om � -300 I I I - -]00 -600 -500 -400 -200 -100 S' EX. RE510ENC � cavnnoN PROPERTY UN I I I CAVAn I I I I I � I L 2 • %�I i I -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -100 -100 m � / I I I g x I o El. BO.Om � -300 I I - - -]00 -600 -500 -400 -200 -100 0 cavnnoN PROPERTY UN I I I �W I I I I � I E4 60.Om -700 -600 -500 -400 -300 -100 -100 0 APPENDIX B Craig Hydrogeological Inc. Report 107 CRAIG jIYDROGEOLOGIC INC. Groundwater and Soil Contamination Groundwater Protection Resource Development Site Remediation Site Professional Groundwater Assessment Debly Resources Inc. Bayside Drive Quarry January, 2013 Prepared For: Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Ltd. Attention: Mr. Stephen Perry, P. Eng. 40 Ashburn Lake Road Saint John, NB E2L 4E3 January 5, 2013 Craig HydroGeoLogic Inc. 140 Meadow Cove Road. Dipper Harbour, NB E5J 2S9 Telephone 506- 659 -3064 Fax 506- 659 -9002 Email dcraig @craighydrogeologic.ca http : / /www.crg 'Q$ydrogeologic.ca/ GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT DEBLY RESOURCES INC. BAYSIDE DRIVE QUARRY JANUARY, 2013 INTRODUCTION Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc., acting on behalf of Debly Resources Inc., retained Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. to conduct a groundwater assessment in order to evaluate the existing groundwater supplies in the general area of a proposed rock quarry and to provide an assessment of the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed quarry activities. The groundwater assessment is required as part of the evaluation process to obtain approval for the proposed rock quarry. This report presents the findings of the groundwater assessment, and conclusions and recommendations based on that assessment. This report was prepared by Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. for the clients, Brunswick Engineering & Consulting Inc., and Debly Resources Inc., and presents the results of an investigation of the existing groundwater supplies located in the general area of the proposed quarry as described in this report. In addition, an assessment of the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed quarry activities is provided. The report is based on the application of scientific principles and professional judgment to certain facts with resultant subjective interpretations. For example, but not limited to, interpolation between boreholes is an accepted industry practice, however, actual subsurface conditions may vary from that interpolated and such variation could impact observations, discussions, conclusions and recommendations in the report. Professional judgments expressed herein are based on the facts currently available within the existing 109 2 data, scope of work, budget and schedule. The material and information in the report reflects Craig Hydrogeologic Inc.'s best judgment in light of the information available at the time of report preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decision(s) to be made based on this report are the responsibility of the third party(ies). Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions taken based on this report. SCOPE The scope of the groundwater assessment is as follows: 1. To conduct a groundwater assessment using available information in order to evaluate the existing groundwater supplies in the general area of a proposed rock quarry, and; 2. To evaluate the groundwater related environmental implications relative to the existing groundwater supplies from the proposed quarry activities, and, 3. To produce a report with the findings of the groundwater assessment and any recommendations that may be necessary to mitigate or minimize the potential for any negative impacts from the quarry operation on the existing groundwater supplies. 110 3 SITE DESCRIPTION General The general location of the proposed quarry and the surrounding area is shown in Figure 1. The proposed quarry is located at 2112 Bayside Drive, Saint John, NB. The existing land in the general area of the proposed quarry is highway transportation and undeveloped woodland. EXISTING GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES There is existing rural residential development located along Red Head Road and Hewitt Road, shown in Figure 1 as red colored rectangles that represent the actual buildings. All of the existing residences are located outside of the 600 meter radius shown in Figure 1 with the exception of the one home located on Hewitt Road which is located approximately 550 meters from the proposed quarry at the closest point. The proposed quarry is located on PID 0046 7506. The existing development in the area utilizes private wells and onsite septic systems; however, the closest well is at least 550 meters distant from the proposed development. A site visit was conducted December 20, 2012. Geology and Hydrogeology: The surficial soils are mapped as a veneer of till and gravel. Based on the well logs found for the nearby area, the overburden ranges in thickness from 0.6 to approximately 32.9 meters (2 to 108 feet) in thickness. The overburden can be used for ground water supplies in the area; however, it is the bedrock aquifer which provides the vast majority of groundwater supplies in the area. The bedrock in the area is mapped as the Late Carboniferous age Balls Lake Formation, composed of conglomerate, sandstone and shale, which also forms the local bedrock 111 4 aquifer. The bedrock is known to be relatively transmissive (readily conducts the flow of ground water). Based on common knowledge of the area, the bedrock aquifer has been successfully developed for private wells by a large number of individuals over the general area. The general conditions found in the aquifer are suitable for water supply development. Local well drillers with knowledge of the area confirmed the potential for water supply development in terms of private wells and did not identify any specific or unusual problems in the area. NB Environment Well Log Database: A search of the New Brunswick Department of Environment ( NBDOE) well log database for a 1,250 meter radius around the proposed quarry area yielded a total of 10 well logs. Copies of the well logs are provided in Appendix 1 at the back of this report. A summary of the information contained in the well logs is provided in Table 1 immediately below. Table 1: Summary of hydrogeologic information derived from search of NBDOE well log database based on a 1,250 meter search radius providing 10 well logs. Well Depth (feet) Estimated Yield (igpm) Depth to Bedrock (feet) Casing Length (feet) Median: 167.5 Median: 6 Median: 20.5 Median: 23.5 Average: 180.5 Average: 8.4 Average: 45.0 Average: 52.1 Minimum: 27 Minimum: 2 Minimum: 2 Minimum: 20 Maximum: 360 Maximum: 20 Maximum: 108 Maximum: 111 As can be seen from the above information in Table 1, the 10 well logs located within a 1,250 meter radius of the proposed quarry have an average estimated yield of 8.4 igpm and a median yield of 6 igpm, which are in excess of the typical domestic well needs of approximately 3 igpm. Out of the 10 well logs, only three wells had estimated yields 112 5 below the 3 igpm level with reported yields of 2.5, 2 and 2 igpm. The lowest yielding wells (2 igpm) had depths of 260 and 290 feet. A low yielding well can be encountered at any location within a bedrock aquifer; however, such low yielding wells should be relatively infrequent in this area. Typically, any low yield wells are simply deepened in order to increase in well storage in order to provide adequate water for domestic use. The data base also contained a 20 igpm well with a depth of 27 feet, which is the only well in the database which is developed in the overburden. Overall the results of the well log database search indicate relatively average groundwater resources in the general area, indicating potential supplies which would be sufficient for private residential use. NB Environment Well Water Chemistry Database: The 1,250 meter radius search of the NBDOE well chemistry database provided results from a total of 8 wells located in the general area for which groundwater chemistry was available. The precise locations of the wells from which the ground water chemistry was obtained are not available due to right to privacy considerations for the property owners. The analytical results for the samples are provided in Table 2 which follows. In Table 2 any result that exceeds the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines (CDWQG) is bolded and color shaded for ease of recognition. The groundwater chemistry data in Table 2 was collected and analyzed using the water analysis certificate provided by the well driller when the well is new. The water samples are usually collected by the homeowner shortly thereafter in order to provide confidence that they can use the water. As a result the well from which the water sample was collected typically has not had enough time or use for the water to clear sufficiently prior to the water sample being collected. The result of this is that the chemistry data in Table 2 may overestimate the long term turbidity and some trace metal concentrations as most wells will clear naturally with use and time. Out of the 8 well records available, one exceeded the CDWQG for arsenic of 10 pg /L with a measured concentration of 14.1 µg/L. Arsenic is known to occur naturally in groundwater in New Brunswick and other areas of Canada and the United States. Waters 113 6 containing elevated concentrations of arsenic should not be consumed or used for cooking; however, they can be used for bathing. Waters containing elevated concentrations of arsenic should be treated using reverse osmosis systems or whole house ion exchange systems. The cost of such systems range from approximately $500.00 to $4,000.00 and they are readily available from local suppliers and installers. Alternatively water with elevated concentrations of arsenic can be replaced with bottled water for drinking and cooking. Out of the 8 chemistry records available, four wells exceeded the CDWQG for iron of 0.3 mg/L and the same four wells also exceeded the CDWQG for manganese (0.05 mg /L). The guideline for iron and/or manganese is based on esthetic considerations, not health. Iron and /or manganese can cause staining of plumbing fixtures and laundry. Iron and /or manganese can usually be readily removed by commercial water softeners at the hardness observed in this water or by filters. The presence of iron and/or manganese in the groundwater from this aquifer is not unusual and is commonly the result of natural conditions. As these chemistry results are from new wells with high levels of turbidity, the results in the database may overestimate long term concentrations of iron and /or manganese. As can be seen in Table 2, one out of the eight available water quality sample results fall outside the range of pH recommended in the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines. The variations observed are minimal and for practical purposes it is doubtful that these variations in pH would impact the usability of the water in a private well or water source. The pH of water is important in determining water treatment methods; however, it is not a health related water quality standard. The pH of water may be adjusted to prevent or reduce corrosion in the distribution system and this is easily accomplished using commercially available water treatment equipment. Out of the eight well chemistries available a single well exceed the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guideline for lead (10 µg/L) with a measured concentration of 15.6 µg/L. Water with elevated concentrations of lead should be treated with a reverse osmosis unit 114 7 for drinking -and cooking uses or replaced with bottled water. The well with the elevated concentration of lead was the same well which had an elevated concentration of arsenic. This same well had the highest observed turbidity (15.8 ntu) in the dataset. It is possible that this elevated turbidity has impacted the analysis of the trace metals. A total of six out of the eight chemistry records available had elevated turbidity present in the samples. The elevated levels of turbidity may be related to the relative newness of the wells and they may not have had sufficient time, or use, to clear naturally. The water samples in the database are provided from the water well testing certificates which are provided by the well driller immediately after the well has been drilled. As a result the vast majority of the analytical results come from new wells. Most new wells clear naturally with time and use. At levels in excess of 5 NTUs turbidity may become noticeable to consumers and therefore, objectionable. The turbidity may be the result of elevated concentrations of iron and or manganese or the presence of particulate in the water. In either case, turbidity can be treated by water softeners and /or particulate filters if necessary. NB Environment Microbiology Database: The NBDOE well chemistry database provided results from a total of 10 wells for E coli analysis. Out of the eight wells there was one detection of E. coli. Water with E. coli present should not be used for cooking or drinking. A total of eight wells had data for total coliforms with 4 detections of total coliforms. Total coliforms are natural soil bacteria and are commonly present in private well water systems, particularly associated with elevated turbidities. Such detections are usually easily treated by shock chlorination of the wells and associated plumbing systems. Again, the observed detections of total coliforms may be related to the relative newness of the wells. In general terms the groundwater chemistries found in the NBDOE database are not unusual for this area or for the rest of New Brunswick and reflect natural aquifer conditions. The groundwater represented by the general inorganic water quality 115 8 analytical results presented in Table 2 represents relatively good quality groundwater suitable for most common uses. POTENTIAL ENVIROMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED QUARRY OPERATION ON EXISTING GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES Site Location: The site is located as shown in Figure 1. The 600 meter radius around the quarry and the locations of existing private homes are also shown. There are no existing homes within the 600 meter radius with the exception of the one home located on Hewitt Road which is located approximately 550 meters from the proposed quarry at the closest point. The private water supply located on Hewitt Road, which is 550 meters distant from the quarry, is also separated from the proposed quarry location by Bean Brook, which acts as a groundwater divide. Shallow groundwater recharging in the area of the proposed quarry would discharge to Bean Brook. Based on the large distances to the existing residential development, it is unlikely that the private groundwater supplies will be impacted by the proposed quarry operations. Topography: The topography is shown in Figure 1 and topographic profiles are shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4 which also show the relative elevations of the existing homes and the bottom of the quarry. In all cases the bottom of the quarry is much higher than the elevations of the existing homes. Since the existing homes source their groundwater from wells which are drilled to lower elevations than the homes themselves, the proposed quarry cannot dewater the existing wells or reduce yields by removal of groundwater as the bottom of the proposed quarry will be much higher than the well or even the top of the aquifer at that point. 116 9 Overall Potential for Dewatering: Based on the location and elevation of the quarry relative to the location and elevation of the existing homes in the area, the potential for the quarry activities having a significant dewatering impact on the groundwater table in the area of the homes is extremely remote. The quarry is too far away and is not situated at an elevation or location (relative to the existing homes) were such impacts are probable. The bottom of the quarry is located about 30 meters above the ground surface in the area of the existing homes. It is simply not possible for the quarry to dewater zones which are lower than the bottom of the quarry itself. Impact of Blasting on Water bearing Fractures: The blasting at the proposed site can potentially impact local groundwater tables by increasing the fractures in the local rock immediately adjacent to the proposed quarry, which in turn results in an increase in water storage in the aquifer, which will result in a lowering of the groundwater table. These impacts are normally significant within approximately 100 meters or 300 feet of the blasting operation. Normally, any lowering of the groundwater table from this type of effect is temporary in nature, as normal recharge will re- establish the groundwater table over time. are normally significant within approximately 100 meters or 300 feet of the blasting operation. Individual groundwater pathways that are dependent on a single or limited number of pathways can also be altered by blasting impact on fractures. Again, such impacts are normally significant within approximately 100 meters or 300 feet of the blasting operation. As the nearest existing well is 550 meters away from the proposed quarry boundary it is extremely unlikely that the quarry blasting will have a significant or discernable impact on water bearing fractures in the local area of that well. Predicted Groundwater Flow Directions: Based on local topography as shown in Figure 1, shallow groundwater recharging in the area of the proposed quarry would flow from the area of the quarry in a northwest direction to discharge to Bean Brook. 117 10 Groundwater supplying the private wells for the homes along Red Head Road would flow down gradient from beneath the topographic high located towards the east of the homes. It appears, based on local topography, that the groundwater from the area of the proposed quarry does not contribute to the water supply for the private homes located along Red Head Road and that the groundwater supplies for those homes are derived from the area east of the homes. 118 11 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS There are a limited number of existing private wells located in the area of the proposed quarry operation. The proposed quarry operation will be located at a sufficient distance and at a high elevation from the existing private wells so that negative impacts on the existing private groundwater supplies are extremely unlikely. Based on the above information, it is concluded that the potential for the subject quarry operation to have significant impacts on the groundwater supplies located at the existing homes in the area is extremely unlikely. Relating to potential groundwater impact concerns it is recommended that the proposed quarry be approved. Report Prepared By: Craig Hydrogeologic Inc. .. t Douglas Craig, M.Sc., P. Geo. Hydrogeologist, 119 12 Appendix 1 Well Logs 120 13 Appendix 1 Well Logs 121 13 122 i m iu. r . •µ l i fir_ `\ � 01011 REHSgN tlpPlkpl / \ _ \ \ \ � J DEBLY RESOURCES , ' ` �' ��'' �' yy • / ' SAW JD1N1, NEV OMM Mgf QUARRY APPLICATION \'/ •' - f - & STUDY / /' 2112 8AY9DE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NO -'f �•� ��'' / SITE PLAN \ BRUNSWICK Engineering & C—utting Inc. N:AiiGVi�L: I:IROR OfRTGI: R/A �J XC[ -� \ \ t / i i 122 123 0 +100 >i ao 'r °a M 0+050 1+a ° Innw caa � as yy 60 B0 " 8 i< " RR , u°0 , ,a0° , ia00 o x <1 a[nsrcalcsceP� o o fin Rfn51CN_OFSCfiPIWI_0 DEBLY RESOURCES SLANT JOHN, NEW BRUNS*M R ]mf QUARRY APPLICATION & STUDY 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB BAY Of FUNDY TO BAYSIDE DRIVE SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +050 TO STA. 0 +100 BRUNSWICK Engineering & C.n.ultlne Inc. 5RP „ RYJ rt SRP n 1005.10 u Im`°./rot 1017 11 11 �PoIONi.V_1. `x100 VEROLAt: LSD) 1a0 „u«a 2 123 124 0 +250 5U 5Y ,o 0 +200 b I I F 883 w 50 ,p � w m P o cP eoo a :oo 0o ao .� b datum cRM[ 0 +150 ' I � co E a. Pua, g b ID ]0 b to 0 Boll u m REw ]erl a 0 11011 u RtwL]K.OExHPIgN_0 DEBLY RESOURCES SAINT JOHN, NEW BRVNSWU . ]ms n. QUARRY APPLICATION & STUDY 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB rc BAY OF FUNDY TO BAYSIDE DRIVE SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +150 TO STA. 0 +250 BRUNSWICK Engineering &(Ansuiing Inc. n. ourR SRP xW SRP r art: 1„rtIr]1N _ � Ia..r 11012�IR tl prt- MOM10N1A1: 15000 5fRP0u: ,:500 t� 3 124 125 ,ro 0 +100 RR I I ro ro i I �€ a ro.Rm I J° n xo m ,00 o J0 - -� - - - 0 +000 w ° w w d w o W ° 0 +300 � 0 +200 � ° I I roam I e� I ' I 1 I I I 2 j ✓ 4 wm Olfift 4 RENPOxyESCfiPRIU 0 i011 DO RENSgN_pESWVMN_0 m,M DEBLY RESOURCES SANT JOHN, NEW BRUNSMCK e wos � QUARRY APPLICATION & STUDY 2112 BAYSIDE DRIVE, SAINT JOHN, NB SOUTH TO NORTH SITE SECTIONS STA. 0 +150 TO STA. 0 +250 BRUNSWICK n. � R �M�bf➢n wxw 1011 it l I 3t- MOMEOxiN.1:m KRTCAI. I: SOD s.VC�lem �[R[ 0 tro Y° 4 125 Appendix 1 Well Logs 126 13 Debly Quarry Bayside Drive 2013 1250 meter radius Well Depth Feet Estimated Yield I(igpm) Depth to Bedrock Casing Length Feet 23.5 Median average 180.5 8.4 260 2 10 20 125 20 83 85 360 10 5 20 110 10 99 100 290 2 2 20 27 20 27 27 152 5 8 20 98 5 94 98 183 2.5 108 111 200 7 14 20 Well Depth Feet Estimated Yield i m Depth to Bedrock Feet Casing Length Feet Median 167.5 6 20.5 23.5 Median average 180.5 8.4 45.0 52.1 AVERAGE max 360 20 108 111 max min 27 2 2 20 min count 10 127 uate printea LU 13 /U 1/U I Filled by 'ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Cable Tool 04/24/2002 ising Information Casing above ground 1ft 6in Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Log Casing Type Diameter From End Slotted? 7 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr 1Oft 0 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Lo Well Lop From End Colour Rock Type 1957 Oft loft Brown Mud and Rock 1957 loft 260ft Red Rock Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 1957 245ft 2 igpm Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Pump Installed Submersible Intake Setting (BTC) 7ft Overall Well Depth 260ft Bedrock Level 1 Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 128 Date printed 2013/01/01 rilled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 09/13/2005 ising Information Casing above ground 1 ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 151 Steel 6 inch Oft 85ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 50ft 20 igpm 1hr 50ft 20 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below top of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Lo Well Loq Well Lop From End Colour Rock Type 12951 Oft 4ft Brown Topsoil 12951 4ft 83ft Grey Clay 12951 83ft 125ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 12951 90ft 4 igpm 12951 118ft 16 igpm Overall Well Depth 125ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 12951 60ft Septic Tank 12951 80ft Leach Field 12951 83ft Right of any Public Way Road 129 Date printed 2013/01/01 rilled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 06/23/2009 tsing Information Casing above ground 1ft 6in Drive Shoe Used? Yes ;II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 116 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 20ft 10 igpm 1hr 20ft 10 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) Submersible Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig 200ft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 27116 Oft 5ft Brown Fill 27116 5ft 360ft Grey Limestone Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 27116 125ft 10 igpm Overall Well Depth 360ft Bedrock Level 5ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 27116 60ft Septic Tank 27116 85ft Leach Field 27116 31 Oft Septic Tank 27116 325ft Leach Field 27116 800ft Right of any Public Way Road 130 Well Lop C asinq I ype Diameter rrom tna 5tottea,e 27116 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 20ft 10 igpm 1hr 20ft 10 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 27116 Oft 5ft Brown Fill 27116 5ft 360ft Grey Limestone Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 27116 125ft 10 igpm Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) Submersible Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig 200ft Overall Well Depth 360ft Bedrock Level 5ft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 27116 60ft Septic Tank 27116 85ft Leach Field 27116 31 Oft Septic Tank 27116 325ft Leach Field 27116 800ft Right of any Public Way Road 131 Date printed 2013/01/01 Tilled by 'ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed ,inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 11/19/2008 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 16 Steel 6 inch Oft 1 00f Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 60ft 10 igpm 1hr 15min 60ft 10 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach (Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig 1 00f Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 28316 Oft 30ft Brown Sand 28316 30ft 99ft Brown Clay 28316 99ft 110ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 28316 103ft 2 igpm 28316 106ft 8 igpm Overall Well Depth 11 Oft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 28316 70ft Right of any Public Way Road 132 Date printed 2013/01/01 rilled by 'ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed Finking Water, Domestic New Well 12/02/2011 (sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes III Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 115 Steel 6 inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 1 5f 2 igpm 1hr 15min 15ft 2 igpm No 0 igpm BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed Bleach(Javex) N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig 1 80f Driller's Loq Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 29315 Oft 2ft Brown Soil 29315 2ft 290ft Red Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 29315 200ft 0.5 igpm 29315 275ft 1.5 igpm Overall Well Depth 290ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks Well Loq Distance Setback From 29315 70ft Septic Tank 29315 90ft Leach Field 29315 85ft Right of any Public Way Road 133 Date printed 2013/01/01 rifled by fell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed rinking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 08/29/2000 ising Information Casing above ground 2ft 1 in Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 121457 Steel 6 inch Oft 27ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air 20ft 17 igpm 2hrs 15min 20ft 20 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 90021457 Oft 8ft Brown Soil 90021457 8ft 14ft Brown Clay 90021457 14ft 27ft Grey Gravel Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 90021457 27ft 20 igpm Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) 20ft Overall Well Depth 27ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 134 Date printed 2013/01/01 -illed by ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 08/21/1995 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Tvpe Diameter From End Slotted? 36800 Steel 6inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 5 igpm No 0 igpm BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant N/A Qty 0 ig Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 90336800 Oft 8ft Brown Mud and Gravel 90336800 8ft 125ft Red Shale 90336800 125ft 152ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 90336800 60ft 1 igpm 90336800 138ft 4 igpm Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 152ft Bedrock Level 8ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 135 Date printed 2013/01/01 -illed by 'ell Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed -inking Water, Domestic New Well (NEW Rotary (ROTARY) 08/05/1998 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft Drive Shoe Used? Yes II Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 94400 Steel 6 inch Oft 98ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 5 igpm No 0 igpm BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Driller's Lo Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 91094400 Oft 94ft Brown Clay and Sand 91094400 94ft 98ft Red Broken Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 91094400 98ft 5 igpm Disinfectant NIA Qty 0 ig Pump Installed N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Oft Overall Well Depth 98ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 136 Date printed 2013/01/01 illed by all Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well Rotary 10/23/2001 sing Information Casing above ground 2ft 1 in Drive Shoe Used? Ye: I Loq Casinq Type Diameter From End Slotted? 55600 Steel 6 inch Oft 111ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 2.5 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 ig Oft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 91555600 Oft 25ft Grey Sand and Gravel 91555600 25ft 97ft Brown Clay 91555600 97ft 108ft Brown Till 91555600 108ft 183ft Grey Shale Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 91555600 117ft 1.5 igpm 91555600 171ft 1 igpm Overall Well Depth 1 83f Bedrock Level 97ft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 137 Date printed 2013/01/01 illed by all Use Work Type Drill Method Work Completed inking Water, Domestic New Well 06/20/2001 sing Information Casing above ground 1ft 6in Drive Shoe Used ?YeE I Log Casing Type Diameter From End Slotted? D2000 Steel 6inch Oft 20ft Aquifer Test/Yield Estimated Initial Water Pumping Final Water Safe Yield Flowing Method Level (BTC) Rate Duration Level (BTC) Well? Rate Air Oft 0 igpm Ohr Oft 7 igpm No 0 igpm (BTC - Below too of casino) Well Grouting Drilling Fluids Used None There is no Grout information. Disinfectant Pump Installed N/A N/A Intake Setting (BTC) Qty 0 i9 Oft Driller's Log Well Loq From End Colour Rock Type 92202000 Oft 6ft Brown Sand 92202000 6ft 14ft Red Clay 92202000 14ft 200ft Red and grey Sandstone Water Bearing Fracture Zone Well Loq Depth Rate 92202000 147ft 2.5 igpm Overall Well Depth 200ft Bedrock Level Oft Setbacks There is no Setback information. 138 APPENDIX C Stormwater Model Data 139 b 3S A P I D0046 506 (Q) 7P PI D00467506 (Pond) 'Subcat? ReaCh� POnd . LICIiC Routing Diagram for 20053901_post Prepared by HP, Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD®10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 140 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (selected nodes) Area CN Description (hectares) (subcatchment- numbers) 6.4894 98 Unconnected pavement, HSG A (3S) 6.4894 98 TOTAL AREA 141 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (selected nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (hectares) Group Numbers 6.4894 HSG A 3S 0.0000 HSG B 0.0000 HSG C 0.0000 HSG D 0.0000 Other 6.4894 TOTAL AREA 142 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 117/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Ground Covers (selected nodes) HSG -A HSG -B HSG -C HSG -D Other Total Ground Subcatchmer (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) (hectares) Cover Numbers 6.4894 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.4894 Unconnected pavement 3S 6.4894 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 6.4894 TOTAL AREA 143 20053901_post Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Pipe Listing (selected nodes) Line# Node Number In -Invert (meters) Out -Invert (meters) Length (meters) Slope n (m /m) DiamMidth (mm) Height (mm) Inside -Fill (mm) 1 7P 57.000 56.000 50.00 0.0200 0.011 381 0 0 144 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S9 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 @2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor- Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Runoff Area = 64,894.0 m2 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >109 mm Flow Length =381.0 m Tc =8.7 min CN =98 Runoff--1.3051 m' /s 7.071 MI Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Peak Elev= 57.829 m Storage =1.884 MI Inflow = 1.3051 m3 /s 7.071 MI 381 mm Round Culvert n =0.011 L =50.00 m S= 0.0200 m/m Outflow= 0.2421 m3 /s 6.688 MI Total Runoff Area = 6.4894 ha Runoff Volume = 7.071 MI Average Runoff Depth = 109 mm 0.00% Pervious = 0.0000 ha 100.00% Impervious = 6.4894 ha 145 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Runoff = 1.3051 m3 /s @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 7.071 MI, Depth >109 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm _ Area (m2) CN Description 64,894.O 98 Unconnected pavement, HSG A 64,894.0 100.00% Impervious Area 64,894.0 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /S) 5.3 100.0 0.1000 0.32 Sheet Flow, Fallow n= 0.050 P2= 89 mm 1.1 100.0 0.1000 1.55 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s 0.2 27.0 0.3000 2.69 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s 2.1 154.0 0.0650 1.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s N E 3 0 LL 8.7 381.0 Total Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Hydrocgraph FT. 51 iris) NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 5 -Year ' 5 -Year Rainfall =115 mm Runoff Area = 64,894.0 m2 1- Runoff Volume =7.071 MI Runoff Depth >109 mm Flow Length =381.0 m Tc =8.7 min CN =98 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 146 Runoff 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S 1 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall= 115 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Summary for Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Inflow Area = 6.4894 ha,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 109 mm for 5 -Year event Inflow = 1.3051 m3 /s @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 7.071 MI Outflow = 0.2421 m3 /s @ 12.56 hrs, Volume= 6.688 MI, Atten= 81 %, Lag= 29.3 min Primary = 0.2421 m3 /s @ 12.56 hrs, Volume= 6.688 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 57.829 m @ 12.56 hrs Surf.Area= 0.2445 ha Storage= 1.884 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 120.6 min calculated for 6.688 MI (95% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 85.8 min ( 839.8 - 754.1 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 5.048 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf-Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega - liters) (Mega- liters) 57.000 0.2100 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.2516 2.308 2.308 59.000 0.2964 2.740 5.048 Device Routinq Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 381 mm Round RCP–Round 15" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m S= 0.0200 mlm Cc= 0.900 n=0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 0.114 m2 Primary OutFlow Max = 0.2421 m3 /s @ 12.56 hrs HW= 57.829 m (Free Discharge) t- 1= RCP_Round 15" (Inlet Controls 0.2421 m3 /s @ 2.12 m /s) 147 20053901 _post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S 9 5 -Year 5 -Year Rainfall = 915 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 E 3 _o LL Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Hydrograph Inflow Area = 6.4894 ha Peak Elev= 57.829 m Storage =1.884 MI 381 mm Round Culvert n =0.011 L =50.00 m S= 0.0200 m/m c w o o 1 u U 1u 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 148 Inflow Primary 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span =0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt =0.05 hrs, 481 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS Reach routing by Stor- Ind +Trans method - Pond routing by Stor -Ind method Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Runoff Area = 64,894.0 mZ 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth >186 mm Flow Length =381.0 m Tc =8.7 min CN =98 Runoff--2.1738 m3 /s 12.039 MI Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Peak Elev= 58.380 m Storage =3.297 MI Inflow= 2.1738 m3 /s 12.039 MI 381 mm Round Culvert n =0.011 L =50.00 m S= 0.0200 m/m Outflow= 0.3305 m3 /s 11.518 MI Total Runoff Area = 6.4894 ha Runoff Volume = 12.039 MI Average Runoff Depth = 186 mm 0.00% Pervious = 0.0000 ha 100.00% Impervious = 6.4894 ha 149 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCADO 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Summary for Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Runoff = 2.1738 m3 /s @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 12.039 MI, Depth >186 mm Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH =SCS, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Area (ml) CN Description 64,894.0 98 Unconnected pavement, HSG A 64,894.0 100.00% Impervious Area 64,894.0 100.00% Unconnected Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (meters) (m /m) (m /sec) (m3 /s) 5.3 100.0 0.1000 0.32 Sheet Flow, Fallow n= 0.050 P2= 89 mm 1.1 100.0 0.1000 1.55 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s 0.2 27.0 0.3000 2.69 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s 2.1 154.0 0.0650 1.25 Shallow Concentrated Flow, _ Unpaved Kv= 4.91 m/s E a 0 T 8.7 381.0 Total Subcatchment 3S: PID00467506 (Q) Hydrograph { 2.1738 rWl i NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year ' 100 -Year Rainfall =192 mm Runoff Area = 64,894.0 m2 Runoff Volume= 12.039 MI Runoff Depth >186 mm Flow Length =381.0 m Tc =8.7 min CN =98 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A 1n 11 19 1C ,A ,IG Time (hours) 150 Runoff 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S9 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Summary for Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Inflow Area = 6.4894 ha,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth > 186 mm for 100 -Year event Inflow = 2.1738 m3 /s @ 12.07 hrs, Volume= 12.039 MI Outflow = 0.3305 m3 /s @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 11.518 MI, Atten= 85 %, Lag= 40.2 min Primary = 0.3305 m3 /s @ 12.74 hrs, Volume= 11.518 MI Routing by Stor -Ind method, Time Span= 0.00 -24.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 58.380 m @ 12.74 hrs Surf.Area= 0.2686 ha Storage= 3.297 MI Plug -Flow detention time= 126.8 min calculated for 11.518 MI (96% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 98.2 min ( 842.5 - 744.3 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 57.000 m 5.048 MI Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store (meters) (hectares) (Mega- liters) (Mega - liters) 57.000 0.2100 0.000 0.000 58.000 0.2516 2.308 2.308 59.000 0.2964 2.740 5.048 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 57.000 m 381 mm Round RCP _Round 15" L= 50.00 m RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 57.000 m / 56.000 m S= 0.0200 m/m Cc= 0.900 n=0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 0.114 mZ Primary OutFlow Max = 0.3305 m3 /s @ 12.74 hrs HW= 58.380 m (Free Discharge) L1= RCP_Round 15" (Inlet Controls 0.3305 m3 /s @ 2.90 m /s) 151 20053901_post NB -Saint John 24 -hr S1 100 -Year 100 -Year Rainfall= 192 mm Prepared by HP Printed 1/7/2013 HydroCAD® 10.00 s/n 07774 © 2012 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 N u- Pond 7P: PID00467506 (Pond) Hydrograph Inflow Area = 6.4894 ha Peak Elev= 58.380 m Storage =3.297 MI 389 mm Round Culvert n =0.011 L =50.00 m f S= 0.0200 m/m -•r- ter.;- -�'- ; � ;'0;� 'l' �- _ti____ ?'7- 7,;-- �,�,r`- �: -, v w o i u a 1v 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Time (hours) 152 0 Inflow 'Primary PROPOSED SITE IS BEHIND THIS HILL ABOUT 800m FROM RED HEAD ROAD VIEWING FROM ANTHONYS COVE ROAD PROPOSED SITE VIEWING FROM HEWETT ROAD 153 P.I.D. 00467506 Kemal ebly Property P.I.O. OOD23804 \ \ OoMd L d lW6hr C .Mixon Prapaly \ / / tp GATE a /` POND RIF g / \\ /�S /' N �4�'q� Foe .......... F R I ° sauna+DNr 1 AREA TO BE REZONED 13.7h, 13.7h, \`Q' eM'• �i RS -2 P.A. 00467506 1-1 \` 1 i . /�} \ \\ �Oy�c2„ Kemal R. Debly P.ID. 00419323 / G �,� o o Property bill RF \OP 9P .12 00 �.y tom.= P.I.D. 55179543 e.Jr ewe° Y �A�L `C ,oD tartitrrtf�bdkl \ \\ \\ RS-2 / � ' OOS•y6o�°0 �aqr \ � \\ \\ Py LD �. \O' kw pp X27 a Am P•rw PraWrO' � x \ / CD LOCATION / P1 R F M Ma Im - Lon" Patty / \\ ^O. i / \ . P.I.O. 00338978 \ / M99am Conti D. 0040DOO -(POIR 144U NOTES ,. Dk-ti- f Bow drown th-: — 2 Pnpowd Powl pads rpot �waHOa Momma BM+w 3. Pnprty U— drMd lrmn SN8 diOtd aPpradmb °ay°. o'W Ww.W b. —it—d 4. C-d— and tm W.—I . d REVISION DESCRIPTION YYyy :cXJc No. R°MSlms Date I By HUGHES SURVEYORS - ENGINEERS Hughes Surves & "Consultants Inc. AS Oa }wt �� SaY dIr , R R. ION T, ^'PURP� / / PROPOSED EXCAVATION SITE caNb 0— / i AREA TO BE REZONED (ORIGINAL PROPOSAL.......... 25.2ha BAYSIDE DRIVE RS / AREA TO BE REZONED (REVISED PROPOSAL) ............ 13.7ha PLAN TO ACCOMPANY REZONING APPLICATION i // \�\ AREA WITHIN LIMITS OF EXCAVATION .................... 6.5ha \ dss e / \ x / e `�• �` °Ot` i. / R F CONCEPTUAL PLAN SHOWING POST EXTRACTION 0 ELEVATIONS (BASED ON MAXIMUM POTENTIAL ." \ j EXCAVATION) Cam Ln Dabna eV oQX, ooP Py GRAPHIC SCALE JAN. 7, zoiz � B.E.S. R.E.T. HORZ. 1 :2000 �• \ / j \ Y12002 January 4, 2013 His Worship Mel Norton and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: Subiect: Board of Trustees to Administer Shared Risk Pension BACKGROUND Under the Shared Risk Pension (SRP) model, a Board of Trustees comprised of 8 trustees will administer the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan. The MOU detailing SRP agreement requires that The Mayor and Common Council appoint four trustees to "the Board of Trustees" (See Appendix A (z)). These appointments must be in place no later than February 1, 2013. A review of Corporate, Municipal, Provincial and State Pension Boards yields a diverse set of requirements and board compositions (Appendix B provides a small sample of those reviewed). These range from boards comprised solely of managers and employees to boards comprised of only individuals holding professional designations, certifications and /or substantial pension related training and experience. Council has been engaged in lengthy dialogue regarding the pension and its administration over the past several months. Key themes that emerged were the desire to have (i) subject matter expertise and (ii) individuals independent of and operating at arm's length to City Hall. MOTIONS Skills Matrix Based on Council discussions and a review of best practices the Nominating Committee has developed a skills matrix to assist with Mayor and Common Council appointments to the Board of Trustees (Appendix Q. That Council adopt the skills matrix appearing as Appendix C as a guide for Mayor and Common Council appointments to the Board of Trustees SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21- 41-1 1 www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E21- 4L1 155 Process Given that final appointments must be made and communicated to the Province no later than February 1, 2013, the process of appointments and their timing is of significant importance. A three week process is proposed (Appendix D). That Council agree and adhere to the process appearing as Appendix D to ensure Mayor and Common Council appointments to the Board of Trustees are made in a timely fashion Respectfully Submitted, (Received via email) Dr. Shelley Rinehart Deputy Mayor City of Saint John SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E21- 4L1 I wwwsaintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N. -B. Canada E2L 4L1 156 APPENDIX A EXCERPT FROM MOU Governance (a) A Board of Trustees comprised of 8 trustees will administer the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan. Four trustees shall be appointed by the Mayor and City Council of the Employer. The other four trustees shall be appointed by the Unions as follows: CUPE 18 shall appoint one trustee, CUPE 486 shall appoint one trustee, SJPA shall appoint one trustee and IAFF shall appoint one trustee. The Board of Trustees must be established by February 1, 2013. In the meantime, the current City of Saint John Plan board of trustees (known as the Pension Board) shall assume the responsibility of the Board of Trustees. At the first meeting of the Board of Trustees, the Board of Trustees shall unanimously select a person who shall be called upon to cast the deciding vote in the event that the Board of Trustees is deadlocked. Such person shall not be a member of the Board of Trustees. (b) After the Conversion Date, the Employer will have no financial obligations or responsibilities for the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan save and except for the obligation to make contributions to it as per the terms of this Memorandum of Understanding, the Funding Policy, and any past contributions due for the period prior to the Conversion Date. (c) Morneau Shepell shall be the interim actuaries for the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan. The Board of Trustees once constituted shall determine the actuaries for the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan as soon as practicable. (d) The Board of Trustees shall be responsible for: (i) All measurements and reporting required by the enabling legislation including regular actuarial valuations and stochastic modelling of the assets and the liabilities of the City of Saint John Shared Risk Plan; (ii) Establishing an investment policy subject to annual review for the purpose of ensuring that the desired security for both the base benefits and the ancillary benefits that are expected to be achieved; (iii) Administering the plan in accordance with the Funding Policy and, for greater clarity, this includes the power to increase or decrease contributions and benefits in accordance with the Funding Policy; and 157 (iv) All other requirements of an administrator under the enabling legislation. 158 Appendix B Ontario Pension Board OPB is committed to good governance — starting from the top down. Each member of our Board has been hand - picked based on their expertise, commitment, integrity and vision. Working together, they ensure the Plan's governance structure and practices reflect the highest standards. For more information on the governance of OPB, please visit the Governance section of our website. M. Vincenza Sera ICD.D (Chair) A former investment banker with 25 years of expertise in capital markets, corporate finance and corporate governance. She has held senior positions with major Canadian firms, including National Bank Financial, Gordon Capital, and CIBC. Vincenza is a member of Ontario Financing Authority Board, as well as a member of the Institute of Corporate Directors. Appointed to the Board on September 17, 2004. Appointed as Chair on July 1, 2007. Current appointment ends June 30, 2013. J. Urban Joseph, O.C. (Vice- Chair) Vice - Chairman of Toronto - Dominion Bank from 1992 to 1996. During his career with the bank, which began in 1952, he held a number of positions, including Executive Vice - President of the Human Resources Division. Appointed to the Board on July 1, 2004. Appointed as Vice -Chair on July 1, 2007. Current appointment ends June 30, 2013. M. David R. Brown A former managing principal at Eckler Ltd., a leading Canadian actuarial consulting firm. During a career spanning more than 40 years, David has consulted to pension clients in both the private and public sectors, served on the Pension Commission of Ontario, and held numerous positions with professional organizations. Appointed to the Board on October 25, 2006. Current appointment ends October 24, 2012. Lynn A. Clark Founding principal of L.A. Clark Consulting, an independent consulting and research organization that focuses on pension and investment issues. Lynn has more than 20 years of experience in the investment banking and pension arena and is a former member of the Industry Task Force on Pension Governance. 159 Appointed to the Board on October 5, 2006. Current appointment ends October 12, 2012. M.E. (Peggy) Gilmour ICD.D Managing Director, Global Reconciliations Shared Services for RBC Capital Markets. Peggy is a Chartered Accountant and senior finance executive with extensive experience in the financial services sector. Peggy has held executive roles in finance and risk management in both the banking and insurance industries. She is a member of the Institute of Corporate Directors. Appointed to the Board on August 12, 2009. Current appointment ends August 11, 2012. Lisa Hillstrom Executive Officer, Pension and Benefits, Ontario Provincial Police Association from April 2006 to present. As Executive Officer for the OPP Association, Lisa provides bereavement counselling, retirement counselling, and assistance to members with insured benefit appeals, LTIP, WSIB and return-to -work issues. During her career, she has held several positions in the pension and benefits field with the Ontario Public Service. Immediately prior to joining the OPP Association, she held the position of Benefit Advisor, Ontario Shared Services. Appointed to the Board on February 13, 2008. Current appointment ends August 12, 2012 Hugh G. Mackenzie Principal in his own economic consulting business and a Research Associate of the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. He has worked for over 30 years in the trade union and non -profit sectors, as well as in all three levels of government. He is chair of the Atkinson Charitable Foundation and is a member of the Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan Board. Appointed to the Board on December 4, 2002. Current appointment ends September 30, 2014. Shamira Madhany Shamira was appointed Chief Officer for Diversity and Accessibility in the OPS in August 2011. As the lead executive at the OPS Diversity Office, Shamira is responsible for guiding the OPS towards its key goals of embedding and sustaining diversity and accessibility. Shamira is well known for her strong partnerships with stakeholders and her demonstrated leadership, passion and commitment towards making the OPS an accessible, inclusive and equitable employer. She served on the Board of the Markham Stouffville Hospital, where she held the position of Vice - Chair of the Hospital's Performance Committee. Appointed to the Board on December 8, 2010. Current appointment ends December 7, 2013. Anthony Wohlfarth Pension Consultant with Nelligan, O'Brien, Payne, LLP in Ottawa. Previously held executive positions with Carleton University Academic Staff Association ( "CUASA "), the Canadian Employment Insurance Commission, and the CAW- Canada. In 2012, Tony completed the Audit Committee Program (ACC designation) with Director's College of Canada, a joint initiative of • E the Conference Board of Canada and DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University. He has also completed the Certificate in Adjudication for Administrative Agencies, Boards and Tribunals from York University. Appointed to the Board on September 1, 2005. Current appointment ends August 31, 2014. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA Members of The Board Francis X. Bielli, Executive Director Esquire Members of the Board Rob Dubow, Chairperson Director of Finance Appointed January 2008 Ronald Stagliano, Fraternal Order of Police. Serving as Employee Elected Representative Vice Chairperson since November 2004 Richard Negrin, Managing Director Appointed July 2010 Esquire Shelly Smith, City Solicitor Appointed January 7, 2008 Esquire Albert L. D'Attilio, Director of Human Resources Appointed June 2, 2008 Esquire Alan L. Butkovitz, City Controller, Elected by voters of Philadelphia Serving as Board Esquire Member since January 2006 Carol Stukes- AFSCME District Council 47 Serving as Employee Elected Representative Baylor Since September 1994 Andrew Thomas Local No. 22, Philadelphia Firefighters Union Serving as Employees Elected Representative Since November 2012 Veronica Pankey AFSCME District Council 33 Serving as Employee Elected Representative Since February 2011 SANDIEGO CITY EMPLOYEES https://www.sdcers.org/ /about /Pages /BoardMembers.aspx mixture of trial lawyers, insurance specialists and accountants /finance experts along with employee appointees 161 Maryland State Nancy K. Kopp, Chairman State Treasurer Ex Officio since February 14, 2002 Member, Investment Committee Member, Administrative Committee Member, Corporate Governance Committee Nancy K. Kopp was elected State Treasurer by the State Legislature on February 14, 2002. As a result of this position, she serves ex- officio on the Board of Trustees. From 1975 until her election to Treasurer, Ms. Kopp served as a member of the House of Delegates. During her distinguished legislative career in the House, Ms. Kopp served on numerous committees, subcommittees and task forces dealing with fiscal, education and human resource issues. For her commitment to these concerns, Ms. Kopp has received many awards of recognition. Ms. Kopp was born in Coral Gables, Florida. She graduated from Wellesley College with a B.A. and received an M.A. from the University of Chicago. 162 Peter Franchot, Vice Chairman State Comptroller Ex Officio Since January 22, 2007 Member, Investment Committee Member, Corporate Governance Committee Peter Franchot was elected Maryland's 33rd Comptroller on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2006. Prior to his election to statewide office, he served for 20 years in the Maryland General Assembly House of Delegates representing the residents of Silver Spring and Takoma Park. During this time Mr. Franchot was a member of the Appropriations Committee and served as Chairman of the Transportation Et the Environment Subcommittee. Throughout his career Mr. Franchot has been a strong advocate for education, health care, transportation and environmental protection initiatives. He attended Amherst College (B.A., 1973) and Northeastern School of Law (J.D., 1978), and served in the United States Army from 1968 to 1970. Mr. Franchot resides in Takoma Park, Maryland with his wife and children. David S. Blitzstein Term: August 1, 2012 - July 31, 2016 Trustee since April 2008 163 Member, Investment Committee Member, Corporate Governance Committee As Special Assistant for Multiemployer Plans for the United Food Et Commercial Workers International Union (UFCW), Mr. Blitzstein currently serves as a trustee on five Taft - Hartley pension funds and two health funds representing a quarter of a million plan participants. He is a presidential appointee to the Advisory Committee of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. In addition, Mr. Blitzstein advises the UFCW International leadership on employee benefit policy issues. Between 1990 and 2006, Mr. Blitzstein served as the Director of the Negotiated Benefits Department of the UFCW, and was responsible for providing collective bargaining advice on health insurance and pension issues. He represents the UFCW as a member of the Steering Committee of the NCCMP, a lobbying group for multiemployer plans. He is also a member of the EBRI and the NASI, and is a Director of the Pension Research Council of the Wharton School - University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Blitzstein is a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and holds a Master of Science in labor studies from the University of Massachusetts in Amherst. He is a frequent speaker at policy forums on retirement and health care. John W. Douglass Term: August 1, 2011 - July 31, 2015 Trustee since May 2004 Member, Administrative Committee Vice Chairman, Audit Committee John W. Douglass was chosen in a special election to be an Employee Systems representative by state employees to fill an un- 164 expired term that ended in 2007. He was subsequently reelected. Most recently, Mr. Douglass was Deputy Director of the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation from 1995 to 2003. He was a member of the Maryland House of Delegates from 1971 to 1994 where he served as Chairman of the Joint Budget and Audit Committee from 1975 to 1988. Mr. Douglass authored the State's Constitutional Amendment mandating a Balanced Budget and is a highly respected expert on State Finances. He also authored the State Constitutional Amendment giving the State emergency borrowing power to meet revenue shortages in the State Treasury. A 1964 Cum Laude graduate of Lincoln University, Mr. Douglass earned a master's degree from Johns Hopkins University in 1966. R T. Eloise Foster Secretary of Budget and Management Ex Officio since January 17, 2007 Member, Administrative Committee Member, Investment Committee T. Eloise Foster, appointed Secretary of the Maryland Department of Budget and Management by Governor Martin O'Malley effective January 17, 2007, serves as an ex officio member of the Board. Prior to this appointment, Ms. Foster served as the lead principal in Foster Et Associates, a government relations consulting firm serving public and private sector organizations throughout Maryland. Ms. Foster previously served as Budget Secretary under Governor Parris N. Glendening. Upon her appointment in 2000, she became the first African - American woman to serve as chief budget officer of a state. Ms. Foster also served as both Deputy and Assistant Secretary at the Maryland Department of Budget and Management 165 and held senior positions in higher education. Considered one of Maryland's leading experts in State budgeting and government operations, she has served on a number of key boards and commissions. Ms. Foster holds a bachelor's degree from Howard University, an M.B.A. from American University, and completed the Senior Executives in State and Local Government Program at Harvard University. Robert R. Hagans, Jr. Term: August 1, 2011 - July 31, 2015 Trustee since November 2011 Member, Investment Committee Member, Audit Committee Robert R. Hagans, Jr., is a gubernatorial appointee to the Board. Since 2001, Mr. Hagans has served as chief financial officer for the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP). In this position he provides strategic guidance and expertise in all areas of AARP's financial management, strategy implementation and policy formulation, in addition to AARP's environmental and physical resources. Mr. Hagans also has over 30 years of work experience in nonprofits and financial management. Prior to joining AARP, he served as director of finance for Prince George's County Government, where he was responsible for the management of the $1.7 billion in cash flow of county funds and the $780 million debt management program. Mr. Hagans also served as assistant vice president for Asset Management and Treasury Operations at Howard University and served on the Prince George's County Police and Fire Service Pension Plans Board of Trustees and the Prince George's County Risk Management Committee. 166 He currently serves as treasurer and trustee on the Board of Directors of Industrial Bank and chairs the Finance Committee of the Board of the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Washington. Mr. Hagans is a member of the Executive Leadership Council and a member and mentor of the 100 Black Men of Greater Washington, DC. He is a resident of Mitchellville, MD. Kenneth B. Haines Term: January 1, 2012 - July 31, 2013 Trustee since January 2012 Member, Administrative Committee Member, Audit Committee Kenneth B. Haines, formerly a foreign language instructor at Northwestern High School in Hyattsville, serves now as president of the Prince George's County Educators' Association ( PGCEA), the bargaining unit for the county's 9,000 professional educators. Mr. Haines was elected by active and retired teachers to complete the term of a retiring trustee. As a member of the PGCEA negotiating team, Mr. Haines has performed cost - analysis of salary and benefit proposals valued at up to $850 million for school system faculty. Before being elected union president, Mr. Haines served a term as vice - president and two as treasurer, where he chaired the committee charged with oversight and analysis of the association's budget. 167 James M. Harkins Term: July 1, 2010 —June 30, 2014 Trustee since October 2004 Director of Maryland Environmental Service Chairman, Administrative Committee Member, Audit Committee James M. Harkins is former Harford County Executive and a two - term member of the Maryland House of Delegates. A gubernatorial appointee to the Board, he is the local government representative. As Director of MES, Mr. Harkins oversees an independent State agency with over 700 employees involved in more than 510 environmental projects located in three states. Before his election as County Executive in 1998, Mr. Harkins served with the Harford County Sheriff's Office for 25 years. In the Maryland House of Delegates he was ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, and served one year on the House Appropriations Committee. He currently serves on the Shock Trauma Board of Visitors. A graduate of Harford Community College, Mr. Harkins and his family live in Whiteford, Maryland. Sheila Hill .: Term: August 1, 2009 —July 31, 2013 Trustee since October 2004 Member, Administrative Committee Member, Investment Committee Chairman, Corporate Governance Committee Sheila Hill was first elected by state employees in October 2004. She has served as president of AFSCME Local 1319 at the Patuxent Institution since 1997. As a 16 year state employee and corrections officer, Ms. Hill serves on the executive board of Council 92 and chairs the Maryland AFSCME Corrections Steering Committee. She has been a lobbyist at the Maryland legislature promoting employee concerns about compensation, staffing and benefits. Born in Frankfurt Germany, daughter of a career Army non - commissioned officer, she moved to Columbia in 1970 when her father retired. Ms. Hill now resides in Catonsville, Baltimore County. F. Patrick Hughes Term: July 1, 2009 —June 30, 2013 Trustee since April 2004 Vice Chairman, Investment Committee Chairman, Audit Committee Member, Securities Litigation Subcommittee F. Patrick Hughes is a gubernatorial appointee to the Board of Trustees. Mr. Hughes was President and Chief Executive Officer of Mid - Atlantic Realty Trust (MART), a New York Stock Exchange listed company headquartered in Baltimore. In October 2003, MART was merged into Kimco Realty Trust of which Mr. Hughes is a director. A real estate investment trust (REIT), Mid - Atlantic Realty was involved in shopping center development and ownership. Prior to this position, Mr. Hughes held similar positions with BTR Realty, Inc. since 1974. Active in many professional, civic and 169 educational associations, Mr. Hughes earned a B.A. and M.B.A. from Loyola University Maryland and is a Certified Public Accountant. Major Morris L. Krome Term: August 1, 2010 - July 31, 2014 Trustee since August 1998 Vice Chairman, Administrative Committee Member, Investment Committee Member, Audit Committee Major Morris L. Krome was first elected to the Board by members of the Maryland State Police Retirement System in 1998. A career officer with the State Police, Major Krome was born and raised in Baltimore City, graduating in 1958 from the Baltimore Polytechnic Institute. He attended the University of Maryland, College Park and later worked as a civilian employee of the State Police before entering the Police Academy. He received an A.A. degree from Catonsville Community College and is a graduate of Northwestern University Traffic Institute's Police Administration Training Program. Major Krome is also a graduate of the Police Executive Research Forum's Executive Training Program. Over the years, Major Krome held broadening supervisory and administrative positions. As a Lieutenant, he commanded the Rockville Barracks. As a Captain he served as assistant commander of the State Police Planning and Research Division. He was promoted to Major in 1986 and assigned as Commander of the Personnel Management Division and later, as Assistant Chief of the State Police Administrative Bureau. Here he began his interest in retirement issues and in 1991, following his retirement, served on the Department of Legislative Reference's Pension Code Revision Sub - Committee. He additionally represented State Police employee 170 organizations on various retirement issues before the legislature prior to his election to the Board. Major Krome lives in Carroll County with his wife, who manages a show horse farm. Theresa Lochte Term: August 1, 2011 - July 31, 2015 Trustee since August 2007 Member, Administrative Committee Member, Audit Committee Member, Investment Committee Theresa M. Lochte was elected to the Board of Trustees by active and retired members of the Teachers' Retirement and Pension System in 2007. She is a member of the Administrative Committee and the Audit Committee. Ms. Lochte has been active in the Teachers Association of Baltimore County (TABCO) and the Maryland State Education Association (MSEA). She serves on MSEA's Pension Protection Coordinating Committee. She is a member of the Board of Directors of the Maryland Retired School Personnel Association. Ms. Lochte has served on the Trustee Education Committee of the National Council on Teacher Retirement (NCTR). Ms. Lochte earned a BA from Mt. St. Agnes College and a Master of Liberal Arts degree from Johns Hopkins University. Since joining the Board, Ms. Lochte has attended NCTR Trustee Institutes, Trustee Workshops, and Annual Conventions. She has attended NEA Retirement and Benefits Forums and Trustee Workshops. Ms. Lochte earned a certificate in a €oelnvestment Strategies and Portfolio Managements €" from The Wharton School. She recently attended the s €oePensions, Retirement Security and Strategies for Investments €" conference at the Labor and Worklife Program at 171 Harvard Law School. Ms. Lochte worked as a speech language pathologist in Baltimore County Public Schools from 1965 until her retirement in 2003. She lives in Ellicott City, Maryland. 1 Harold Zirkin Term: September 10, 2011 - June 30, 2015 Trustee since September 2007 Chairman, Investment Committee Member, Corporate Governance Committee Vice Chairman, Securities Litigation Subcommittee Harold Zirkin is a gubernatorial appointee to the Board. Mr. Zirkin is President of Zirkin- Cutler Investments, Inc., a firm which provides investment management services for individuals, pensions, retirement accounts, foundations and charitable organizations. Mr. Zirkin founded H. Zirkin Investments, Inc., in 1973. A partner joined the firm in 1985 and the company name was changed to Zirkin- Cutler Investments, Inc. The company was sold to First National Bank of Maryland (now MEtT Bank) in 1996. In 2010, the company was sold to United Capital of Newport Beach, CA. Mr. Zirkin serves as trustee for more than 50 trusts and foundations and is investment counsel for more than 50 pension and retirement accounts. He earned a B.S. degree in business administration from Syracuse University and an M.B.A. in investment analysis and portfolio management from American University. He also holds the designation of Chartered Financial Analyst. He resides in Chevy Chase. 172 Thurman W. Zollicoffer, Jr. Term: September 2011 - July 31, 2015 Trustee since September 2007 Member, Investment Committee Vice Chairman, Corporate Governance Committee Chairman, Securities Litigation Subcommittee Thurman W. Zollicoffer, Jr., a partner in the Baltimore -based law firm Whiteford, Taylor 5t Preston, is a gubernatorial appointee to the Board. Previously, Mr. Zollicoffer served as City Solicitor and Counsel for the City of Baltimore Mayor and City Council, a position in which he managed a staff of 110 and a budget of $14 million. During his tenure with the City, he also served as a member of and counsel to the Board of Estimates, the body that deliberates all city contracts and financial operations. Mr. Zollicoffer is a trustee of the Baltimore City Employee Retirement System and is a member of the Governor's Blue Ribbon Commission to Study Retiree Health Care Options. He holds a bachelor's degree from Towson University and a J.D. degree from the University of Maryland. Public Advisors to the Investment Committee Selected for a 3 -year term by the Board, based on their professional education and credentials in the investment industry, and with the approval of the Board of Public Works 173 Wayne H. Shaner Term: July 1, 2011 - June 30, 2014 Public Advisor since 1991 Wayne H. Shaner is one of three public members of the Board selected on the basis of his professional experience and education in the financial industry. Mr. Shaner is managing partner of Rockledge Partners, LLC located in Bethesda, Maryland. In his prior position, Mr. Shaner was managing director of the Lockheed Martin Investment Management Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Lockheed Martin Company where he managed the Bethesda based parent corporation's consolidated employees retirement and saving plan assets. He was appointed to this position upon the merger of the Lockheed and Martin Marietta Corporations in 1995. He had joined Martin Marietta in 1976 and by 1993 had been elected Vice - President. Mr. Shaner received his B.A. in liberal arts and a master's degree in biochemistry from Johns Hopkins University. After service in the U. S. Navy, he earned an M.B.A. from the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania and was awarded a C.F.A. in 1983. 174 Brian B. Topping Term: July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2013 Public Advisor since 2003 Brian B. Topping is one of three public members of the Investment Committee chosen by the Board on the basis of his professional education and credentials in the investment industry. Since 1997, Mr. Topping has served as Vice - Chairman of Mercantile Safe Deposit and Trust Company (MSDT). In addition, he is a consultant to the Wealth and Investment Management Division and co- manager of the Mercantile Growth and Income Fund. From 1976 -1996 he served as MSDT Vice - Chairman and head of the Trust Et Investment Division. After receiving a B.A. degree from the University of Pennsylvania, he was awarded an M.B.A. from the Wharton Graduate Division in 1965. Mr. Topping was President and Trustee of the Maryland Historical Society from 1983 - 1990 and is a current trustee of the Sheppard Et Enoch Pratt Hospital. Larry E. Jennings, Jr. Term: July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2015 Public Advisor since 2008 Larry E. Jennings, Jr. is one of three public members of the Investment Committee chosen by the Board of Trustees for his professional education and investment experience. Mr. Jennings is a Senior Managing Director and one of the founders of TouchStone Partners, was formerly a principal of Carnegie Morgan Partners ( "CMP "), a financial advisory firm to state and local governments. Prior to forming CMP in 1994, Mr. Jennings spent over seven years as an investment banker at Legg Mason Wood Walker, Inc. rising to Managing Director. Mr. Jennings' investment banking experience includes real estate workouts, restructuring distressed municipal credits, sale /leaseback of public real estate assets, and negotiating 175 energy contracts on behalf of public and private entities. In prior years, Mr. Jennings also worked as a Senior Financial Analyst with Maryland National Bank. Mr. Jennings received a B.S. in Mathematics and Economics M.B.A. at Carnegie Mellon University, where he concentrated in Finance and Strategy. Mr. Jennings is a member of the board of trustees of Carnegie Mellon University and sits on the Investment and Library Committees, and has co- chaired the Math Curriculum Advisory Board. Mr. Jennings is Chairman and a member of the Investment Committee of Morgan State University Foundation. Dr R. Dean Kenderdine Executive Director of the Maryland State Retirement and Pension System January 17, 2007 - Present R. Dean Kenderdine is chief executive officer of SRPS. Working with the Chief Investment Officer, Mr. Kenderdine is also responsible for ensuring that the System's assets are invested and managed properly and prudently. Mr. Kenderdine has dedicated his 29 year career to public service. Prior to this appointment, Mr. Kenderdine served as Chief of Staff for the Comptroller of Maryland, Assistant Secretary of Tourism, Film and the Arts for the Maryland Department of Business and Economic Development, State Director for United States Senator Barbara A. Mikulski, and director and consultant to several non- profit organizations. Mr. Kenderdine is a member of the Board of Directors for Goodwill 176 Industries of Chesapeake, First Vice President of the Board of Directors for the Londontown Public House and Gardens, mentor for the Big Brother /Big Sisters Program of Maryland and member of the Volvo Ocean Race of the Chesapeake, Inc. Mr. Kenderdine holds a master's degree from the University of Maryland and a bachelor's degree from Arizona State University. He is a member of Leadership Maryland, a thriving network of informed, engaged leaders who are helping shape the future of Maryland. 177 APPENDIX C SKILLS MATRIX Appointee I Appointee II Appointee III Appointee IV Education /Professional Designation Economics Finance Accounting Human Resource Management Law Area of Expertise /Experience (min 5 years) Benefit Management Risk Management Law: Tax Labour Estate Planning Financial Planning Accounting: Tax Estate Planning Securities Banking Insurance Civic Engagement /Knowledge 178 APPENDIX D Proposed Process and Timeline January 7, 2013 Endorsement of Skills Matrix Request of Council to provide nominations for Board of Trustee membership (willingness to be considered must have been confirmed, curriculum vitae or resume to be provided to the Clerk's office no later that 4pm. January 14, 2013 January 15, 2013 Nomination packages distributed to Nominating Committee for consideration Nominating Committee meetings set January 21, 2013 Nominating Committee reports back to Council with recommendations for appointment to the Board of Trustees Council approved appointments to the Board of Trustees January 28, 2013 Appointments to the Board of Trustees finalized and communicated 179