hydrogeological assessment report 130 david …

HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT REPORT

130 David Manchester Road Carp, Ontario

FINAL REPORT

Prepared for: CFC Holdings

Attention: Wendy Cox 1856 Old Carp Road

Carp, Ontario K0A 1L0

Prepared by: McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd.

115 Walgreen Road, R.R. #3 Carp, ON K0A 1L0 Tel. (613) 836-2184

Project No. CP-10-124 Meghan Cameron, B.Sc. March 2011 Mark Priddle, P.Geo.

CFC Holdings Hydrogeological Report Project CP-10-124 130 David Manchester Road, Carp, ON

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. ES - 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of an assessment for evaluating the suitability of a proposed severance of a property located in Carp, within the City of Ottawa, Ontario from a hydrogeological perspective. The subject property is located near the community of Stittsville, at 130 David Manchester Road. The total area of the property is approximately 7.234 ha, with a proposal to separate a 1.64 ha portion on David Manchester. A significant amount of testing has been undertaken on the subject property to assess the suitability of the subject property to be serviced by an individual private well and individual septic system. The proposed plan is to develop the 1.64 ha portion for commercial purposes. The terrain analysis portion of the work involved a visual inspection of the site, review of well records in the area and soil sampling in the general area of the proposed septic system. There are suitable locations on the severed and retained portions of the property for septic system serving commercial buildings and/or private residences. Overall the hydrogeological testing indicates that the site is suitable for the proposed development with respect to potential groundwater supply and potential impacts. The severed portion of the proposed property is generally covered with a thin continuous layer of overburden which is underlain by limestone bedrock. There is a depression (exposed bedrock) on the central and eastern portion of the remnant property that is a result of the aggregate extraction operations that formerly took place on-site. The testing involved the evaluation of groundwater yield from one new well on the property and an assessment of groundwater quality from this well. There were no reasonably accessible neighbouring wells. Some water well information for nearby private water wells was obtained and evaluated as part of this assessment. In general, the natural groundwater quality has issues related to aesthetic parameters (colour, hydrogen sulphide, total dissolved solids, hardness, and iron). The only Maximum Acceptable Concentrations (MAC) that were exceeded in the two samples that were collected were for fluoride and sodium (initial samples only) and turbidity (both samples). Elevated fluoride was likely due to suspended solids in the first sample (no exceedance in the final sample). The sodium level dropped to less than 20 mg/L in the second sample. The turbidity was less than the treatable limit in the final sample. It is expected that through development and regular use, the turbidity of the pumped groundwater will decrease and not affect water treatment, if so required.


McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. ES - 2

The raw groundwater quality at the site is generally potable with treatment for certain aesthetic parameters. As a precaution, it is recommended that UV disinfection and softening (if desired) with a sodium-free softener (i.e. potassium chloride) be utilized for domestic potable water supplies. Such systems require regular maintenance and monitoring. If wells are properly sealed and not installed too deep, sufficient yield and suitable quality (health-related parameters) are expected. The proposed development is acceptable from a hydrogeologic perspective under the following conditions:

Water supply wells are installed as per O. Reg. 903 with at least 6 m of casing, but with depths of less than 100 m to avoid encountering hard, saline water,

Water demand for the development should not exceed 7,500 L/day

Normal well setbacks from septic systems (15 m), and other sources of contamination (30 m) are adhered to,

Consideration should be given to water treatment using softening (using potassium as opposed to sodium) and UV disinfection,

Septic systems are properly designed and installed (septic systems will require imported fill), and

Proper well and septic maintenance programs are undertaken.


McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. TOC - 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

2.0 BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 SITE SETTING ......................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 NEIGHBOURING PROPERTIES AND LAND USES ......................................................................................... 4 2.3 HYDROLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 BACKGROUND GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY ...................................................................................... 4

2.4.1 Recharge/Discharge Areas ................................................................................................................ 5 2.4.2 Hydrogeologically Sensitive Features ................................................................................................ 5 2.4.3 Potential Sources of Contamination................................................................................................... 5

3.0 HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................... 7

3.1 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................ 8

3.2.1 Static conditions................................................................................................................................ 8 3.2.2 Pumping Tests ................................................................................................................................... 8 3.2.3 Well Yield.......................................................................................................................................... 9 3.2.4 Transmissivity ................................................................................................................................... 9 3.2.5 Long-term Yield............................................................................................................................... 10 3.2.6 Water Quality.................................................................................................................................. 10

3.3 WATER TREATMENT............................................................................................................................. 12 3.4 WATER WELL RECORD REVIEW............................................................................................................ 12

4.0 TERRAIN ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................... 14

4.1 GENERAL SOILS EVALUATION .............................................................................................................. 14 4.2 SEPTIC EVALUATION ............................................................................................................................ 14 4.3 CONTAMINANT ATTENUATION .............................................................................................................. 14 4.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT .................................................................................................................. 15

5.0 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS............................................................................................................ 16

5.1 REGIONAL HYDROGEOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 16 5.2 SITE HYDROGEOLOGY .......................................................................................................................... 16 5.3 WATER SUPPLY.................................................................................................................................... 16 5.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT .................................................................................................................. 17

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 18

6.1 WATER SUPPLY.................................................................................................................................... 18 6.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT .................................................................................................................. 18

7.0 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................... 19

8.0 LIMITATIONS...................................................................................................................................... 20


McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. TOC - 2

LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1 Summary of Site Instrumentation Table 3-2 Hydrogeological Properties Table 3-3 Water Elevations Table 3-4 Field Measurement Results Table 3-5 Summary of Water Quality Results (Laboratory Analysis) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Site Setting Figure 2 Subject Property and Proposed Well and Septic System Locations Figure 3 Subject Property and Area (Air Photo) PHOTOGRAPHS LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Site Location Plan, Official Plan – Schedule A, Rural Policy Plan (City of Ottawa) Appendix B Legal Survey (Draft) Appendix C Laboratory Certificates of Analysis (Water Quality Data, Grain Size Analysis) Appendix D Water Well Record Search Information (Ecolog ERIS) and On-site Water Well

Record Appendix E Hydraulic Testing Data Appendix F Hydraulic Testing Analysis Results Appendix G LSI and RSI Calculations Appendix H Grain Size Analysis Results


McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. (McIntosh Perry) was retained by CFC Holdings (CFC) to conduct hydrogeological and terrain analysis assessments of a rural (see Appendix A) countryside property (~7.234 ha total) located in Carp, within the City of Ottawa, Ontario. The subject property is located near the community of Stittsville, at 130 David Manchester Road. An outline of the subject property is presented on an air photo showing the surrounding area (Figure 3). This study has been prepared in support of an application for approval of the proposed severance of this property. The proponent is seeking to sever part of the lot on the property as noted on the legal survey (Appendix B). Because of its location in an unserviced area in City of Ottawa, proposed servicing for the property is to utilize a private water supply well and a private septic system. This work was conducted in general accordance with Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) guidance as follows:

Guideline D-5: Planning for Sewage and Water Services (August 1996) Procedure D-5-4: Technical Guideline for Individual On-site Sewage Systems: Water

Quality Impact Risk Assessment (August 1996) Procedure D-5-5: Technical Guideline for Private Wells: Water Supply Assessment

(August 1996) The following report describes the studies that were undertaken. This work was initiated by McIntosh Perry in the January of 2011 with a site reconnaissance. The work presented herein involved the following:

Hydrogeological assessment (for evaluating water supply) Terrain analysis (in support of septic design)

The proposed severance is located adjacent in a rural portion of the City of Ottawa (Figure 1). The subject property is located on the west side of Highway 7 (Figure 3). At the present time, it is undeveloped with open and treed areas (Photos 1-3). The property is currently designated Rural Natural Feature in the Official Plan (OP) and zoned Rural Countryside (RU) in the comprehensive zoning by-law. Highway 7, adjacent to the property, has been designated a scenic corridor in the OP. The client is applying to rezone the subject property to allow for the construction of a warehouse and retail store.



The legal property description for the property is: Part of Lot 1, Concession 4, Geographic Township of Huntley, Formerly Township of West Carleton, City of Ottawa. The total area of the property is approximately 7.234 ha. The client is proposing to sever a 1.64 ha portion and the remainder of the property will stay undeveloped. The work presented herein also includes background information pertaining to the following:

General site setting information Geological and Hydrogeological Background Site Specific Conditions Water treatment options Wastewater treatment and disposal options



2.0 BACKGROUND

2.1 Site Setting

The subject property (site) is located on the east side of David Manchester Road (Figures 1 and 2). For the purpose of discussions in this report, it is considered that David Manchester Road (along subject site) and Highway 7 are both oriented north-south, while Rothbourne Road and the southern portion of David Manchester Road are oriented east-west and if they were to connect, would generally represents the southern boundary of the subject property. Aerial photographs and Ottawa e-maps were used to create a site sketch of the subject property, which indicated the approximate property boundaries. The legal property description for the property is: Part of Lot 1, Concession 4, Geographic Township of Huntley, Formerly Township of West Carleton, City of Ottawa. The ground surface elevation is 138 +/- 4 metre above sea level. The property is irregularly shaped as noted on Figures 2 and 3. The majority of the property is presently “inactive”. The property consists of open and treed land, originally cleared prior to 1932 for what appears to be agricultural purposes. It does not appear that a structure was ever erected on-site. There is access to the site from David Manchester Road. The only vehicle entrance to the site is from David Manchester Road at the southern intersection between the electrical transmission corridor and David Manchester Road. The entrance/parking area consists primarily of gravel and earth materials. The remainder of the property consists of grassed open space, bedrock exposures, or treed/vegetated areas along the west, north and south property boundaries. The property does not seem to be actively used. Evidence of former small scale logging is present throughout the site. It also appears that the central and eastern portion of the site have once been used for shallow (overburden, likely topsoil, sand and/or gravel) aggregate extraction. There is a depression (exposed bedrock) on the central and eastern portion of the property that is a remnant of the mineral extraction operations that once took place on-site. Drainage on the property is variable and appears to be dictated by the local topography. A few small low-lying areas with water depths less than 0.45 m were present on-site. The site is bounded to the west by David Manchester Road; to the north by a vacant rural property / high-tension electrical transmission line corridor; to the south by the former alignment of Rothbourne Road, as well as a forested area, and to the east by Highway 7. Further east is a wooded lot.



The property is currently designated Rural Natural Feature and Highway 7 has been designated a scenic corridor in the Official Plan (OP) and It is zoned Rural Countryside – RU in the comprehensive zoning bylaw. CFC Holdings is applying to rezone the subject property to allow warehouse and retail store as additional permitted uses in the zone. The climate is humid continental with cool winters and warm summers. The mean annual precipitation is approximately 914mm with 203 cm as snow. The mean daily temperature is approximately 6oC (Environment Canada Weather Normals (1971-2000) for Ottawa)).

2.2 Neighbouring Properties and Land Uses

The immediate surrounding land use is mineral extraction (quarry), rural general industrial (towing yard, concrete product manufacturer), highway right-of-way, or rural countryside (treed with sparse residences). There also exists a high-tension electrical transmission corridor (easement) which crosses the northern portion of the site from east to west. The Official Plan – Schedule A, Rural Policy Plan (City of Ottawa) is presented in Appendix A. The majority of the area within 500, of the site is zoned General Rural Area, and Rural Natural Features Area. There are also areas zoned Significant Wetlands and Limestone Resource Area.

2.3 Hydrology

The site is relatively flat, with the land sloping up just south of the electrical easement. The elevation on site is approximately 138 +/- 4 m asl, with the lowest point being along the southern and western portion of the site. There is a swale which extends along a portion of the west boundary of the property along the east side of David Manchester Road, as well as one along the west of Highway 7, which runs parallel to the eastern boundary of the subject site. The ditch running along Highway 7 appears lower in elevation than the subject site. Surface drainage is likely toward the neighbouring ditches.

2.4 Background Geology and Hydrogeology

General geological maps of the area indicate that overburden consists of various deposits; including Champlain Sea Deposits, and Champlain Sea Sediments. Champlain Sea Deposits include gravel, sand and boulders while beaches are commonly fossiliferous. The nature of sediment is controlled by underlying material; e.g. gravel, sand, and boulders where developed from till and glaciofluvial deposits; slabs and shingles where developed from sedimentary



bedrock. Post-Champlain Sea Deposits consist of organic deposits such as: mainly muck and peat in bogs, fens, swamps and poorly drained areas, and alluvial deposits such as stratified sand, silt, minor gravel, and disseminated organic matter (Map 2140A). The bedrock at the subject property is composed of Paleozoic rock, of the Ottawa Formation; limestone with some shaly partings with some sandstone in basal part. (Map 1508A) A review of the water well records within 500 m of the subject property showed that the depth to bedrock ranges from 0.3 m to 4 m below ground surface (mbgs), with an average depth of 1.83 mbgs. The bedrock is always referred to as “limestone” in the well records. All the water wells were completed in the bedrock (Appendix D) 2.4.1 Recharge/Discharge Areas

A review of topographic maps, geological maps and a windshield survey shows that the site is in a groundwater recharge area. Its elevation is somewhat higher than the surrounding areas to the north and east (direction of groundwater flow). The predominant source of recharge to the regional aquifer is precipitation and infiltration at upgradient locations. Drainage on the property is sporadic and appears to be dictated by the local topography. A few small low-lying areas with standing water were present on-site.

2.4.2 Hydrogeologically Sensitive Features

In the area of former aggregate extraction (primarily on remnant portion), there is little to no overburden. This could be classified as a sensitive feature as the shallow limestone bedrock is fractured.

2.4.3 Potential Sources of Contamination

A windshield survey of the area was conducted in combination with a review of maps and zoning information. The site is located in a Rural Countryside area with some residential properties and highway activity in the area. According to the Phase I ESA, completed by McIntosh Perry dated November 2010 for the site, there is some potential for fill to be present on the property in the form of backfill gravel and sand along the eastern portion of the site. Three stockpiles of what appeared to be topsoil mixed-in with woody by-product from logging or land clearing were also observed. It is likely that the material found in the stockpiles originated on-site. McIntosh Perry staff also observed hazardous materials dumping, likely from disposal by trespassers on the north portion of the property (remnant). This material included plastic motor



oil containers (roughly 40 of various sizes) and used oil filters (5), which appeared to have been dumped along the southern edge of the high-tension electrical transmission easement. Old containers of engine antifreeze coolant (3), tire sealant (1), and fuel additives (1) were also observed. An empty plastic fuel “jerry” can was also observed. A small amount of household garbage was found to have been left on-site (aluminum cans, paper and cardboard waste, plastics, rubber tires (2). The nearest service station is located approximately 2.3 km northeast of the subject property. One above-ground fuel tank was observed roughly 165 m of the subject property, at the towing facility to the south-east of the property (opposite side of Highway 7). No other fuel storage was observed or reported within 500 m of the subject property. Along the western boundary of the site (on the west side of David Manchester Road), were two pole-mounted electrical transformers of unknown age and condition. It is expected that since there is no waste water service available in the area surrounding the site, there is likely septic tanks and septic fields or holding tanks at nearby residences in the area. There are none on the subject property. Four water wells were located within 500m of the subject property. Three (3) of the wells are/were used for domestic purposes, while one was/is used for as a public water source (according to the Ecolog Report). A quarry is located approximately 500 m north-northwest of the subject property on the opposite side of Highway 7. The quarry has the potential to affect groundwater quality in the event of contaminant discharges which would affect groundwater rapidly.



3.0 HYDROGEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

McIntosh Perry conducted a detailed hydrogeological investigation at the site to assess the feasibility of individual private wells for servicing the proposed residential lots. As noted in Section 1, the work generally followed the Guidance of MOE Procedure D-5-5: Technical Guideline for Private Wells: Water Supply Assessment. 3.1 Methodology

Wilf Hall and Sons Water Well Drilling (Well Contractor’s Licence No. 2558) was retained by CFC Holdings to drill one water well on site for testing purposes and eventual use when the property is developed (Photo 5). The drilling was conducted by Mark Hall (Well Technician’s License No. T-2228). Wilf Hall and Sons Water Well Drilling also provided and installed the pump for all pumping test activities. A summary of the test well that was included in this study is presented in Table 3-1. The location of the well is noted on Figure 2.

Table 3-1 Groundwater Instrumentation

Formation Well ID Depth (m)

Driller’s Well Record Estimated Yield

(L/minute)

TW1 93 Limestone 11.4 * * - Recommended pumping rate as noted on Well Record The initial estimation of the yield and quality of water from the test well was made by the drillers during development, immediately after drilling. The yield determined by this tests are noted in Table 3-1. Details are provided on the Well Record in Appendix D. A minimum six-hour pumping test was conducted at the test well under the direction of McIntosh Perry staff (February; 3, 2011, Photo 5). During the testing program, water levels were measured in the pumping well. Water quality was also measured in the field during the test. Two water samples were collected during the seven hour test, for the “subdivision supply” suite of parameters. All samples were collected unfiltered and unchlorinated directly into clean bottles supplied by the analytical laboratory (Exova Laboratories Ltd., Ottawa, ON). Samples were kept on ice and shipped directly to Exova. All samples were received by the laboratory within 24 hours of collection. Exova received a Certificate of Laboratory Proficiency in 1991 from the Canadian Association for Laboratory Accreditation (CALA). Following an independent laboratory audit, Accutest achieved full accreditation from CALA (Registration Number 2602). Under the auspices of the



Standards Council of Canada (SCC), Accutest was awarded an ISO 17025 accreditation and is fully accredited for Ontario Safe Drinking Water Act (OSDWA) testing. During test, water level monitoring consisted of manual readings with an electronic water level tape. Drawdown was measured in the pumping wells and measurements were made until at least 95% recovery in the pumping well. The data were analyzed using Aquifer WIN32 software. This software was used to determine the transmissivity (T) in m2/s and storativity (S). The solution of Theis (1935) was used to analyze the pumping test data assuming confined conditions for the bedrock aquifer, also Hantush (1964) was used to analyze the pumping test data assuming a leaky aquifer in confined conditions for the bedrock aquifer. 3.2 Results

The data from the pumping test (drawdown curve) is noted in Appendix E. The calculations of hydrogeological properties that were conducted using the Aquifer WIN32 software are presented in Appendix F with a summary of results being presented in Table 3-2. Water elevation data are presented in Table 3-3. Water quality data are presented in Tables 3-4 (Field measurements) and 3-5 (Laboratory results). Laboratory Certificates of Analysis are presented in Appendix C. 3.2.1 Static conditions

Groundwater was not observed in the overburden during the drilling of the test well. It is anticipated that during certain periods of the year such as the spring, the overburden is saturated and groundwater flow would mirror the surface topography (i.e. flow radially from the higher points of the site). A few small low-lying areas with water depths less than 0.45 m were present on-site during McIntosh Perry’s Phase I ESA investigation. During the pumping test, static water level was measured in the test well prior to pumping (Table 3-3). The static groundwater level was 2.40 mbgs at this time (February 2011). 3.2.2 Pumping Tests

The pumping test was conducted at TW1 by Wilf Hall & Sons Drilling (Wilf Hall), under the direction of McIntosh Perry staff. The pump, hose and power supply were furnished by Wilf Hall. The well contractor installed and removed the pump from the well. The water discharge was directed away from the pumping well and was allowed to flow overland across the subject



property. At the time of the pumping test, the ground was snow covered and the weather was cold (-20oC to -6oC). All the water level measurement data are presented in Appendix E. TW1 TW1 was installed at the site on January 27, 2011. It was drilled to a depth of 93 m. The overburden was 1.55 m in thickness. A steel casing, 13.64 m in length, was installed in the hole and sealed with a cement/bentonite grout. The hole was grouted from 13.64 m to the ground surface. The remainder of the well was an open hole in the rock. The rock was described as black/grey limestone by the driller. Water was not encountered in substantial amounts at any depth. The drillers returned to site on January 28, 2011 and surged the well to attempt to increase its yield. The driller initially estimated a yield of 11.4 L/minute (2.5 gal/min). The recommended pumping rate for this well was 13.6 L/minute (3 gal/min). McIntosh Perry undertook a pumping test at this location on February 3, 2011. The well was pumped at a rate of 14 to 18.5 L/minute (average of 15 L/minute) for seven (7) hours. The drawdown stabilized at 18.1 m. Greater than 95% recovery in water level was achieved in about 513 minutes. Full recovery in water level was achieved in approximately 1300 minutes. Recovery was measured based on water levels without the pump present in the well. 3.2.3 Well Yield

The testing and development undertaken by the driller immediately after well installation provided a reasonable indication of the yield of the test well (Table 3-1). During the seven hour test, at least 6,000 L of water was pumped from the well. This is equivalent to much more than the daily demand for water for the proposed commercial use. 95% recovery was achieved at approximately 500 minutes after the cessation of pumping. 3.2.4 Transmissivity

A summary of the well and hydrogeological properties determined during the testing work at the site are presented in Table 3-2. The data output from the analysis is presented in Appendix F and the results are summarized in Table 3-2.



Table 3-2 Hydrogeological Properties

Parameter Test Results

Method TW1 Transmissivity (m2/s)

Theis (1935) Hantush (1964)

6.0 x 10-6

4.0 x 10-6 Storativity (-) Theis (1935)

Hantush (1964)

6.6 x 10-8

1.1 x 10-7

Estimated Sustainable Yield (L/min)

14

The values of transmissivity, storativity and yield are low to moderate for aquifers supplying individual homes for domestic purposes. 3.2.5 Long-term Yield

The long term yield (maximum recommended pumping rate) of each well was estimated based on the following factors:

Observations during seven-hour pumping test Driller’s recommendation Calculated properties Density of development

It is anticipated that the proposed development will require a maximum of 2000 to 4000 L/day for all uses. There are presently no nearby users of groundwater nor will there be in the future. The water-bearing zone in the test well is below the final floor elevation, therefore it is unlikely that quarrying will affect yields in the area. As such, the test well will be suitable for supplying the proposed development. 3.2.6 Water Quality

Laboratory Certificates of Analysis for all the groundwater testing conducted at the site are presented in Appendix C. A summary of results from the testing of the one water well is presented in Table 3-5. At the test well location, samples were taken twice during the seven hour test. Based on test results from the one test well (TW1), the water quality will be acceptable in terms of health-related parameters. Total coliforms and E. coli were not detected in the two water



samples that were collected (chlorine residual was not present in either sample). The only Maximum Acceptable Concentrations (MAC) that were exceeded in the two samples that were collected were:

Fluoride (TW1-1) Turbidity (TW-1-1 and TW1-2) Sodium (TW1-1)

Elevated fluoride was detected in TW1-1. Its concentration (1.89 mg/L) was slightly above MAC (1.5 mg/L). It is speculated that this was due to natural conditions (elevated suspended solids) in this initial sample. The fluoride concentration decreased during the pumping test to 0.91 mg/L, which is below the MAC. It is noted that the well was tested shortly after being installed and the turbidity was initially elevated during the pumping test. It was also noted that the turbidity decreased over the course of the seven-hour pumping test based on both field (Table 3-4) and laboratory measurements (Table 3-5). Turbidity was found to be 75.2 NTU (TW1-1) in the initial sample (exceeding MAC of 1.0 NTU) but decreased to 2.4 NTU in final sample (TW1-2). This exceeds the MAC, but is below the treatable limit. It is expected that through development and regular use, the turbidity of the pumped groundwater will decrease and not affect water treatment, if so required. Therefore, turbidity is not an impediment to the water supply for this development. The sodium concentration in TW1-1 was 127 mg/L, exceeding the MAC for persons on sodium-restricted diets of 20 mg/L, but below the MAC of 200 mg/L for others. It is suspected that the initially high sodium concentration was a result of the driller adding bleach (sodium hypochlorite) to disinfect the well immediately after installation. Sodium concentrations decreased during the pumping test to 17 mg/L, which is below the MAC for all persons. Several operational guidelines (OG) and aesthetic objectives (AO) were exceeded. These exceedances were noted for colour, hydrogen sulphide, TDS, hardness, and iron. In TW1-2 colour was found to be 7 TCU, which exceeds the AO of 5 TCU. The hydrogen sulphide concentrations in TW1-1 and TW1-2 were <1.0 mg/L (elevated detection limited due to high turbidity) and 0.38 mg/L, respectively both of which exceed the AO of 0.05 mg/L.



The TDS concentration in TW1-1 was 627 mg/L which exceeds the AO of 500 mg/L. The second sample (TW1-2) however was 338 mg/L which is below the AO. The hardness concentrations in TW1-1 and TW1-2 were 210 mg/L and 226 mg/L, respectively both of which exceed the OG of 100 mg/L. This is expected as the well was completed in carbonate-bearing materials (limestone). The Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) and the Ryznar Stability Index (RSI) were calculated for the groundwater samples obtained from the site. The LSI is used as an indicator of scaling potential. The LSI was close to zero for both samples which indicated borderline scaling potential. The RSI indicated that calcium carbonate formation probably would not lead to a protective corrosion inhibitor film (Appendix G). The iron concentration found in TW1-1 was 4.26 mg/L which exceeds the AO of 0.3 mg/L. The second sample (TW1-2) however was 0.06 mg/L which is below the AO. The aesthetic parameters that exceed their respective objectives are at levels which do not affect health and are treatable. 3.3 Water Treatment

The use of disinfection may be desired. Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection would be most appropriate for the potable water supply. Based on the observed water quality there should not be any hindrances to UV disinfection. The UV transmittance at the well was 88.5% toward the end of the seven-hour pumping test. With development and shocking of the well at the site, a suitable and safe supply of water can be obtained. For aesthetic reasons, water treatment such as softening, may be desired. It is noted that softening with a standard salt (NaCl) softener will increase the sodium and chloride concentrations relative to those noted in Table 3-5. Potassium salt softeners are recommended. 3.4 Water Well Record Review

The Water Well Information System database indicated that there are four water wells that are accurately located within 500 m of the centre of the subject property; these records were identified in the EcoLog ERIS report, which was obtained during the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, performed by McIntosh in November 2010. The search results are presented in Appendix D.



Out of the four records with stratigraphic information, it was noted that all were completed in limestone. The total depths ranged from 36.6 to 44.2 m with a mean of 40.2 m. The overburden thicknesses ranged from 0.31 m to 4.27 m. The average overburden thickness was 1.9 m. With respect to water, the quality was identified as “fresh” in the three of the wells, and not listed for one of the wells. Water was encountered, on average, at 24.4 m below ground. Static water levels averaged 7.9 m below ground. The reported yields ranged from 23 L/minute to 67 L/min, with an average of 49 L/minute.



4.0 TERRAIN ANALYSIS

During a site inspection, completed by McIntosh Perry personnel, it was noted that the central and eastern portions of the site may have once been used for shallow (overburden, likely topsoil, sand and/or gravel) aggregate extraction. There is a depression (exposed bedrock) on the central and eastern portion of the property that is a remnant of the aggregate operations that formerly took place on-site. A soil (overburden) sample was obtained for analysis from the general area of the proposed septic system. It was submitted for grain size analysis and laboratory T-time testing. 4.1 General Soils Evaluation

The following presents a summary of soil characteristics of the site and surrounding area:

Bedrock was encountered at 1.55 mbgs during the drilling of the test well onsite. Overburden was described as sand and gravel by the drillers. According to the well records for the area bedrock ranges from 0.61 to 4.21 m bgs and

overburden consisted generally of sand and gravel. Bedrock exposures were observed on the central and eastern portion of the property

that is a remnant of the former aggregate extraction operations on site. 4.2 Septic Evaluation

The terrain analysis involved evaluation of the soils on the subject property. Topsoil is underlain by shallow deposits of sand and gravel, possibly till. In summary, the investigations suggested that the native material was moderately suitable for individual septic systems for the proposed development with a T-time of 6-8 minutes/cm. This is relative permeable suggested finer-grained material will have to be imported for the septic system. The two possible locations for proposed systems (Figure 2) will have shallow bedrock and possibly seasonal high water table. The septic bed for the proposed development will have to be raised and imported fill will be required. 4.3 Contaminant Attenuation

Of concern with rural development is the potential contamination of shallow aquifer with nitrates. The present concentration of nitrate in the test well was <0.1 mg/L. There are limited sources of nitrate in groundwater in the area (i.e. no farming or developments on septic systems). The lot to be severed (1.64 ha) is sufficiently large enough to accommodate a conventional septic system without affecting nitrate concentrations above the ODWS at the property boundary.



4.4 Wastewater Treatment

Two possible locations for septic systems on the subject property are presented on Figure 2. There is separation between the existing test well and the proposed septic systems while meeting all the other minimum setback requirements of the OBC, MOE and Township. At the present time, a septic design has not been undertaken. It is anticipated that the design flow will be less than 10,000 L/day for the proposed development and therefore the application will be submitted to the Ottawa Septic System Office.



5.0 SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS

The proposed development is located in Carp, Ontario, within the City of Ottawa. The subject property is located near the community of Stittsville, at 130 David Manchester Road. The property consists of open and treed land, with no development on the property. The total area of the property is approximately 7.234 ha, with a proposal to sever a 1.64 ha portion on David Manchester. 5.1 Regional Hydrogeology

The site is located on bedrock composed of Paleozoic rock, of the Ottawa Formation; limestone rock. Groundwater flow in both the bedrock and overburden generally follows the surface topography. Shallow bedrock (<100 m) groundwater flow is likely to the north-northeast, in the direction of the nearest quarry and the Carp River. 5.2 Site Hydrogeology

Overburden groundwater flow is controlled by the surface topography. Flow is generally toward the two ditches at the boundaries of the site and low-lying areas on site. Groundwater flow in the bedrock cannot be accurately defined because only one well with accurate water level measurements was available. As noted above, it is inferred that deeper regional groundwater flow is toward the north northeast. The bedrock aquifer was found to be of low to moderate permeability. Fracturing is likely to be primarily horizontal in the limestone. 5.3 Water Supply

Groundwater testing at the site showed that the water yield and water quality is good. Safe yields of more than 14 L/minute were determined for the test wells. No Ontario Drinking Water Standards (MACs) were exceeded in the test well during the final sampling, with the exception of turbidity (TW1-2). The turbidity was below the treatable limit and is expected to decrease with development and use of the well. It has been shown that the bedrock aquifer is suitable for supplying the needs for one commercial proposed development in terms of quality. The water quality is acceptable; however disinfection (UV) and softening may be desired.




There is sufficient space for a conventional Class IV septic system to supply the proposed development as noted on Figure 2. Two possible locations have been noted on this figure. The native overburden material was found to have relatively high permeability for buried septic systems, therefore imported fill will be required. At this stage, a septic design has not been completed.



6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Water Supply

Well Construction The newly installed test well is suitable for supplying the proposed development (O.Reg.

903 setbacks must be adhered to) The well should be maintained prior to use Water demand should not exceed 7500 L/day

Water Quality and Treatment

Water generally meets Standards at the present time (turbidity should decrease to below the MAC with development).

Aesthetic parameters may be treated A UV system may be used as a precaution If water softening is desired, the use of potassium is recommended


Septic Systems

In the proposed area for the septic system, the water table and bedrock surface may be less than 0.9 m below the ground surface, however imported material may be required

The septic system should be constructed with all appropriate setbacks as per Ontario Regulations and the Ontario Building Code

Native material is relatively permeable for septic systems; the native soils should be assessed at each proposed septic location and imported fill be used, if necessary.

Site Layout

Proposed well, septic and building locations are noted on Figure 2 The depth to bedrock and groundwater should be confirmed at the septic location before

construction



7.0 REFERENCES

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. (McIntosh Perry), November 2010. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 130 David Manchester Road, Carp, ON.

Hantush, M.S., 1964, Hydraulics of Wells, In Advances in Hydroscience (V.T. Chow, editor), Vol. 1, pp. 281-432, Academic Press, New York. OGS Earth, 2010. Ontario Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry, - Ontario Geological Survey Earth – for Google Earth Theis, C.V., 1935, The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using groundwater storage, Trans. Amer. Geophys. Union, Vol. 16, pp. 519-524.



8.0 LIMITATIONS

This report has been prepared and the work referred to in this report has been undertaken by McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. for CFC Holdings. It is intended for the sole, and exclusive use of CFC Holdings, its affiliated companies and partners and their respective insurers, agents, employees, advisors and reviewers (collectively, “CFC Holdings”). The report may not be relied upon by any other person or entity without the express written consent (Reliance Letter) of McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on decisions made based on it, without a reliance letter are the responsibility of such third parties. McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. accept no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report. The investigation undertaken by McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. with respect to this report and any conclusions or recommendations made in this report reflect McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. judgment based on the site conditions observed at the time of the site inspection on the date(s) set out in this report and on information available at the time of the preparation of this report. This report has been prepared for specific application to this site and it is based, in part, upon visual observation of the site, subsurface investigation at discrete locations and depths, and specific analysis of specific chemical parameters and materials during a specific time interval, all as described in this report. Unless otherwise stated, the findings cannot be extended to previous or future site conditions, portions of the site which were unavailable for direct investigation, subsurface locations which were not investigated directly, or chemical parameters, materials or analysis which were not addressed. Substances other than those addressed by the investigation described in this report may exist within the site, substances addressed by the investigation may exist in areas of the site not investigated and concentrations of substances addressed which are different than those reported may exist in areas other than the locations from which samples were taken. If site conditions or applicable standards change or if any additional information becomes available at a future date, modifications to the findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report may be necessary.


McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd.

TABLES

Table 3-3Water Level - Pumping Test Drawdown

Proposed Lockwood Subdivision, Glen Tay, ON

TW1 - test well 3-Feb-11

Time Water level TW1 Water Elevation Drawdown(minutes) (m) (m asl) (m)

0 2.400 0.00 (4.99m before pump)1 4.505 2.116 7.995 5.609 18.5L/min12 10.390 7.9918 12.350 9.95 18.5L/min25 16L/min33 15.530 13.13 Sample TW1-143 16.745 14.35 16L/min46 18.250 15.85 16L/min66 19.265 16.87 16L/min

101 19.645 17.25 16L/min115 19.980 17.58 15.5L/min121 20.510 18.11 15.0L/min158 20.830 18.43 15.5L/min172 20.750 18.35 14L/min183 20.535 18.14 14L/min240 20.535 18.14 14L/min279 20.540 18.14 14L/min300 20.540 18.14 14L/min339 20.545 18.15 14L/min360 20.535 18.14 14L/min384 20.540 18.14 14L/min392 20.545 18.15 14L/min422 20.550 18.15 Sample TW1-2 Pump off425 19.260 16.86 pump removed428 18.980 16.58430 18.080 15.68431 17.820 15.42432 17.500 15.10437 14.150 11.75446 11.035 8.64452 9.415 7.02472 6.500 4.10513 5.570 3.17517 5.530 3.13523 5.490 3.09528 5.405 3.011366 4.815 2.42

Notes

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineeers Ltd. Water level data-TW1_Feb 3.2011

Table 3-4Field Measurement Results

130 David Manchester Rd., Carp, ON

Project: CP-10-124

Pumping Test at: TW1 Date: 14-Oct-10

Time Turbidity pH Conductivity TDS Temperature Chlorine Residual Flow Rate* Water Elevation Drawdown Sample(hrs since start) (NTU) (ppm) (L/minute) (m asl) (m) ID

00:06 82.30 7.73 2280 1066 2.8 11** 0:09 18.5 (bucket)0:12 88.60 7.89 1373 683 5.80:17 18.50:22 43.40 7.74 1229 646 6.30:25 15.90:31 42.20 7.68 1243 616 6.90:33 0 TW1-10:41 28.10 7.50 831 423 7.1 15.91:11 43.80 7.46 617 297 7.3 15.91:36 29.20 7.51 593 298 7.51:47 15.72:01 15.22:11 10.22 7.48 590 297 8.32:30 15.52:33 4.67 7.53 668 323 8.92:52 143:16 2.54 7.56 523 264 8.4 144:00 144:05 1.75 7.58 868 440 8.34:37 0.76 7.58 599 303 7.95:18 1.21 7.51 634 322 8.05:39 13.95:52 1.00 7.49 581 294 8.36:00 13.66:17 0.64 7.41 529 266 8.46:34 146:46 0.79 7.42 515 259 8.37:02 0 pump off TW1-2

95% Recovery ~500 min* Flow rate - 2.5 L added to each nucket measurment, due to leak** flow rate from flow meter, all other measurments from the bucket

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers 1of1 Table 3-4 - Field Data

Table 3-5Summary of Water Quality Results (Lab Data)

130 David Manchester Rd. Carp, ON

Project:Matrix: water

Sample Date: 2011-02-03 2011-02-03Sample ID:

PARAMETER UNITS MRL TYPE LIMIT UNITSAlkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 5 259 261 OG 500 mg/LChloride mg/L 1 17 4 AO 250 mg/LColour TCU 2 3 7 AO 5 TCUConductivity uS/cm 5 965 520Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L 0.5 1.8 3.0 AO 5 mg/LFluoride mg/L 0.10 1.89 0.91 MAC 1.5 mg/LHydrogen Sulphide mg/L 0.01 <1.0* 0.38 AO 0.05 mg/LN-NH3 (Ammonia) mg/L 0.02 0.13 0.16N-NO2 (Nitrite) mg/L 0.10 <0.10 <0.10 MAC 1.0 mg/LN-NO3 (Nitrate) mg/L 0.10 <0.10 <0.10 MAC 10.0 mg/LpH 8.05 7.91 6.5-8.5Phenols mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sulphate mg/L 1 212 22 AO 500 mg/LTannin & Lignin mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1TDS (COND - CALC) mg/L 5 627 338 AO 500 mg/LTotal Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.10 0.16 0.17Turbidity NTU 0.1 75.2 2.4 MAC 1.0 NTUHardness as CaCO3 mg/L 1 210 226 OG 100 mg/LIon Balance 0.01 0.98 0.93Calcium mg/L 1 48 56Magnesium mg/L 1 22 21Potassium mg/L 1 7 6Sodium mg/L 2 127 17 MAC 20 mg/LIron mg/L 0.03 4.26 0.06 AO 0.3 mg/LManganese mg/L 0.01 0.04 0.01 AO 0.05 mg/LUV Transmittance @ 254 nm % 0.1 88.5

Total Coliforms ct/100mL 0 0 MAC 0 ct/100mLEscherichia Coli ct/100mL 0 0 MAC 0 ct/100mLHeterotrophic Plate Count ct/1mL 189 81Faecal Coliforms ct/100mL 0 0Faecal Streptococcus ct/100mL 0 0MRL = Method Reporting Limit INC = Incomplete AO = Aesthetic Objective OG = Operational Guideline MAC = Maximum Allowable Concentration IMAC = Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration

Concentration exceeds AO or OG 232Concentration exceeds MAC 5.3

H2S MRL raised due to sample turbidity

Test Well TW1

CP-10-124

Comment:

GUIDELINE

ODWSOGTW1-1 TW1-2

* - H2S MRL raised due to sample turbidity

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers 1 of 1 Table 3-5 - Lab Data



FIGURES

1 3 0 D AV I D M A NC H ES T ER RD 1 3 0 D A VI D M AN C HE S T E R R D 1 3 0 D AV I D M A N CH E ST E R R D

1 3 0 D AV I D M A N CH E ST E R R D 1 3 0 D AV I D M A N CH E ST E R R D

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

DAT

A CE

NTR

E R

D

DAT

A CE

NTR

E R

D

DAT

A CE

NTR

E R

D

DAT

A CE

NTR

E R

D

DAT

A CE

NTR

E R

D

RIV

ER

SI D

E D

R

RI V

ER

SID

E D

R

RIV

ERS

IDE

DR

R

IVE

RS

IDE

DR

R

IVE

RS

IDE

DR

HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD

HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD HERON RD

WALKLEY RD

WALKLEY RD

WALKLEY RD

WALKLEY RD

WALKLEY RD

ST

ITTS

VIL

LE M

AIN

ST

S

TIT

TSV

ILLE

MA

IN S

T

ST

ITTS

VIL

LE M

AIN

ST

S

T IT

TSV I

LLE

MA

IN S

T S

TIT

TSV

ILLE

MA

IN S

T

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

RICHMOND RD

RICHMOND RD

RICHMOND RD

RICHMOND RD

RICHMOND RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

BASELINE RD

BASELINE RD

BASELINE RD

BASELINE RD

BASELINE RD

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

RI V

ER

SI D

E D

R

RIV

ER

SID

E D

R

RIV

ER

SID

E DR

R

IVE

RS

IDE

DR

R

IVE

RS

IDE

DR

HUN

T CL

UB

RD

HUN

T CL

UB

RD

HUN

T CL

UB

RD

HUN

T CL

UB

RD

HUN

T CL

UB

RD

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

WO

ODR

OFFE AVE

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER R

D

RICHM

OND RD

RICHM

OND RD

RICHMOND R

D

RICHMOND R

D

RICHM

OND RD

HUNT CLUB RD

HUNT CLUB RD

HUNT CLUB RD

HUNT CLUB RD

HUNT CLUB RD

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

GR

EE

NB

AN

K R

D

GR

EE

NB

AN

K R

D

GR

EE

NB

AN

K R

D

GR

EE

NB

AN

K R

D

GR

EE

NB

AN

K R

D

HWY417 IC131 RAMP66 HWY417 IC131 RAMP66 HWY417 IC131 RAMP66 HWY417 IC131 RAMP66 HWY417 IC131 RAMP66

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

ME

RIVA

LE R

D

ME

RIVA

LE R

D

ME

RIV

ALE

RD

M

ER

IVALE

RD

M

ERIV

ALE

RD

HIG

HW

AY

416

H

IGH

WA

Y 4

16

HIG

HW

AY

41 6

H

IGH

WA

Y 4

1 6

HIG

HW

AY

41 6

HW

Y416 IC66 R

AMP24

HW

Y416 IC66 R

AMP24

HW

Y416 IC66 R

AMP24

HW

Y416 IC66 R

AMP24

HW

Y416 IC66 R

AMP24

HWY417 IC142 R

AMP16

HWY417 IC

142 RAMP16

HWY417 IC142

RAMP16

HWY417 IC142

RAMP16

HWY417 IC142

RAMP16

HIGHWAY 417 HIGHWAY 417 HIGHWAY 417 HIGHWAY 417 HIGHWAY 417

HW

Y4 1

7 IC

134

RA

MP

2 5

HW

Y41

7 I C

1 34

RA

MP

2 5

HW

Y41

7 IC

134

RA

MP 2

5

HW

Y41

7 IC

134

RA

MP

25

HW

Y41

7 IC

134

RA

MP

25

RAMP

RAMP

RAMP

RAMP

RAMP

HWY417 IC126 RAMP55

HWY417 IC126 RAMP55

HWY417 IC126 RAMP55

HWY417 IC126 RAMP55

HWY417 IC126 RAMP55

PALLADIU

M DR

PALLADIU

M DR

PALLADIU

M DR

PALLADIU

M DR

PALLADIU

M DR

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN R

D

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

UPLAND

S DR

UPLAND

S DR

UPLAND

S DR

UPLAND

S DR

UPLAND

S DR

HWY416 IC75A RAMP63

HWY416 IC75A RAMP63

HWY416 IC75A RAMP63

HWY416 IC75A RAMP63

HWY416 IC75A RAMP63

PRIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

PRIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

PR

INC

E O

F W

ALE

S D

R

PR

INCE

OF

WA

LES

DR

PRIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

TUR

N LANE

TUR

N LANE

TURN LANE

TURN LAN

E

TUR

N LANE

MEADOWLANDS DR

MEADOWLANDS DR

MEADOWLANDS DR

MEADOWLANDS DR

MEADOWLANDS DR

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD C

EDARVIEW

RD

CEDAR

VIEW R

D

CEDAR

VIEW R

D

CEDAR

VIEW R

D

CEDAR

VIEW R

D

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

AIRPORT P

ARKWAY P

RIV

AIRPORT P

ARKWAY P

RIV

AIRPORT P

ARKWAY PRIV

AIRPORT

PARKWAY PRIV

AIRPORT P

ARKWAY P

RIV

RIVER RD

RIVER RD RIVER RD

RIVER RD RIVER RD

PALLADIUM DR

PALLADIUM DR

PALLADIUM DR

PALLADIUM DR

PALLADIUM DR

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

HOPE SIDE RD

HOPE SIDE RD

HOPE SIDE RD

HOPE SIDE RD

HOPE SIDE RD

CLYDE AVE

CLYDE AVE

CLYDE AVE

CLYDE AVE

CLYDE AVE

AIRPORT PKW

Y

AIRPORT PKW

Y

AIRPORT PKW

Y

AIRPORT PKW

Y

AIRPORT PKW

Y

PR

INCE

OF

WA

LES

DR

PR

INCE

OF

WA

LES

DR

P

RIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

P

RIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

P

RIN

CE O

F W

ALE

S D

R

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

HIGHWAY 417

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

MERIVALE R

D

RIVER

RD

RIVER

RD

RIVER

RD

RIVER

RD

RIVER

RD MITCH OWENS RD

MITCH OWENS RD

MITCH OWENS RD

MITCH OWENS RD

MITCH OWENS RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

TURN

LANE

TURN

LANE

TURN

LANE

TUR

N LA

NE

TURN

LANE

RI V

ER

RD

R

IVE

R R

D

RIV

ER

RD

R

IVE

R R

D R

IVE

R R

D

LEITRIM RD

LEITRIM RD

LEITRIM RD

LEITRIM RD

LEITRIM RD

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER R

D

RIV

ER

RD

RIV

ER

RD

RIV

ER R

D

F ISHER AVE

FISHER AVE

FISHER AVE

FISHER AVE

FISHER AVE

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

DUNROBIN RD

DUNROBIN RD

DUNROBIN RD

DUNROBIN RD

DUNROBIN RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

MARCH RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

CARP RD

JOCKVALE RD

JOCKVALE RD

JOCKVALE RD

JOCKVALE RD

JOCKVALE RD

GR

EENBANK R

D

GR

EENBANK R

D

GR

EENBANK R

D

GR

EENBANK R

D

GR

EENBANK R

D

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

WEST HUNT CLUB RD

RIC

HM

ON

D R

D

RIC

HM

ON

D R

D

RIC

HM

ON

D R

D

RIC

HM

ON

D R

D

RIC

HM

ON

D R

D

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

CARLING AVE

MO

ODI

E D

R

MO

ODI

E D

R

MO

ODI

E D

R

MO

ODI

E D

R

MO

ODI

E D

R

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

ROBERTSON RD

ROBERTSON RD

ROBERTSON RD

ROBERTSON RD

ROBERTSON RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

FALLOWFIELD RD

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

EAGLESO

N R

D

MARCH RD MARCH RD MARCH RD MARCH RD MARCH RD

TURN LANE

TURN LANE

TURN LANE

TURN LANE

TURN LANE

TRAIL RD TRAIL RD TRAIL RD TRAIL RD TRAIL RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELD

EAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HAZELDEAN RD

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY

7 H

IGH

WA

Y 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIGHWAY 7

HIGHWAY 7

HIGHWAY 7

HIGHWAY 7

HIGHWAY 7

PR

INCE

OF

WAL

ES D

R

PR

INCE

OF

WAL

ES D

R

PRIN

CE O

F W

ALES

DR

PRIN

CE

OF

WA

LES

DR

PR

INCE

OF

WAL

ES D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

MO

ODIE D

R

Figure 1 Site Setting

130 David Manchester, Carp, ON 0CP-10-124

City of Ottawa

Subject Property Scale: ~2km

N

6736

6562

6656

1 30

6 800

1 90

130

130

1 97

1 73

130 DAVID MANCHESTER RD 130 DAVID MANCHESTER RD 130 DAVID MANCHESTER RD 130 DAVID MANCHESTER RD 130 DAVID MANCHESTER RD

HW

Y7 IC H

AZELD

EAN

RAM

P62

HW

Y7 IC H

AZELD

EAN

RAM

P62

HW

Y7 IC

HA

ZELDE

AN RA

MP

62

HW

Y7 IC H

AZELD

EAN R

AMP62

HW

Y7 IC H

AZELD

EAN

RAM

P62

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HW

Y7 IC

HA

ZELDEA

N RA

MP

34

HW

Y7 IC

HA

ZELDEA

N RA

MP

34

HW

Y 7 IC H

AZE

LDE

AN

RA

MP34

HW

Y 7 IC H

AZE

LDE

AN R

AM

P34

HW

Y7 IC

HA

ZELDE A

N RA

MP

34

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY 7

HIG

HW

AY

7 H

IGH

WA

Y 7 H

IGH

WAY

7

DAVID MANCHESTER RD

DAVID MANCHESTER RD

DAVID MANCHESTER RD

DAVID MANCHESTER RD

DAVID MANCHESTER RD

DA

VID

MA

NCH

EST

ER

RD

D

AV

ID M

ANC

HE S

TE

R R

D

DA

VI D M

AN

CH

ES

TER

RD

D

AVI D

MA

NC

HE

STE

R R

D

DA

VI D

MA

NCH

EST

ER

RD

ROTHBOURNE RD

ROTHBOURNE RD

ROTHBOURNE RD

ROTHBOURNE RD

ROTHBOURNE RD

Figure 3 Site and Surrounding Area– Aerial

Photograph (2008)

Active Quarry

Proposed Severance Area

Approximate location of PW-1

Existing Water Wells

Newly Installed Water Well

Limits of Subject Property



PHOTOGRAPHS



Photo 1 Subject Property November 12, 2010

Photo 2 Subject Property November 12, 2010



Photo 3 Exposed soil on subject property November 12, 2010

Photo 4 Drilling test well TW-1



Photo 5 Pumping Test at TW-1



APPENDIX A

Site Location Plan - Official Plan – Schedule A, Rural Policy Plan (City of Ottawa)

S

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

109

87

65

43

21

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

1110

98

76

54

32

127

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

109

87

65

43

2

1

3534333231302928272625242322212019181716151413121110

987654321

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

2324

2526

2728

2930

3132

3334

3536

3738

3940

4142

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

D

C

B

A

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

313233343536373839404142

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829

31323334353637383940414243

30313233343536373839404142

2726

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

109

87

65

43

21

10 9

8

7 6

5 4

3 2

1

11

19 1

8 17 1

6 15 1

4 13 1

2

30 2

9 28 2

7 26 2

5 24 2

3 22 2

1 20

27 26 25 24 23 22 21

9 8 7

6 5 4

3 2 1

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

12 11 10

18 17 16 15 14 13

26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19

20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10

IV

VII

VIII

I

II

III

V

V I

IX

X

XI

XII

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

IX

X

VI

II

II

I

IV

V

I

XII

XI

X

IX

VIII

VII

VI

V

IV

II

I

II

I

XI X

IX

VIII

VII

VI

V IV

III

II

I

VI

V

IV

III

II

I

IV

I

II

II

A

I

XII

XI

X

IX

VIII

VII

VI

V

IV

III

II

I

X

IX

VIII

VII

VI

V

IV

III

II

I

I

II

III

I

V

V

V

I

VII

E

D C

B A

A B

1 2

3

4 5

6

7 8

9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

10

11

12 1

3 14

15

16 1

7 18

19 20

21

22

23 2

4 25

26

27

B

A

I

II

I

II

III

I

V

V

V

I

VII

VII

VIII

IX

X X

I

57

56

55

47

34

30

174

34

28

28

35

37

33

8

26

32

27

27

278

41

14

27

41

6

6

411431

25

19

2

3

6

6

25

73

13

46

9

416

8

25

24

14

73

19

13

11

2313 12

17

32

15

16

59

59

36

38

88

86

36

5A

49

10

5

8

12

3

45

7

49

49

5

3

20

20

5

5

22

5

922

7

29

117

417

61

417

13

6

5

85

31

31

6A

417

30

174

416

417

35

4

84

47A

417

Prepared by: City of Ottawa,

Preparé par : Ville d’Ottawa , Le Service de l'urbanisme , du transport en commun et de l'environnement , Octobre 2006

Department of Planning, Transit and the Environment, October 2006

Cumberland

Sarsfield

Vars

Navan

Notre-Dame- des-Champs

CarlsbadSprings

Greely

Ashton Munster

rev

iR

ua

ed

iR

erèiviR

Fallowfield

Richmond

Manotick

NorthGower

Kars

Osgoode

Vernon

MetcalfeKenmore

RUSSELL

Marionville

NORTHDUNDAS

NORTHGRENVILLE

Burritt’sRapids

MONTAGUE

BECKWITH

Carp

Kinburn

Galetta

FitzroyHarbour

Dunrobin

ConstanceBay

Ri v

i èr

e d

es

Ou

t ao

ua

i s /

O

t t a

w

a R

i v e r

Macdonald-CartierInternational Airport

Aéroport InternationalMacdonald-Cartier

reviR awattO

/ siauoatuO sede rèv iR i

P r o v i n c e o f / P r o v i n c e d e

Q UÉ BE C

C i t y o f / G A T INE A U

V i l l e d e

CLARENCE-ROCKLAND

THENATION

AA

Zone urbaine (voir annexe B)Zone urbaine futur (voir annexe B)Ceinture de verdure (voir annexe B)VillageZone de ressources agricolesZone rurale généraleZone rurale caractéristiques naturellesZone de ressources calcairesZone de ressources de sable et de gravierZone écologique naturelleGrand espace vertTerres humides d'importancesituées au sud et à l'est du Bouclier canadienAéroport de CarpZone rurale d’emploi du couloir routier de CarpDépôt de sable siliceuxSite d'enfouissement des déchets solidesLimite de la zone urbaineLimite de la Ville d'Ottawa

Urban Area (see Schedule B)Future Urban Area (see Schedule B)

Greenbelt (see Schedule B)Village

Agricultural Resource AreaGeneral Rural Area

Rural Natural Features AreaLimestone Resource Area

Sand and Gravel Resource AreaNatural Environment Area

Major Open SpaceSignificant Wetlands

South and East of the Canadian ShieldCarp Airport

Carp Road Corridor Rural Employment AreaSilica Sand Deposit

Solid Waste Disposal SiteUrban Area Boundary

City Boundary

Plan officiel - Annexe APlan des politiques en milieu rural

Plan officiel - Annexe APlan des politiques en milieu rural

Official Plan - Schedule ARural Policy Plan

Official Plan - Schedule ARural Policy Plan

McNAB/BRAESIDE

Note:1) This schedule forms part of the Official Plan of the City of Ottawa and must be read in conjunction with the text.2) Boundaries between land use designations are to be interpreted according to Section 5.4.3) In order to determine permitted land use, reference must also be made to Schedule K, Development Constraints.

Note:1) La présente annexe fait partie du Plan officiel de la Ville d’Ottawa et doit être consultée en se reportant au texte même du Plan officiel.2) Les limites des désignation de sol visées par les politiques doivent êtres interprétées en fonction de la section 5.4 du Plan officiel.3) Afin de déterminer les activités et les aménagements autorisés, il faut également consulter l’Annexe K , Contraints d’aménagements.

kmkm4 2 0 2 4 6 8 Scale / Échelle

S

SEE SCHEDULE BVOIR ANNEXE B

MISSISSIPPIMILLS

ROGER ST

EVEN

S

FRANKTO

WN

FALLO

WFIELD

DWYER HILL

DWYER HILL

DWYER HILL

GALETTA

SIDE

KINBURN SIDE

THOMAS D

OLAN

MARCH

DUNROBIN

CARP

CARP

CARP

EAGLESON

MOODIE BANKFIELD

BROPHY

FOURTH LINE

MITCH OWENS

MITCH OWENSBANK

BANK

MARVELVILLE

DALMENY

STAG

ECOA

CH

8TH. LINE

ANDERSON

ALBION

SNAKEISLAND

VICTORIA

MILTON

FRANK KENNY

RUSSELL

RUSSELL

RUSSLAND

DUNNING

DUNNING

COLONIAL

INNES

SAUMURE

RIVER

RIVE

R

DILWORTH

FERRY

HAZELD

EAN

FERNBANK

RICHMOND

HUN

YT EL

MCBEAN

MAIN

TRIM

ROCKDALE

DEVINE

BOUNDARY

SEE SCHEDULE BVOIR ANNEXE B

[email protected]

# 7# 14# 16# 31# 42

City of Ottawa Consolidation and Amendments

Ville d’Ottawa Plan officielAmendement au plan directeur approuvé

Official Plan

# 46

OMB decision/Décision de la CAMO - N° 437; 2038; 2711; 2787; 3184; 1034; 1195; MM070008

# 52# 50

# 58# 59

# 61# 77# 78# 86



APPENDIX B

Legal Survey (Draft)



APPENDIX C

Laboratory Certificates of Analysis

EXOVA ACCUTEST REPORT OF ANALYSIS

Client: McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. Report Number: 1102291 115 Walgreen Rd., R.R. #3 Date: 2011-02-11 Carp, ON Date Submitted: 2011-02-04 K0A 1L0Attention: Ms. Meghan Cameron Project:

P.O. Number:Chain of Custody Number: 108641 Matrix: Water

LAB ID: 861015 861016Sample Date: 2011-02-03 2011-02-03

Sample ID:

PARAMETER UNITS MRL TYPE LIMIT UNITSAlkalinity as CaCO3 mg/L 5 259 261 OG 500 mg/LChloride mg/L 1 17 4 AO 250 mg/LColour TCU 2 3 7 AO 5 TCUConductivity uS/cm 5 965 520Dissolved Organic Carbon mg/L 0.5 1.8 3.0 AO 5 mg/LFluoride mg/L 0.1 1.89 0.91 MAC 1.5 mg/LHydrogen Sulphide mg/L 0.01 <1.0 0.38 AO 0.05 mg/LN-NH3 (Ammonia) mg/L 0.02 0.13 0.16N-NO2 (Nitrite) mg/L 0.1 <0.10 <0.10 MAC 1.0 mg/LN-NO3 (Nitrate) mg/L 0.1 <0.10 <0.10 MAC 10.0 mg/LpH 8.05 7.91 6.5-8.5Phenols mg/L 0.001 <0.001 <0.001Sulphate mg/L 1 212 22 AO 500 mg/LTannin & Lignin mg/L 0.1 <0.1 <0.1Total Dissolved Solids (COND - CALC) mg/L 5 627 338 AO 500 mg/LTotal Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.1 0.16 0.17Turbidity NTU 0.1 75.2 2.4 MAC 1.0 NTUHardness as CaCO3 mg/L 1 210 226 OG 100 mg/LIon Balance 0.01 0.98 0.93Calcium mg/L 1 48 56Magnesium mg/L 1 22 21Potassium mg/L 1 7 6Sodium mg/L 2 127 17 AO 200 mg/LIron mg/L 0.03 4.26 0.06 AO 0.3 mg/LManganese mg/L 0.01 0.04 0.01 AO 0.05 mg/LUV Transmittance @ 254 nm % 0.1 88.5

MRL = Method Reporting Limit INC = Incomplete AO = Aesthetic Objective OG = Operational Guideline MAC = Maximum Allowable Concentration IMAC = Interim Maximum Allowable Concentration

APPROVAL:Ewan McRobbie

Methods references and/or additional QA/QC information available on request. Inorganic Lab Supervisor

TW1-1 TW1-2

OCP-10124

GUIDELINE

ODWSOG

Comment: 861015: H2S MRL raised due to sample turbidity

1 of 1 Results relate only to the parameters tested on the samples submitted. 8-146 Colonnade Road, Ottawa, ON, K2E 7Y1



APPENDIX D

Water Well Record Search Information (EcoLog ERIS) and On-site Well Record

2

Water Well Information System

Provincial Source Database

Water Well Information Systemof of Detail ReportEnvironmental Risk Information Services Ltd.

Page

Well Id Lot Concession Address

GOULBOURN TOWNSHIP7109804 018 12

Map Key Company

WWIS-1

Concession Name County Municipality

OTTAWA-CARLETON GOULBOURN TOWNSHIPlot 18 con 12

Thickness(ft)

OriginalDepth (ft)

Material Colour

2.0013124

119.9803188 GREY

Material

GRAVEL

LIMESTONE

2.0013124

117.9790064

Easting Nad83: Northing Nad83: Zone: Utm Reliability: Construction Date: Primary Water Use: Secondary Water Use: Well Depth (ft): Pump Rate (gpm): Static Water Level (ft): Flow Rate (gpm): Clear/Cloudy: Specific Capacity: Final Well Status: Construction Method: Flowing (y/n): Elevation (ft): Elevation Reliability: Depth to Bedrock (ft): Overburden/Bedrock: Water Type: Casing Material:

423896 5011938

18 margin of error : 10 - 30 m

6/5/2008 Domestic

119.9803188

12.489851176 8.0708664

Water Supply

Air Precussion

8 STEEL, OPEN HOLE

3




Page


HUNTLEY TOWNSHIP1517038 001 05

Map Key Company

WWIS-2


CON OTTAWA-CARLETON HUNTLEY TOWNSHIP lot 1 con 5

Thickness(ft)

OriginalDepth (ft)

Material Colour

8

125

BROWN

GREY

Material

SAND, GRAVEL

LIMESTONE, MEDIUM-GRAINED

8

117


423329.6 5011921

18 margin of error : 30 m - 100 m

7/25/1979 Domestic

125

15 10

CLEAR

Water Supply

Air Precussion N 458

Read from topographic map, contour interval - 10 f 8 Bedrock

FRESH STEEL, OPEN HOLE

4




Page



Map Key Company

WWIS-3



Thickness(ft)

OriginalDepth (ft)

Material Colour

1

145

BROWN

GREY

Material

TOPSOIL

LIMESTONE

1

144


423232.6 5012324

18 margin of error : 30 m - 100 m

12/21/1974 Domestic

145

6 8

CLEAR

Water Supply

Air Precussion N 446

Read from topographic map, contour interval - 10 f 1 Bedrock

FRESH STEEL, OPEN HOLE

5




Page



Map Key Company

WWIS-4



Thickness(ft)

OriginalDepth (ft)

Material Colour

8.2021

13.779528

136.811028

BROWN

GREY

BROWN

Material

SAND, PACKED

CLAY, SILT, HARD

LIMESTONE, LAYERED

8.2021

5.577428

123.0315


424120 5012141

18 margin of error : 10 - 30 m

10/2/2007 Public

136.811028

17.597536 76.115488

CLEAR

Rotary (Convent.)

FRESH



APPENDIX E

Hydraulic Testing Data

McIntosh Perry Consulting Engineers Ltd. Water level data-TW1_Feb 3.2011 - TW1

Water Level - Test Well TW1Proposed Lockwood Subdivision - Glen Tay, ON

75.000

80.000

85.000

90.000

95.000

100.000

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Time (minutes)

Wat

er E

leva

tion

(m a

sl)

~14 - 15.5L/minute

Static Level (pump removed)

Pumpoff (430 min)

>95% recovery in ~500min

Pump removed

Adjusted flow

95% recovery

>100% recovery in ~1350min



APPENDIX F

Hydraulic Testing Analysis Results

Hantush

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

101

10-1 100 101 102 103 104 105

W(u

,r/B

)+f

1/u

TransmissivityStorage Coefficientr/B

3.96945e-006 sq m/sec1.08932e-0070.2

LEGEND

Data Used Data Ignored

TW-1 (0CP-10124)

Theis

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

100

101

10-1 100 101 102 103 104 105

W(u

)

1/u

TransmissivityStorage Coefficient

5.96496e-006 sq m/sec6.55119e-008

LEGEND

Data Used Data Ignored

TW-1 (0CP-10124)



APPENDIX G

LSI and RSI Calculations

Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) Ryznar Stability Index (RSI)RSI = 2(pHs) - pH

If LSI is negative: No potential to scale, the water will dissolve CaCO3

If LSI is positive: Scale can form and CaCO3 precipitation may occur Where:

pH is the measured water pH

pHs is the pH at saturation in calcite or calcium carbonateLSI = pH - pHs

Where:

pH is the measured water pHpHs is the pH at saturation in calcite or calcium carbonate and is defined as:

pHs = (9.3 + A + B) - (C + D)

Where:A = (Log10 [TDS] - 1) / 10B = -13.12 x Log10 (

oC + 273) + 34.55C = Log10 [Ca2+ as CaCO3] - 0.4D = Log10 [alkalinity as CaCO3]

TW1-1 TW1-2pH 8.05 A 0.179727 pH 7.91 A 0.152892TDS 627 B 2.445322 TDS 338 B 2.416893Hardness 210 C 1.922219 Hardness 226 C 1.954108Alkalinity 259 D 2.4133 Alkalinity 261 D 2.416641Temp. 6.9 Temp. 8.3pHs = 7.58953 pHs = 7.499036LSI = 0.46047 LSI = 0.410964RSI= 7.129059 RSI= 7.088072

RSI >> 7 the calcium carbonate formation probably does not lead to a protective corrosion inhibitor film

RSI >> 8 mild steel corrosion becomes an increasing problem.

If LSI is close to zero: Borderline scale potential. Water quality or changes in temperature, or evaporation could change the index.

The LSI is probably the most widely used indicator of cooling water scale potential. It is purely an equilibrium index and deals only with the thermodynamic driving force for calcium carbonate scale formation and growth.

The empirical correlation of the Ryznar stability index can be summarized as follows:

RSI << 6 the scale tendency increases as the index decreases



APPENDIX H

Grain Size Analysis Results

hydrogeological assessment report 130 david …

Documents