160 acres of land in grand turk for sale
DESCRIPTION
This 161 acre property is available in Grand Turk for sale.TRANSCRIPT
161 Acres of Oceanfront property with 6000 feet of beachfront! This is your opportunity to purchase your own exclusive private enclave located on Grand Turk
Island in the Turks and Caicos Islands .
Investment opportunity in the Turks and Caicos The Turks & Caicos offer a number of advantages for savvy investors:
English speaking, close proximity to the United States, direct flights, US currency, based on English common law, stable government, NO income, estate, corporate, real estate TAX …these are a few reasons the Turks and Caicos are attracting tourists and investors from all over the
world.
Political Climate:The Turks and Caicos Islands are officially English speaking with a population close to 30,000 people made up of both "Belongers" (citizens) and Expatriates. The official currency is the US Dollar.
Presently, the Turks and Caicos Islands is an internal-governing Overseas Territory with a ministerial system of government. The country operates from the 2006 constitution which provides for a Governor appointed by HM the Queen, an Executive Council and a Legislative Council.
The Governor is responsible for external affairs, defense, internal security, offshore finance and certain other matters, but is otherwise normally required to act on the advice of the Executive Council.
The Executive Council deals with the affairs of the Government. It is presided over by His Excellency the Governor and is made up of the elected Ministers of Government. The Legislative Council is responsible for the passage of laws, monitoring Government policies and bringing to account the Executive Branch on behalf of the electorate.
Under this structure the Turks and Caicos enjoys a stable government guided by British Law. The Government is pro-development but is taking a responsible approach by learning from the experiences of other West Indies neighbors. Tourism is the number one industry with Offshore Financial services coming in second and growing.
Investment Climate:Traditionally the investment opportunities in Turks and Caicos have been based in real estate as witnessed by the recent high-end condo developments springing up along 12 mile Grace Bay Beach on Providenciales. As more people become familiar and comfortable with this country as a viable investment centre, opportunities for offshore investment structures and funds have become popular.
Part of this attraction is a well defined regulatory framework within which to operate a comprehensive range of financial activities including banking, insurance, trusts, mutual funds, investment dealing, companies and partnerships. TCI's modern legislation is complemented by an experienced professional infrastructure in the public and private sectors.
The Turks and Caicos Islands provide a full range of international banking and trust services. There are many licensed entities that carry out banking business, five licensed to carry out domestic and international services from within the islands. The Financial Services Commission (FSC) embodies in a single agency all regulatory aspects of the financial services industry. The FSC is responsible for licensing and supervising all finance-related operating entities to internationally accepted standards. The FSC also provides a centralized and cost-effective service for registering companies, partnerships, trademarks and patents in TCI.
As well, Investment Dealers legislation was recently introduced which provides for persons to be licensed as a fund manager, investment adviser or investment dealer.
TCI Exclusive Attractions The islands are arranged around the edges of two large limestone plateaus, the Turks Bank, with deep
offshore waters that serve as major transit points for Humpback Whales, spotted Eagle rays, Manta Rays and Turtles. Anglers who are fishing for Tuna, Wahoo and Blue Marlin use these same rich waters. Bordering the edges of the islands are lines of coral reef and some of the most impressive walls of coral in the Caribbean.
In the last decade on Turks and Caicos, divers have begun to discover some of the finest coral reefs and walls in the world. From the legendary walls of Grand Turk, West Caicos and Provo's Northwest Point to the historic wrecks south of Salt Cay, a dozen world-class walls have become Mecca for the serious diver.
From late December through April, the entire Atlantic herd of 2,500 Humpback Whales pass through the shores on their annual migration to the Mouchoir Bank, just 20 - 30 miles southeast. During this period divers can listen to an underwater concert of the whales' songs. During the summer, divers encounter Manta Rays cruising the face of the walls. Encounters with Dolphin are not uncommon.
The salt ponds and inland marshes serve as excellent feeding grounds for resident and migratory birds. Search for Great Blue Herons, Flamingos, Osprey and Pelicans alongside Egrets, Terns, Frigates, Boobies and other water birds. As part of the National Parks system more than twelve small cays have been set aside and protected for breeding grounds.
Grand Turk Cruise Center The Grand Turk Cruise Center, with direct beachfront access, is a first-class facility
nestled among nearly 14 acres of landscaped grounds. With convenient changing rooms, showers and lockers for cruise line guests, cruise center visitors also can swim either in the ocean’s sparkling waters or in one of the largest pools in the Caribbean, stroll along the idyllic beach, relax in a chaise lounge or covered beach chair, and even rent a private cabana for the day and enjoy a massage. The cruise center is also home to a Jimmy Buffet’s Margaritaville, a fun and exciting place the whole family can enjoy. In the coming year, visitors to the cruise center will have the opportunity to peruse through a 45,000 sq. ft. shopping center which includes a 10,000 sq. ft. Dufry duty-free shop, and 35,000 sq. ft. of high end jewelry stores, an array of unique and world-renowned apparel and t-shirt stores, locally crafted souvenirs and gifts, and food and beverage facilities.
Scuba Diving/Snorkeling The Turks and Caicos Islands are surrounded by one of the most extensive coral reef systems worldwide
(65 miles across and 200 miles long). As a result, the islands are consistently ranked as one of the premier diving locations in the world.
Excellent visibility (up to 200 feet), pristine reefs, abundant tropical flora and fauna, fish and other marine life, quality diving services and easy conditions make the Turks and Caicos Islands a world class diving destination. There is exceptional wall diving starting in shallow turquoise water and dropping off into the deep blue giving a real thrill. The reef is relatively close to the beach which makes for accessible beach dives. Shipwrecks, old and new further increase the multiplicity of the islands as an outstanding diving destination.
A 22 mile-wide channel, the Columbus Passage, separates the Turks Islands from the Caicos Islands. This 8,000 foot deep passage serves as major transit lines for migrating, spotted eagle rays, manta rays, turtles and dolphins. Summer waters (82 to 84 degrees Fahrenheit at the surface) are certainly warm enough for swimsuits, protection in the form of a light wet suit is welcomed by most divers. In the winter, water temperatures of 74 to 78 degrees Fahrenheit would suggest the use of a 2 to 3mm (1/8 to 3/16 inch) wetsuit. Computers are an advantage owing to the multi-level nature of diving in the Turks and Caicos.
Grand Turk International Airport Grand Turk is our country's capital and its international airport is served by daily flights from
Providenciales/PLS on SkyKing and Air Turks & Caicos. Flying time is approximately 30 minutes. The airport offers full international entry and departures services, as well as a restaurant/bar, ground transportation, tourist information, and a full-service FBO for private planes.
Visitors arriving via international flights and connecting to Grand Turk through Providenciales must first clear immigration and customs and claim baggage at PLS before making the connection to Grand Turk through the domestic departure area at the Provo Airport.
TownAirport name ICAO IATA Usage Customs Runway IFR
Rwy length
Grand Turk I.
Grand Turk Intl MBGT GDT Civ. Yes Paved Yes 6300 ft
Hawk’s Nest PlantationDevelopment Potential
Hawk’s Nest PlantationSite Data
Oceanfront Lots: 17 @ +/- 1/3 to ½ acre (9 direct frontage, 8 rear) Lagoon Lots: 49 @ +/- 1/3 to ½ acres Hilltop Condo/Hotel w/Spa: 5.2 acres -20 units @ 3 bedrooms per Oceanfront Condo/Hotel: 8.4 acres – 67 units @ 2 bedrooms per Lagoon Condos: 352 Units @ 3 bedrooms per (bldg avg. 4 story) Retail: 16,000 S.F. (Potential for maximum 50,000 S.F.) Options: Casino Locations Sale includes all site plans, environmental studies, hydraulic
studies, engineering studies, and more. Price available upon requestFor more information contact: William Korff, (843) 224-4221
DRAWING NUMBER
REM
ARKS
SHEET: OF
Sig
natu
re
Dat
e
07-1
437
Haw
ks N
est B
athy
met
ric S
urve
y.dw
g L
ayou
t1 5
/25/
07
Xre
fs A
ttach
ed=
1485
Nor
th A
tlant
ic A
ve.,
Sui
te 1
13
Coc
oa B
each
, Flo
rida
3293
1
(321
) 799
-233
2
HYD
RO
GR
APH
IC A
ND
TO
POG
RA
PHIC
SU
RVE
YH
AW
KES
NES
T PL
AN
TATI
ON
GR
AN
D T
UR
K, T
CI
FOR
PO
RTR
AIT
PR
OPE
RTI
ES
II, IN
C.
Apr
il 20
07
07-1
437
1"=4
00'
1 1
Gar
y W
. Baz
emor
e, P
SM
Cer
tific
ate
of A
utho
rizat
ion
#LB7
072
N
”“ ”
2009
Bill Korff
Hawkes Nest Plantation
1/1/2009
The Competition for Gaming
The following is an excerpt from a 10-K SEC Filing, filed by SYZYGY ENTERTAINMENT LTD on 3/27/2008. Syzygy Entertainment Ltd, a Nevada corporation, formerly known as Triple Bay Industries, Inc., (“Syzygy” or “SYZG” or the “Company”), is publicly traded on the Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board market under the ticker symbol SYZG. Syzygy, through its acquisition of Rounders Ltd., a Turks and Caicos company and The Game International TCI, Ltd., a Turks and Caicos company (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Rounders”) is focused on the development and operation of destination gaming and resort facilities in the Turks and Caicos Islands. To date, Rounders has opened “The Players’ Club”, an up-market licensed casino, bar and slot parlor business on the growing tourist based island of Providenciales (known as “Provo”). Rounders has opened a second slot parlor on the island of Grand Turk, the capital of the Turks and Caicos Islands. It is located in Big Daddy’s Beach Shack, adjacent to the Carnival Cruise Line Facility. Subsequent to year end, Rounders has located 3 additional slot locations on North Caicos, as well as two additional locations near the airport on Provo. The Company discontinued operations of the business of manufacturing and selling disposable decontamination systems, which formed the basis of its operations before the acquisition of Rounders.
Rounders, Ltd., a Turks and Caicos corporation and its affiliated company The Game International TCI, Ltd. (the “Company” or “Rounders”), were originally incorporated in 2006. Rounders has been placed in a position to work with a “belonger” (a native islander) associate with the goal of attracting a hotel, casino, gaming and poker room development to the islands. Rounders together with its partners and affiliated companies has identified an appropriately sized site located in the Grace Bay resort district that would be suitable for a gaming operation. Discussions are also underway in regards to the planning, financing, and construction of a destination hotel/gaming resort.
The Island Opportunity
The Turks & Caicos Islands (TCI) lies at the southern tip of the Bahamas, just 75 minutes by air or 575 miles Southeast of Miami and covers 193 square miles in the Atlantic Ocean. The Turks and Caicos Islands enjoy excellent air services from the US, Canada, Europe and the Caribbean, as well as reliable domestic services throughout the island chain. This accessibility combined with its close location to the US along with the fact that the Turks and Caicos Islands has the third largest coral reef system in the world, has led to the development of a very stable, growing, and profitable tourism industry over the last two decades.
4
Initially focusing on the diving industry, the island now encompasses both family beach vacations and increasing supplies a higher end product that caters to the discerning traveler seeking luxury accommodations. With a proliferation of upscale boutique resorts along with some of the best tropical beaches in the world, this steady incline in tourism and increasing accessibility has boosted property development in Turks & Caicos to an unprecedented scale.
The island currently has two operating casinos with The Players Club being one of them. The Government recognizes the need to broaden the leisure and entertainment options for the visitor to the island. Casino-style activities represent an important amenity necessary to enhance Turks & Caicos Islands reputation as a premium “must visit” destination.
The Players Club
Rounders Ltd opened “The Players’ Club”, an up-market, licensed, casino, bar and slot parlor business on the growing tourist based island of Providenciales (known as “Provo”) in December of 2006. Provo, while having visitor numbers in the region of 160,000 tourists a year, does not have a licensed casino operating at this time, and adult recreational nightlife on island for tourists is limited to bars and restaurants.
Located in the newly opened Queen Angel Resort, a top of the line gaming and poker facility has been completed. This facility has been outfitted with approximately 80 gaming machines providing 150 player seats, and the experience of playing games of chance as Texas Hold Em, Black Jack, Roulette, slots and a variety of other card and dice games. The Players Club provides a gaming experience in the environment of a fully staffed and operational bar.
Licensing for Live Gaming
On February 8, 2008, we received approval for a full-scale casino license, which is a major addition to our current offerings. A live gaming license allows us to operate a full scale casino and has shown a dramatic increase in volume at the current Players’ Club location since introduction. In addition, the live gaming license will allow us to pursue an international clientele and capture further revenue streams associated with that influx of volume. One of only two licenses issued in the country, we believe, with our current strategies, we are poised to seize control of the majority of the gaming dollars in the market.
Licensing for Slot Parlor, 100 Machines for 5 Islands
Rounders has petitioned, and the government has accepted, an application for Rounders to possess a license that would entitle the Company to have 100 gaming machines on Provo, Grand Turk, North, West, and Middle Caicos. In the first few months of operation of The Players Club, the Government has recognized the distinct advantages to facilities like The Players Club, versus games, 4 at a time, located in the bars and restaurants.
5
Grand Turk, a New Facility
In December 2007, Rounders established the first four slot machines in Big Daddy’s Beach Shack, perfectly positioned next to the Carnival Cruise Line docking station. By partnering with the managers and operators of a newly opened, first class, Caribbean restaurant, located literally where the Carnival Cruise Ships signature blue beach chairs conclude, this restaurant property begins. The future development plans for the facility would hold up to 25 machines and a new building would be constructed to host the remaining machines. Grand Turk is the capital of the island and hosts most of the government operations and facilities. A mere 3,800 residents call Grand Turk home, and for the most part, it has been a “sleepy” little island stretching just 14 miles from north to south. Government officials expect the cruise ship dock to bring an additional 400,000 tourists to the island each year.
Carnival Corp, the parent company of 12 cruise lines, invested $50 million dollars into a cruise ship boat dock, a 13 acre day use resort, featuring the largest Jimmy Buffet Margaritaville themed restaurant in the Caribbean. The newly opened dock can hold two cruise ships at one time. In addition, Carnival provided start up money to local shore excursion companies to help support tourist related activities including tour vehicles, horse back rides, snorkeling, diving, sightseeing, and many other events. Currently, there are approximately 2 cruise ships per week coming into port, carrying up to 3,400 passengers and 1,800 crew members for the larger ships. At the height of the coming tourist and cruise season, the Grand Turk port is expected to have one cruise ship per day coming into port.
75 Slot License
Rounders has recently purchased an additional slot route gaming license in the Turks and Caicos that allows for the deployment of up to 25 gaming machines in a single location. Although the license does not specify which island it is specifically designated for, management believes it can be used on Provo, Grand Turk, or any other island in the Turks and Caicos. Rounders intends to develop a lower scale, “locals” facility to utilize this license. By partnering with an existing building owner, Rounders believes The Players Club, designed more like a traditional gaming facility, may be too formal for a lot of the local players, which have a more “laid back” Caribbean lifestyle. Local play on Provo alone was more than six million dollars in 2006 and is growing each year with the growth in tourism and employment.
Grant of Poker License
Rounders has been granted a one of a kind poker license for the Turks and Caicos. The Government recognized from the public relations success of the Johnny Chan Invitational, poker can be marketed as an internationally branded tourist destination event.
The Players Club Turks and Caicos Classic in Association with the World Poker Tour
From September 24, 2007 until October 1, 2007, Rounders hosted a World Poker Tour event on the island called The Players Club Turks and Caicos Classic. The event was held at Club Med and filmed for the Game Show Network, scheduled to be aired on May 19, 2008. Local partner, Rhynie Campbell came away with the first place prize of nearly $433,000. Since the completion of the event, the World Poker Tour has cancelled its agreement with Rounders, along with most other “foreign location” poker events that they held in 2007.
6
Other Poker Events
In advance of this proposed hotel/gaming resort development that would carry a branded poker room and as an introduction to poker tournaments on the island, an affiliated event promoter, The Game International Ltd, created and hosted the Johnny Chan TCI Invitational Poker Tournament, which was held in the Turks & Caicos Islands on September 9-16, 2006. The field included three World Series of Poker (“ WSOP”) champions, as seen on ESPN, Carlos “The Matador” Mortenson, Johnny Chan, and the most recent champion, crowned on August 11, 2006, Jamie Gold. Mr. Gold won a record 12 Million dollars in this years WSOP event. Other pro players included international names such as David “Devil Fish” Ulliot, Bob “The Butcher” Clark, Jeff Madsen, Bodog player David Williams, Amir Vahedi, Ian Frazer and a host of local players, with Jac Arama, Ashley Hayes and Michael Greco flying in from the UK for the Tournament . The eventual winner was the 2001 World Series of Poker champion, Carlos “The Matador” Mortenson .
In 2007, in an effort to gain a World Poker Tour event, Rounders entered into an agreement with world renowned poker expert, Jack McClelland. Jack has over twenty-five years experience in poker and is currently the tournament director and poker room host at the Bellagio Las Vegas. Prior to this, he was at The World Series of Poker with Jack Binion for fifteen years and the Director for the Commerce Casino in Los Angeles for nine years. Other Las Vegas tournaments include The Grand Prix of Poker (Golden Nugget), Super Bowl of Poker (Caesars Palace), Queens Poker Classic (Four Queens) and Knights of the Round Table (Tropicana). Jack is also in the Poker Dealer Hall of Fame. The agreement with Mr. McClelland has been terminated.
Hotel/Casino, Land and Development
Rounders expects to purchase land that someday will host what would be considered a more traditional, hotel, resort and gaming facility. Although there are no current agreements, management believes partnering with a “name brand” hotel operator that would bring a reservation systems and operational management to the island, would be the best fit possible at this time. The recent approval for a full line class 3 gaming license, which allows live dealing and a reduced tax rate, adds substantial value to the company and in negotiations with hotel operators and brands.
Other Slot Route Opportunities
Rounders is exploring and evaluating other potential opportunities, both in the United States, Caribbean, Bermuda and Central America.
7
Employees
At December 31, 2007, the Company’s CEO was the only part-time employee at the Company’s headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina. At December 31, 2007, we had 15 full time and 7 part time employees in our gaming operations in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Our employees are not represented by a labor union. We have experienced no work stoppage and believe that our employee relationships are good.
Identification of the Subject Property___________________________
Located on the island of Grand Turk, Hawkes Nest Plantation consists of 161 acres situated on the Southeast point of the island. The property has approximately 6,000 lineal feet of ocean frontage with panoramic views of the Atlantic Ocean and the uninhibited islands off the coast. Located adjacent to the north of the parcel is a newly constructed passenger terminal at the international airport providing a 7000’ runway. This destination is easily accessible from surrounding islands and the main land. Located adjacent to the west of the property is a new $ 50 Million dual cruise ship port capable of servicing 1,000’ vessels developed by Carnival Cruise Lines. Natural features on the site consist of beaches, uplands, varying elevations, 40’bluffs, mangroves, scrub brush and interior lands. The primary beaches are located off the southern portion of the property as well as a more private beach at the northern corner. In between the two sections of beach are bluffs which rise significantly above the rest of the property creating 360 degree views of the ocean and site.
Executive Summary__________________________________________ Currently Planned is the Hawkes Nest Plantation Resort, an 865 – unit Five Star Master Planned Resort Community with a diversified mix of condo Hotel Rooms and Suites, Condominiums, and Single Family Estate Lots. Resort Amenities include a Casino, an 87-Slip Marina and 35,000 SF Marina Village. Located on the southwest corner are 17 oceanfront estate style single family lots. The configuration of lots, commonly referred to as “Flag Lots“, allow each owner their own private access point to the beach. To the east of the ocean front residences is a parcel dedicated for a high-end Hotel/Casino. With some of the best beaches this makes for a prime location. Adjacent to this Hotel and east of the main marina entrance sits a Boutique Hotel with a private yacht club capable of servicing large vessels.
Hawkes Nest Plantation Resort A Turks and Caicos Island Development British West Indies
Situated atop the bluffs and overlooking the ocean is another site for an exclusive Hotel with a private spa. At 5.2 acres the zoning would allow for 124 bedrooms. As this location is situated high above the resort site, the idea is to create a lower density high-end product. In order to make the product blend in with the natural topography, and to feel more exclusive, the densities have been reduced by half, creating sixty seven total units. On the interior lands of the site there will be canals cut to allow for boat access as well as the creation of two separate private islands. They will be divided into 47 single family estate home sites. The canals surrounding these homes vary between 150’ to upwards of 300’ creating a more natural feel to the waterways. This will allow for larger scale yachts to navigate. The entire perimeter of the estate island properties will be concrete bulk-heading for direct tie-ups. Average island lot frontage will range from 100’ to 300’. Surrounding the waterways are condominium units to create a “Marina Village“, look and feel. Consisting of approximately 244 units at three bedrooms per unit the buildings will vary in height from four to six stories to create architectural interests. The frontage of the condominiums will also be entirely bulk-headed allowing for each residence to have a slip in front of their units. Located at the main entrance to the site will be a retail marina village with shops, a convenience market, dining, shopping, etc. and a public plaza. The space will offer services and amenities for both residents of the site as well as potential passengers and other tourists. By the nature of its location, the retail village will serve to capture visitors close to the entrance of the property as well as yachting transits and keep the remaining properties exclusive. The mixed-use Properties mentioned above as well as the Retail and Commercial outfits provide an array of residual income streams in addition to the Real Estate Build-out. These income streams will span Land and Square Footage Leases, Property Management, Marina Operations, Wastewater Collection, Utilities, Telecommunications and Excursions. Government incentives are No Property Tax, No Income Tax, No Capital Gains Tax, Utility Licensing, Offshore Banking and other local Business incentives.
Company Profile The property was acquired in August, 2004’. Since then the company has engaged in assembling a master planning team for the development of the plantation. Several work shops have been conducted to decide the best mixed use for the parcel along with many studies that illustrate the marina function and how it relates to the environment. To date, the conceptual Master Planning is complete as well as the program design for the Marina Basin. In addition, all Utility Infrastructure and design analysis for the parcel has been completed. A Mangrove Assessment is complete with key findings that support the design program. A Marine Baseline Assessment along with a Hydro-Flushing Analysis was also conducted and added to our master plan. Several feasibility studies have been performed over the years as the master plan was shaped into its current configuration.
Development Team________________________________________ Master Planners EDSA Edsaplan.com Marine Engineers ATM Appliedtm.com Leisure Consultants Norton NortonConsulting.net Civil Engineers CSE [email protected] General Contractors Johnston Int. Johnstonint.com Legal Team Miller, Simmons, O’Sullivan [email protected]
Project Impact_____________________________________________ The project proposed will create more than 750 new employment positions ranging from Hotel Staff, Casino Operators, Restaurant Staff, Retail Boutique Shops, Management Agents, Hospitality Staff, Marina Operations, Private Services, Tourism Services, Sport Fishing, Real Estate Sales and Service, Resort Operations and Upper Management. This will have a tremendous positive impact for the Local Government as well as the Local Island residence. These jobs will allow local residence to mitigate their travel to other outer islands for employment which in turn will gain their support for overall development. The Economic impact for the Local Government will be welcome by the Ministry as well as the Residents in conjunction with creating a sustainable project for growth and employment.
Resort Project and the Environment__________________________ The development team has made a very strong effort to fully understand the current project proposed including the Specific Site and its Surrounding Environments. To date we have conducted the following studies that formed the basis of our Master Planned Development:
A) Site Survey B) Topography Survey
C) Site Reconnaissance D) Marine Benthic Survey E) Hydrology Flushing Analysis F) Mangrove Assessment G) Coastal Impact Assessment H) Marine Market Overview I) Wind & Hazard Study J) Feasibility Study K) Utility Infrastructure Design
Support materials and individual studies, analysis, assessments and reports available upon request.
Inquiries___________________________________________________ Please send your contact information to [email protected] and reference Hawkes Nest Plantation Resort.
BASELINE MANGROVE ASSESSMENT
HAWKES NEST PROJECT SITE
GRAND TURK
TURKS & CAICOS ISLANDS
APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, INC.2770 NW 43 STREET, SUITE B
GAINESVILLE, FL, 32606352-375-8700
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A baseline assessment of a mangrove wetland on the Hawkes Nest project site on
Grand Turk was conducted April 10 through 12, 2007. The mangrove wetland includes
approximately 37 acres and is located on the south side of South Creek, just off the
eastern end of the runway for the Grand Turk airport. ATM personnel conducting the
assessment were John Bossart and Dan Rich. John Waszak surveyed spot elevations.
The purpose for the baseline assessment was to determine existing site conditions for
subsequent use in master planning and impact analysis.
Overall, the mangroves are healthy and of high quality, consisting of an intertidal zone of
fringing red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) and a basin mangrove forest with mixed red
and black (Avicennia germinans) mangroves. The mangroves were associated with a
shallow salt pond and intermittent patches of herbaceous high-marsh and salt barrens.
Red and black mangrove trees are in excess of 30 feet tall within the basin forest, and
black mangroves were measured with trunk diameters up to 30 inches. The basin forest
is a prolific breeding ground for salt marsh mosquitoes; however, opportunities exist to
combine mosquito control with recreational kayak trails.
1
2.0 MANGROVE MAPPING
Mapping of the different plant communities within the mangrove wetland was conducted
using an infrared satellite image dated 25 March 2003. Figure 1 provides a map
delineating the different wetland components that were identified. Mapping units are
described in the following sections.
2.1 RM (RED MANGROVE)The site includes both intertidal and non-tidal red mangrove stands. All intertidal red
mangrove is located along the South Creek shoreline, where it occurs in a dense,
monotypic stand with its characteristic tangled mass of prop roots. Red mangrove tree
heights within the fringing forest are generally 10 to 15 feet; however, some trees near
the western end of the fringe (near the airport) are more than 30 feet tall. Several other
monotypic stands of red mangrove occur in the non-tidal, basin zone of the mangrove
wetland. Tree heights in these areas were approximately 10 to 15 feet.
Photo 1. Intertidal red mangrove fringe along South Creek. Turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) is growing on the bottom among the roots.
2
3
2.2 BM – SHRUBBY (BLACK MANGROVE, SHRUB-SIZED)Shrub-sized black mangroves are located north of the large salt pond. These
mangroves were generally no more than 6 to 8 feet in height. The individual shrubs
were scattered in distribution with open ground between them.
Photo 2. Shrubby black mangroves to north of salt pond
2.3 RM/BM – TALL (MIXED RED AND BLACK MANGROVE, WITH RM DOMINANT, HEIGHT TO 30+ FEET)
This mapping unit was identified within a single stand at the south end of the basin zone.
This area is densely vegetated with both red and black mangroves, with the red
mangrove dominating. Tree heights were in excess of 30 feet. Black mangroves were
generally larger than the red mangroves, with some of the black mangroves having trunk
diameters up to 30 inches.
4
Photo 3. Red mangrove prop roots within the mixed red and black mangrove stand. Survey rod height is 8 feet.
2.4 BM/RM – TALL (MIXED BLACK AND RED MANGROVE, WITH BM DOMINANT, HEIGHT TO 30+ FEET)
This mapping unit was similar in structure to the RM/BM – Tall mapping unit, however, in
this case, the black mangroves outnumbered the red mangroves. Tree heights were
more than 30 feet, but the understory was much more open than in the areas dominated
by red mangrove because there were fewer red mangrove prop roots.
5
Photo 4. Black mangrove dominated portion of mixed red and black mangrove stand. Pencil-like structures are black mangrove pneumatophores, which are part of the black mangrove’s root system and provide aeration to the underlying roots that are buried in the saturated, anoxic mud.
2.5 HIGH MARSHHigh marsh is a common wetland component around mangrove-dominated areas and is
characterized by low-growing, herbaceous vegetation. At Hawkes Nest, the
herbaceous, high marsh vegetation is dominated by saltgrass (Distichlis spicata),
saltwort (Batis maritima), glasswort (Salicornia spp.), and sea purslane (Sesuvium
portulacastrum). High marsh is inundated infrequently, such as during spring tides or
weather-driven high water events. Excessive evaporation maintains a very high soil
salinity.
2.6 SALT PONDThe Hawkes Nest site includes a shallow salt pond typical of the Bahamas archipelago.
The water depth was very shallow during the field survey, so birds could wade at
generally any location within the pond. However, the water level probably rises in
6
response to rainfall. As is typical with these types of salt ponds, during periods of low
rainfall, the pond water probably evaporates completely, leaving an exposed mud flat
that would be favored by foraging shorebirds. Pond water salinity in these types of
ponds is highly variable in response to rainfall and evaporation. The pond water salinity
on the day of the site survey was 35 ppt, which is the same as ocean water. Pond water
salinity can fall to nearly zero in response to heavy rains. As the water evaporates, the
remaining water becomes increasingly saline. Salinities well in excess of 100 ppt are
common in salt ponds, which is a primary reason their bottoms remain unvegetated.
Photo 5. View to the north from southeast corner of salt pond at Hawkes Nest site. The birds near the black mangrove are two white-cheeked pintail ducks and a black-necked stilt.
7
Photo 6. View to the southeast from west shoreline of salt pond at Hawkes Nest project site.
2.7 SALT BARRENLike high marsh, salt barrens are commonly found in mangrove systems. Salt barrens
are unvegetated, or sparsely vegetated, areas of highly saline sands. The sparse
vegetation that does grow consists of the same species as found in the high marsh, i.e.,
saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), saltwort (Batis maritima), glasswort (Salicornia spp.), and
sea purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum).
8
3.0 TIDE RANGE IN RELATION TO MANGROVE ELEVATIONS
Zonation of red and black mangroves is largely determined by their location in relation to
the tide range. Red mangroves typically occur at lower elevations (mean high water and
below), so they are tidally inundated more frequently and to a deeper depth than black
mangroves, which occur at elevations at or above mean high water. Fringing mangrove
systems are directly connected to the tidal waters. Basin mangrove systems are at least
partially isolated from the tide, usually by a low-relief ridge that is only crested by higher
tides, such as spring tides.
Tidal datums were measured using a tide gauge set in South Creek. The gauge was in
place for 41 days from February 28 through April 10, 2007. Summary statistics for
standard tide parameters are provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary Statistics for Tide Data Collected in South Creek
MAX 2.12 feet
MHHW 1.54
MHW 1.32
MTL 0.42
MLW -0.46
MLLW -0.57
MIN -0.95
The tide range between MHW and MLW is 1.78 feet, with a total mean tide range of 2.11
feet. The range between maximum and minimum water elevations is 3.07 feet. Figure 2
provides a stage-duration curve for the tide data.
Spot elevations at selected locations within the mangroves were measured using an
RTK GPS. A number of spot elevations of the submerged bottom of South Creek were
measured along the waterward edge of the fringing mangrove system, right along the
tree drip line. Bottom elevations along the mangrove fringe ranged from -0.6 to -1.6 feet,
with an average elevation of -1.17 feet. Based on the measured tides, water depths
along the waterward edge of the fringing mangrove system are 2.49 feet during a mean
high water event (MHW = +1.32 feet) and up to 2.71 feet during a mean higher high
water event (MHHW = +1.54 feet).
9
The elevation of the submerged bottom along the mangrove fringe is indicated on the
stage-duration curve (Figure 2). Even during the lowest of low tides (-0.95 foot), there is
still an average depth of 0.22 foot along the waterward edge of the mangrove fringe.
Average water depths are 0.71 foot during mean low tide events. This means that the
mangrove prop roots along the waterward edge are always submerged and can support
the growth of epiphytic algae and invertebrates, and provide protective habitat for
juvenile fish.
In contrast to the mangrove fringe, spot elevations measured within the shrubby black
mangroves within the basin zone ranged from +1.2 to +1.6 feet, which is generally at or
above mean high water (Figure 2). Tidal inundation through the basin zone is
intermittent, at best occurring only during spring tide or other high tide events. The
majority of the time the ground in the basin mangrove zone is exposed. Red mangrove
prop roots, as well as all the other plant stems in the basin zone, do not show water lines
or colonization by epiphytic algae or invertebrates.
-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10
Duration
Tide
Sta
ge (f
t)
0
Ground elevation in shrubby black mangrove
Submerged bottom elevation along mangrove fringe
MHW
Mean Tide
MLW
Figure 2. Stage-Duration Curve for Tide Data Collected in South Creek 28 February through 10 April 2007.
10
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
Development at the Hawkes Nest project site will largely surround the existing mangrove
wetland, including excavation of a marina basin in adjacent uplands to the west and
excavation of a flushing channel across the mangrove fringe along South Creek.
However, the mangrove wetland is a prolific source of salt marsh mosquitoes, which
must be brought under control to accommodate the surrounding development. A series
of flushing channels would open the area to tidal inundation and serve to reduce
mosquito breeding areas at the source. If appropriately designed and constructed, these
tidal channels may also be used as kayak trails and become a valuable ecotourism
amenity. Finally, these tidal channels may also provide the opportunity to accrue
mitigation credit for use in offsetting impacts in cutting the flushing channel through the
mangrove fringe, as well as the nearshore waters. A recommendation for combining
mosquito control flushing with kayak trails is provided below, as well as a discussion
regarding potential mitigation credit.
The mangrove wetland provides the conditions to breed enormous numbers of salt
marsh mosquitoes. Unlike fresh water mosquitoes that lay eggs in containers of
stagnant water (old tires, flower pots, and roadside ditches being common examples),
salt marsh mosquitoes lay their eggs on damp mud, such as that found within black
mangrove forests and high marshes. The female salt marsh mosquito is adept at
locating the micro-depressions in the wetland surface that will fill with water and remain
flooded after rain or an unusually high tide (e.g., a spring tide). After the female
mosquito deposits her eggs on the damp mud within the mangroves, the eggs lie
dormant until a flooding event occurs, at which time the eggs hatch and the cycle
repeats.
Mosquito source control depends on removing the opportunities for mosquito eggs to lie
dormant. Flushing channels that expose egg-laying sites to tidal inundation directly
remove the eggs and also allow access for small fish to prey on both eggs and mosquito
larvae. Figure 3 provides a conceptual plan for a series of tidal flushing channels
through the mangroves. The goal of the flushing channels is to convert much of the
basin mangrove to an intertidal system. The main channels are intended to be
augmented by much smaller secondary channels that would specifically target mosquito
11
12
breeding sites that are identified by comprehensive field reconnaissance by mosquito
control specialists.
Figure 4 provides a conceptual cross-section illustrating potential design components for
the main tidal channels. The main tidal channels will have variable widths, anticipated to
be between 15 and 30 feet. Channels will be excavated to a depth sufficient to maintain
at least a 2-foot water depth even at lower low tide. This will facilitate fish movement
and provide for kayak access. The main channels will be lined with red mangroves
planted along variable-width planting areas. During rising tides, water will overtop the
channel banks and flood the adjacent red mangrove planting zones. During a falling
tide, water will drain from the mangrove planting areas and, at low tide, will be confined
within the tidal channels. The planted ground elevations within the mangrove zones will
be intermediate between high and low tides. The channels and mangrove planting areas
will be excavated out of the underlying limestone. Planting areas will be overexcavated
by a minimum of 4 feet and then backfilled with sand overlain by muck. A rock sill
between the channels and the planting areas will retain the sand and muck and prevent
it from being washed into the channel during falling tides.
Only red mangroves will be planted in the restoration areas. Red mangroves are the
best adapted to deep tidal inundation, and their dense, tangled prop roots provide the
most valuable marine nursery habitat and contribute the most to marine fisheries. If
planted properly, the red mangroves will grow up and over the channels, forming a
tunnel effect that will add to the aesthetics while kayaking (Photo 7). Boardwalks and
observation platforms can also be incorporated into the concept.
Photo 7. Example of a kayak trail overtopped by red mangroves.
13
14
Wildlife habitat diversity within the mangrove restoration areas can also be increased by
incorporating a number of small, open ponds. These ponds would be randomly located
within the mangrove planting areas and have variable shapes, widths, and depths. Like
the tidal channels, these ponds will be excavated from the rock substrate, but not
backfilled with sand and muck. However, the ponds will not be connected to the tidal
channel network so they will hold water during low tide, allowing them to serve as refugia
for fish. During high tides, when the mangrove prop roots are flooded, the fish will
migrate from their low tide refugia and forage among the prop roots. In addition, the
outer pond edges will include shallow, variable-width littoral zones to provide foraging
areas for shorebirds and wading birds. Littoral shelves can be included along some
secondary tidal channel edges. The primary contribution of red mangroves to marine
productivity is the intertidal nursery habitat provided by their prop roots. For the Hawkes
Nest mangroves, this contribution to marine productivity is limited to the red mangrove
fringe along South Creek. The submerged prop roots of these mangroves are richly
colonized by epiphytic algae and invertebrates, which provide a food source for juvenile
fish. The tangle maze of submerged prop roots also provides cover for the juvenile fish.
In contrast, mangroves within the basin zone are not regularly inundated by tides and do
not directly contribute to marine productivity. Because these mangroves are isolated
from a direct connection to tidal inundation, they do not provide any habitat for juvenile
fish. Despite the presence of red mangroves within the basin zone, their prop roots are
rarely submerged and, therefore, do not support any colonization by epiphytic algae or
invertebrates.
By maximizing the area that is completely flooded during every high tide, small fish will
have maximum access to all areas and will be able to prey on mosquito eggs and larvae.
However, not all of the existing basin mangrove can or should be converted to intertidal
mangrove, and additional mosquito control options will have to be employed. These
options include the installation of smaller, secondary tidal channels that will allow fish
access to isolated sites, the application of mosquito larvae pathogens to defined
breeding trouble spots, and the use of mosquito traps.
The smaller, secondary channels would not be intended for kayak use but would be
routed to specifically target mosquito-breeding sites. Such sites would be identified by
15
comprehensive reconnaissance of the entire mangrove site. While extensive excavation
and grading will be necessary to install the main channels, red mangrove planting areas,
and any additional ponds that may be incorporated, the secondary channels can be
installed with a rotary ditcher. This unit is typically pulled behind a tractor fitted with
oversized, low-pressure tires that will support the tractor on the soft wetland surface.
The rotary ditcher simultaneously cuts a small ditch and side casts the excavated
material as a fine film of mud. Determining the feasibility of this construction method will
require consideration of the depth to the underlying limestone.
Mosquito breeding sites within the mangroves that remain outside the reach of tidal
inundation may also be controlled by mosquito larvae pathogens that are added to
known breeding sites after rains or high tide events. These pathogens are a freeze-
dried bacteria, Bacillus thuringensis israeliensis, or BTI, that is marketed as a
compressed briquette. These briquettes are thrown into the standing water where the
mosquitoes are known to breed. The water reconstitutes the dried bacteria, which then
attack and kill the mosquito larvae. The BTI has the advantage of being very target
specific, unlike a general insecticide.
For mosquitoes that escape the source control measures, CO2 generating mosquito
traps have been shown to very effective elsewhere in the Turks and Caicos, specifically
Parrot Cay. These traps use bottled propane to produce CO2, which attracts mosquitoes
and funnels them into a trap, where they are removed from the breeding population.
Continual operation of the traps causes the local mosquito population to crash after
several weeks and continued operation prevents the breeding population from becoming
reestablished.
A formal mosquito management plan may be an appropriate consideration for the overall
resort planning. Dr. David Dame, a retired University of Florida entomologist and former
president of the American Mosquito Control Association is a recommended consultant.
He travels worldwide consulting on mosquito control issues for projects such as Hawkes
Nest.
16
Hydrodynamic and Flushing Analysis
Proposed Marina at Hawkes Nest Plantation, Grand Turk, BWI
PREPARED BY:
APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, INC. CHARLESTON, SC
USA
PREPARED FOR:
MR. JOHN SKERCHEK, PORTRAIT PROPERTIES II, INC.
MAY 2007
II
Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................................1
1.1. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 1 1.2. REPORT OUTLINE....................................................................................................................................... 1
2. MODEL DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................................................4 3. MODEL SET-UP.........................................................................................................................................................6
3.1. MODEL GEOMETRY ................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2. BATHYMETRY ............................................................................................................................................ 6 3.3. TIDAL FORCING.......................................................................................................................................... 6 3.4. WIND .......................................................................................................................................................... 7
4. MODEL RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................................13 4.1. HYDRODYNAMIC MODEL RESULTS ........................................................................................................13 4.2. FLUSHING MODEL RESULTS....................................................................................................................13
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................................18 REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................................................................19
III
List of Figures
FIGURE 1-1 LOCATION MAP OF PROPOSED MARINA AT HAWKES NEST PLANTATION, GRAND TURK, BWI................................2 FIGURE 1-2 SKETCH OF PROPOSED MARINA LAYOUT. ....................................................................................................................3 FIGURE 3-1 MODEL GRID OF THE PROPOSED MARINA – SCENARIO 1.............................................................................................9 FIGURE 3-2 MODEL GRID OF THE PROPOSED MARINA – SCENARIOS 2 AND 3. .............................................................................10 FIGURE 3-3 MODEL GRID DEPTHS..................................................................................................................................................11 FIGURE 3-4 MEASURED WATER SURFACE ELEVATIONS AT PROJECT SITE....................................................................................12 FIGURE 4-1 SIMULATED CURRENT MAGNITUDES DURING PEAK FLOOD CONDITION. ..................................................................15 FIGURE 4-2 SIMULATED CURRENT MAGNITUDES DURING PEAK EBB CONDITION........................................................................16 FIGURE 4-3 SIMULATED DYE CONCENTRATION IN MARINA BASIN VERSUS TIME. .......................................................................17
IV
List of Tables
TABLE 3-1 WIND DATA, GRAND TURK ISLAND..............................................................................................................................8 TABLE 4-1 PREDICTED FLUSHING TIMES FOR THE PROPOSED MARINA BASIN AND FLUSHING OPTIONS. ....................................14
1
Hydrodynamic and Flushing Analysis
Proposed Marina at Hawkes Nest Plantation, Grand Turk, BWI
1. INTRODUCTION
This hydrodynamic and flushing analysis was completed to address circulation and flushing concerns for the proposed marina development at Hawkes Nest Plantation, Grand Turk, GWI. Adequate flushing reduces the potential for the stagnation of water in the marina basin, helps to maintain the biological productivity, and reduces the potential for toxic accumulation in bottom sediment. Maintaining water quality within a basin depends primarily on flushing as determined by water circulation within the basin, and minimizing sources of pollution in the basin.
This study utilized a numerical model to simulate the flushing of conservative pollutants in the proposed marina system over time. The results of the simulations were used to determine if the basin exhibits good circulation and flushing characteristics.
1.1. Site Location and Description
Hawkes Nest Plantation is located near the southern end of Grand Turk Island, Turks and Caicos Island, BWI, as shown in Figure 1-1. The layout of the proposed marina is shown in Figure 1-2. The new marina basin will be excavated to depths of 11 ft below Mean Low Water (MLW). Two flushing and entrance channels, with depths of 5 ft and 12 ft (MLW), respectively, connect the marina basin to the open water.
1.2. Report Outline
This report presents the model study in the following sections:
• Section 2 presents a detailed description of the model used for the flushing study;
• Section 3 presents the model set-up and describes the data input to the model;
• Section 4 presents the hydrodynamic and flushing model results; and
• Section 5 provides the report conclusions.
Figure 1-1 Location map of proposed marina at Hawkes Nest Plantation, Grand Turk, BWI.
Project site
Figure 1-2 Sketch of proposed marina layout.
4
2. MODEL DESCRIPTION
The Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC) was used for this project. EFDC is a general purpose modeling package for simulating two or three-dimensional flow, transport and biogeochemical process in surface water systems including: rivers, lakes, estuaries, reservoirs, wetlands and near shore to shelf scale coastal regions. The EFDC model was originally developed at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science for estuarine and coastal applications and is considered public domain software.
In addition to hydrodynamic, salinity, and temperature transport simulation capabilities, EFDC is capable of simulating cohesive and noncohesive sediment transport, near field and far field discharge dilution from multiple sources, eutrophication processes, the transport and fate of toxic contaminants in the water and sediment phases, and the transport and fate of various finfish and shellfish. Special enhancements to the hydrodynamic portion of the code, including: vegetation resistance, drying and wetting, hydraulic structure representation, wave-current boundary layer interaction and wave induced currents, allowing refined modeling of wetland and marsh systems, controlled flow systems, and nearshore wave induced currents and sediment transport.
The following description is from the introduction to the EFDC User Manual (Hamrick, 1996):
The physics of the EFDC model, and many aspects of the computational scheme, are equivalent to the widely used Blumberg-Mellor model (Blumberg and Mellor, 1987) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ CH3D or Chesapeake Bay model (Johnson, et al, 1993). The EFDC model solves the three-dimensional, vertically hydrostatic, free surface, turbulent averaged equations of motions for a variable density fluid. Dynamically coupled transport equations for turbulent kinetic energy, turbulent length scale, salinity and temperature are also solved. The two turbulence parameter transport equations implement the Mellor-Yamda level 2.5 turbulence closure scheme (Mellor and Yamada, 1982; Galperin et al, 1988). The EFDC model uses a stretched or sigma vertical coordinate and Cartesian or curvilinear, orthogonal horizontal coordinates.
The numerical scheme employed in EFDC to solve the equations of motion uses second order accurate spatial finite differencing on a staggered or C grid. The model’s time integration employs a second order accurate three-time level, finite difference scheme with an internal-external mode splitting procedure to separate the internal shear or baroclinic mode from the external free surface gravity wave or barotropic mode. The external mode solution is semi-implicit, and simultaneously computes the two-dimensional surface elevation field by a preconditioned conjugate gradient procedure. The external solution is completed by the calculation of the depth average barotropic velocities using the new surface elevation field. The model’s semi-implicit external solution allows large time steps that are constrained only by the stability criteria of the explicit central difference or high order upwind advection scheme (Smolarkiewicz and Margolin, 1993) used for the nonlinear accelerations. Horizontal
5
boundary conditions for the external mode solution include potions for simultaneously specifying the surface elevation only, the characteristic of an incoming wave (Bennett and McIntosh, 1982), free radiation of an outgoing wave (Bennett, 1976) or the normal volumetric flux on arbitrary portions of the boundary. The EFDC model’s internal momentum equation solution, at the same time step as the external, is implicit with respect to vertical diffusion. The internal solution of the momentum equations is in terms of the vertical profile of shear stress and velocity shear, which results in the simplest and most accurate form of the baroclinic pressure gradients and eliminates the over-determined character of alternate internal mode formulations. Time splitting inherent in the three time level scheme is controlled by periodic insertion of a second order accurate two time level trapezoidal step. The EFDC model is also readily configured as a two-dimensional mode in either the horizontal or vertical planes.
The EFDC model implements a second order accurate in space and time, mass conservation fractional step solution scheme for the Eulerian transport equations for salinity, temperature, suspended sediment, water quality constituents and toxic contaminants. The transport equations are temporally integrated at the same time step or twice the time step of the momentum equation solution (Smolarkiewicz and Margolin, 1993). The advective step of the transport solution uses either the central difference scheme used in the Blumberg-Mellor model or a hierarchy of positive definite upwind difference schemes. The highest accuracy upwind scheme, second order accurate in space and time, is base on a flux corrected transport version of Smolarkiewicz’s multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm numerical diffusion. The horizontal diffusion step, if required, is explicit in time, while the vertical diffusion step is implicit. Horizontal boundary conditions include time variable material inflow concentrations, upwinded outflow, and a damping relation specification of climatological boundary concentration. For the temperature transport equation, the NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory’s atmospheric heat exchange model (Rosati and Miyakoda, 1988) is implemented.
6
3. MODEL SET-UP
The model set-up requires the user to build a model grid based on the geometry of the study area (i.e., the shorelines and bathymetry) and develop the model inputs (i.e., the boundary forcings and model coefficients). The boundary forcings used for this study include the offshore tidal elevations and wind.
In support of the model application, ATM conducted field investigations in the vicinity of the proposed project from February 28 to April 10, 2005. The purpose of the data collection was to characterize the depths at the project site and measure the tidal signals near the project site.
3.1. Model Geometry
The model geometry is defined by the shorelines of Grand Turk Island and the proposed marina basin. The marina basin boundaries were digitized and imported from a TIF drawing file created by Portrait Properties II, LLC. After the marina basin was merged with the island shoreline, the shoreline was translated to local grid coordinates based on the coordinates of marina basin. The shorelines were then transformed into a GIS basemap and used as a guide for development of the numerical model grid.
Three scenarios with different locations of flushing and entrance channels were simulated in this study. In these three scenarios, the entrance channel is 200 ft wide and 12 ft deep relative to Mean Low Water (MLW), and the flushing channel is 100 ft wide and 5 ft deep relative to MLW. Their computational grids are presented in Figures 3-1 and 3-2. The model grid covers the entire marina basin and two entrance and flushing channels. The grid cells range in size from 15 meters wide in the flushing and entrance channels to 10 meters wide in the marina basin and 200 meters in the area away from the project site. The higher resolution in the project area was desired in order to accurately simulate the current pattern in the project site. The furthest north and west cells at the seaside are considered as the boundary cells in the model.
3.2. Bathymetry
Local bathymetry was input to the model grid by using the GIS editor to select grid cells and specify the grid cell depth. March 1, 2007 survey data collected by ATM in the study area were used to define the model grid depths in the nearshore areas. The bathymetry in the marina basin and entrance and flushing channels was based on the proposed dredge depth of 11 ft (3.3 m), 12 ft (3.6 m) and 5 ft (1.5 m) relative to MLW. The model grid depths are shown in Figure 3-3.
3.3. Tidal Forcing
Water surface elevations in the model were forced at the north and south ocean boundaries. Tidal measurements were collected at the project site between February 28 and April 10, 2007. Figure 3-4 shows the tidal records measured at this location. Local tides are semi-diurnal (i.e., two high tides and two low tides per day), with an inequality between successive highs and lows. The US Army Corps of Engineers ADCIRC model simulated tidal database for the western Atlantic basin was used to evaluate tidal phasing in the vicinity of Grand Turk
7
Island. Based on this analysis, it was determined that it is reasonable to assume that there is no tidal phase difference between the model boundaries.
3.4. Wind
Wind data is available for Grand Turk Island, based on hourly surface wind observations between November 1954 and November 1968 made by the United States Air Force. The values of mean wind speed and percent occurrence of wind are greatest from due east (i.e., trade winds). Of significant importance is the 90-degree sector between northeast and southeast, which accounts for 89% of the average annual wind energy. These data, along with the local shoreline orientation and nearby sheltering features indicate that the prevailing winds at the project site would blow along the channel from the east. Table 3-1 provides wind data from Grand Turk.
The 6.7m/s wind condition is exceeded 89 percent of the time, and therefore can be used to represent a minimum wind condition. Therefore, a steady minimum average wind of 6.7m/s from the east was used in this study.
8
Table 3-1 Wind data, Grand Turk Island.
Figure 3-1 Model grid of the proposed marina – Scenario 1.
Flushing Channel
Entrance Channel
Figure 3-2 Model grid of the proposed marina – Scenarios 2 and 3.
Flushing Channel
Entrance Channel
Entrance Channel
Flushing Channel
Figure 3-3 Model grid depths for Scenario 1 (shown as meters below MLW).
Figure 3-4 Measured water surface elevations at project site.
-1.00
-0.80
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
2/28/07 3/5/07 3/10/07 3/15/07 3/20/07 3/25/07 3/30/07 4/4/07 4/9/07
Day
Wat
er S
urfa
ce E
leva
tion
(m)
13
4. MODEL RESULTS
4.1. Hydrodynamic Model Results
The hydrodynamic model was used to simulate the flow of water in and out of the marina basin over a period of ten days for the three scenarios discussed in Section 3.1 (grids shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2). The tides used for the model simulation are shown in Figure 3-3. The model simulation started with the neap portion of the tidal cycle. This results in a somewhat conservative analysis, since the larger range of spring tide conditions would result in increased tidal flows and flushing.
Scenario 3 generated the largest currents in the basin, as compared to the other two scenarios. In general, currents during neap tides are smaller than during spring tides, which is due to higher tidal ranges associated with spring tides. Simulated current magnitudes for Scenario 3 during peak flood and peak ebb for spring tide are shown in Figures 4-1 and 4-2. The results indicate that the currents in the basin will be much smaller than in the channels. The maximum speeds are 0.12 m/s in the north entrance channel, 0.04 m/s in the south flushing channel, and 0.04 m/s or less in the basin.
4.2. Flushing Model Results
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) recommends that in order to provide reasonable assurance that water quality will not be a concern, flushing times should not exceed four days (USEPA, 1985). However, it should be noted that flushing times in excess of four days do not necessarily indicate poor water quality or that applicable water quality standards will be violated. Clark (1983) recommends that a maximum time of 2-4 days should be safe as a design criterion while a period of more than 10 days should be considered an unacceptable flushing time. The generally accepted concentration target for these flushing times, based on the concentration of a conservative tracer (as utilized herein), is 10 percent of initial loading.
For this study, the entire marina basin was assumed to have an initial concentration of 100 percent (i.e., a unit concentration of 1). 10 percent tracer remaining after four days or less will be considered good flushing, 10 percent remaining after 4 to 10 days will be considered marginal flushing, and greater than 10 days will be considered unacceptable flushing.
The overall dye concentration in the entire basin under steady easterly wind condition at different time is summarized in a plot of the relative initial pollutant mass remaining in the marina basin versus time (Figure 4-3).
For Scenario 1, the proposed marina basin will flush to 58.1% of the initial dye remaining after 4 days and 38.2% remaining after 10 days, which is considered a poor flushing rate.
For Scenario 2, the proposed basin will flush to 10% of the initial dye remaining within 2.9 days, which is considered a good flushing rate.
14
For Scenario 3, the results show that the initial dye concentration in the proposed marina basin will disperses quickly and will flush to 10% remain only within 1.2 days. Furthermore, it will flush to 0.3% remaining after 4 days. It is considered a very good flushing rate.
Overall, the study results indicate that proposed marina basin will flush very quickly if the entrance and flushing channels are designed at the right location. Therefore, the basin will exhibit good water quality and clarity as long as best management practices (BMPs) are employed to minimize pollution sources to the basin.
Table 4-1 Predicted flushing times for the proposed marina basin and flushing options.
Flushing Options
Scenario Entrance channel
Flushing channel
Percent Initial Concentration after 4 days
Time Required to Reach 10%
Initial Concentration
1 At north In the middle 58.1% > 10 days
2 At north At south 3.1% 2.9 days 3 At south At north 0.3% 1.2 days
Figure 4-1 Simulated current magnitude during peak flood conditions.
Figure 4-2 Simulated current magnitude during peak ebb conditions.
Figure 4-3 Simulated dye concentration in marina basin versus time.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (days)
Perc
ent I
nitia
l Mas
s R
emai
ning
Scenario 1Scenario 2Scenario 3
18
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study was undertaken to evaluate the circulation and flushing characteristics and potential impact of the proposed marina at Hawkes Nest Plantation, Grand Turk, BWI. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) recommends that in order to provide reasonable assurance that water quality will not be a concern, flushing times should not exceed four days (USEPA, 1985). However, it should be noted that flushing times in excess of four days do not necessarily indicate poor water quality or that applicable water quality standards will be violated. Clark (1983) recommends that a maximum time of 2-4 days should be safe as a design criterion while a period of more than 10 days should be considered an unacceptable flushing time.
The study utilized a state-of-the-art hydrodynamic and mass transport model to evaluate the flushing characteristics of the proposed marina design. The model included tidal forcing and wind forcing based on the analysis of the measured water surface elevations and wind at the project site.
The model simulations indicate that the proposed marina basin will flush very quickly if the entrance and flushing channels are designed at the right location. With a 200 ft wide 12 ft deep entrance channel located at the south of the basin and a 100 ft wide 5 ft deep flushing channel located at the north of the basin, the proposed marina basin will flush with 90 percent exchange of the marina waters within 1.2 days under typical trade wind conditions. With this configuration, the marina will exhibit very good flushing characteristics, and it is expected that the basin will exhibit good water quality and clarity as long as best management practices (BMPs) are employed to minimize pollution sources to the basin.
19
REFERENCES
Applied Technology & Management, Inc. 2004: Hydrodynamic and flushing study for Proposed Development at Leeward, Providenciales, ATM, Charleston, SC.
Bennett, A. F., 1976: Open boundary conditions for dispersive waves. J. Atmos. Sci., 32, 176-182.
Bennett, A. F., and P. C. McIntosh, 1982: Open ocean modeling as an inverse problem: tidal theory. J. Phys. Ocean., 12, 1004-1018.
Blumberg, A. F., and G. L. Mellor, 1987: A description of a three-dimensional coastal ocean circulation model. In: Three-Dimensional Coastal Ocean Models, Coastal and Estuarine Science, Vol. 4. (Heaps, N. S., ed.) American Geophysical Union, pp. 1-19.
Hamrick, J.M. 1996: User’s manual for the environmental fluid dynamics computer code. Special Report No. 331 in Applied Marine Science and Ocean Engineering. Department of Physical Sciences, School of Marine Science, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, The College of William and Mary. Gloucester Point, VA.
Johnson, B. H., K. W. Kim, R. E. Heath, B. B. Hsieh, and H. L. Butler, 1993: Validation of three-dimensional hydrodynamic model of Chesapeake Bay. J. Hyd. Engrg., 119, 2-20.
Mellor, G. L., and T. Yamada. 1982: Development of a turbulence closure model for geophysical fluid problems. Rev. Geophys. Space Phys., 20, 851-875.
Rosati, A. K., and K. Miyakoda, 1988: A general circulation model for upper ocean simulation. J. Phys. Ocean., 18, 1601-1626.
Smolarkiewicz, P. K., and L. G. Margolin, 1993: On forward-in-time differencing for fluids: extension to a curvilinear framework. Mon. Weather Rev., 121, 1847-1859.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 1984: "Shore Protection Manual." Coastal Research Center. USACE Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1985: Coastal Marinas Assessment Handbook. Atlanta: NEPA Compliance Section, USEPA Region IV, 570 p.
A P P L I E D T E C H N O L O G Y & M A N A G E M E N T , I N C .
Marine Benthic Resource Baseline Assessment
Hawkes Nest, Grand Turk
British West Indies
Prepared for:
Hawkes Nest Enterprises Incorporated
by:
Applied Technology and Management
May 15, 2007
Table of Contents
1. Summary……………………………………………………………………………………….3
2. Approach……………………………………………………………………………………….4
3. Marine Communities………………………………………………………………………….4
4. Marine Species………………………………………………………………………………..8
5. Resource Uses………………………………………………………………………………..5
6. Protective Legislation and Regulations……………………………………………………12
7. Potential Environmental Issues and Considerations…………………………………….17
8. Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………..18
Figures Figure 1. Proposed Site of Hawkes Nest Plantation.
Figure 2. Proposed Channel Alignment and Beach Enhancement Sites.
Figure 3. Benthic Survey Areas for April 2007 Field Reconnaissance.
Figure 4. Notable Marine Features and Habitats (April 2007).
Figure 5. Coastal Rock Community.
Figure 6. Seagrass Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 7. Macroalgae Flat Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 8. Finger Coral Reef Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 9. Soft Coral Reef Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 10. Fringing Reef Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 11. Mangrove Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 12. Protected Species in the Project Area.
Appendix A. Marine Species List…………………………………………………...32
2
3
1. Summary
ATM performed marine ecological assessments of the property’s shoreline and offshore
marine areas during the week of April 9 through April 13, 2007. The property is located
along the southeast coast of Grand Turk, adjacent to the airport and a salt pond, or
salina, to the west; the northern edge of the property is bounded by the South Creek
National Park. The site includes roughly 160 acres of upland area and spans 6,000
linear feet of open shoreline. Figure 1 depicts the property boundary based on
information provided to date. Figure 2 shows the proposed channel locations and beach
enhancement area.
The benthic resource survey was limited to areas potentially affected by channel
dredging and beach enhancement (See Figure 3). The marine environment consists of
a low energy system of seagrass, macroalgae flats, patch and fringing reefs, finger coral
reef, mangrove nursery and soft coral communities. Dense turtlegrass (Thalassia
testudinum), shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) and manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme)
were abundant, as shown on the map of the marine communities (Figure 4). The most
common hard corals include club finger coral (Porites sp.), lesser starlet coral
(Siderastrea radians) and mustard coral (Porites astroides). A list of all species
observed in the project vicinity is provided in Appendix A. General ecological health was
found to be very good, with few existing impacts beyond marine debris on the shorelines
and occasionally in the water in the form of derelict fishing nets. The reefs and seagrass
beds were thriving, with no visible signs of damage from poor water quality, vessel
anchors, storms, or major diseases.
The area currently supports recreational uses such as snorkeling, sightseeing and
kayaking, along with some artisanal fishing. These uses are not incompatible with the
project goals, however, existing snorkeling sites should be considered during channel
planning to avoid user conflicts.
This report includes the results of field investigations and potential issues related to the
proposed development. This fatal-flaw level analysis determined there are substantial
ecological considerations, including dense seagrass beds, thriving coral reefs, and the
South Creek National Park, that may adversely affect the ability of developing the site.
2. Approach
The marine assessment was conducted by Sabeena Beg, a project environmental
scientist from ATM. Ms. Beg has conducted a number of ecological surveys in Florida,
the Bahamas, and the British West Indies (Anguilla and Turks and Caicos) for the past
10 years. The field investigations were limited to a level of research necessary to
highlight any potential issues for future development of the property and are not
considered sufficient for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The Owner
provided copies of the most recent conceptual master plan of the subject property (dated
13 June 2005, EDSA), which ATM used to roughly delineate the property limits.
Based on the assessment’s purpose and limited field time and budget, the investigation
included three components:
1) Acquisition and review of 2005 aerial photography (Figure 2);
2) Literature search of flora and fauna that are protected by local, national, and/or
international regulations and agreements; and
3) Reconnaissance-level benthic habitat field investigations.
Marine assessments were conducted in the areas shown on Figure 3, in which current
conditions, species, habitats, and ecologically notable features were documented.
Extensive EIA level mapping of habitat boundaries and inventories of flora and fauna
were beyond the scope of this assessment, however, photographs and Global
Positioning System (GPS) coordinates were taken where protected species were
observed.
3. Marine Communities
The marine survey focused on the immediate project area and the project sphere of
influence, located in the waters proposed for an entrance channel and flushing channel
for the marina, as well as areas of proposed beach improvements. Six marine habitat
types were identified as depicted on Figure 4:
• Coastal Rock / Intertidal Zone (Figure 5)
• Seagrass (Figure 6)
• Macroalgae Flats (Figure 7)
• Finger Coral Reef (Figure 8)
4
• Soft Coral Reefs (Figure 9)
• Patch and Fringing Reefs (Figure 10)
• Mangrove Nursery (Figure 11)
The approximate community boundaries run in a general shore-parallel zonation from
shallow to deep, with a band of seagrass and calcareous algae, then finger coral
(Porites) reef, soft coral beds, and seagrass further from shore, then transitioning into a
fringing reef community. Between each community were dense to moderate seagrass
beds. Figures 5 through 11 depict representative photographs from each community
type.
3.1 Coastal Rock / Intertidal Zone
The proposed shoreline enhancement project is located within this community. The
coastal rock community serves the purpose of protecting landward structures and
communities from storm-induced erosion, and typically forms where strong wave action
has scoured fine sediments from the shore. On the eastern edges of the property lies
two small pocket beaches segmented by exposed limestone rock with small cliffs,
named Gun Hill. Gun Hill is a remnant of colonial era gun or observation emplacement
and is the second highest elevation on Grand Turk.
The coastal rock community appeared healthy and without major anthropogenic impacts,
except debris. No threatened or endangered species were observed. Environmental
conditions are severe in the coastal rock community, hence species diversity and
species populations are low when compared to other natural communities. Mollusks,
such as periwinkles (Littorina littorina), and chitons (Class Polyplacophora) were
observed, and marine crabs were found in the small tidal pools (Figure 5). Intertidal
communities supported fuzzy chitons (Acanthopleura granulata), beaded periwinkle
snails (Tectarius muricatus), and nimble spray crabs (Percnon gibbesi). Several birds
were foraging along the shoreline, such as ruddy turnstones (Arenaria interpres) and
oystercatchers (Haematopus sp.). White-tailed tropic birds (Phaethon lepturus
dorotheae), magnificent frigatebirds (Fregata magnificens), osprey (Pandion haliaetus)
and reddish egrets (Egretta rufescens) were seen overhead.
5
3.2 Seagrass Communities
Dense seagrass beds were found throughout the survey area. They were mostly
comprised of turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) but also contained manatee grass
(Syringodium filiforme). In some shallow locations, shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was
also intermixed. Crustaceans, mollusks, juvenile fish such as the striped parrotfish
(Scarus iserti), and a green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) were observed foraging in this
habitat.
Close to shore, the seagrass communities were dense and mixed with a variety of
macroalgae. Neogoniolithon spectabile, a crustose coralline algae, was interspersed
throughout the shoreline communities at both the north and south locations where beach
enhancements and a flushing channel may be located (Figure 2). In the deeper water
areas, a dense bed of turtle and manatee grass paralleled the shoreline, then became
less dense to sparse farther east. Seagrass communities dominated the project area
and were present in all areas of proposed development. In the South Creek area, turtle
grass beds were moderate with scattered lugworm (Arenicola spp.) mounds throughout
the community. There were occasional patches of shoal grass in small sandy areas.
Anemones and sea cucumbers were common in this area, as well as juvenile fish.
Father east toward the fringing reefs, the area around the reefs were comprised of sand,
with a transition in deeper waters to macroalgae-flat dominated areas, then dense
seagrass. All seagrass areas appeared healthy and had a rich diversity of species.
3.3 Finger coral (Porites spp.) reef
In the shallow waters along the eastern coastline, branched finger coral (Porites furcata)
reefs are encountered approximately 200 feet offshore. Other dominant species
associated with the reef include thin finger coral (Porites divaricata), mustard coral
(Porites astreoides), and crustose coralline algae. These platform shaped reefs support
a large assemblage of fish and provide shelter for many juveniles such as damselfishes
and parrotfish. The reefs are found in shallow waters of 3 – 4 feet in depth. Seagrass
immediately surrounds this community.
6
3.4 Soft Coral reef
Soft coral communities dominated by sea whips (Plexaura, Plexaurella, and
Pseudoplexaura spp.), rods (Pterogorgia spp.), fans (Gorgonia spp.) and plumes
(Psuedopterogorgia spp.) paralleled the shoreline east of the finger coral reef and at the
south end of the proposed flushing channel. The soft coral reefs provided habitat for
many juvenile and some adult fish. Burrows in the bases of the substrate on which the
corals grew sheltered spiny lobster and squirrelfish. The corals had no signs of disease.
3.5 Patch and Fringing Reefs
Patch and fringing reefs supported a diverse assemblage of corals and sponges
dominated by large elkhorn coral, occasional staghorn coral, and purple sea fans. The
corals within the study area were large, healthy and robust with slight evidence of
bleaching. Species of fish noted included goldentail moray eel (Gymnothorax miliaris),
foureye butterflyfish (Chaetodon capistratus), and juvenile striped parrotfish. A juvenile
hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) was resting in a crevice. Surrounding the
fringing reef, sand bottom with macroalgae transitioned into dense seagrass.
3.6 Mangrove
Within the survey area, red mangroves (Rhizophora mangle) line South Creek. The
prop-roots of these mangroves serve as a nursery area for juvenile fish species; juvenile
gray and schoolmaster snappers were noted in this area. The surrounding seagrass
communities provide additional cover and transitional habitat to the reef system. Both
habitats are important for lobster, conch, and reef fish, all of which were observed
among the mangrove prop-roots. From east to west along the channel, small
mangroves were beginning to take root. This system appears quite healthy, with the
exception of human debris. Additional information on the mangrove community can be
found in the Baseline Mangrove Assessment (ATM, 2007).
4. Marine Species
A total of 110 marine species were identified during the surveys, and additional surveys
would likely reveal more species present in this pristine area. A species list is included
7
as Appendix A with common and scientific name, type of organism, relative abundance,
and habitat type. Throughout this report, the common and scientific names are given
first, followed by the common name for the remainder, unless there is no common name
as is the case for certain algae and invertebrates.
The most common fish species are shown in Table 1. All other fish species, as well as
coral, and other invertebrates, are listed in Appendix A.
Table 1. Most Common Fishes Sighted during April 2007 Surveys.
Scientific Name Common Name Thalassoma bifasciatum Bluehead Wrasse Haemulon flavolineatum French Grunt Haemulon sciurus Bluestriped Grunt Holocentrus rufus Longspine Squirrelfish Holocentrus sp. Squirrelfish Lutjanus apodus Schoolmaster Snapper Mulloidichthys martinicus Spotted Goatfish Scarus inserti Striped Parrotfish
4.1 Protected Species Considerations
The Turks and Caicos are currently adopting endangered species legislation that was
not available during the time of this report. It will include provisions for the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which does not apply to
development activities in the country, just to trade in wildlife products from protected
species such as conch and sea turtle. While the TCI do not yet have a formal
endangered species program, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature
(IUCN)’s “Red List” is a common reference used when discussing species of
conservation concern. The IUCN, also known as the World Conservation Union,
establishes levels of threats from highest to lowest as Critically Endangered,
Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, Lower Risk, and Data Deficient as shown in
the status column in Table 2. Table 2 lists all marine species listed for conservation
concern by the IUCN in the Turks and Caicos (updated 2006).
8
Table 2. Marine Fauna Protected by the IUCN Potentially Present Within the Assessment Area (bold indicates species observed.) Common name Scientific Name Status Rough-toothed dolphin Steno bredanensis Data Deficient Manatee Trichechus manatus Vulnerable Green turtle Chelonia mydas Endangered Leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea Critically Endangered Hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys imbricata Critcally Endangered Spotted eagle ray Aetobatus narinari Near Threatened Blacktip shark Carcharinus limbatus Lower Risk Bull shark Carcharinus leucas Lower Risk Tiger shark Galeocerdo cuvier Lower Risk Shortfin mako Isurus oxyrinchus Lower Risk Lemon shark Negaprion brevirostris Lower Risk Blue shark Prionace glauca Lower Risk Scalloped hammerhead Sphyrna lewini Lower Risk Smooth hammerhead Sphyrna zygaena Lower Risk Oceanic whitetip shark Carcharhinus longimanus Vulnerable Nurse shark Ginglymostoma cirratum Data Deficient Whale shark Rhincodon typus Vulnerable Red grouper Epinephelus morio Near Threatened Goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara Critically Endangered Nassau grouper Epinephelus striatus Endangered Yellowfin grouper Mycteroperca venenosa Near Threatened Rainbow parrotfish Scarus guacamaia Vulnerable Queen triggerfish Balistes vetula Vulnerable Marbled grouper Dermatolepis inermis Vulnerable Hogfish Lachnolaimus maximus Vulnerable Cubera snapper Lutjanus cyanopterus Vulnerable Mutton snapper Lutjanus analis Vulnerable Albacore tuna Thunnus alalunga Data Deficient Bigeye tuna Thunnus obesus Vulnerable Northern bluefin tuna Thunnus thynnus Data Deficient
Two marine species listed by the IUCN were sighted during field surveys: green and
hawksbill sea turtles. Photographs of protected species and species of conservation
concern are shown in Figure 12.
4.1.1 Sea Turtles
The fringing reefs and sea grass beds found offshore of the Hawkes Nest project site
support foraging opportunities for at least four species of sea turtles: leatherback, green,
loggerhead and hawksbill. The leatherback, green and hawksbill sea turtles are
designated as endangered and the loggerhead sea turtle is considered threatened under
9
the Endangered Species Act in the United States and by the IUCN. Sea turtles seen
during surveys include a juvenile hawksbill resting in a crevice of a fringing reef, and an
adult green sea turtle foraging in the seagrass beds. No sea turtle tracks were seen
along the project area beaches during the survey; however, nesting surveys were not
conducted. Because sea turtle nesting season in Grand Turk is from approximately
March to October, encountering a nest during the April survey was possible.
The main threats to sea turtles include harvesting of nesting turtles and eggs, incidental
capture by fishing gear, loss of beach nesting habitats, lighting near beaches that can
mislead hatchlings away from the sea, and marine debris, such as fishing nets and
plastics that can entangle or choke turtles.
Sea turtle population recovery is complicated by legal hunting of turtles in the TCI.
Hawksbill turtles are hunted for their tortoiseshell, while green turtles are hunted for their
meat. Because hawksbill turtles live on a diet of sponges and many of the sponges are
toxic, their meat can be toxic as well. Green turtle hatchlings and juveniles are
omnivorous, while the adults live on a diet of seagrass and algae. Green sea turtles do
not reach sexual maturity until age 25; the age of maturity for hawksbill turtles is
unknown. Approximately 1 in 1000 hatchlings reaches maturity, so the removal of an
adult or subadult turtle can cause a significant population impact.
Green and hawksbill sea turtles depend on sand beaches for nesting sites and their
young need beaches that are not lit during hatching season or they will become
disoriented. Sea turtle hatchlings instinctively orient towards the brightest part of the
night sky when they emerge from their nest. In the absence of human development, the
breaking ocean surf and reflected night sky on the water are the brightest spots on the
beach.
Potential adverse impacts of the project on sea turtles include boat/turtle collision,
erosion of existing possible nesting beaches, disturbance of nesting females, light
pollution from development which could result in an increase in abandoned nesting
attempts and disorientation of turtle hatchlings, and the modification of foraging habitat.
10
4.1.2 Other Species of Concern
Queen Conch
Queen conchs were observed in the seagrass beds near the project site. The queen
conch is listed as a threatened species by CITES and the TCI have regulations
concerning their harvest to protect and conserve this species as a fishery (Fisheries
Protection Ordinance 1998). The species has significantly declined throughout the
Bahamas and Caribbean and increasingly strict regulations regarding their take are
aimed at reducing overfishing. Overfishing and habitat disruption are the main cause of
this drastic decline, and their import is controlled by CITES signatory nations. Conchs
reach sexual maturity at age 5 and may live for 40 years. Conchs need seagrass habitat
to successfully reproduce. They live in shallow habitats and are easy to find and capture,
which makes them vulnerable to fishing pressure.
Elkhorn and Staghorn Coral
The project area includes healthy elkhorn reefs and occasional staghorn individuals as
shown in Figure 12. Elkhorn and staghorn coral are listed as threatened under the
United States’ Endangered Species Act due to their decline and their important role as
reef building species (US Department of Commerce 2006). While they are not currently
protected in the TCI, impacts to these species should be avoided. Both species
transplant well and can be relocated from the impact area if the channel dredging
location overlaps with their local distribution.
5. Resource Uses
The project vicinity is currently used primarily for recreational purposes, snorkeling,
sightseeing and kayaking. Dive boats with large groups of people were seen regularly in
the area while the assessment was being conducted. The bay at the entrance to South
Creek provides many snorkeling opportunities. The shallow waters and robust fringing
reef allow visitors to see a variety of species. Since 1996, cruise ships have been
bringing snorkelers to the area’s reefs and to a popular stingray experience near the
protected island of Gibb Cay. Kayakers were seen within the South Creek National Park.
Cruise ship passengers were also seen on personal watercraft in the area. Upland
areas are visited by cruise passengers via guided safari tours and all-terrain vehicles.
11
The project area is used by local fisherman for spear-fishing and free diving for fish and
conch offshore. During the survey, a fisherman was seen just outside of the project
area. The boat captain explained that the reefs in the marine area are fished by the
local fishermen. In one area, large piles of conch shells were seen near the reef. No
active commercial fishing was noted. Expected signs of commercial fishing or significant
artisanal fishing would include fish traps, small boats operating in the area carrying
fishing gear, or other signs of activity. This was seen on the other side of the island. A
few juvenile commercially harvested fish species were seen in the project area, including
juvenile snapper, lobster, barracuda, parrotfish, and conch.
6. Protective Legislation and Regulations
This fatal-flaw level analysis includes a literature review of relevant protective legislation
for the area. Relevant policies (and date enacted) include:
• Turks and Caicos Islands National Park Ordinance enacted May 15, 1998 • Guidelines for the protection of Humpback Whales and Other Cetaceans - 2004 • Turks and Caicos Islands Demarcation Buoys, Access Lanes, Dive and Snorkel
Mooring, Scientific Monitoring Marker, Park Boundaries, Training Zones and Swim Zones.
• Turks and Caicos Islands Coast Protection Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Turks and Caicos Islands Fisheries Protection Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Turks and Caicos Islands Fisheries Limits Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Turks and Caicos Islands National Trust Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Turks and Caicos Islands Plant Protection Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Wild Birds Protection Ordinance - May 15, 1998 • Minerals (Exploration and Exploitation) Ordinance - May 15, 1998
The main policy relevant to the project is the Park Ordinance, due to the South Creek
National Park which may be located just north of the property. During investigations and
literature review, it was unclear where the park boundaries may overlap with the
proposed project and additional information is necessary to establish the park boundary
locations. While consideration must be given to the Park Ordinance, the policy does not
necessarily present an insurmountable obstacle to site development because the
recreational uses may be integrated with the park.
12
6.1 Natural Parks, Protected Areas, and Marine Reserves
There are eleven National Parks, eleven Nature Reserves and four Sanctuaries in the
TCI. All of these are marine protected areas, except five of the Nature Reserves. Grand
Turk has three national parks and one sanctuary: Columbus Landfall Marine National
Park, Grand Turk Cays Land and Sea National Park (including Gibbs, Penniston, Martin,
Alonza, and Pinzon Cays), South Creek National Park, and Long Cay Sanctuary.
South Creek National Park includes the South Creek estuary (excluding Eves Hill) and is
an important wetland area, recognized for its value as the least impacted of the 125
wetlands of international importance listed under the Ramsar Convention by the UK
Government.
The National Park Ordinance (1998) describes the boundaries of South Creek as
follows:
“An area of 183 acres in Grand Turk bounded by a line across the mouth of South Creek extending along the coast to the north of Materson’s Point, along the northern boundary of Parcel 10411/4 and the western boundary of Parcel 10411/3 until this meets a wall, in a south-westerly direction along the wall to the south side of the road to Materson’s Point, along the south side of this road in a westerly direction until it’s junction with a track, leading to the eastern end of Grand Turk Airport, along the east side of this track around the end of the runway to the canal leading from Hawks Pond Salina to South Creek. Around the Crown land holdings 10505/5 and 6 comprising mangroves and wetlands following the west side of the track ending at South Creek; then in an easterly direction to the starting point and excluding Parcel 10410/3 Eves Hill which is in private ownership.”
This description and location, however, conflicts with that portrayed on the Park’s
website. The National Parks Ordinance allows some types of development including
buildings, marinas and other construction to facilitate enjoyment by the public.
Government’s policy states that “the government is prepared to use any available Crown
land (other than national parks, nature reserves, sanctuaries and areas of historical
interest) for development in the right circumstances”. Minimizing impacts from the
proposed development on the National Park should be helpful in Government
discussions about appropriate development of the site.
13
7. Potential Environmental Issues and Considerations
7.1 Marina
Marine resources of the pristine waters of Grand Turk form the core of local livelihood
and water-based tourism. A variety of marine resources, including seagrass beds and
coral reefs, were observed throughout the project area. The proposed interior marina
basin and associated channels would have a large impact on these marine resources.
Excavation of the entire marina basin footprint would be required to provide adequate
water depth within the basin, along with excavation of an access channel connecting to
“deep” water and a flushing channel to facilitate water exchange within the basin. While
the total impact to resources cannot be quantified at this time, it is likely to be significant
and will present challenges to environmental approval. A more precise estimate of
unavoidable resource impacts will have to be made, along with proposals for mitigation
such as coral and seagrass transplants, etc.
An issue related to a substantial marina facility at this location is the potential impact to
the National Park, local usage site, and tourist based underwater activities that are
popular in this in this area of Grand Turk. Depending on the level of vessel traffic, the
marina may negatively impact local dive charters and inhibit other existing commercial
ventures that utilize these waters.
7.2 Entrance and Flushing Channels
Dredging channels for navigation and flushing will have impacts to seagrasses, coral
reefs, and other marine habitats shown in Figure 4. Figure 2 shows the proposed
locations for an entrance channel and/or flushing channels as Channel 1 (to the north)
and 2 (to the south).
Main habitats of concern located in the Channel 1 area include dense seagrass beds, as
well as a pristine patch reef community shown in Figure 4. In the area of Channel 2, a
healthy soft coral reef is found that extends well to the south, and appears to be almost
continuous along the shoreline. Additional reefs exist to the south of the survey area,
and are labeled on navigation charts as Talbot Shoal and Gun Reef.
Either channel option would result in marine impacts. The areas proposed for the either
channel are in healthy condition. The affected habitats are linked and the channel may
14
have impacts beyond the immediate area: the mangroves provide an ideal habitat for
juvenile fish, roosting and nesting birds, the decaying organic matter (detritus) from the
mangroves provides nutrients to the seagrass beds, and the seagrass provides nutrients
to the reefs. The creation of the channel and marina will greatly affect this area and all
surrounding areas. The fringing reefs may become compromised by the change in
nutrient loads and the increased boat traffic and subsequent pollutants.
7.3 Beach Fill
Due to the proximity of nearshore marine resources such as seagrass, corals, and reefs
the placement of beach fill at the “Public Beach” to re-establish an aesthetically
functional beach will likely have impacts that require further study. The beach
enhancement project will greatly affect a flourishing seagrass community, which in turn
will also affect an important reef community.
The proposed beach enhancement project will require sand for suitable beach quality
material. Potential borrow sites have not been identified as of yet. Once identified, jet
probes will be used within each of the potential borrows sites and sand samples will be
acquired and analyzed in order to choose a borrow site according to sand compatibility.
7.4 Operational Impacts
Once the development is complete and operations have begun, a new series of potential
impacts exist. They are mostly related to the daily maintenance and operational
functions that rely on the use of hazardous materials, such as cleaning agents,
fertilizers, fuels, oils, and other chemicals that can damage the environment.
7.5 Coral Reef Considerations
Many reefs fringing, finger coral and soft corals were found in the nearshore areas and
in the footprint of the proposed project. Turbidity from dredging and beach enhancement
has the potential to cause sedimentation of these reefs, with negative impacts resulting if
the sedimentation becomes chronic.
Coral reefs are sensitive communities, and hazardous spills and increased sediment
suspension due to boat traffic and dredging could potentially impact them. Reef-building
15
corals are extremely sensitive to sedimentation because they use photosynthesis, as
well as filter feeding, to eat. When sediment covers them, they can not photosynthesize,
and they must use their energy to slough off the sediment from their tissues and filter-
feeding tentacles, instead of gathering food. As a result, algae can overgrow the corals,
killing them. Runoff and/or leachate from landscape and golf course fertilizers has also
been documented to adversely affect coral reefs, as increased nutrient levels promote
algae growth. Algae can overtake coral reefs, as well as seagrass beds, if nitrogen and
phosphorus levels are significantly increased. This process, called eutrophication, can
occur from human activities such as uncontrolled fertilizer rich runoff water.
Reef-building coral are also vulnerable to natural impacts from storms, temperature
changes, algal blooms, and predators such as sponges, and worms. If The Turks
government agencies prescribe monitoring, care should be taken to differentiate which
changes, if any, are due to natural causes and which are anthropogenic.
Some sedimentation, nutrient loading, and runoff impacts from upland clearing,
landscaping and land maintenance may occur. Impacts include the effects from
leaching and runoff of nutrients and pesticides from residential and common areas. Best
management practices for landscaping, storm water control, and erosion/sediment
control should be implemented during all phases of the project. Provided that these
practices are utilized, negative impacts to the marine environment will be minimized.
The proposed marina should follow best management practices for planning,
construction and operation to avoid adverse impacts to water quality within the bay and
ocean.
7.6 Seagrass Considerations
Seagrass is a dominant habitat type in the area, growing in dense to medium dense
throughout the survey area. Like a coral reef, the physical structure of the seagrass
beds provides increased living substrate and cover for fish and invertebrates, such as
spiny lobster and conch. As seagrass dies back seasonally, the dead vegetation feeds
prey for fish. Seagrass beds and patches change in size, shape, and density from year
to year, however, the roots and rhizomes remain below the surface for future growth.
The root system also stabilizes fine sediments and prevents disturbance of fine-grained
benthic habitats. Seagrass is sensitive to changes in turbidity because the depth to
16
which it grows is limited by light penetration. Like coral reefs, seagrass has an
associated community of hydroids, worms, shrimp, hermit crabs, and encrusting
invertebrates that feed commercial fishes. Dredging-related turbidity, nutrient
overloading, and physical damage from propeller wash or boat groundings are some of
the potential concerns for this project related to seagrass. Seagrass transplants are a
typical means of providing mitigation for seagrass impacts. Government often assigns a
certain percentage of impacted seagrass that must be transplanted to compensate for
those that would be lost from dredging a channel, creating a beach, or filling an a
nearshore area.
7.7 Mangrove Considerations Excavation of a marina basin is required to fulfill the master plan as proposed. However,
mangroves provide important habitat and the impacts could be a concern. Typically,
mangrove impacts can be mitigated with mangrove planting, preservation, and
enhancement of existing systems. An example of enhancement would be to restore
hydrology to mangrove wetlands that have been cut off from tidal flushing by
construction of a coastal road. Such a mitigation effort can be implemented by providing
funds to retrofit culverts, or installing culverts along a road to restore tidal hydrology to
mangroves that are cut off from the ocean.
8. Recommendations
This environmental overview of the project area indicates some challenges for
development. The proposed interior marina basin poses the single largest challenge for
the project as it will potentially impact a large area of pristine and sensitive resources
that form the base for tourism and resource use in the region. Care should be taken to
avoid impacts to sensitive resources and minimize the footprint of impact from the
marina access channel and flushing channel. The navigation channel will likely need to
be at least twice as deep and twice as wide as the flushing channel, and therefore, is of
greater concern for environmental impacts.
The recommended option for a navigation channel is Channel 2, while a small and less
intrusive flushing channel could be located in the Channel 1 area. This recommendation
is based on environmental, economic, and engineering considerations.
17
As is shown by the bathymetric survey, the distance to deep water (-12 MLW) is
significantly less for Channel 2. Less distance to dredge means lower environmental
impacts. At the site of proposed Channel 1, habitat quality was higher than at proposed
Channel 2, which further decreases environmental impacts associated with Channel 2.
Compared to Channel 1, Channel 2’s finger coral reef was not as healthy, the seagrass
beds were less dense, more macroalgae covered the coral and was interspersed with
the seagrass, and there was more boat traffic close to shore.
Choosing Channel 2 would also minimize impacts to the South Creek National Park.
Substrate also plays a large role in determining which site is better from a dredging
perspective. The benthic substrate near Channel 1, which supports the extensive and
dense seagrass beds portrayed on Figure 4 is also a less consolidated and softer
sediment than that found at the Channel 2 area, which would likely require more
maintenance dredging, further increasing the impacts associated with Channel 1.
Finally, by aligning the channel to run between the reef features of Gun Reef and Talbot
Shoal, it appears that lesser impacts to coral reef habitat would result from using
Channel 2 for the navigation channel.
The expected path forward for the project, based on ATM’s current understanding of the
Client’s needs, is as follows:
• Preparation of an Environmental Impact Assessment for the adopted master
plan; and
• Permitting approvals for development and initiation of construction with
appropriate environmental monitoring and controls.
18
8. References
ATM. 2007. Baseline Mangrove Assessment, Hawkes Nest Project Site, Grand Turk.
US Department of Commerce 2006. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 223. [Docket No. 050304058–6116–03; I.D. No. 060204C] RIN No. 0648–XB29 Endangered and Threatened Species: Final Listing Determinations for Elkhorn Coral and Staghorn Coral.
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. (CITES) 2007. List of
Threatened and Endangered Species. UNEP-WCMC. Downloaded 11 May, 2007. United Nations Environment Programme- World Conservation Monitoring Centre(UNEP-WCMC) Species Database
IUCN 2006. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded
on 11 May 2007.
Turks And Caicos Islands, 1998. Chapter 80 National Parks Ordinance and Subsidiary Legislation Revised Edition showing the law as at 15 May 1998.
19
Figure 1. Proposed Site of Hawkes Nest Plantation Outlined in Red.
Figure 3. Benthic Survey Areas for April 2007 Field Reconnaissance.
Figure 5. Coastal Rock Community Showing Chitons (upper left) and Snails in Tide Pools (lower right).
Figure 6. Seagrass Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 7. Macroalgae Flat Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 8. Finger Coral Reef Communities in the Project Area (with Transition from Seagrass in Top Left).
Figure 9. Soft Coral Reef Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 10. Patch and Fringing Reef Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 11. Mangrove Communities in the Project Area.
Figure 12. Protected Species in the Project Area (clockwise from top left): Hawksbill Turtle, Elkhorn Coral, Staghorn Coral, and Elkhorn Coral.
Appendix A.
Marine Species List, Benthic Habitat Survey for Hawkes Nest, April 2007.
Family/Scientific Name
Common Name
Life Form
Abundance
CRUSTACEANS
Panulirus argus Caribbean Spiny Lobster Lobster Occasional
Percnon gibbesi Spray Crab Crab Common MOLLUSKS Ancanthopleura granulata Fuzzy Chiton Chiton Common
Cyphoma gibbosum Flamingo Tongue Flamingo tongue Occasional
Holothuria floridana Florida Sea Cucumber Sea cucumber Occasional Holothuria mexicana Donkey Dung Sea cucumber Common Strombus gigas Queen Conch Snail Occasional ECHINODERMS Diadema antillarum Long-spined Urchin Urchin Common Clypeaster rosaceus Inflated sea biscuit sea biscuit Occasional Echinometra viridis Rock Boring Urchin Sea urchin Occasional tripneustes ventricosus West Indian sea egg Sea urchin Occasional MARINE PLANTS SEAGRASSES Syringodium filiforme Manatee-grass Seagrass Abundant Thalassia testudinum Turtle grass Seagrass Abundant Haludule wrightii Shoal grass Seagrass Abundant MACROALGAE Rhodophyta Heterosiphonia gibbesii Common Amphiroa sp. Amphiroa Red Algae Occasional Neogoniolithon spectabile Corraline algae Red Algae Abundant Porolithon pachydermum Reef Cement Red Algae Occasional Wrangelia penicillata Red Algae Occasional Phaeophyta Dictyota crispata Y-branched algae Brown Algae Dictyota mertensii Y-branched algae Brown Algae Common Padina gymnospora Scroll Algae Brown Algae Occasional Padina sanctae-crucis Scroll Algae Brown Algae Common Turbinaria sp. Brown Algae Common
Chlorophyta Avrainvillea longicaulis Paddle Blade Algae Green Algae Occasional Caulerpa prolifera Green Algae Occasional Caulerpa sertuariodes Green Algae Occasional Chaemaedoris peniculum Green Algae Occasional
Halimeda incrassata Green Algae Common in
bays Halimeda sp. Green Algae Occasional Halimeda monile Green Algae Occasional Halimeda opuntia Green Algae Occasional Penicillus sp. Bristle Brush Green Algae Common Penicillus pyriformis Flat top Bristle Brush Green Algae Occasional Udotea cyathiformis Mermaids Tea Cup Green Algae Occasional Udotea sp. Mermaid's Fan Green Algae Common Valonia sp. Bubble Algae Green Algae Occasional FISH Abudefduf saxatilis Sergeant Major Fish Occasional Acanthus caeruleus Blue Tangs Fish Common Antherinidae, clupeidae,engraulididae
Silversides, anchovies, and herrings Fish Occasional
Aulostomus maculatus Trumpetfish Fish Occasional Blennidae Blenny Fish Occasional Canthidermis sufflamen Ocean triggerfish Fish Occasional Caranx ruber Bar Jacks Fish Occasional Chaetodon striatus Banded butterflyfish Fish Common Chaetodon capistratus Foureye butterflyfish Fish Common Dasyatis americana Southern stingray Ray Common Diodon hystrix Porcupine fish Fish Occasional Gerres cinereus yellowfin mojarra Fish Occasional Gobiidae Goby Fish Common Gymnothorax miliaris Goldentail Moray Eel Occasional Haemulon flavolineatum French grunt Fish Common Haemulon scirenus Stripped grunt Fish Common Halichoeres bivittatus Slippery Dick Fish Occasional Halichoeres maculipiana? Clown wrasse
Fish Occasional Heteropriacanthus cruentatus
Glasseye Snapper
Fish Occasional Holocentrus rufus Longspine Squirrelfish Fish Common Holocentrus sp. Squirrelfish Fish Common Labridae Wrasse (unidentified) Fish Occasional
2
Lactophrous sp. Smooth trunkfish Fish Common Lutajanus apodus Schoolmaster snapper Fish Common Lutajanus griseus Gray snapper Fish Occasional Lutjanus synagris Lane snapper Fish Occasional Lutajanus mahogoni Mahogony snapper Fish Occasional Microspathodon chrysurus
Yellow-tail Damselfish Fish Occasional
Ocyurus chrysurus Yellow-tail Snapper Fish Occasional Pseudupeneus maculatus Spotted goatfish Fish Common Scarus iserti Stripped Parrotfish Fish Common Scarus taeniopterus Princess Parrotfish Fish Occasional Stegastes fuscus Dusky Damselfish Fish Occasional Stegastes leucostictus Beaugregory Fish Occasional Sphyraena barracuda Barracuda Fish Occasional Sparisoma viridae Stoplight Parrotfish Fish Occasional Stegastes variables Cocoa damsels Fish Occasional Thalassoma bifasciatum Bluehead Wrasse
Fish Common Antherinidae, clupeidae,engraulididae
Silversides, anchovies, and herrings Fish occasional
Serranus tabacarius tobacco fish Fish Common
Kyphosus sectatrix Bermuda chub Fish Occasional CORALS
Hydrocorals Millepora alcicornis Branching Fire Coral Coral Common Millepora complanata Blade Fire Coral Coral Occasional Octocorals Plexaura homomalia Black Sea Rods Coral Occasional Plexaurella sp. Slit pore sea rods Coral Occasional Pseudoplexaura sp. Porous Sea Rods Coral Common Pseudopterogorgia sp. Sea Plumes Coral Common Pterogorgia sp. Sea Plumes Coral Common Pterogorgia anceps Angular sea whip Coral Occasional Gorgonia ventalina Common sea fan Coral Common Gorgonia flabellum Venus Sea Fan Coral Common Stony Corals Siderastrea radians Lesser starlet Coral Coral Common Acropora palmata Elkhorn Coral Coral Occasional Diplora clivosa Knobby Brain Coral Coral Occasional Diplora strigosa Brain Coral Coral Common
3
Porites astreoides Mustard Hill Coral Coral Common Porites porites Finger Coral Coral Common Porites furcata Branched Finger Coral Coral Common Porites divaricata Thin Finger Coral Coral Occasional Siderastrea radians Lesser starlet Coral Coral Common Eusmilia fastigiana Smooth flower coral Coral Occasional Acropora cervicornis Staghorn Coral Coral Occasional Siderastrea sidera Massive Starlet Coral Coral Occasional SPONGES CNIDARIANS Bartholomea annulata Corkscrew anemone Anemone Occasional Stichodactyla helianthus Sun anemone Anemone Occasional Condylactis gigantea Giant anemone Anemone Common Hydroida Hydroid Hydroid Occasional ANNELIDS Arenicola cristata Lugworms Worm Common Anamobaea orstedii Split-crown feather
duster Worm Occasional
REPTILES Eretmochelys imbricata Hawksbill Sea turtle Sea turtle Occasional Chelonia mydas Green Sea turtle Sea turtle Occasional
4
Hawkes Nest Plantation Grand Turk, TCI
Conceptual Infrastructure Design and Analysis
Portrait Properties II, Incorporated
PREPARED BY: APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, INC.
411 PABLO AVENUE JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA 32250
(904) 249-8009
December 21, 2007
ii
Table of Contents
1.0 PURPOSE ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 ROADWAY LAYOUT ...................................................................................................... 1 3.0 STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM ....................................................................... 2
3.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION..................................................... 2 3.2 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS ............................................................ 2 3.3 ASSUMPTIONS................................................................................................ 8 3.4 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................... 9
4.0 WATER STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ................................................ 9 4.1 GENERAL......................................................................................................... 9 4.2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN ................................................................................. 10 4.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS ............................................................................ 13
5.0 WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM .......................15 5.1 GENERAL....................................................................................................... 15 5.2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN ................................................................................. 15 5.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS ............................................................................ 19
6.0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL ................................................................20 6.1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY LOCATION..................................... 20 6.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL DESIGN............................... 20 6.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS ............................................................................ 21
7.0 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ..................................................................22 8.0 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................22
APPENDIX A – STORMWATER MODEL RESULTS AND CALCULATIONS APPENDIX B – EPANET WATER MODEL RESULTS APPENDIX C – WASTEWATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CALCULATIONS AND
PUMP INFORMATION
iii
List of Tables TABLE 3-1 RETURN PERIOD ANALYSIS SUMMARY ……...……….………………………………..…3 TABLE 3-2 DESIGN STORMS RAINFALL TOTALS ……..……………..……………………………......3 TABLE 3-3 DESIGN STORM PEAK BASIN RUNOFF RATES …………….…… ………………..……3 TABLE 3-4 PEAK DISCHARGE RATES ……………………..………………..…………………….…..…8 TABLE 4-1 PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS ……………….……………………………………….…11 TABLE 4-2 EPANET WATER MODEL SYSTEM RESULTS…… …… ………………………………14 TABLE 4-3 PRELIMINARY WATERMAIN LENGTHS …….….……….…………………….………….14 TABLE 5-1 PROJECTED WASTEWATER RATES ……….……….……………….………….…….…17 TABLE 5-2 WASTEWATER SUBSYSTEMS ……….……….……………….…………………….……18 TABLE 5-3 SUBSYSTEM GRAVITY SEWER SYSTEMS………………………………..……....….…18 TABLE 5-4 TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS………………………….….……….………………….….…...18 TABLE 5-5 PUMP STATION SYSTEMS …………………………….……….………………….…....…19
iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) has been authorized by Portrait Properties II, Inc. to prepare an infrastructure analysis for the proposed resort development, Hawkes Nest Plantation, on Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos Island. ATM understands the development to currently include: three hotels – a 122 unit casino hotel, a 50 unit marina hotel, and a 100 unit hillside hotel; residential uses including – 100 casino condominium units, 118 marina condominium units, 67 hillside condominium units, 244 lagoon condominium units, 17 beach lots for single family homes, and 48 island lagoon estate lots for single family homes; a marina retail village; and a 82 slip marina. The condominiums will range from studios, one, two, three bedroom and penthouses. The development will be constructed in several phases. ATM prepared an analysis of the following infrastructure components: roadways, stormwater drainage, water storage and distribution, wastewater collection and transmission, wastewater treatment and disposal, and electrical distribution. The methodology and results of each component analysis are described below. The roadway layout prepared by ATM for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development was based on the upland topographic survey provided by the owner and the master plan for the entire development as prepared by EDSA. The roadway elevations have been established in conjunction with the finished floor elevations and the existing site elevations and typically only vary, due to the relatively flat nature of the site, from 2.8 to 3.4 meters. The slope of the roadways ranges from 0.43 to 2.13 percent with a cross slope of 2.0 percent to move runoff off the roadway and into the swales. The proposed roadway material is asphalt paving as the roadways are anticipated for standard vehicular traffic ATM prepared an evaluation of the site to determine a suitable stormwater drainage system for the development. The existing site area is comprised of roughly two (2) main existing drainage basins which are separated by a coastal dune ridge ranging from approximately 13 to 15 meter. The proposed site was divided into drainage basins designated as Drainage Basin One (DB-1) through Drainage Basin Twenty-four (DB-24). At the completion of construction, all “first flush” (roughly 25.0 mm) stormwater flows landward of the coastal dune ridge will be conveyed to drainage wells. Geological suitability for the drainage wells will need to be confirmed through geotechnical investigation. Since the first flush carries the highest concentration of sediment and other pollutants, this was assumed to provide reasonable assurances that water clarity impacts to the lagoon area due to storm runoff would be negligent while minimizing the use of drainage wells. Runoff in excess of the drainage wells’ capacities will discharge to the proposed interior lagoon via underground pipes or will sheet flow over the bulkhead. The collection system is designed to convey the 10-year return frequency storm. Potable water for domestic and fire flow uses for the proposed Hawkes Nest Plantation development will be provided by connection to the TCI government water treatment and distribution system. Connection will be made to the existing government owned-operated watermain located west of the development. The proposed 200 mm (8-inch) minimum watermain will be routed to the northwest corner of the Hawkes Nest Plantation development where the utility back of house area will be located. The water storage facilities will consist of two above 2.0 million liter (0.5 million gallon) ground water storage tanks which will provide three days water storage based on average daily flow. The water will be distributed to the various areas of the development by three pumps – two 30 Hp high service and one 60 Hp fire flow, and distribution piping ranging in size from 50- to 300-mm (2- to 12-inch). The projected average daily water demands for the proposed development are approximately 1,317,000 liters
v
per day (lpd) (348,000 gallons per day (gpd)). The proposed water distribution system can meet all the projected varying demands of the system, including average daily flow, maximum daily flow, maximum daily flow with fire flow, and peak hourly flow without dropping the residual pressure in the system below 20 pounds per square inch (psi) at any location. Wastewater generated by the Hawkes Nest Plantation development will be collected and transferred to a wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) located in the northwest corner of the development. The projected average daily wastewater generation rate for the development is approximately 1,075,000 lpd (284,000 gpd). The projected peak hourly wastewater generation rate is approximately 2,220 lpm (590 gpm). The development was divided up into seven (7) subsystems each with gravity sewer and a submersible or grinder duplex pump station. Subsystem 3 for the Beachfront/Oceanview Estates will potentially require grinder pump stations for each of the nine southeasterly lots as these are behind the ridge and will not be able to drain by gravity directly from the homes. For the marina facility, two (2) vacuum sewer system pump outs will be utilized within the marina facilities and will discharge to Subsystem No. 4. The seven (7) pump stations range in size from 0.4 to 23 Hp. The transmission system will consist of approximately 2,191 meters (7,190 linear feet) of forcemain ranging from 50- to 150-mm (2- to 6-inches). The maximum depths of the 3,251 meters (10,670 linear feet) of 200- and 300-mm (8- and 12-inch) gravity sewer within these subsystems does not exceed three meters (ten feet). The proposed gravity sewer system will include approximately 64 manholes. Based on preliminary load calculations of wastewater generation for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development, it is estimated that the entire development will generate approximately 1.07 mld (0.28 mgd). ATM recommends treatment of the wastewater to a quality acceptable for public access reuse irrigation on green spaces and landscaping throughout the site. The primary recommended effluent parameters for public access reuse are 20 milligrams/liter (mg/L) carbonaceous biological oxygen demand (CBOD) and 5 mg/L total suspended solids (TSS) with high level disinfection. A conventional secondary WWTF utilizing pretreatment, extended aeration, clarification, filtration, and high level disinfection by gas chlorination can meet these parameters. Reject and reuse storage will also be necessary along with reuse distribution pumps and piping. The reuse system will consist of two 25 Hp pumps and 1,575 meters (5,170 feet) of 200 mm (8-inch) and 3,017 meters (9,900 feet) of 150 mm (6-inch) piping. Construction of the treatment facilities in two phases to match construction of the development is recommended to defer capital costs and avoid deterioration of unused equipment. Each phase would include construction of a 0.55 mld (0.30 mgd) wastewater treatment facility and ancillary facilities. Power for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development will receive the primary feed from the government owned electrical system with a connection off-site near the airport to the edge of the property. The electrical distribution system throughout the development has been designed for underground installation. The proposed maximum electrical demand for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development based on the master plan, the land use, and the unit density is 8.0 megawatts (MW). The distribution system has been laid out in a loop configuration. With this design, if one circuit goes out, the other circuit can be closed and will carry the entire load for the system. Each infrastructure system has been designed in an effort to comply with the developer’s preferences and master plan while providing cost effective and efficient systems. Any significant changes to the development or master plan will require updates of the preliminary infrastructure design to ensure the systems are adequate to meet the needs of the updated development.
1
1.0 PURPOSE
Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) has been authorized by Portrait Properties II, Inc. to prepare an infrastructure analysis for the proposed resort development, Hawkes Nest Plantation, on Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos Island. The site is approximately 65.2 hectares (161 acres), ranges from elevations of 2.5 to 12 meters (8 to 38 feet). ATM has used the July 25, 2007 Master Plan as prepared by EDSA; the unit density and market study information as provided by Norton Consulting; survey, and other proposed design information as provided by the owner, and as gathered during the ATM site visit. Based on this information, ATM understands the development to currently include: three hotels – a 122 unit casino hotel, a 50 unit marina hotel, and a 100 unit hillside hotel; residential uses including – 100 casino condominium units, 118 marina condominium units, 67 hillside condominium units, 244 lagoon condominium units, 17 beach lots for single family homes, and 48 island lagoon estate lots for single family homes; a marina retail village; and a 82 slip marina. The condominiums will range from studios, one, two, three bedroom and penthouses. The development will be constructed in several phases. As part of the infrastructure analysis, ATM has prepared water and wastewater demand calculations; water, sewer, reuse, and stormwater drainage single line diagrams and corresponding calculations and models; an evaluation of the wastewater treatment processes and water storage requirements; road geometry and typical section details. The following sections provide comprehensive descriptions of the analysis process and the corresponding results for each aspect of the infrastructure. 2.0 ROADWAY LAYOUT
The roadway layout prepared by ATM for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development was based on the upland topographic survey provided by the owner and the master plan for the entire development as prepared by EDSA. Except for the ridge along the eastern side of the development, the topography of the site is relatively flat at approximately 2.0- to 2.5-meters (6.5 to 8.2 feet). The finished floor elevations for the conceptual design were based off of the anticipated storm surge and bulkhead elevations and have been established at 3.5 meters (11.5 feet) minimum. The roadway elevations have been established in conjunction with the finished floor elevations, the existing site elevations, and the stormwater system design to ensure the functionality of the roadways. Due to the relatively flat nature of the site, the road elevations typically only vary from 2.8 to 3.4 meters. The slope of the roadways ranges from 0.43 to 2.13 percent with a cross slope of 2.0 percent to move runoff off the roadway and into the swales. The roadway layout presented utilizes a 17 meter total right-of-way section with 3.5 meter lanes and an additional 5 meters each side for the verge/soft shoulders and swales to collect and direct stormwater runoff. When the roadway is developed to construction level drawings and specifications, additional topographical survey data should be gathered and consideration should be given to ensure sufficient area is available within the right-of-way for drainage swales and placement of water, forcemain, and reuse pressure piping, electrical conduit, and communication utilities outside of the paved roadway. The proposed roadway material is asphalt paving as the roadways are anticipated for standard vehicular traffic. The conceptual roadway plan and profile layouts and a cross section detail are presented in the ATM Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure plans.
2
3.0 STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM
3.1 GENERAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The site is comprised of approximately 79 upland hectares made up of mostly sparse coastal vegetation on shallow slopes of less than 0.30%, along with an interior mangrove stand and beach dune vegetation. The project is composed of a marina/casino mixed-use development, which will be located at the south end of the project; interior island lagoon lots; multi-family condominiums along the main road; and beach front lots and condominiums. Due to the nature of the geography and topography, the storm runoff from interior development must be conveyed to allow the upstream runoff flows to the proposed lagoon/marina in downstream development areas. ATM performed a preliminary investigation of the drainage characteristics of the upstream areas to facilitate the design and construction of the required drainage conveyance infrastructure. Currently, runoff from precipitation generally flows from exterior portions of the site to the interior on-site mangrove depressional area through sheet flow; although some initial runoff may permeate through the soils as it travels inland. The proposed development area is comprised of roughly two (2) main existing drainage basins. These two basins are separated by a coastal dune ridge ranging from approximately 13 to 15 meters. Most of the existing interior site is at approximately 2.5 meters. (The vertical datum is referenced to local mean sea level (MSL), and the site benchmark a monument stamped DOS T6 1961) Currently, Basin 1, which will contribute runoff through developable areas, is located at the north and west corners of the site. Its upstream boundary begins slightly above the interior mangrove depressional area. Drainage basin 2 flows off the coastal dune ridge to the Atlantic Ocean.
At the completion of construction, all “first flush” (roughly 25.0 mm) stormwater flows landward of the coastal dune ridge will be conveyed to drainage wells. Runoff in excess of the drainage wells’ capacities will discharge to the proposed interior lagoon via underground pipes or will sheet flow over the bulkhead. The collection system is designed to convey the 10-year return frequency storm.
3.2 PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE ANALYSIS
The proposed site was divided into drainage basins designated as Drainage Basin One (DB-1) through Drainage Basin Twenty-four (DB-24). (See Figure DB-1). Drainage basins DB-1 through DB-4 consist of the island lagoon lots and drainage basins DB-5 through DB-24 consist of roadway and exterior site drainage which contribute runoff to the lagoon area. The basins were designated based on roadway alignments, site features, and topographical features along with consideration for separation from other infrastructure. Runoff hydrographs were developed for the proposed development using the Unit Hydrograph and SCS Curve Number methods. The drainage system is designed to address water quality and clarity as it relates to the downstream lagoon area. In order to achieve this goal, drainage wells were placed throughout the site (See Figure DB-1) to capture runoff from a 64.5 mm (2.5
3
inch) 24 hr storm. This storm event produces the first flush of runoff discussed earlier. Stormwater flows above the first flush will be conveyed to the downstream lagoon area. Rainfall varies greatly throughout the Turks and Caicos Islands, from 1,016 mm (40 inches) per year on North Caicos to 533 mm (21 inches) per year for South Caicos and Grande Turk. Rainfall data in daily format specific to Grande Turk is not readily available; therefore, data was taken from Samana located in the Dominican Republic approximately 240 km (150 miles) from the project area. Due to the similarity of these sites prone to hurricanes and other extreme rainfall events it is assumed that the following data is adequate for this project. Rainfall estimates are suspected to be conservative due to the arid climate of Grande Turk versus the moist climate of Samana. For the available data, a statistical analysis was performed to establish return frequencies for the 24-, 48-, and 72-hour storm events (Table 3-1). The 10 year design storm rainfall totals have been listed in Table 3-2.
Table 3-1: Return Period Analysis Summary
Return 24 HR Event 48 HR Event 72 HR Event
Period (yrs) Precipitation (in) Precipitation (in) Precipitation (in) 10 6.15 8.5 9.5 25 7.5 9.8 10.5
100 9.5 11.3 12.2 Return 24 HR Event 48 HR Event 72 HR Event
Period (yrs) Precipitation (mm) Precipitation (mm) Precipitation (mm) 10 156 216 241 25 191 249 267
100 241 287 310
Table 3-2: Design Storms Rainfall Totals
Return Period Duration Rainfall (mm) Rainfall (in) 10 24 156 6.15 10 48 216 8.5 10 72 241 9.5
The peak basin runoff rates generated for the 10 yr design storms are listed in Table 3-3 below.
Table 3-3: Design Storm Peak Basin Runoff Rates
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 1 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.38 6.5 13.45 48 216 0.40 8.5 14.18 72 241 0.35 9.5 12.39
4
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 2 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.37 6.5 12.91 48 216 0.38 8.5 13.51 72 241 0.34 9.5 11.90
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 3 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.41 6.5 14.38 48 216 0.43 8.5 15.13 72 241 0.38 9.5 13.25
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 4 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.38 6.5 13.45 48 216 0.41 8.5 14.39 72 241 0.36 9.5 12.62
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 5 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.21 6.5 7.38 48 216 0.22 8.5 7.73 72 241 0.19 9.5 6.87
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 6 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.35 6.5 12.30 48 216 0.31 8.5 10.85 72 241 0.26 9.5 9.31
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 7
Duration, hrs
Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.50 6.5 17.67 48 216 0.48 8.5 17.06 72 241 0.42 9.5 14.96
5
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 8 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.56 6.5 19.83 48 216 0.51 8.5 17.98 72 241 0.44 9.5 15.59
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 9
Duration, hrs
Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.73 6.5 25.65 48 216 0.85 8.5 30.17 72 241 0.78 9.5 27.65
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 10 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.47 6.5 16.50 48 216 0.50 8.5 17.73 72 241 0.45 9.5 15.78
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 11 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.51 6.5 18.02 48 216 0.48 8.5 16.94 72 241 0.42 9.5 14.66
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 12 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.43 6.5 15.02 48 216 0.40 8.5 14.23 72 241 0.35 9.5 12.26
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 13 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.56 6.5 19.75 48 216 0.68 8.5 24.01 72 241 0.47 9.5 16.50
6
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 14 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.76 6.5 26.85 48 216 0.82 8.5 28.86 72 241 0.73 9.5 25.88
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 15 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.51 6.5 18.08 48 216 0.58 8.5 20.44 72 241 0.51 9.5 18.12
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 16 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.63 6.5 22.31 48 216 0.58 8.5 20.60 72 241 0.50 9.5 17.51
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 17 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.60 6.5 21.10 48 216 0.58 8.5 20.40 72 241 0.49 9.5 17.22
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 18 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.14 6.5 4.84 48 216 0.13 8.5 4.73 72 241 0.11 9.5 4.01
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 19 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.14 6.5 4.91 48 216 0.14 8.5 4.88 72 241 0.12 9.5 4.14
7
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 20 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.59 6.5 20.77 48 216 0.59 8.5 21.00 72 241 0.51 9.5 18.12
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 21 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.34 6.5 11.92 48 216 0.33 8.5 11.63 72 241 0.29 9.5 10.35
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 22 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.42 6.5 14.90 48 216 0.41 8.5 14.54 72 241 0.37 9.5 12.94
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 23 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.28 6.5 9.80 48 216 0.24 8.5 8.32 72 241 0.21 9.5 7.28
Predicted Peak Runoff, Basin 24 Duration,
hrs Rainfall, mm Runoff, m3/s Rainfall, inches Runoff, cfs
24 156 0.16 6.5 5.77 48 216 0.15 8.5 5.16 72 241 0.13 9.5 4.46
Table 3-4 shows the Peak Discharge Rates for the basins. The drainage wells are designed for the 64.5 mm (2.5 in) 24 hr storm which produces approximately 25.4 mm (1.0 inch) of runoff. The drainage pipes are designed for remainder of the Peak Discharge (Design Peak) generated from the 10 year highest peak duration storm. (Highest Peak minus 64.5 mm (2.5 in) 24 hr = Design Peak)
8
Table 3-4: Peak Discharge Rates
Peak Discharge Rates (cms)
Highest Peak 2.5IN-24HR DESIGN
PEAK 0.40 0.11 0.29 0.38 0.11 0.28 0.43 0.12 0.31 0.41 0.11 0.29 0.22 0.05 0.16 0.35 0.11 0.24 0.50 0.14 0.36 0.56 0.16 0.40 0.85 0.17 0.68 0.50 0.13 0.38 0.51 0.16 0.35 0.43 0.13 0.29 0.68 0.17 0.51 0.82 0.20 0.62 0.58 0.15 0.43 0.63 0.22 0.41 0.60 0.24 0.36 0.14 0.05 0.09 0.14 0.06 0.08 0.59 0.20 0.40 0.34 0.08 0.25 0.42 0.11 0.32 0.28 0.07 0.21 0.16 0.05 0.12
3.3 ASSUMPTIONS
This analysis uses rainfall information from Samana located in the Dominican Government which is approximately 240 km (150 miles) away from the subject site. Conservative curve numbers and percentage of impervious areas was also used in this analysis. It is important to note that no off-site drainage is considered in this analysis, though little to none is expected due to the flat nature of the site and suspected clean sands. The site is assumed to be built-out according to the proposed site plan available as of November 2007.
9
3.4 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
To avoid impacting water clarity in the lagoon system due to sediment transport from upstream areas, ATM recommends capturing runoff via drainage well for the first flush, 25.4 mm (1.0 inch) of runoff. It was desirable to provide a balance between the use of drainage wells where viable positive discharge locations were available against the prospect of reducing water clarity from storm runoff. Since the first flush carries the highest concentration of sediment and other pollutants, this was assumed to provide reasonable assurances that water clarity impacts due to storm runoff would be negligent while minimizing the use of drainage wells. A 64.5 mm (2.5 inch) storm event over a 24 hour period was used to simulate the first flush runoff volume. Stormwater beyond this amount will be discharged to the lagoon/marina area. This requires a conveyance system to be installed throughout the site.
ATM recommends using the smallest pipe system that will allow conveyance of the selected design storm. Typically, the pipes recommended in Figure DB-1 will accommodate this criterion for the 10 yr storm. Geological suitability for the drainage wells will need to be confirmed through geotechnical investigation. ATM’s analysis assumes that the drainage wells will have a capacity of 0.10 cubic meters per second (cms) (5,680 liters per minute (lpm) ((3.44 cubic feet per second (cfs) (1,500 gallons per min (gal/min)) and any deviation less than this required flow will require additional analysis and/or additional drainage wells. In this preliminary analysis, ATM recommends the pipe conveyance system depicted in Figure DB-2. To assure positive drainage and to avoid full submergence of upstream pipes from tidal water, a maximum of 0.9% slope for drainage pipes is recommended. These pipes will discharge into the lagoon/marina area. It is estimated that the downstream invert of the pipes will likely be at or above the mean high water (mhw) line. The delineated drainage basins and conceptual stormwater conveyance system are presented in the ATM December 21, 2007 Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure Plans. 4.0 WATER STORAGE AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
4.1 GENERAL
Potable water for domestic and fire flow uses for the proposed Hawkes Nest Plantation development will be provided by connection to the TCI government water treatment and distribution system. The existing government water treatment facility consists of a 1,135,000 lpd (300,000) gallon per day (gpd) reverse osmosis (RO) plant located approximately 1 km (0.6 miles) west of the Hawkes Nest Plantation site. Connection will be made to the existing government owned-operated watermain located west of the development. The proposed watermain will be routed approximately 1,540 meters (5,050 feet) to the northwest corner of the Hawkes Nest Plantation development where the utility back of house area will be located. The actual size of the proposed watermain will need to be coordinated with the government as the design progresses but should be a minimum of 200 mm (8-inch).
10
As stated, the current capacity of the RO plant is 1,135,000 lpd (300,000 gpd). The primary user of the potable water is the Carnival Cruise Line cruise terminal which utilizes up to the 1,135,000 lpd (300,000 gpd) capacity of the RO plant. According to initial site investigations and discussions, the government has plans to increase the capacity of the RO facility to 2,270,000 lpd (600,000 gpd). Given the potential for the full treatment capacity to be utilized by the cruise terminal on an intermittent basis, installation of water storage facilities with a capacity equal to three days demand is recommended to buffer against insufficient continuous capacity and also to provide fire flow storage. The proposed water distribution system for the development has been sized to provide the adequate domestic and fire suppression water to each proposed and existing structure and the marina as based on the master plan, dated 25 July 2007. The water storage facilities will consist of two above ground water storage tanks. The water will be distributed to the various areas of the development by high service pumps and distribution piping. Although sizing of watermains is based on experience and calculations, in order to provide a system that has the most cost effective and efficient sized piping, a computer model is typically created. For the Hawkes Nest Plantation water distribution system, EPANET version 2.0 was used to simulate potential water demand scenarios expected at the development. This program uses links to represent pipes and nodes to represent supply points. Information for the links, such as length, diameter, and friction coefficient, and information for the nodes, such as elevation and demand, are entered to simulate projected on-site conditions. The model was created by importing the Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Master Plan into the program to serve as a background picture and automatic scale for the distribution system layout. Nodes were placed in the locations of projected demands, based on the conceptual master plan facility layouts/land use densities as provided by Portrait Properties II Inc., and pipes connecting the nodes were initially sized based on experience and calculated water demands. With this simplified system layout in place, elevations and demand for each node and high service distribution pumps were added to the model.
4.2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN As stated, the water demands for the development were calculated based on unit density and location information provided by the owner such as number of hotel rooms; square footage of condominiums, single family homes and retail and ancillary facilities; and size and number of marina slips. Determination of water demands for support facilities such as restaurants, bars, fitness centers, etc., were based on previous experience with other resort developments. The values assigned to each of these parameters were based on amassed knowledge of typical water usage and real world data gathered from existing facilities. Common practice for design of a water distribution system is to ensure that the system can meet all the varying demands, including average daily flow, maximum daily flow, maximum daily flow with fire flow, and peak hourly flow without dropping the residual pressure in the system below 20 pounds per square inch (psi) at any location. Pressures below 20 psi may allow for groundwater infiltration into the water distribution mains, which can contaminate the water supply. Typical fire suppression water requirements vary from 1900 to 2850 liters per minute (lpm) (500 to 750 gallons per minute (gpm)) depending on the type and use of structures and local requirements.
11
The projected average daily water demands for the proposed development are approximately 1,317,000 liters per day (lpd) (348,000 gallons per day (gpd)). The breakdown of the demand calculations for average daily flow and peak hourly flow are provided in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Projected Water Demands
Facility
gpd lpd gpm lpmOceanfront: Condominiums/Hotel w/Spa 17,500 66,245 30.4 115.0Oceanfront Bungalows
2-Bedroom 8,100 30,662 14.1 53.23-Bedroom 16,000 60,567 27.8 105.2
Oceanfront: Gun Hill Preserve 100 379 0.2 0.7Marina Condominiums/Hotel
hotel 27,500 104,099 47.7 180.7condos 15,000 56,781 26.0 98.6
Owner's Yacht Club 7,000 26,498 12.2 46.0Private Slips(Included in Marina Boat slips) Beachfront Oceanview Estates
Beachfront 4,500 17,034 12.5 47.3Oceanview 4,000 15,142 11.1 42.1
Casino Hotel/Condominium hotel 31,250 118,294 54.3 205.4
1-Bedroom condominium 5,000 18,927 8.7 32.92-Bedroom condominium 10,500 39,747 18.2 69.03-Bedroom condominium 16,000 60,567 27.8 105.2
Penthouse 2,500 9,464 4.3 16.4Marina Village
Plaza/Retail Complex 3,200 12,113 5.6 21.0condominiums 7,500 28,391 13.0 49.3
Marina Boat Slips 12-meter (40ft.) 3,200 12,113 80.0 302.8
15 to 17-meter (50-55ft.) 6,000 22,712 150.0 567.818 to 23-meter (60-75ft.) 4,800 18,170 240.0 908.5
24-meter (80ft.) and above 9,600 36,340 120.0 454.2Lagoon Condominiums
1-Bedroom 12,250 46,371 21.3 80.52-Bedroom 21,900 82,901 38.0 143.93-Bedroom 44,000 166,558 76.4 289.2Penthouse 6,000 22,712 10.4 39.4
Lagoon Slips (12 to 15 meters) 26,400 99,935 660.0 2498.4Island Lagoon Lots w/private slips
Island 1 12,500 47,318 34.7 131.4Island 2 11,500 43,532 31.9 120.9
Private Slips (12 to 24-meters) 2,200 8,328 110.0 416.4Private Slips (24 to 45-meters) 11,700 44,289 130.0 492.1
Tennis Courts/Fitness Facility 200 757 0.3 1.3
Total Projected Water Demand 347,900 1,316,945 2,017 7,635
Peak HourlyFlow Flow
Average Daily
12
The following assumptions were also used in the model:
1. For most node elevations, spot elevations were used based on topographical information provided by the owner. Where there was no available spot elevation, interpolation of contours was used to determine node elevations.
2. All pipe will have a minimum cover of approximately one (1) meter (three (3) feet).
3. Residential and commercial supply nodes were modeled with elevations of three (3) to
12 meters (10 to 40 feet) above grade in order to account for multistory structures.
4. All marina nodes were modeled with elevations of 1.5 meters (five (5) feet) above grade to account for the height of pedestals.
5. Although multiple high service and fire distribution pumps are typically used at water
facilities to provide lower horsepower requirements and more cost effective distribution which can vary to meet changing demands, in order to simplify the model, a reservoir with unvarying water elevation was used for each scenario.
6. The extent of the watermains was typically limited to the right-of-way area. However, the
model was designed to take the topography of the parcels/properties into account. After all the data was entered, the model was then optimized for average daily flow (ADF) conditions. This was accomplished by running the model, analyzing the pressures at each node and ensuring that there were no nodal pressures below 20 pounds per square inch (psi) or above 70 psi while meeting all water supply demands. As stated, pressures below 20 psi may allow for groundwater infiltration into the water distribution mains which can contaminate the water supply, while pressures above 70 psi can be expensive to maintain due to the excessive power requirements of the high service pumps and can also cause strain on the piping joints and plumbing fixtures within facilities. Based on the analysis, pipe sizes and high service pumps were altered to determine an efficient and cost effective system with a uniform pressure distribution. The model results and layout of pipes and nodes for Hawkes Nest EPANET model are provided in the appendices. The total projected ADF for the system is approximately 915 lpm (242 gpm), or approximately 1.32 million liters per day (mld) (0.35 million gallons per day (mgd)). The resulting operating total head condition for this flowrate is approximately 38 meters (125 feet). Once the model was optimized for ADF conditions, it was evaluated for maximum daily flow (MDF), MDF with fire flow (MDF+FF), and peak hourly flow (PHF) scenarios to determine the pump requirements and the adequacy of the system design. The projected MDF conditions for the development are approximately 1,650 lpm (435 gpm), or 2.4 mld (0.63 mgd). For the MDF model scenario, the nodal demands were revised, but the pipe sizes and pump that were used for the ADF condition were held constant. Based on the results of the scenario, the distribution system layout and reservoir condition were acceptable to meet the maximum daily flow conditions while remaining within the suggested pressure ranges. The resulting operating total head condition for the maximum daily flowrate is approximately 40 meters (130 feet). The further analysis of the system for PHF and MDF+FF conditions demonstrated that these greater total demands necessitated changes to the pipe sizing and reservoir water elevation to provide nodal pressures within the acceptable range. The projected PHF demand for the
13
development is approximately 7,650 lpm (2,000 gpm) while the MDF+FF condition is approximately 4,500 lpm (1,185 gpm). The major source of demand for the peak hourly flow condition was the marina hose bibb requirements. The resulting operating total head condition for the PHF condition is approximately 43 meters (140 feet). For fire flow conditions, typical design standard is to operate the system at MDF conditions while simulating a fire at various locations. A fire flow demand of 2,850 lpm (750 gpm) at a single location was used, and with the MDF, provided for a total demand of 4,500 lpm (1,185 gpm). The model was tested with the fire flow in two different locations near the Island Lots Area and Hotel Condominium with Spa Area. These were determined to be the worst condition for fire flow by virtue of the water demands and the topography of the site. For both MDF with fire flow scenarios, the demands were met while maintaining the residual pressures within the system above 20 psi. The resulting operating total head condition for the MDF with fire flow conditions is approximately 43 meters (140 feet). Typically at a water facility, large pumps dedicated to fire flow and PHF conditions are provided in addition to the high service distribution pumps used for ADF and MDF. This allows the system to operate in a more efficient and cost effective manner by only operating the higher horsepower pumps during extreme conditions. The proposed Hawkes Nest Plantation water distribution system was designed in this manner.
4.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS As indicated, the proposed conceptual system can meet all demand requirements generally within the desired pressure range of 20 to 70 psi. The detailed model results for the four scenarios are provided in the appendices. Table 4-2 provides the system results for the four potable water demand model scenarios and the approximate operating conditions for each scenario. The model was created with nodal elevations typically set to resemble the actual elevation of the water usage. Several of the condominiums and hotels in the development are proposed to be multistory structures. As noted in the MDF+FF conditions, in particular, the model as set up may not achieve the 20 psi threshold. This is due primarily to the extreme elevations set in the model to represent these multistory structures. It is critical that the fire flow requirements for these large structures be coordinated with the fire protection system designer as the design of the development progresses. It is not uncommon for a fire booster pump and/or storage tank to be provided at the ground floor or basement level of a multistory structure to meet the necessary fire flow and pressure conditions. The proposed water distribution system provided here is considered a conservative design and with the incorporation of booster systems and/or tanks at some of the multistory structures should be capable of providing all the potable and fire flow water demands of the development. The operating conditions provided in Table 4-2 were utilized to select the high service distribution and PHF/fire flow pumps for the development. A three pump system is recommended for the Hawkes Nest Plantation water distribution system including two 1,900 lpm (500 gpm) pumps to meet the ADF and MDF demands with back-up capacity and a third pump of approximately 3,785 lpm (1,000 gpm) to provide the additional capacity necessary to meet the PHF and fire flow demands of the system. Based on the total head condition, the ADF/MDF
14
pumps will have a power rating of approximately 30 Hp and the PHF/fire flow pump will have a power rating of approximately 60 Hp.
Table 4-2: EPANET Water Model System Results
Based on the results of the model scenarios, the pipe sizes within the Hawkes Nest water distribution system will vary from 50- to 300 mm (2- to 12-inches) in the quantities provided in Table 4-3. The smaller watermains (50 mm) are for use within the marina. The proposed offsite watermain connection to the government owned water treatment and distribution system will be approximately 1,540 meters (5,050 feet) of 200 mm (8-inch) minimum watermain. The watermains shall be constructed of High Density Polyethylene (HDPE). The HDPE pipe sections will be welded and therefore the potential for leaks in the system is substantially reduced which will be particularly important for the watermain installed under the channel. Additionally, HDPE pipe is significantly more flexible than polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pressure pipe which can ease installation and reduce the need for bends and fittings. The water distribution system will also have fire hydrants located throughout the site and around all bulkhead areas where there are boat slips. The hydrants will be placed at a maximum of 150 meters (500 feet) separation in areas where there are structures and 300 meters (1,000 feet) separation in areas where there are no building structures, such as around the mangrove area.
Table 4-3: Preliminary Watermain Lengths
Watermain Size (mm)
Watermain Size (inches)
Total Length (meters) Total Length (feet)
50 2 50 164100 4 190 624150 6 2,790 9,154200 8 2,755 9,039300 12 1,200 3,937
The three day storage requirements for the development are approximately 3.95 million liters (1.00 million gallons). As the Hawkes Nest Plantation will be constructed in phases, it is recommended that two water storage tanks be constructed. Each tank should have a capacity of approximately 2.0 million liters (0.5 million gallons) and will have a footprint of approximately 18.5 meters (60 feet) diameter with a side wall height of approximately 7.5 meters (24 feet). The first tank should be constructed and online to serve the initial phases with the construction of the second tank delayed until necessary to keep up with the progression of the development. This delayed construction will allow the capital cost to be deferred until necessary.
Demand Condition
System Maximum Pressure (psi)
System Minimum Pressure (psi)
System Operating Condition
ADF 53.93 28.88 915 lpm @ 38 m 242 gpm@125 ft
MDF 55.87 23.61 1,650 lpm @ 40 m 435 gpm@130 ft
PHF 54.30 21.75 7,650 lpm @ 43 m 2,000 gpm@140 ft
MDF+FF 67.56 19.54 4,500 lpm @ 43 m 1,185 gpm@140 ft
15
The conceptual water system layout including watermain locations, sizes, and lengths; hydrant locations; and the location and size of the ground storage tanks at the utility site are presented in the ATM December 21, 2007 Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure Plans. 5.0 WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
5.1 GENERAL
Wastewater generated by the Hawkes Nest Plantation development will be collected and transferred to a wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) located on the utility site on the northwest corner of the development. The primary desire when designing wastewater collection and transmission systems is to transport the wastewater via gravity in order to minimize the use of pumps and mechanical equipment which require additional maintenance and power. The size of the development, layout of the roadways, and the topography in certain areas along the coastline reduce the ability to exclusively utilize a gravity sewer system. Therefore, the system has been preliminarily designed with a mix of gravity sewer, duplex grinder and submersible pump stations, and forcemains. Although wastewater treatment facilities are primarily designed to treat average daily flows and attenuate peak flows, wastewater collection and transmission systems are designed around peak hourly flow conditions such that even during extreme conditions, the wastewater will be transported away from the residences and facilities to eliminate overflows and backups in the system. The projected wastewater generation rates for the Hawkes Nest Plantation have been based off of the projected water demands. In most cases, it has been assumed that 80 to 100% of the water used at a residence, facility, or resort amenity will also be discharged to the wastewater collection system. This is a conservative assumption given that some of the water will be consumed, but similar to the practice of utilizing peak hourly flow conditions for design; this is done to protect the residences and facilities and eliminate the potential for backups and overflows. The primary exception to this assumption is for the marina. The primary water use at marinas is wash-down water for the boats and yachts which does not get returned to the wastewater collection system. The slips at the Marina Village have been designed with the consideration for two sewer pump out systems. The size of the wet slips vary from 12 to 24 meters (40 to 80 feet) and based on the associated size of the holding tanks and the transient nature of the Marina Village, it is estimated that the sewer pump outs will have a 114 lpm (30 gpm) capacity. The sewer pump outs will discharge to the upland gravity sewer collection system. The following sections describe the methodology and proposed layout for the conceptual wastewater collection and transmission system.
5.2 PRELIMINARY DESIGN The projected average daily wastewater generation rate for the Hawkes Nest Plantation, based on the assumptions used for the water demand projections and those listed above is approximately 1,075,000 lpd (284,000 gpd). The projected peak hourly wastewater generation
16
rate is approximately 2,220 lpm (590 gpm) and was calculated by applying peaking factors to the average daily flow rates. A peak flow factor of 2.5 was used for the commercial and retail uses and for the hotels. A peak factor of 4.0 was used for residences. The factors were determined from past experience and accepted industry practice and literature. The breakdown for average daily and peak hourly wastewater flows are provided in Table 5-1. After the calculation of the projected wastewater generation rates for the development and location of the demands, the development and topography were evaluated to determine the feasible use and extents of gravity sewer. Based on this evaluation, the development was divided up into seven (7) subsystems which are presented in Table 5-2 each with gravity sewer and a submersible or grinder duplex pump station. Subsystem 3 for the Beachfront/Oceanview Estates will potentially require grinder pump stations for each of the nine southeasterly lots as these are behind the ridge and will not be able to drain by gravity directly from the homes. The topographic data provided for this project is limited. Before preparation of additional wastewater system design is completed, a more thorough topographical survey should be completed as the site topography can have a significant impact on the layout and cost of the wastewater collection system. The determination of the location of the pump station and the extents of the gravity sewer were based on providing a typical maximum gravity sewer depth of three (3) meters (ten (10) feet). This limit was established to maintain construction costs within a reasonable range. As the depth of gravity sewer increases, the associated per linear foot cost also increases, therefore, it is desirable to maintain a maximum piping depth of three (3) meters. After determining the conceptual layouts of the gravity sewer, the size of the gravity sewer piping was determined. Gravity sewer piping capacities are primarily based on the slopes at which the pipes are installed. Design standards dictate a slope which provides a minimum velocity in the pipe of 0.6 meters per second (2 feet per second) to reduce solids deposition that can cause plugging of the pipes or backups in the system. Table 5-3 provides the size of gravity sewer piping, approximate length of piping, and the maximum depth of piping within each subsystem. The pumping stations that service the gravity sewer subsystems were designed with appropriately sized pumps, forcemains and discharge locations in an attempt to maintain the total dynamic head for the system less than 30 meters (100 feet). Head conditions greater than 30 meters (100 feet) require pumps with larger motors, which are typically not cost effective. Reasonable system head conditions can typically be maintained by using forcemains which provide velocities between 0.6 to 2.1 meters per second (mps) (2 to 7 feet per second (fps)). The estimated forcemain velocities are well within the acceptable operating range and are provided along with additional information on the pump stations and forcemains in Table 5-4. The private forcemains and grinder pump stations which may potentially be required for the Beachfront/Oceanview parcels have not been included in this summary as it cannot be determined without additional information on the development and layouts.
17
Table 5-1: Projected Wastewater Rates
Facility
gpd lpd gpm lpmOceanfront: Condominiums/Hotel w/Spa 17,500 66,245 30.38 115.01Oceanfront Bungalows
2-Bedroom 8,100 30,662 14.06 53.233-Bedroom 16,000 60,567 27.78 105.15
Oceanfront: Gun Hill Preserve Marina Condominiums/Hotel
hotel 27,500 104,099 47.74 180.73condos 15,000 56,781 26.04 98.58
Owner's Yacht Club 7,000 26,498 12.15 46.00Private Slips (Included in Marina Boat slips) Beachfront Oceanview Estates
Beachfront 4,500 17,034 12.50 47.32Oceanview 4,000 15,142 11.11 42.06
Casino Hotel/Condominium hotel 31,250 118,294 54.25 205.37
1-Bedroom condominium 5,000 18,927 8.68 32.862-Bedroom condominium 10,500 39,747 18.23 69.003-Bedroom condominium 16,000 60,567 27.78 105.15
Penthouse 2,500 9,464 4.34 16.43Marina Village
Plaza/Retail Complex 3,200 12,113 5.56 21.03condominiums 7,500 28,391 13.02 49.29
Marina Boat Slips (2 pump-outs @ 30 gpm) 12-meter (40ft.) 0 0 0.00 0.00
15 to 17-meter (50-55ft.) 0 0 0.00 0.0018 to 23-meter (60-75ft.) 0 0 30.00 113.56
24-meter (80ft.) and above 0 0 30.00 113.56Lagoon Condominiums
1-Bedroom 12,250 46,371 21.27 80.512-Bedroom 21,900 82,901 38.02 143.923-Bedroom 44,000 166,558 76.39 289.16Penthouse 6,000 22,712 10.42 39.43
Lagoon Slips (12 to 15 meters) 0 0 0.00 0.00Island Lagoon Lots w/private slips(no pump-outs for slips)
Island 1 12,500 47,318 34.72 131.44Island 2 11,500 43,532 31.94 120.92
Private Slips (12 to 24-meters) 0 0 0.00 0.00Private Slips (24 to 45-meters) 0 0 0.00 0.00
Tennis Courts/Fitness Facility 200 757 0.35 1.31
Total Projected Wastewater Flows 283,900 1,074,678 587 2,221
Average Daily Peak HourlyFlow Flow
18
Table 5-2: Wastewater Subsystems
Subsystem No. Area Description
1 Marina-Condos2 Hotel-Condo w/spa-Bungalows3 Beachfron/Oceanview Estates4 Marina/Casino-Condo-Hotel5 Island Lot 26 Island Lot 17 Lagoon Condos
Table 5-3: Subsystem Gravity Sewer Systems
Subsystem No. Area Description(mm) (inches) (meters) (feet) (meters) (feet)
1 Marina-Condos 200 8 160 525 1.5 6
2 Hotel-Condo w/spa-Bungalows 200 8 475 1558 2.1 73 Beachfron/Oceanview Estates 200 8 485 1591 2.1 74 Marina/Casino-Condo-Hotel 200 8 365 1198 2.1 75 Island Lot 2 200 8 315 1033 2.4 86 Island Lot 1 200 8 380 1247 2.7 97 Lagoon Condos 200 8 925 3035 3.0 10
Lagoon Condos 300 12 144 472 3.0 10
Diameter Length Depth Gravity Sewer
Table 5-4: Transmission Systems
Pump DescriptionStation (lpm) (gpm)
(mm) (inches) (meters) (feet) (lps) (fps)1 Marina Condo Area 439 116 100 4 222 728 0.9 3.0
2Hotel/Condo Spa & Bungalows 825 218 100 4 657 2155 1.7 5.6
3Ocean/Beachfront Estates 91 24 50 2 77 253 0.7 2.4
4Marina Village/Casino Hotel Condo 704 186 100 4 460 1509 1.4 4.7
5 Island Lots 1 121 32 50 2 45 148 1.0 3.36 Island Lots 2 254 67 80 3 240 787 0.9 3.0
7Lagoon Condo/Island Lots 1,510 399 150 6 490 1608 1.4 4.5
CapacityDiameter Length Velocity
Forcemain
With the information on peak flows to the subsystems and the sizing and routes of the forcemains, the pump station hydraulics were estimated. Each subsystem was assumed to have a duplex submersible or grinder pump station where one (1) pump could pump the total
19
peak hourly flow and the second pump functioned as a backup. For the marina facility two (2) vacuum sewer system pump outs will be utilized within the marina facilities and will discharge to Subsystem No. 4. A summary of the pump station design is provided in Table 5-5.
Table 5-5: Pump Station Systems
Pump Station Operating Condition Pump Model Power (Hp) Pump Curve ID
1439 lpm @ 4.7 m 116 gpm @ 15.3 ft
FLYGT/Model CP3085.183 1.6 61-438-00-3003
2825 lpm @ 28.1 m 218 gpm @ 92.3 ft
FLYGT/Model CP3152.181 23 63-269-00-2365
3 - Grinder91 lpm @ 3.9 m 24 gpm @ 12.7 ft Zoeller/Model 211 0.4 NA
4704 lpm @ 15.9 m 186 gpm @ 52.1 ft
FLYGT/Model CP3127.181 7.5 61-462-00-3006
5 - Grinder121 lpm @ 4.3 m 32 gpm @ 14.3 ft
Zoeller/Model 260 Series 0.5 NA
6254 lpm @ 7.2 m 67 gpm @ 23.8 ft
FLYGT/Model CP3085.183 3 63-436-00-5303
71510 lpm @ 10.4 m 399 gpm @ 34.2 ft
FLYGT/Model CP3127.181 7.5 61-433-00-3004
5.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS The preliminary design of the Hawkes Nest Plantation wastewater collection and transmission system has been established with a primary effort to serve the development with gravity sewer where possible and to minimize the use of pump stations and thereby reduce the maintenance and power costs associated with operating the system. The resulting layout for the system requires seven (7) subsystems each with gravity sewer, a pump station, and forcemain. The Beachfront/Oceanview estates may require private grinder pump stations and forcemains due to the topography of the nine southeastern most lots. The marina will have two (2) vacuum pump out systems each with a 114 lpm (30 gpm) capacity which will discharge in to Subsystem No. 4. The seven (7) pump stations range in size from 0.4 to 23 Hp. The transmission system will consist of approximately 2,191 meters (7,190 linear feet) of forcemain ranging from 50- to 150-mm (2- to 6-inches). As with the watermains, the forcemains will be construction of HDPE to reduce leaks and ease installation. The maximum depths of the 3,250 meters (10,670 linear feet) of gravity sewer within these subsystems does not exceed three meters (ten feet). All proposed gravity sewer will be 200- or 300-mm (8- or 12-inch) polyvinyl chloride (PVC) piping. The proposed gravity sewer system will include approximately 64 manholes. The ATM December 21, 2007 Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure Plans provides the conceptual wastewater collection and transmission system layout including gravity sewer piping and forcemain sizes, lengths and locations; manhole locations; and pump station locations and information.
20
6.0 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL
6.1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY LOCATION Wastewater generated by the Hawkes Nest Plantation development will be collected and transferred to a wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) for treatment and disposal on-site. The Hawkes Nest Plantation WWTF will be located on 3.2 ha (8 acres) in the northwestern corner of the development. The proposed utility site will provide sufficient area for the water storage and distribution pumps described in Section 4.0, the wastewater treatment and reuse storage and reuse distribution pumps, and an administration/operations building. This site is ideal as the elevation of the site (2.5 m) is at or lower than the other areas of the development which is advantageous and cost effective for the design of the collection and transmission systems. Additionally, the location of this site allows for isolation and screening of the utility site from the remainder of the development and the mangrove area.
6.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL DESIGN
Wastewater treatment facilities should be designed to treat the anticipated average daily wastewater flow from the collection area while providing the hydraulic capacity to handle the peak wastewater flow. Based on preliminary load calculations of wastewater generation for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development, it is estimated that the entire development will generate approximately 1.07 mld (0.28 mgd). As with the water storage facilities, construction of the wastewater treatment facilities in two phases to match construction of the development is recommended to defer capital costs as long as possible and to avoid deterioration of equipment which would not be used when installed. A determination of the timeline for construction of the second phase of the WWTF can be estimated based on the growth and construction rate of the initial portion of the development. Due to the layout of the development with primarily consolidated structures such as condominiums and hotels, the lack of off-site effluent disposal areas, and the potential environmental impacts of effluent surface water discharge, ATM recommends treatment of the wastewater to a quality acceptable for public access reuse irrigation on green spaces and landscaping throughout the site. The primary recommended effluent parameters for public access reuse are 20 milligrams/liter (mg/L) carbonaceous biological oxygen demand (CBOD) and 5 mg/L total suspended solids (TSS) with high level disinfection. A conventional secondary WWTF utilizing the following processes can meet these parameters:
• Pretreatment – Screening and/or Grit Removal • Extended Aeration • Clarification • Filtration • Chlorination
The addition of a reject storage tank providing one day storage is recommended for the WWTF. The tank shall have a capacity of 1.10 million liters (0.30 million gallons) and shall have a diameter of 13.7 meters (45 feet) and a sidewall height of approximately 7.6 meters (25 feet). The tank will provide storage for effluent which does not meet the effluent parameters for CBOD, TSS, or disinfection whether due to operational problems, excessive biological loadings,
21
or extreme flow conditions. The reject storage will allow the wastewater to be slowly fed back to the head of the treatment facility for proper treatment. Treated effluent meeting all required parameters for public access will be stored in reuse storage tanks at the WWTF and will be distributed throughout the site by reuse distribution pumps and reuse piping. Two days storage of reuse water is recommended to buffer against storm events when irrigation is not practical. Two tanks are proposed for reuse storage, each with a capacity of 1.10 million liters (0.30 million gallons) and a diameter of 13.7 meters (45 feet) and a sidewall height of approximately 7.6 meters (25 feet). For purposes of the conceptual design, it has been estimated that the reuse will be used for irrigation on average about six hours per day. With a WWTF capacity of approximately 1.10 mld (0.30 mgd), this is equivalent to a discharge rate of approximately 3,100 lpm (830 gpm). Based on the area of the development and the conceptual impervious area, the irrigation rate to the greenspace and landscaped areas should be less than the typically accepted application rate of 5 cm per week (2 inches/week). As with the water distribution system for the site, an EPANET version 2.0 model was created to simulate the irrigation system demands expected throughout the development and to cost effectively size the reuse distribution mains and pumps. Similar assumptions utilized for nodes and pipes in the water system were also used in the reuse model. The pressure at the delivery points of the reuse system will be determined by the irrigation system designers; however, for purposes of the conceptual design, it was estimated that a minimum of 30 psi will be required throughout the system. Based on the results of the model, the proposed reuse distribution system will loop throughout the site and will consist of 1,575 meters (5,170 feet) of 200 mm (8-inch) and 3,017 meters (9,900 feet) of 150 mm (6-inch) piping. As with the watermains and forcemains, the reuse piping shall be constructed of HDPE to take advantage of its properties. The reuse distribution pumps located at the WWTF will be two 25 Hp pumps with a capacity of 1600 lpm (425 gpm) each.
6.3 SUMMARY AND RESULTS The Hawkes Nest Plantation WWTF should be constructed in two phases to coincide with the rate of development growth and should be sized for 0.55 mld (0.15 mgd) for each phase for a total build out capacity of 1.10 mld (0.30 mgd). ATM recommends a WWTF utilizing conventional treatment methods to produce effluent of a quality acceptable for public access reuse irrigation. The structures and equipment listed below are recommended for the two phases of the WWTF. Certain structures such as the reuse distribution pumps, the reject storage, and the chlorination structure are recommended to be sized and constructed in Phase I with sufficient capacity for the Phase II needs. This will minimize process interruptions and bypassing operations when the Phase II of the WWTF is constructed. Phase I
• Screening/Grit Removal; • Influent pump station; • Influent and effluent piping; • 0.55 mld (0.15 mgd) package extended aeration WWTF (dual trains); • 1,140 lpm (300 gpm) sand filters (dual) for peak flow;
22
• Gas chlorination facilities within blower/operations building. Accommodate Phase II chlorination cylinders;
• 1.10 million liter (0.30 million gallon) reject storage tank; • 1.10 million liter (0.30 million gallon) reuse storage tank; • Two skid mounted reuse distribution pumps. 1600 lpm (425 gpm), 25 Hp each.
Accommodates Phase II requirements and provides backup; • Reuse distribution piping sized to accommodate Phase I and Phase II flows; • Blowers and operations building – shall also accommodate operational
equipment of water storage and distribution facility.
Phase II • Screening/Grit Removal • Influent and effluent piping • 0.55 mld (0.15 mgd) package extended aeration WWTF (dual trains) • 1,140 lpm (300 gpm) sand filters (dual) for peak flow • Gas chlorination cylinders and feed equipment • 1.10 million liter (0.30 million gallon) reuse storage tank
A conceptual layout of the proposed Hawkes Nest Plantation WWTF and the reuse distribution system are presented in the ATM December 21, 2007 Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure Plans.
7.0 ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
Power for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development will receive the primary feed from the government owned electrical system with a connection off-site near the airport to the edge of the property. The distribution system will be brought in through the proposed utility site for distribution. The electrical distribution system throughout the development has been designed for underground installation. The proposed maximum electrical demand for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development based on the master plan, the land use, and the unit density is 8.0 megawatts (MW). The breakdown of the demands for the site, the primary circuit feeder layout, transformer location, and primary switches are presented in the electrical plans in the ATM December 21, 2007 Hawkes Nest Plantation Conceptual Infrastructure Plans. As noted on the conceptual infrastructure plans, the distribution system has been laid out in a loop configuration. With this design, if one circuit goes out, the other circuit can be closed and will carry the entire load for the system. Each circuit has been designed to carry the maximum load although the layout has been designed such that no more than about 2 MW is on either circuit typically.
8.0 CONCLUSION
This report provides a comprehensive discussion of the assumptions, calculations, and design of each aspect of the roadways, stormwater drainage, water storage and distribution, wastewater collection, transmission and treatment system, and electrical distribution preliminary layouts for the Hawkes Nest Plantation development. Each system has been designed in an
23
effort to comply with the developer’s preferences and master plan while providing a cost effective and efficient system. Any significant changes which are made to the development, road layout, densities, or master plan will require updates to the preliminary infrastructure design to ensure the systems are adequate to meet the needs of the updated development.
APPENDIX A
STORMWATER MODEL RESULTS
Basin Name: Basin 1 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.84 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.84 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.30 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.926 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.001 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.12 Flow Max (cfs): 13.453 Runoff Volume (in): 4.654 Runoff Volume (ft3): 49437.472
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 10 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.04 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.04 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.834 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.11 Flow Max (cfs): 16.497 Runoff Volume (in): 4.436 Runoff Volume (ft3): 61733.956
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 11 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.83 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.83 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.217 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 1 of 37
DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 18.021 Runoff Volume (in): 4.763 Runoff Volume (ft3): 55620.266
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 12 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.96 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.96 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.692 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 89.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.05 Flow Max (cfs): 15.022 Runoff Volume (in): 4.873 Runoff Volume (ft3): 47612.009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 13 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.95 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.95 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.663 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.04 Flow Max (cfs): 19.748 Runoff Volume (in): 4.653 Runoff Volume (ft3): 61868.362
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 14 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.92
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 2 of 37
Comp Time Inc (min): 2.92 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 6.262 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.12 Flow Max (cfs): 26.852 Runoff Volume (in): 4.331 Runoff Volume (ft3): 98444.517
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 15 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.05 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.05 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 30.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.717 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.16 Flow Max (cfs): 18.078 Runoff Volume (in): 4.763 Runoff Volume (ft3): 81556.526
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 16 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.85 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.85 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 92.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.05 Flow Max (cfs): 22.309 Runoff Volume (in): 5.208 Runoff Volume (ft3): 71335.854
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 3 of 37
Basin Name: Basin 17 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 21.108 Runoff Volume (in): 5.901 Runoff Volume (ft3): 80832.232
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 18 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.884 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 95.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 4.844 Runoff Volume (in): 5.551 Runoff Volume (ft3): 17804.932
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 19 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.73 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.73 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.923 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 4 of 37
Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.07 Flow Max (cfs): 4.905 Runoff Volume (in): 5.901 Runoff Volume (ft3): 19776.864
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 2 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.89 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.89 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.812 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.10 Flow Max (cfs): 12.912 Runoff Volume (in): 4.653 Runoff Volume (ft3): 47484.586
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 20 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.72 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.72 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.137 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 91.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.10 Flow Max (cfs): 20.769 Runoff Volume (in): 5.096 Runoff Volume (ft3): 76533.085
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 21 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 5 of 37
Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.366 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 11.924 Runoff Volume (in): 4.119 Runoff Volume (ft3): 35384.480
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 22 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.957 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 14.903 Runoff Volume (in): 4.119 Runoff Volume (ft3): 44223.210
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 23 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.44 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.44 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.619 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.02 Flow Max (cfs): 9.078 Runoff Volume (in): 4.331 Runoff Volume (ft3): 25453.219
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 6 of 37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 24 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.978 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.02 Flow Max (cfs): 5.773 Runoff Volume (in): 4.546 Runoff Volume (ft3): 16130.304
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 3 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.99 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.99 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.143 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.10 Flow Max (cfs): 14.380 Runoff Volume (in): 4.763 Runoff Volume (ft3): 54348.543
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 4 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.19 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.19 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 23.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.041
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 7 of 37
Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.11 Flow Max (cfs): 13.450 Runoff Volume (in): 4.761 Runoff Volume (ft3): 52553.708
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 5 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.63 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.63 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 19.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.629 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.08 Flow Max (cfs): 7.376 Runoff Volume (in): 4.330 Runoff Volume (ft3): 25601.950
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 6 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.016 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.02 Flow Max (cfs): 12.295 Runoff Volume (in): 4.764 Runoff Volume (ft3): 34859.127
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 7 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 8 of 37
Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.88 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.88 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.10 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.352 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 17.668 Runoff Volume (in): 4.436 Runoff Volume (ft3): 53981.162
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 8 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.41 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.41 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.418 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.01 Flow Max (cfs): 19.828 Runoff Volume (in): 4.545 Runoff Volume (ft3): 56390.693
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 9 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.39 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.39 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 6.150 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 32.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 7.861 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.21 Flow Max (cfs): 25.647 Runoff Volume (in): 4.119 Runoff Volume (ft3): 117526.532
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 9 of 37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 1 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.84 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.84 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.30 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.926 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.001 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.04 Flow Max (cfs): 14.175 Runoff Volume (in): 6.928 Runoff Volume (ft3): 73588.321
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 10 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.04 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.04 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.834 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.07 Flow Max (cfs): 17.727 Runoff Volume (in): 6.687 Runoff Volume (ft3): 93055.447
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 11 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.83 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.83 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 10 of 37
Area (ac): 3.217 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.02 Flow Max (cfs): 16.938 Runoff Volume (in): 7.047 Runoff Volume (ft3): 82293.103
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 12 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.96 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.96 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.692 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 89.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.01 Flow Max (cfs): 14.233 Runoff Volume (in): 7.168 Runoff Volume (ft3): 70036.384
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 13 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.95 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.95 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.663 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.01 Flow Max (cfs): 18.994 Runoff Volume (in): 6.927 Runoff Volume (ft3): 92107.895
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 14 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 11 of 37
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.92 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.92 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 6.262 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.04 Flow Max (cfs): 28.858 Runoff Volume (in): 6.567 Runoff Volume (ft3): 149283.258
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 15 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.05 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.05 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 30.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.717 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.12 Flow Max (cfs): 20.437 Runoff Volume (in): 7.047 Runoff Volume (ft3): 120667.671
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 16 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.85 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.85 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 92.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 20.599 Runoff Volume (in): 7.528 Runoff Volume (ft3): 103106.887
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 12 of 37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 17 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.04 Flow Max (cfs): 20.396 Runoff Volume (in): 8.248 Runoff Volume (ft3): 112967.650
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 18 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.884 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 95.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.04 Flow Max (cfs): 4.725 Runoff Volume (in): 7.888 Runoff Volume (ft3): 25300.686
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 19 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.73 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.73 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.50
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 13 of 37
Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.923 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.05 Flow Max (cfs): 4.876 Runoff Volume (in): 8.248 Runoff Volume (ft3): 27639.843
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 2 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.89 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.89 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.812 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.06 Flow Max (cfs): 13.514 Runoff Volume (in): 6.927 Runoff Volume (ft3): 70699.695
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 20 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.72 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.72 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.137 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 91.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.03 Flow Max (cfs): 21.005 Runoff Volume (in): 7.407 Runoff Volume (ft3): 111244.794
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 21 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 14 of 37
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.366 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 11.633 Runoff Volume (in): 6.327 Runoff Volume (ft3): 54348.293
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 22 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.957 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 14.538 Runoff Volume (in): 6.327 Runoff Volume (ft3): 67924.015
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 23 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.44 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.44 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.619 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 8.324 Runoff Volume (in): 6.567
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 15 of 37
Runoff Volume (ft3): 38597.576
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 24 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.978 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 5.157 Runoff Volume (in): 6.808 Runoff Volume (ft3): 24157.376
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 3 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.99 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.99 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.143 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.04 Flow Max (cfs): 15.130 Runoff Volume (in): 7.048 Runoff Volume (ft3): 80411.409
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 4 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.19 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.19 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 16 of 37
Time of Conc (min): 23.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.041 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.06 Flow Max (cfs): 14.386 Runoff Volume (in): 7.047 Runoff Volume (ft3): 77777.809
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 5 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.63 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.63 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 19.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.629 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.03 Flow Max (cfs): 7.725 Runoff Volume (in): 6.567 Runoff Volume (ft3): 38823.382
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 6 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.016 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 10.847 Runoff Volume (in): 7.048 Runoff Volume (ft3): 51575.641
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 7 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 17 of 37
Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.88 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.88 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.10 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.352 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 17.058 Runoff Volume (in): 6.687 Runoff Volume (ft3): 81360.867
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 8 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.41 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.41 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.418 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.00 Flow Max (cfs): 17.981 Runoff Volume (in): 6.807 Runoff Volume (ft3): 84464.033
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 9 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-48HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.39 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.39 Rainfall File: Scsii-48 Rainfall Amount (in): 8.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 48.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 32.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 7.861 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 24.13 Flow Max (cfs): 30.172
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 18 of 37
Runoff Volume (in): 6.326 Runoff Volume (ft3): 180516.036
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 1 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.84 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.84 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.30 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.926 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.001 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.02 Flow Max (cfs): 12.385 Runoff Volume (in): 7.904 Runoff Volume (ft3): 83963.074
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 10 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.04 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.04 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.834 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.04 Flow Max (cfs): 15.780 Runoff Volume (in): 7.657 Runoff Volume (ft3): 106557.132
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 11 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.83 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.83 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 19 of 37
Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.217 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 14.660 Runoff Volume (in): 8.028 Runoff Volume (ft3): 93748.893
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 12 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.96 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.96 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.692 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 89.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.01 Flow Max (cfs): 12.263 Runoff Volume (in): 8.151 Runoff Volume (ft3): 79645.671
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 13 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.95 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.95 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.663 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 59.99 Flow Max (cfs): 16.497 Runoff Volume (in): 7.905 Runoff Volume (ft3): 105099.436
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 14 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 20 of 37
Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.92 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.92 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 6.262 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.05 Flow Max (cfs): 25.877 Runoff Volume (in): 7.531 Runoff Volume (ft3): 171208.407
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 15 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.05 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.05 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 30.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.717 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.12 Flow Max (cfs): 18.119 Runoff Volume (in): 8.024 Runoff Volume (ft3): 137399.375
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 16 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.85 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.85 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 92.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 59.98
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 21 of 37
Flow Max (cfs): 17.505 Runoff Volume (in): 8.517 Runoff Volume (ft3): 116655.203
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 17 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.02 Flow Max (cfs): 17.219 Runoff Volume (in): 9.244 Runoff Volume (ft3): 126615.474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 18 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.884 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 95.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.02 Flow Max (cfs): 4.010 Runoff Volume (in): 8.881 Runoff Volume (ft3): 28488.376
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 19 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.73 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.73 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 22 of 37
Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.923 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.04 Flow Max (cfs): 4.137 Runoff Volume (in): 9.245 Runoff Volume (ft3): 30981.835
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 2 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.89 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.89 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.812 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.04 Flow Max (cfs): 11.903 Runoff Volume (in): 7.905 Runoff Volume (ft3): 80674.677
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 20 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.72 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.72 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.137 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 91.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.02 Flow Max (cfs): 18.120 Runoff Volume (in): 8.396 Runoff Volume (ft3): 126094.433
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 21 Group Name: BASE
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 23 of 37
Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.366 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 10.353 Runoff Volume (in): 7.284 Runoff Volume (ft3): 62567.533
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 22 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.957 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 12.939 Runoff Volume (in): 7.284 Runoff Volume (ft3): 78196.348
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 23 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.44 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.44 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.619 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 24 of 37
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 7.278 Runoff Volume (in): 7.533 Runoff Volume (ft3): 44273.534
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 24 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.978 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 4.460 Runoff Volume (in): 7.781 Runoff Volume (ft3): 27612.096
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 3 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.99 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.99 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.143 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.03 Flow Max (cfs): 13.246 Runoff Volume (in): 8.027 Runoff Volume (ft3): 91581.723
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 4 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.19 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.19 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 25 of 37
Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 23.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.041 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.07 Flow Max (cfs): 12.616 Runoff Volume (in): 8.026 Runoff Volume (ft3): 88581.858
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 5 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.63 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.63 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 19.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.629 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.02 Flow Max (cfs): 6.873 Runoff Volume (in): 7.531 Runoff Volume (ft3): 44522.952
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 6 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.016 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 9.308 Runoff Volume (in): 8.028 Runoff Volume (ft3): 58749.019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 7
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 26 of 37
Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.88 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.88 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.10 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.352 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 60.00 Flow Max (cfs): 14.960 Runoff Volume (in): 7.655 Runoff Volume (ft3): 93146.002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 8 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.41 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.41 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.418 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 59.99 Flow Max (cfs): 15.588 Runoff Volume (in): 7.780 Runoff Volume (ft3): 96537.128
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 9 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 10YR-72HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.39 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.39 Rainfall File: Sfwmd72 Rainfall Amount (in): 9.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 72.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 32.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 7.861 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 27 of 37
Time Max (hrs): 60.17 Flow Max (cfs): 27.645 Runoff Volume (in): 7.279 Runoff Volume (ft3): 207724.223
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 1 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.84 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.84 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.30 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.926 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.001 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.12 Flow Max (cfs): 3.918 Runoff Volume (in): 1.309 Runoff Volume (ft3): 13907.813
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 10 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 3.04 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.04 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.834 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.11 Flow Max (cfs): 4.415 Runoff Volume (in): 1.176 Runoff Volume (ft3): 16369.474
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 11 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.83 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.83
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 28 of 37
Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.217 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 5.524 Runoff Volume (in): 1.379 Runoff Volume (ft3): 16107.939
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 12 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.96 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.96 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.692 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 89.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.05 Flow Max (cfs): 4.725 Runoff Volume (in): 1.452 Runoff Volume (ft3): 14190.888
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 13 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.95 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.95 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.663 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.07 Flow Max (cfs): 5.832 Runoff Volume (in): 1.309 Runoff Volume (ft3): 17403.855
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 29 of 37
Basin Name: Basin 14 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.92 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.92 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 6.262 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.12 Flow Max (cfs): 6.982 Runoff Volume (in): 1.114 Runoff Volume (ft3): 25331.658
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 15 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.05 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.05 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 30.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.717 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.23 Flow Max (cfs): 5.399 Runoff Volume (in): 1.379 Runoff Volume (ft3): 23618.743
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 16 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.85 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.85 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 92.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 30 of 37
DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.05 Flow Max (cfs): 7.717 Runoff Volume (in): 1.690 Runoff Volume (ft3): 23152.099
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 17 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.773 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 8.426 Runoff Volume (in): 2.267 Runoff Volume (ft3): 31049.935
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 18 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.45 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.45 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 18.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.884 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 95.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 1.808 Runoff Volume (in): 1.960 Runoff Volume (ft3): 6286.488
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 19 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.73
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 31 of 37
Comp Time Inc (min): 2.73 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.923 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 98.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.07 Flow Max (cfs): 1.957 Runoff Volume (in): 2.267 Runoff Volume (ft3): 7596.854
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 2 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.89 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.89 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 21.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.812 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 87.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.10 Flow Max (cfs): 3.733 Runoff Volume (in): 1.309 Runoff Volume (ft3): 13357.265
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 20 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.72 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.72 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 20.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 4.137 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 91.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.10 Flow Max (cfs): 6.913 Runoff Volume (in): 1.608 Runoff Volume (ft3): 24147.719
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 32 of 37
Basin Name: Basin 21 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.366 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 2.966 Runoff Volume (in): 0.997 Runoff Volume (ft3): 8561.025
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 22 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.80 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.80 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 13.50 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.957 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 3.707 Runoff Volume (in): 0.997 Runoff Volume (ft3): 10699.493
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 23 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.44 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.44 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.80 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.619 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 33 of 37
Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.05 Flow Max (cfs): 2.432 Runoff Volume (in): 1.114 Runoff Volume (ft3): 6549.763
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 24 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 0.978 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.02 Flow Max (cfs): 1.669 Runoff Volume (in): 1.242 Runoff Volume (ft3): 4406.575
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 3 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.99 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.99 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 22.40 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.143 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.15 Flow Max (cfs): 4.302 Runoff Volume (in): 1.380 Runoff Volume (ft3): 15739.747
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 4 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 34 of 37
Spec Time Inc (min): 3.19 Comp Time Inc (min): 3.19 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 23.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.041 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.16 Flow Max (cfs): 4.012 Runoff Volume (in): 1.379 Runoff Volume (ft3): 15218.409
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 5 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 2.63 Comp Time Inc (min): 2.63 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 19.70 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 1.629 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 84.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.13 Flow Max (cfs): 1.910 Runoff Volume (in): 1.114 Runoff Volume (ft3): 6587.817
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 6 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.33 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.33 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.00 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 2.016 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 88.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.02 Flow Max (cfs): 3.799 Runoff Volume (in): 1.380 Runoff Volume (ft3): 10095.648
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 35 of 37
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 7 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.88 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.88 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 14.10 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.352 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 85.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.06 Flow Max (cfs): 4.894 Runoff Volume (in): 1.176 Runoff Volume (ft3): 14313.943
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 8 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 1.41 Comp Time Inc (min): 1.41 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 10.60 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 3.418 Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 86.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.04 Flow Max (cfs): 5.732 Runoff Volume (in): 1.241 Runoff Volume (ft3): 15404.223
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basin Name: Basin 9 Group Name: BASE Simulation: 2.5IN-24HR Node Name: 1 Basin Type: SCS Unit Hydrograph
Unit Hydrograph: Uh484 Peaking Fator: 484.0 Spec Time Inc (min): 4.39 Comp Time Inc (min): 4.39 Rainfall File: Scsii-24 Rainfall Amount (in): 2.500 Storm Duration (hrs): 24.00 Status: Onsite Time of Conc (min): 32.90 Time Shift (hrs): 0.00 Area (ac): 7.861
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 36 of 37
Vol of Unit Hyd (in): 1.000 Curve Number: 82.000 DCIA (%): 0.000
Time Max (hrs): 12.21 Flow Max (cfs): 6.034 Runoff Volume (in): 0.996 Runoff Volume (ft3): 28432.569
Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing Model (ICPR) ©2002 Streamline Technologies, Inc. Page 37 of 37
TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 1
ATotal = 11842.00 sq m 1.1842 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6842.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5000.00 98
CNoverall = 87* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 1)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2
n (roughness) = 0.8 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 80L (length) m = 35 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 110 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.28 T2 (hour) = 0.069 T3 (hour) = 0.008
Tc = 0.4 hours = 21.3 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 2
ATotal = 11378.00 sq m 1.1378 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6478.00 79Impervious N/A - D 4900.00 98
CNoverall = 87* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 2)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.8 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 80L (length) m = 35 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 120 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.28 T2 (hour) = 0.076 T3 (hour) = 0.008
Tc = 0.4 hours = 21.7 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 3
ATotal = 12720.00 sq m 1.272 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6920.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5800.00 98
CNoverall = 88* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 3)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2
n (roughness) = 0.8 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 70L (length) m = 35 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 140 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.28 T2 (hour) = 0.088 T3 (hour) = 0.007
Tc = 0.4 hours = 22.4 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 4
ATotal = 12305.00 sq m 1.2305 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6505.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5800.00 98
CNoverall = 88* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 4)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2
n (roughness) = 0.8 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 70L (length) m = 35 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 180 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.28 T2 (hour) = 0.114 T3 (hour) = 0.007
Tc = 0.4 hours = 23.9 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 5
ATotal = 6591.00 sq m 0.6591 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 4758.00 79Impervious N/A - D 1833.00 98
CNoverall = 84* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 5)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.8 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 60L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 120 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.25 T2 (hour) = 0.076 T3 (hour) = 0.006
Tc = 0.3 hours = 19.7 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 6
ATotal = 8158.00 sq m 0.8158 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 4121.00 79Impervious N/A - D 4037.00 98
CNoverall = 88* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 6)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 50L (length) m = 20 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 65 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.11 T2 (hour) = 0.041 T3 (hour) = 0.005
Tc = 0.2 hours = 9.3 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 7
ATotal = 13565.00 sq m 1.3565 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6211.00 79Impervious N/A - D 7354.00 98
CNoverall = 89* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 7)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 55L (length) m = 25 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 150 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.13 T2 (hour) = 0.095 T3 (hour) = 0.005
Tc = 0.2 hours = 14.1 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 8
ATotal = 13833.00 sq m 1.3833 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 8974.00 79Impervious N/A - D 4859.00 98
CNoverall = 86* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 8)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 55L (length) m = 15 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 130 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.09 T2 (hour) = 0.082 T3 (hour) = 0.005
Tc = 0.2 hours = 10.6 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 9
ATotal = 31813.00 sq m 3.1813 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 27332.00 79Impervious N/A - D 4481.00 98
CNoverall = 82* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 9)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 L (lengh) ft = 160L (length) m = 140 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.53 T3 (hour) = 0.015
Tc = 0.5 hours = 32.9 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 10
ATotal = 15514.00 sq m 1.5514 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 10508.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5006.00 98
CNoverall = 85* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 10)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 90L (length) m = 80 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 50 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.34 T2 (hour) = 0.032 T3 (hour) = 0.009
Tc = 0.4 hours = 22.8 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 11
ATotal = 13018.00 sq m 1.3018 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 7118.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5900.00 98
CNoverall = 88* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 11)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 100L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.16 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.010
Tc = 0.2 hours = 13.7 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 12
ATotal = 10893.00 sq m 1.0893 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 5127.00 79Impervious N/A - D 5766.00 98
CNoverall = 89* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 12)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 60L (length) m = 35 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.18 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.006
Tc = 0.2 hours = 14.7 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 13
ATotal = 14823.00 sq m 1.4823 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 8760.00 79Impervious N/A - D 6063.00 98
CNoverall = 87* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 13)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 120L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 120 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.16 T2 (hour) = 0.076 T3 (hour) = 0.012
Tc = 0.2 hours = 14.6 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 14
ATotal = 25343.00 sq m 2.5343 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 18213.00 79Impervious N/A - D 7130.00 98
CNoverall = 84* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 14)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 260L (length) m = 60 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 110 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.27 T2 (hour) = 0.069 T3 (hour) = 0.025
Tc = 0.4 hours = 21.9 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 15
ATotal = 19090.00 sq m 1.909 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 9869.00 79Impervious N/A - D 9221.00 98
CNoverall = 88* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 15)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 L (lengh) ft = 40L (length) m = 130 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.50 T3 (hour) = 0.004
Tc = 0.5 hours = 30.4 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 16
ATotal = 15270.00 sq m 1.527 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 5164.00 79Impervious N/A - D 10106.00 98
CNoverall = 92* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 16)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 130L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.16 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.013
Tc = 0.2 hours = 13.9 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 17
ATotal = 4895.00 sq m 0.4895 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 74.00 79Impervious N/A - D 4821.00 98
CNoverall = 98* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 17)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 L (lengh) ft = 10L (length) m = 70 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.31 T3 (hour) = 0.001
Tc = 0.3 hours = 18.4 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 18
ATotal = 3576.00 sq m 0.3576 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 555.00 79Impervious N/A - D 3021.00 98
CNoverall = 95* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 18)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 L (lengh) ft = 10L (length) m = 70 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.31 T3 (hour) = 0.001
Tc = 0.3 hours = 18.4 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 19
ATotal = 3736.00 sq m 0.3736 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 0.00 79Impervious N/A - D 3736.00 98
CNoverall = 98* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 19)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 L (lengh) ft = 10L (length) m = 80 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.34 T3 (hour) = 0.001
Tc = 0.3 hours = 20.5 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 20
ATotal = 16743.00 sq m 1.6743 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 6240.00 79Impervious N/A - D 10503.00 98
CNoverall = 91* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 20)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 60L (length) m = 60 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.27 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.006
Tc = 0.3 hours = 20.4 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 21
ATotal = 9576.00 sq m 0.9576 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 7966.00 79Impervious N/A - D 1610.00 98
CNoverall = 82* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 21)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 60L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.16 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.006
Tc = 0.2 hours = 13.5 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 22
ATotal = 11968.00 sq m 1.1968 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 10091.00 79Impervious N/A - D 1877.00 98
CNoverall = 82* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 22)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 70L (length) m = 30 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.16 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.007
Tc = 0.2 hours = 13.5 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 23
ATotal = 6552.00 sq m 0.6552 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 4850.00 79Impervious N/A - D 1702.00 98
CNoverall = 84* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 23)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 40L (length) m = 20 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.11 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.004
Tc = 0.2 hours = 10.8 min.
POST-CONDITION CURVE NUMBERBASIN 24
ATotal = 3956.00 sq m 0.3956 ha
Description Soil Group* Area (sq m) CNOpen Space N/A - D 2418.00 79Impervious N/A - D 1538.00 98
CNoverall = 86* Soil Group based on worst-case senario for hydrologic soil group.
POST-TIME OF CONCENTRATION (BASIN 24)
DRAINAGE BASIN:
1. Sheet Flow 2. Shallow Concentrated Flow 3. Channel Flow Tt = 0.007 (n L)0.8 Tt = L Tt = L(n) (P2)
0.5 s0.4 3600 V 3600 (1.49 r2/3 s1/2)
n (roughness) = 0.45 V (velocity) = 0.44 m/sec -->From Figure 3-1 L (lengh) ft = 50L (length) m = 5 s (slope) m/m = 0.005 n (roughness) = 0.012P2 (2/24) in. = 5.2 L (length) m = 100 r (hydraulic radius) = 0.375
s (slope) m/m = 0.010 s (channel slope) = 0.002
T1 (hour) = 0.04 T2 (hour) = 0.063 T3 (hour) = 0.005
Tc = 0.1 hours = 6.3 min.
APPENDIX B
EPANET WATER MODEL RESULTS
Page 1 12/10/2007 1:57:26 AM ********************************************************************** * E P A N E T * * Hydraulic and Water Quality * * Analysis for Pipe Networks * * Version 2.0 * ********************************************************************** Input File: HawkesNestWaterDistSystem_ADF (12-01-07).NET Link - Node Table: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MS6 YC 225.26 4 2 YC 1 67.79 8 3 1 MHC1 87.74 4 4 1 2 152.64 8 5 2 MHC2 51.98 4 6 2 3 107.77 8 7 3 MHC3 44.25 4 8 3 4 105.39 8 9 4 MHC4 104.78 4 10 4 5 346.65 8 11 5 6 131.82 8 12 6 7 376.21 8 13 7 8 80.42 6 14 8 9 89.11 6 15 9 BU1 67.77 4 16 9 BU2 55.85 4 17 9 10 126.06 6 18 10 BU3 71.47 4 19 10 17 90.89 6 20 17 BU4 52.21 4 21 17 18 107.39 6 22 18 BU5 46.92 4 23 18 BU6 58.22 4 24 7 19 470.32 8 25 19 22 85.44 8 28 22 23 212.59 8 29 23 24 309.28 8 30 24 PB1 70.54 4 39 32 LC14 105.10 4 40 32 33 113.11 8 41 33 LPS6 186.24 4 42 33 35 131.15 8 43 35 LC13 81.37 4 44 35 38 222.37 8 45 38 LC12 92.10 4 46 38 39 117.58 8 47 39 LPS5 195.62 4
Page 2 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 39 40 115.51 8 49 40 LC11 92.94 4 50 40 42 171.65 8 51 42 LC10 95.55 4 52 42 44 138.77 8 53 44 LPS4 193.67 4 54 44 45 104.30 8 55 45 LC9 99.61 4 57 46 47 167.06 12 58 47 LC8 98.83 4 59 47 49 141.95 12 60 49 LPS3 235.31 4 61 49 51 123.54 12 62 51 LC7 69.19 4 65 53 LC6 71.47 4 66 53 55 175.15 12 67 55 TFC 66.64 4 68 55 57 71.01 12 69 57 LC5 95.95 4 70 57 59 123.39 12 71 59 LPS2 224.10 4 72 59 60 163.46 12 73 60 61 197.05 12 74 61 62 162.72 12 75 60 LC4 97.67 4 76 61 LC3 87.42 4 77 62 64 146.37 12 78 64 65 92.10 12 79 65 66 116.64 12 80 64 LC2 108.08 4 81 65 LPS1 201.58 4 82 66 LC1 91.80 4 86 71 IL1-S 563.04 6 87 71 72 629.37 8 88 72 IL2-N 338.04 6 89 72 IL2-S 373.88 6 90 66 74 112.72 12 91 74 75 253.03 12 92 75 76 77.72 8 93 76 MV1 80.13 4 94 76 MV2 84.07 4 95 76 MS2 103.79 6 96 MS2 MS3 129.41 4 97 MS2 MS1 100.68 4 98 MS3 MS4 337.30 4 99 MS4 MS5 197.38 4 100 75 84 278.86 12
Page 3 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 87 MS4 274.35 8 108 91 92 254.63 8 109 92 93 238.25 6 126 62 71 556.45 8 127 71 IL1-N 383.75 6 26 32 27 1023.29 8 27 27 24 618.49 8 32 46 30 49.52 12 33 51 53 200.10 12 34 84 87 511.81 12 35 87 91 325.04 8 36 93 CHC3 67.30 6 37 91 13 84.88 6 38 13 CHC2 126.02 6 83 13 CHC1 192.85 6 84 11 92 277.45 6 101 12 11 305.69 6 102 20 16 450.01 6 103 16 93 295.00 6 110 14 MS6 167.45 4 31 46 21 188.49 8 56 21 45 64.44 8 111 30 R1 620.74 12 106 MS5 15 357.72 4 107 15 14 157.72 8 114 22 CHS 165.90 6 85 12 OE 160.99 4 104 20 BE 171.29 4 Node Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS6 6.67 124.44 50.45 0.00 YC 4.86 124.42 50.45 0.00 1 0.00 124.42 50.45 0.00 MHC1 29.51 124.34 32.65 0.00 2 0.00 124.43 50.45 0.00 MHC2 0.00 124.43 32.68 0.00 3 0.00 124.43 50.45 0.00 MHC3 0.00 124.43 32.68 0.00 4 0.00 124.43 50.45 0.00 MHC4 0.00 124.43 32.69 0.00 5 0.00 124.44 50.46 0.00 6 0.00 124.45 50.46 0.00 7 0.00 124.46 50.46 0.00
Page 4 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 0.00 124.45 53.93 0.00 9 0.00 124.45 53.92 0.00 10 0.00 124.44 53.92 0.00 BU1 0.00 124.45 29.23 0.00 BU2 0.00 124.45 29.23 0.00 BU3 0.00 124.44 29.22 0.00 BU4 0.00 124.44 29.22 0.00 BU5 0.00 124.44 29.22 0.00 BU6 16.74 124.42 29.21 0.00 17 0.00 124.44 53.92 0.00 18 0.00 124.44 53.92 0.00 19 0.00 124.49 50.47 0.00 CHS 12.15 124.49 21.88 0.00 22 0.00 124.49 50.48 0.00 23 0.00 124.52 50.49 0.00 24 0.00 124.55 50.50 0.00 PB1 0.00 124.55 50.50 0.00 27 0.00 124.61 50.53 0.00 32 0.00 124.72 50.57 0.00 33 0.00 124.73 50.58 0.00 LC14 0.00 124.72 36.27 0.00 LPS6 0.00 124.73 48.41 0.00 35 0.00 124.74 50.58 0.00 LC13 0.00 124.74 36.29 0.00 LC12 0.00 124.76 36.30 0.00 38 0.00 124.76 50.59 0.00 39 0.00 124.78 50.60 0.00 LPS5 0.00 124.78 48.43 0.00 40 0.00 124.79 50.60 0.00 LC11 0.00 124.79 36.31 0.00 42 0.00 124.81 50.61 0.00 LC10 0.00 124.81 36.31 0.00 44 0.00 124.82 50.62 0.00 LPS4 0.00 124.82 48.45 0.00 45 0.00 124.83 50.62 0.00 46 0.00 124.86 50.63 0.00 47 0.00 124.84 50.62 0.00 LC8 0.00 124.84 36.33 0.00 LC9 0.00 124.83 36.32 0.00 49 0.00 124.82 50.62 0.00 LPS3 0.00 124.82 48.45 0.00 51 0.00 124.80 50.61 0.00 LC7 0.00 124.80 36.31 0.00 53 0.00 124.77 50.60 0.00 LC6 0.00 124.77 36.30 0.00 55 0.00 124.75 50.59 0.00 TFC 0.35 124.75 50.59 0.00
Page 5 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 0.00 124.74 50.58 0.00 LC5 0.00 124.74 36.29 0.00 59 0.00 124.73 50.58 0.00 LPS2 0.00 124.73 48.41 0.00 60 0.00 124.71 50.57 0.00 61 0.00 124.68 50.56 0.00 62 0.00 124.66 50.55 0.00 LC4 0.00 124.71 36.27 0.00 LC3 0.00 124.68 36.26 0.00 64 0.00 124.64 50.54 0.00 65 0.00 124.64 50.54 0.00 66 0.00 124.63 50.53 0.00 LC2 0.00 124.64 36.24 0.00 LPS1 18.83 124.56 48.34 0.00 LC1 58.44 124.33 36.11 0.00 71 0.00 124.64 54.01 0.00 IL1-S 0.00 124.64 39.71 0.00 72 0.00 124.64 54.01 0.00 IL2-N 16.12 124.62 39.70 0.00 IL2-S 0.00 124.64 39.71 0.00 74 0.00 124.62 50.53 0.00 75 0.00 124.62 50.53 0.00 76 0.00 124.62 54.00 0.00 MV1 0.00 124.62 39.70 0.00 MV2 7.43 124.61 39.69 0.00 MS2 0.00 124.61 50.53 0.00 MS1 0.00 124.61 48.36 0.00 MS3 0.00 124.61 48.36 0.00 MS4 9.72 124.60 48.35 0.00 MS5 0.00 124.55 48.34 0.00 84 0.00 124.61 50.53 0.00 87 0.00 124.60 50.52 0.00 91 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 92 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 93 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 CHC2 45.31 124.51 29.25 0.00 CHC1 0.00 124.55 36.20 0.00 13 0.00 124.55 50.50 0.00 14 0.00 124.47 50.47 0.00 OE 2.78 124.57 32.74 0.00 CHC3 0.00 124.57 29.28 0.00 BE 3.13 124.57 36.21 0.00 IL1-N 10.21 124.64 39.71 0.00 30 0.00 124.87 50.64 0.00 11 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 12 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 16 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00
Page 6 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 0.00 124.57 50.51 0.00 21 0.00 124.84 50.63 0.00 15 0.00 124.48 50.47 0.00 R1 -242.25 125.00 0.00 0.00 Reservoir Link Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 6.94 0.18 0.06 Open 2 2.08 0.01 0.00 Open 3 29.51 0.75 0.91 Open 4 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 6 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 8 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 10 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 11 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 12 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 13 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 14 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 17 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 19 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 21 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 23 16.74 0.43 0.32 Open 24 -44.17 0.28 0.07 Open 25 -44.17 0.28 0.07 Open 28 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 29 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 40 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 42 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 44 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 46 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open
Page 7 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 50 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 52 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 54 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 57 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 59 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 61 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 66 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 67 0.35 0.01 0.00 Open 68 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 70 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 71 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 72 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 73 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 74 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 75 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 77 159.25 0.45 0.10 Open 78 159.25 0.45 0.10 Open 79 140.42 0.40 0.08 Open 80 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 81 18.83 0.48 0.40 Open 82 58.44 1.49 3.22 Open 86 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 87 16.12 0.10 0.01 Open 88 16.12 0.18 0.04 Open 89 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 90 81.98 0.23 0.03 Open 91 81.98 0.23 0.03 Open 92 12.91 0.08 0.01 Open 93 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 94 7.43 0.19 0.07 Open 95 5.48 0.06 0.01 Open 96 5.48 0.14 0.04 Open 97 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 98 5.48 0.14 0.04 Open 99 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 100 69.07 0.20 0.02 Open
Page 8 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 17.85 0.11 0.01 Open 108 5.91 0.04 0.00 Open 109 3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 126 26.33 0.17 0.03 Open 127 10.21 0.12 0.02 Open 26 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 27 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 32 -242.25 0.69 0.21 Open 33 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 34 69.07 0.20 0.02 Open 35 51.22 0.33 0.09 Open 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 37 45.31 0.51 0.28 Open 38 45.31 0.51 0.28 Open 83 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 84 -2.78 0.03 0.00 Open 101 -2.78 0.03 0.00 Open 102 -3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 103 -3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 110 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 31 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 56 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 111 -242.25 0.69 0.21 Open 106 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 107 13.61 0.09 0.01 Open 114 12.15 0.14 0.02 Open 85 2.78 0.07 0.01 Open 104 3.13 0.08 0.01 Open
Page 1 12/12/2007 3:11:43 PM ********************************************************************** * E P A N E T * * Hydraulic and Water Quality * * Analysis for Pipe Networks * * Version 2.0 * ********************************************************************** Input File: HawkesNestWaterDistSystem_ADF@140ft (12-01-07).NET Link - Node Table: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MS6 YC 225.26 4 2 YC 1 67.79 8 3 1 MHC1 87.74 4 4 1 2 152.64 8 5 2 MHC2 51.98 4 6 2 3 107.77 8 7 3 MHC3 44.25 4 8 3 4 105.39 8 9 4 MHC4 104.78 4 10 4 5 346.65 8 11 5 6 131.82 8 12 6 7 376.21 8 13 7 8 80.42 6 14 8 9 89.11 6 15 9 BU1 67.77 4 16 9 BU2 55.85 4 17 9 10 126.06 6 18 10 BU3 71.47 4 19 10 17 90.89 6 20 17 BU4 52.21 4 21 17 18 107.39 6 22 18 BU5 46.92 4 23 18 BU6 58.22 4 24 7 19 470.32 8 25 19 22 85.44 8 28 22 23 212.59 8 29 23 24 309.28 8 30 24 PB1 70.54 4 39 32 LC14 105.10 4 40 32 33 113.11 8 41 33 LPS6 186.24 4 42 33 35 131.15 8 43 35 LC13 81.37 4 44 35 38 222.37 8 45 38 LC12 92.10 4 46 38 39 117.58 8 47 39 LPS5 195.62 4
Page 2 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 39 40 115.51 8 49 40 LC11 92.94 4 50 40 42 171.65 8 51 42 LC10 95.55 4 52 42 44 138.77 8 53 44 LPS4 193.67 4 54 44 45 104.30 8 55 45 LC9 99.61 4 57 46 47 167.06 12 58 47 LC8 98.83 4 59 47 49 141.95 12 60 49 LPS3 235.31 4 61 49 51 123.54 12 62 51 LC7 69.19 4 65 53 LC6 71.47 4 66 53 55 175.15 12 67 55 TFC 66.64 4 68 55 57 71.01 12 69 57 LC5 95.95 4 70 57 59 123.39 12 71 59 LPS2 224.10 4 72 59 60 163.46 12 73 60 61 197.05 12 74 61 62 162.72 12 75 60 LC4 97.67 4 76 61 LC3 87.42 4 77 62 64 146.37 12 78 64 65 92.10 12 79 65 66 116.64 12 80 64 LC2 108.08 4 81 65 LPS1 201.58 4 82 66 LC1 91.80 4 86 71 IL1-S 563.04 6 87 71 72 629.37 8 88 72 IL2-N 338.04 6 89 72 IL2-S 373.88 6 90 66 74 112.72 12 91 74 75 253.03 12 92 75 76 77.72 8 93 76 MV1 80.13 4 94 76 MV2 84.07 4 95 76 MS2 103.79 6 96 MS2 MS3 129.41 4 97 MS2 MS1 100.68 4 98 MS3 MS4 337.30 4 99 MS4 MS5 197.38 4 100 75 84 278.86 12
Page 3 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 87 MS4 274.35 8 108 91 92 254.63 8 109 92 93 238.25 6 126 62 71 556.45 8 127 71 IL1-N 383.75 6 26 32 27 1023.29 8 27 27 24 618.49 8 32 46 30 49.52 12 33 51 53 200.10 12 34 84 87 511.81 12 35 87 91 325.04 8 36 93 CHC3 67.30 6 37 91 13 84.88 6 38 13 CHC2 126.02 6 83 13 CHC1 192.85 6 84 11 92 277.45 6 101 12 11 305.69 6 102 20 16 450.01 6 103 16 93 295.00 6 110 14 MS6 167.45 4 31 46 21 188.49 8 56 21 45 64.44 8 111 30 R1 620.74 12 106 MS5 15 357.72 4 107 15 14 157.72 8 114 22 CHS 165.90 6 85 12 OE 160.99 4 104 20 BE 171.29 4 Node Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS6 6.67 139.44 56.95 0.00 YC 4.86 139.42 56.95 0.00 1 0.00 139.42 56.95 0.00 MHC1 29.51 139.34 39.15 0.00 2 0.00 139.43 56.95 0.00 MHC2 0.00 139.43 39.18 0.00 3 0.00 139.43 56.95 0.00 MHC3 0.00 139.43 39.18 0.00 4 0.00 139.43 56.95 0.00 MHC4 0.00 139.43 39.19 0.00 5 0.00 139.44 56.95 0.00 6 0.00 139.45 56.96 0.00 7 0.00 139.46 56.96 0.00
Page 4 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 0.00 139.45 60.43 0.00 9 0.00 139.45 60.42 0.00 10 0.00 139.44 60.42 0.00 BU1 0.00 139.45 35.73 0.00 BU2 0.00 139.45 35.73 0.00 BU3 0.00 139.44 35.72 0.00 BU4 0.00 139.44 35.72 0.00 BU5 0.00 139.44 35.72 0.00 BU6 16.74 139.42 35.71 0.00 17 0.00 139.44 60.42 0.00 18 0.00 139.44 60.42 0.00 19 0.00 139.49 56.97 0.00 CHS 12.15 139.49 28.38 0.00 22 0.00 139.49 56.98 0.00 23 0.00 139.52 56.99 0.00 24 0.00 139.55 57.00 0.00 PB1 0.00 139.55 57.00 0.00 27 0.00 139.61 57.03 0.00 32 0.00 139.72 57.07 0.00 33 0.00 139.73 57.08 0.00 LC14 0.00 139.72 42.77 0.00 LPS6 0.00 139.73 54.91 0.00 35 0.00 139.74 57.08 0.00 LC13 0.00 139.74 42.78 0.00 LC12 0.00 139.76 42.79 0.00 38 0.00 139.76 57.09 0.00 39 0.00 139.78 57.10 0.00 LPS5 0.00 139.78 54.93 0.00 40 0.00 139.79 57.10 0.00 LC11 0.00 139.79 42.81 0.00 42 0.00 139.81 57.11 0.00 LC10 0.00 139.81 42.81 0.00 44 0.00 139.82 57.12 0.00 LPS4 0.00 139.82 54.95 0.00 45 0.00 139.83 57.12 0.00 46 0.00 139.86 57.13 0.00 47 0.00 139.84 57.12 0.00 LC8 0.00 139.84 42.83 0.00 LC9 0.00 139.83 42.82 0.00 49 0.00 139.82 57.12 0.00 LPS3 0.00 139.82 54.95 0.00 51 0.00 139.80 57.11 0.00 LC7 0.00 139.80 42.81 0.00 53 0.00 139.77 57.10 0.00 LC6 0.00 139.77 42.80 0.00 55 0.00 139.75 57.09 0.00 TFC 0.35 139.75 57.09 0.00
Page 5 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 0.00 139.74 57.08 0.00 LC5 0.00 139.74 42.79 0.00 59 0.00 139.73 57.08 0.00 LPS2 0.00 139.73 54.91 0.00 60 0.00 139.71 57.07 0.00 61 0.00 139.68 57.06 0.00 62 0.00 139.66 57.05 0.00 LC4 0.00 139.71 42.77 0.00 LC3 0.00 139.68 42.76 0.00 64 0.00 139.64 57.04 0.00 65 0.00 139.64 57.04 0.00 66 0.00 139.63 57.03 0.00 LC2 0.00 139.64 42.74 0.00 LPS1 18.83 139.56 54.84 0.00 LC1 58.44 139.33 42.61 0.00 71 0.00 139.64 60.51 0.00 IL1-S 0.00 139.64 46.21 0.00 72 0.00 139.64 60.51 0.00 IL2-N 16.12 139.62 46.20 0.00 IL2-S 0.00 139.64 46.21 0.00 74 0.00 139.62 57.03 0.00 75 0.00 139.62 57.03 0.00 76 0.00 139.62 60.50 0.00 MV1 0.00 139.62 46.20 0.00 MV2 7.43 139.61 46.19 0.00 MS2 0.00 139.61 57.03 0.00 MS1 0.00 139.61 54.86 0.00 MS3 0.00 139.61 54.86 0.00 MS4 9.72 139.60 54.85 0.00 MS5 0.00 139.55 54.84 0.00 84 0.00 139.61 57.03 0.00 87 0.00 139.60 57.02 0.00 91 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 92 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 93 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 CHC2 45.31 139.51 35.75 0.00 CHC1 0.00 139.55 42.70 0.00 13 0.00 139.55 57.00 0.00 14 0.00 139.47 56.97 0.00 OE 2.78 139.57 39.24 0.00 CHC3 0.00 139.57 35.78 0.00 BE 3.13 139.57 42.71 0.00 IL1-N 10.21 139.64 46.21 0.00 30 0.00 139.87 57.14 0.00 11 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 12 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 16 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00
Page 6 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 0.00 139.57 57.01 0.00 21 0.00 139.84 57.13 0.00 15 0.00 139.48 56.97 0.00 R1 -242.25 140.00 0.00 0.00 Reservoir Link Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 6.94 0.18 0.06 Open 2 2.08 0.01 0.00 Open 3 29.51 0.75 0.91 Open 4 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 6 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 8 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 10 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 11 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 12 -27.43 0.18 0.03 Open 13 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 14 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 17 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 19 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 21 16.74 0.19 0.04 Open 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 23 16.74 0.43 0.32 Open 24 -44.17 0.28 0.07 Open 25 -44.17 0.28 0.07 Open 28 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 29 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 40 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 42 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 44 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 46 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open
Page 7 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 50 -56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 52 -56.33 0.36 0.10 Open 53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 54 -56.33 0.36 0.10 Open 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 57 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 59 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 61 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 66 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 67 0.35 0.01 0.00 Open 68 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 70 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 71 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 72 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 73 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 74 185.58 0.53 0.13 Open 75 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 77 159.25 0.45 0.10 Open 78 159.25 0.45 0.10 Open 79 140.42 0.40 0.08 Open 80 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 81 18.83 0.48 0.40 Open 82 58.44 1.49 3.22 Open 86 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 87 16.12 0.10 0.01 Open 88 16.12 0.18 0.04 Open 89 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 90 81.98 0.23 0.03 Open 91 81.98 0.23 0.03 Open 92 12.91 0.08 0.01 Open 93 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 94 7.43 0.19 0.07 Open 95 5.48 0.06 0.01 Open 96 5.48 0.14 0.04 Open 97 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 98 5.48 0.14 0.04 Open 99 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 100 69.07 0.20 0.02 Open
Page 8 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 17.85 0.11 0.01 Open 108 5.91 0.04 0.00 Open 109 3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 126 26.33 0.17 0.03 Open 127 10.21 0.12 0.02 Open 26 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 27 56.32 0.36 0.10 Open 32 -242.25 0.69 0.21 Open 33 185.93 0.53 0.13 Open 34 69.07 0.20 0.02 Open 35 51.22 0.33 0.09 Open 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 37 45.31 0.51 0.28 Open 38 45.31 0.51 0.28 Open 83 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 84 -2.78 0.03 0.00 Open 101 -2.78 0.03 0.00 Open 102 -3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 103 -3.13 0.04 0.00 Open 110 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 31 56.33 0.36 0.10 Open 56 56.33 0.36 0.10 Open 111 -242.25 0.69 0.21 Open 106 13.61 0.35 0.22 Open 107 13.61 0.09 0.01 Open 114 12.15 0.14 0.02 Open 85 2.78 0.07 0.01 Open 104 3.13 0.08 0.01 Open
Page 1 12/10/2007 2:03:59 AM ********************************************************************** * E P A N E T * * Hydraulic and Water Quality * * Analysis for Pipe Networks * * Version 2.0 * ********************************************************************** Input File: HawkesNestWaterDistSystem_MDF (12-01-07).NET Link - Node Table: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MS6 YC 237.46 4 2 YC 1 67.79 8 3 1 MHC1 87.74 4 4 1 2 152.64 8 5 2 MHC2 51.98 4 6 2 3 107.77 8 7 3 MHC3 68.94 4 8 3 4 105.39 8 9 4 MHC4 104.78 4 10 4 5 346.65 8 11 5 6 131.82 8 12 6 7 376.21 8 13 7 8 80.42 6 14 8 9 89.11 6 15 9 BU1 67.77 4 16 9 BU2 55.85 4 17 9 10 126.06 6 18 10 BU3 71.47 4 19 10 17 90.89 6 20 17 BU4 52.21 4 21 17 18 107.39 6 22 18 BU5 46.92 4 23 18 BU6 58.22 4 24 7 19 470.32 8 25 19 22 85.44 8 28 22 23 212.59 8 29 23 24 309.28 8 30 24 PB1 70.54 4 39 32 LC14 105.10 4 40 32 33 113.11 8 41 33 LPS6 186.24 4 42 33 35 131.15 8 43 35 LC13 81.37 4 44 35 38 222.37 8 45 38 LC12 92.10 4 46 38 39 117.58 8 47 39 LPS5 195.62 4
Page 2 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 39 40 115.51 8 49 40 LC11 92.94 4 50 40 42 171.65 8 51 42 LC10 95.55 4 52 42 44 138.77 8 53 44 LPS4 193.67 4 54 44 45 104.30 8 55 45 LC9 99.61 4 57 46 47 167.06 12 58 47 LC8 98.83 4 59 47 49 141.95 12 60 49 LPS3 235.31 4 61 49 51 123.54 12 62 51 LC7 69.19 4 65 53 LC6 71.47 4 66 53 55 175.15 12 67 55 TFC 66.64 4 68 55 57 71.01 12 69 57 LC5 95.95 4 70 57 59 123.39 12 71 59 LPS2 224.10 4 72 59 60 163.46 12 73 60 61 197.05 12 74 61 62 162.72 12 75 60 LC4 97.67 4 76 61 LC3 87.42 4 77 62 64 146.37 12 78 64 65 92.10 12 79 65 66 116.64 12 80 64 LC2 108.08 4 81 65 LPS1 201.58 4 82 66 LC1 91.80 4 86 71 IL1-S 549.22 6 87 71 72 629.37 8 88 72 IL2-N 338.04 6 89 72 IL2-S 373.88 6 90 66 74 112.72 12 91 74 75 253.03 12 92 75 76 77.72 8 93 76 MV1 80.13 4 94 76 MV2 84.07 4 95 76 MS2 103.79 6 96 MS2 MS3 129.41 4 97 MS2 MS1 100.68 4 98 MS3 MS4 337.30 4 99 MS4 MS5 197.38 4 100 75 84 278.86 12
Page 3 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 87 MS4 274.35 8 108 91 92 254.63 8 109 92 93 238.25 6 126 62 71 556.45 8 127 71 25 384.00 6 26 32 27 1023.29 8 27 27 24 618.49 8 32 46 30 49.52 12 33 51 53 200.10 12 34 84 87 511.81 12 35 87 91 325.04 8 36 93 CHC3 67.30 6 37 91 13 84.88 6 38 13 CHC2 126.02 6 83 13 CHC1 192.85 6 84 11 92 277.45 6 101 12 11 305.69 6 102 20 16 450.01 6 103 16 93 295.00 6 110 14 MS6 163.53 4 31 46 21 188.49 8 56 21 45 64.44 8 111 30 R1 620.74 12 106 MS5 15 357.72 4 107 15 14 157.72 8 114 22 CHS 165.90 6 85 12 OE 160.99 4 104 20 BE 171.29 4 Node Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS6 12.00 128.34 52.14 0.00 YC 8.75 128.29 52.12 0.00 1 0.00 128.29 52.12 0.00 MHC1 53.13 128.06 34.26 0.00 2 0.00 128.31 52.13 0.00 MHC2 0.00 128.31 34.36 0.00 3 0.00 128.32 52.13 0.00 MHC3 0.00 128.32 34.37 0.00 4 0.00 128.32 52.14 0.00 MHC4 0.00 128.32 34.37 0.00 5 0.00 128.35 52.15 0.00 6 0.00 128.36 52.15 0.00 7 0.00 128.39 52.17 0.00
Page 4 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 0.00 128.38 55.63 0.00 9 0.00 128.37 55.62 0.00 10 0.00 128.35 55.62 0.00 BU1 0.00 128.37 30.92 0.00 BU2 0.00 128.37 30.92 0.00 BU3 0.00 128.35 30.92 0.00 BU4 0.00 128.34 30.91 0.00 BU5 0.00 128.33 30.91 0.00 BU6 30.13 128.27 30.88 0.00 17 0.00 128.34 55.61 0.00 18 0.00 128.33 55.60 0.00 19 0.00 128.48 52.21 0.00 CHS 21.88 128.49 23.61 0.00 22 0.00 128.50 52.21 0.00 23 0.00 128.57 52.24 0.00 24 0.00 128.66 52.28 0.00 PB1 0.00 128.66 52.28 0.00 27 0.00 128.85 52.36 0.00 32 0.00 129.16 52.50 0.00 33 0.00 129.20 52.51 0.00 LC14 0.00 129.16 38.20 0.00 LPS6 0.00 129.20 50.35 0.00 35 0.00 129.24 52.53 0.00 LC13 0.00 129.24 38.23 0.00 LC12 0.00 129.30 38.26 0.00 38 0.00 129.30 52.56 0.00 39 0.00 129.34 52.58 0.00 LPS5 0.00 129.34 50.41 0.00 40 0.00 129.37 52.59 0.00 LC11 0.00 129.37 38.29 0.00 42 0.00 129.43 52.61 0.00 LC10 0.00 129.43 38.32 0.00 44 0.00 129.47 52.63 0.00 LPS4 0.00 129.47 50.47 0.00 45 0.00 129.50 52.65 0.00 46 0.00 129.58 52.68 0.00 47 0.00 129.51 52.65 0.00 LC8 0.00 129.51 38.35 0.00 LC9 0.00 129.50 38.35 0.00 49 0.00 129.46 52.63 0.00 LPS3 0.00 129.46 50.46 0.00 51 0.00 129.41 52.61 0.00 LC7 0.00 129.41 38.31 0.00 53 0.00 129.34 52.57 0.00 LC6 0.00 129.34 38.28 0.00 55 0.00 129.27 52.55 0.00 TFC 0.25 129.27 52.55 0.00
Page 5 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 0.00 129.24 52.53 0.00 LC5 0.00 129.24 38.23 0.00 59 0.00 129.19 52.51 0.00 LPS2 0.00 129.19 50.35 0.00 60 0.00 129.13 52.49 0.00 61 0.00 129.06 52.45 0.00 62 0.00 128.99 52.43 0.00 LC4 0.00 129.13 38.19 0.00 LC3 0.00 129.06 38.15 0.00 64 0.00 128.95 52.41 0.00 65 0.00 128.92 52.40 0.00 66 0.00 128.90 52.38 0.00 LC2 0.00 128.95 38.11 0.00 LPS1 33.00 128.70 50.13 0.00 LC1 105.19 128.02 37.70 0.00 71 0.00 128.95 55.87 0.00 IL1-S 18.38 128.92 41.56 0.00 72 0.00 128.93 55.87 0.00 IL2-N 0.00 128.93 41.57 0.00 IL2-S 29.00 128.89 41.55 0.00 74 0.00 128.89 52.38 0.00 75 0.00 128.87 52.37 0.00 76 0.00 128.86 55.84 0.00 MV1 13.38 128.85 41.53 0.00 MV2 0.00 128.86 41.54 0.00 MS2 0.00 128.86 52.37 0.00 MS1 0.00 128.86 50.20 0.00 MS3 0.00 128.85 50.20 0.00 MS4 17.50 128.81 50.18 0.00 MS5 0.00 128.68 50.12 0.00 84 0.00 128.85 52.36 0.00 87 0.00 128.82 52.35 0.00 91 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 92 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 93 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 CHC2 81.56 128.56 31.01 0.00 CHC1 0.00 128.66 37.98 0.00 13 0.00 128.66 52.28 0.00 14 0.00 128.44 52.19 0.00 OE 5.00 128.72 34.54 0.00 CHC3 0.00 128.73 31.08 0.00 BE 5.63 128.72 38.01 0.00 25 0.00 128.95 41.58 0.00 30 0.00 129.61 52.69 0.00 11 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 12 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 16 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00
Page 6 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 0.00 128.73 52.31 0.00 21 0.00 129.52 52.66 0.00 15 0.00 128.45 52.19 0.00 R1 -434.78 130.00 0.00 0.00 Reservoir Link Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 12.55 0.32 0.19 Open 2 3.80 0.02 0.00 Open 3 53.13 1.36 2.70 Open 4 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 6 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 8 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 10 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 11 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 12 -49.33 0.31 0.08 Open 13 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 14 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 17 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 19 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 21 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 23 30.13 0.77 0.94 Open 24 -79.46 0.51 0.19 Open 25 -79.46 0.51 0.19 Open 28 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 29 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 40 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 42 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 44 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 46 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open
Page 7 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 50 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 52 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 54 -101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 57 333.44 0.95 0.38 Open 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 59 333.44 0.95 0.38 Open 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 61 333.44 0.95 0.38 Open 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 66 333.44 0.95 0.38 Open 67 0.25 0.01 0.00 Open 68 333.19 0.95 0.38 Open 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 70 333.19 0.95 0.38 Open 71 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 72 333.19 0.95 0.38 Open 73 333.19 0.95 0.38 Open 74 333.19 0.95 0.38 Open 75 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 77 285.81 0.81 0.29 Open 78 285.81 0.81 0.29 Open 79 252.81 0.72 0.23 Open 80 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 81 33.00 0.84 1.12 Open 82 105.19 2.69 9.57 Open 86 18.38 0.21 0.05 Open 87 29.00 0.19 0.03 Open 88 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 89 29.00 0.33 0.12 Open 90 147.62 0.42 0.09 Open 91 147.62 0.42 0.09 Open 92 23.24 0.15 0.02 Open 93 13.38 0.34 0.21 Open 94 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 95 9.86 0.11 0.02 Open 96 9.86 0.25 0.12 Open 97 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 98 9.86 0.25 0.12 Open 99 24.55 0.63 0.65 Open 100 124.38 0.35 0.06 Open
Page 8 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 32.19 0.21 0.04 Open 108 10.63 0.07 0.00 Open 109 5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 126 47.38 0.30 0.07 Open 127 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 26 101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 27 101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 32 -434.78 1.23 0.63 Open 33 333.44 0.95 0.38 Open 34 124.38 0.35 0.06 Open 35 92.19 0.59 0.26 Open 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 37 81.56 0.93 0.83 Open 38 81.56 0.93 0.83 Open 83 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 84 -5.00 0.06 0.00 Open 101 -5.00 0.06 0.00 Open 102 -5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 103 -5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 110 24.55 0.63 0.65 Open 31 101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 56 101.34 0.65 0.31 Open 111 -434.78 1.23 0.63 Open 106 24.55 0.63 0.65 Open 107 24.55 0.16 0.02 Open 114 21.88 0.25 0.07 Open 85 5.00 0.13 0.03 Open 104 5.63 0.14 0.04 Open
Page 1 12/21/2007 6:09:07 AM ********************************************************************** * E P A N E T * * Hydraulic and Water Quality * * Analysis for Pipe Networks * * Version 2.0 * ********************************************************************** Input File: HawkesNestWaterDistSystem_MDF+FF @140ft(12-01-07).NET Link - Node Table: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MS6 YC 237.46 4 2 YC 1 67.79 8 3 1 MHC1 87.74 4 4 1 2 152.64 8 5 2 MHC2 51.98 4 6 2 3 107.77 8 7 3 MHC3 68.94 4 8 3 4 105.39 8 9 4 MHC4 104.78 4 10 4 5 346.65 8 11 5 6 131.82 8 12 6 7 376.21 8 13 7 8 80.42 6 14 8 9 89.11 6 15 9 BU1 67.77 4 16 9 BU2 55.85 4 17 9 10 126.06 6 18 10 BU3 71.47 4 19 10 17 90.89 6 20 17 BU4 52.21 4 21 17 18 107.39 6 22 18 BU5 46.92 4 23 18 BU6 58.22 4 24 7 19 470.32 8 25 19 22 85.44 8 28 22 23 212.59 8 29 23 24 309.28 8 30 24 PB1 70.54 4 39 32 LC14 105.10 4 40 32 33 113.11 8 41 33 LPS6 186.24 4 42 33 35 131.15 8 43 35 LC13 81.37 4 44 35 38 222.37 8 45 38 LC12 92.10 4 46 38 39 117.58 8 47 39 LPS5 195.62 4
Page 2 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 39 40 115.51 8 49 40 LC11 92.94 4 50 40 42 171.65 8 51 42 LC10 95.55 4 52 42 44 138.77 8 53 44 LPS4 193.67 4 54 44 45 104.30 8 55 45 LC9 99.61 4 57 46 47 167.06 12 58 47 LC8 98.83 4 59 47 49 141.95 12 60 49 LPS3 235.31 4 61 49 51 123.54 12 62 51 LC7 69.19 4 65 53 LC6 71.47 4 66 53 55 175.15 12 67 55 TFC 66.64 4 68 55 57 71.01 12 69 57 LC5 95.95 4 70 57 59 123.39 12 71 59 LPS2 224.10 4 72 59 60 163.46 12 73 60 61 197.05 12 74 61 62 162.72 12 75 60 LC4 97.67 4 76 61 LC3 87.42 4 77 62 64 146.37 12 78 64 65 92.10 12 79 65 66 116.64 12 80 64 LC2 108.08 4 81 65 LPS1 201.58 4 82 66 LC1 91.80 4 86 71 IL1-S 549.22 6 87 71 72 629.37 8 88 72 IL2-N 338.04 6 89 72 IL2-S 373.88 6 90 66 74 112.72 12 91 74 75 253.03 12 92 75 76 77.72 8 93 76 MV1 80.13 4 94 76 MV2 84.07 4 95 76 MS2 103.79 6 96 MS2 MS3 129.41 4 97 MS2 MS1 100.68 4 98 MS3 MS4 337.30 4 99 MS4 MS5 197.38 4 100 75 84 278.86 12
Page 3 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 87 MS4 274.35 8 108 91 92 254.63 8 109 92 93 238.25 6 126 62 71 556.45 8 127 71 25 384.00 6 26 32 27 1023.29 8 27 27 24 618.49 8 32 46 30 49.52 12 33 51 53 200.10 12 34 84 87 511.81 12 35 87 91 325.04 8 36 93 CHC3 67.30 6 37 91 13 84.88 6 38 13 CHC2 126.02 6 83 13 CHC1 192.85 6 84 11 92 277.45 6 101 12 11 305.69 6 102 20 16 450.01 6 103 16 93 295.00 6 110 14 MS6 163.53 4 31 46 21 188.49 8 56 21 45 64.44 8 111 30 R1 620.74 12 106 MS5 15 357.72 4 107 15 14 157.72 8 114 22 CHS 165.90 6 85 12 OE 160.99 4 104 20 BE 171.29 4 Node Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS6 12.00 110.23 44.30 0.00 YC 8.75 102.92 41.13 0.00 1 0.00 102.86 41.10 0.00 MHC1 53.13 102.62 23.23 0.00 2 0.00 102.78 41.07 0.00 MHC2 0.00 102.78 23.30 0.00 3 0.00 102.72 41.04 0.00 MHC3 0.00 102.72 23.28 0.00 4 0.00 102.67 41.02 0.00 MHC4 0.00 102.67 23.25 0.00 5 0.00 102.48 40.94 0.00 6 0.00 102.42 40.91 0.00 7 0.00 102.22 40.82 0.00
Page 4 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 0.00 102.21 44.29 0.00 9 0.00 102.20 44.28 0.00 10 0.00 102.18 44.27 0.00 BU1 0.00 102.20 19.58 0.00 BU2 0.00 102.20 19.58 0.00 BU3 0.00 102.18 19.58 0.00 BU4 0.00 102.17 19.57 0.00 BU5 0.00 102.15 19.57 0.00 BU6 30.13 102.10 19.54 0.00 17 0.00 102.17 44.27 0.00 18 0.00 102.15 44.26 0.00 19 0.00 102.06 40.76 0.00 CHS 21.88 102.02 12.14 0.00 22 750.00 102.04 40.75 0.00 23 0.00 104.16 41.67 0.00 24 0.00 107.25 43.00 0.00 PB1 0.00 107.25 43.00 0.00 27 0.00 113.43 45.68 0.00 32 0.00 123.65 50.11 0.00 33 0.00 124.78 50.60 0.00 LC14 0.00 123.65 35.81 0.00 LPS6 0.00 124.78 48.43 0.00 35 0.00 126.09 51.17 0.00 LC13 0.00 126.09 36.87 0.00 LC12 0.00 128.31 37.83 0.00 38 0.00 128.31 52.13 0.00 39 0.00 129.48 52.64 0.00 LPS5 0.00 129.48 50.47 0.00 40 0.00 130.63 53.14 0.00 LC11 0.00 130.63 38.84 0.00 42 0.00 132.35 53.88 0.00 LC10 0.00 132.35 39.58 0.00 44 0.00 133.73 54.48 0.00 LPS4 0.00 133.73 52.31 0.00 45 0.00 134.78 54.93 0.00 46 0.00 137.30 56.03 0.00 47 0.00 137.16 55.96 0.00 LC8 0.00 137.16 41.66 0.00 LC9 0.00 134.78 40.63 0.00 49 0.00 137.03 55.91 0.00 LPS3 0.00 137.03 53.74 0.00 51 0.00 136.93 55.86 0.00 LC7 0.00 136.93 41.56 0.00 53 0.00 136.75 55.79 0.00 LC6 0.00 136.75 41.49 0.00 55 0.00 136.60 55.72 0.00 TFC 0.25 136.60 55.72 0.00
Page 5 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 0.00 136.54 55.70 0.00 LC5 0.00 136.54 41.40 0.00 59 0.00 136.43 55.65 0.00 LPS2 0.00 136.43 53.48 0.00 60 0.00 136.29 55.59 0.00 61 0.00 136.12 55.51 0.00 62 0.00 135.97 55.45 0.00 LC4 0.00 136.29 41.29 0.00 LC3 0.00 136.12 41.21 0.00 64 0.00 135.87 55.41 0.00 65 0.00 135.80 55.38 0.00 66 0.00 135.73 55.34 0.00 LC2 0.00 135.87 41.11 0.00 LPS1 33.00 135.58 53.11 0.00 LC1 105.19 134.85 40.66 0.00 71 0.00 135.93 58.90 0.00 IL1-S 18.38 135.90 44.59 0.00 72 0.00 135.91 58.89 0.00 IL2-N 0.00 135.91 44.59 0.00 IL2-S 29.00 135.87 44.57 0.00 74 0.00 135.68 55.33 0.00 75 0.00 135.59 55.28 0.00 76 0.00 135.58 58.75 0.00 MV1 13.38 135.56 44.44 0.00 MV2 0.00 135.58 44.45 0.00 MS2 0.00 135.57 55.27 0.00 MS1 0.00 135.57 53.11 0.00 MS3 0.00 135.43 53.05 0.00 MS4 17.50 135.07 52.89 0.00 MS5 0.00 128.30 49.96 0.00 84 0.00 135.51 55.25 0.00 87 0.00 135.36 55.18 0.00 91 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00 92 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00 93 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00 CHC2 81.56 135.10 33.84 0.00 CHC1 0.00 135.20 40.82 0.00 13 0.00 135.20 55.12 0.00 14 0.00 115.84 46.73 0.00 OE 5.00 135.26 37.38 0.00 CHC3 0.00 135.27 33.91 0.00 BE 5.63 135.26 40.84 0.00 25 0.00 135.93 44.60 0.00 30 0.00 137.50 56.11 0.00 11 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00 12 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00 16 0.00 135.27 55.15 0.00
Page 6 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 0.00 135.27 55.14 0.00 21 0.00 135.42 55.21 0.00 15 0.00 116.03 46.81 0.00 R1 -1184.78 140.00 0.00 0.00 Reservoir Link Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 197.58 5.04 30.77 Open 2 188.83 1.21 0.97 Open 3 53.13 1.36 2.70 Open 4 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 6 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 8 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 10 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 11 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 12 135.70 0.87 0.52 Open 13 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 14 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 17 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 19 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 21 30.13 0.34 0.13 Open 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 23 30.13 0.77 0.95 Open 24 105.57 0.67 0.33 Open 25 105.57 0.67 0.33 Open 28 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 29 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 40 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 42 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 44 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 46 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open
Page 7 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 50 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 52 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 54 -666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 57 518.47 1.47 0.87 Open 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 59 518.47 1.47 0.87 Open 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 61 518.47 1.47 0.87 Open 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 66 518.47 1.47 0.87 Open 67 0.25 0.01 0.00 Open 68 518.22 1.47 0.87 Open 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 70 518.22 1.47 0.87 Open 71 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 72 518.22 1.47 0.87 Open 73 518.22 1.47 0.87 Open 74 518.22 1.47 0.87 Open 75 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 77 470.84 1.34 0.73 Open 78 470.84 1.34 0.73 Open 79 437.84 1.24 0.64 Open 80 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 81 33.00 0.84 1.12 Open 82 105.19 2.69 9.57 Open 86 18.38 0.21 0.05 Open 87 29.00 0.19 0.03 Open 88 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 89 29.00 0.33 0.12 Open 90 332.65 0.94 0.38 Open 91 332.65 0.94 0.38 Open 92 45.34 0.29 0.07 Open 93 13.38 0.34 0.21 Open 94 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 95 31.96 0.36 0.15 Open 96 31.96 0.82 1.05 Open 97 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 98 31.96 0.82 1.05 Open 99 209.58 5.35 34.32 Open 100 287.31 0.82 0.29 Open
Page 8 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 195.12 1.25 1.03 Open 108 10.63 0.07 0.00 Open 109 5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 126 47.38 0.30 0.07 Open 127 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 26 666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 27 666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 32 -1184.78 3.36 4.02 Open 33 518.47 1.47 0.87 Open 34 287.31 0.82 0.29 Open 35 92.19 0.59 0.26 Open 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 37 81.56 0.93 0.83 Open 38 81.56 0.93 0.83 Open 83 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 84 -5.00 0.06 0.00 Open 101 -5.00 0.06 0.00 Open 102 -5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 103 -5.63 0.06 0.01 Open 110 209.58 5.35 34.32 Open 31 666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 56 666.31 4.25 9.99 Open 111 -1184.78 3.36 4.02 Open 106 209.58 5.35 34.32 Open 107 209.58 1.34 1.17 Open 114 21.88 0.25 0.07 Open 85 5.00 0.13 0.03 Open 104 5.63 0.14 0.04 Open
Page 1 12/10/2007 2:27:13 AM ********************************************************************** * E P A N E T * * Hydraulic and Water Quality * * Analysis for Pipe Networks * * Version 2.0 * ********************************************************************** Input File: HawkesNestWaterDistSystem_PHF @140ft(12-01-07).NET Link - Node Table: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 MS6 YC 172.28 4 2 YC 1 67.79 8 3 1 MHC1 87.74 4 4 1 2 152.64 8 5 2 MHC2 51.98 4 6 2 3 107.77 8 7 3 MHC3 44.25 4 8 3 4 105.39 8 9 4 MHC4 104.78 4 10 4 5 346.65 8 11 5 6 131.82 8 12 6 7 376.21 8 13 7 8 80.42 6 14 8 9 89.11 6 15 9 BU1 67.77 4 16 9 BU2 55.85 4 17 9 10 126.06 6 18 10 BU3 71.47 4 19 10 17 90.89 6 20 17 BU4 52.21 4 21 17 18 107.39 6 22 18 BU5 46.92 4 23 18 BU6 58.22 4 24 7 19 470.32 8 25 19 22 85.44 8 28 22 23 212.59 8 29 23 24 309.28 8 30 24 PB1 70.54 4 39 32 LC14 105.10 4 40 32 33 113.11 8 41 33 LPS6 186.24 4 42 33 35 131.15 8 43 35 LC13 81.37 4 44 35 38 222.37 8 45 38 LC12 92.10 4 46 38 39 117.58 8 47 39 LPS5 195.62 4
Page 2 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 39 40 115.51 8 49 40 LC11 92.94 4 50 40 42 171.65 8 51 42 LC10 95.55 4 52 42 44 138.77 8 53 44 LPS4 193.67 4 54 44 45 104.30 8 55 45 LC9 99.61 4 57 46 47 167.06 12 58 47 LC8 98.83 4 59 47 49 141.95 12 60 49 LPS3 235.31 4 61 49 51 123.54 12 62 51 LC7 69.19 4 65 53 LC6 71.47 4 66 53 55 175.15 12 67 55 TFC 66.64 4 68 55 57 71.01 12 69 57 LC5 95.95 4 70 57 59 123.39 12 71 59 LPS2 224.10 4 72 59 60 163.46 12 73 60 61 197.05 12 74 61 62 162.72 12 75 60 LC4 97.67 4 76 61 LC3 87.42 4 77 62 64 146.37 12 78 64 65 92.10 12 79 65 66 116.64 12 80 64 LC2 108.08 4 81 65 LPS1 201.58 6 82 66 LC1 91.80 4 86 71 IL1-S 549.22 6 87 71 72 629.37 8 88 72 IL2-N 338.04 6 89 72 IL2-S 373.88 6 90 66 74 112.72 12 91 74 75 253.03 12 92 75 76 77.72 8 93 76 MV1 80.13 4 94 76 MV2 84.07 4 95 76 MS2 103.79 6 96 MS2 MS3 129.41 4 97 MS2 MS1 100.68 4 98 MS3 MS4 336.50 4 99 MS4 MS5 198.47 4 100 75 84 278.86 12
Page 3 Link - Node Table: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Start End Length Diameter ID Node Node ft in ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 87 MS4 285.24 8 108 91 92 254.63 8 109 92 93 238.25 6 126 62 71 556.45 8 127 71 25 384.00 6 26 32 27 1023.29 8 27 27 24 618.49 8 32 46 30 49.52 12 33 51 53 200.10 12 34 84 87 511.81 12 35 87 91 325.04 8 36 93 CHC3 67.30 6 37 91 13 84.88 6 38 13 CHC2 126.02 6 83 13 CHC1 192.85 6 84 11 92 277.45 6 101 12 11 305.69 6 102 20 16 450.01 6 103 16 93 295.00 6 110 14 MS6 220.26 4 31 46 21 188.49 8 56 21 45 64.44 8 111 30 R1 620.74 12 106 MS5 15 357.72 4 107 15 14 157.72 8 114 22 CHS 165.90 6 85 12 OE 160.99 4 104 20 BE 171.29 4 Node Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS6 120.00 117.97 47.65 0.00 YC 12.15 121.24 49.06 0.00 1 0.00 121.29 49.09 0.00 MHC1 73.78 120.85 31.13 0.00 2 0.00 121.51 49.18 0.00 MHC2 0.00 121.51 31.42 0.00 3 0.00 121.67 49.25 0.00 MHC3 0.00 121.67 31.49 0.00 4 0.00 121.83 49.32 0.00 MHC4 0.00 121.83 31.56 0.00 5 0.00 122.34 49.55 0.00 6 0.00 122.54 49.63 0.00 7 0.00 123.10 49.87 0.00
Page 4 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 0.00 123.08 53.33 0.00 9 0.00 123.06 53.32 0.00 10 0.00 123.03 53.31 0.00 BU1 0.00 123.06 28.62 0.00 BU2 0.00 123.06 28.62 0.00 BU3 0.00 123.03 28.61 0.00 BU4 0.00 123.01 28.60 0.00 BU5 0.00 122.98 28.59 0.00 BU6 41.84 122.88 28.55 0.00 17 0.00 123.01 53.30 0.00 18 0.00 122.98 53.29 0.00 19 0.00 124.04 50.28 0.00 CHS 30.38 124.19 21.75 0.00 22 0.00 124.21 50.35 0.00 23 0.00 124.73 50.58 0.00 24 0.00 125.48 50.90 0.00 PB1 0.00 125.48 50.90 0.00 27 0.00 126.98 51.55 0.00 32 0.00 129.46 52.63 0.00 33 0.00 129.73 52.75 0.00 LC14 0.00 129.46 38.33 0.00 LPS6 0.00 129.73 50.58 0.00 35 0.00 130.05 52.89 0.00 LC13 0.00 130.05 38.59 0.00 LC12 0.00 130.59 38.82 0.00 38 0.00 130.59 53.12 0.00 39 0.00 130.88 53.24 0.00 LPS5 0.00 130.88 51.08 0.00 40 0.00 131.16 53.36 0.00 LC11 0.00 131.16 39.07 0.00 42 0.00 131.57 53.54 0.00 LC10 0.00 131.57 39.25 0.00 44 0.00 131.91 53.69 0.00 LPS4 0.00 131.91 51.52 0.00 45 0.00 132.16 53.80 0.00 46 0.00 132.78 54.07 0.00 47 0.00 131.46 53.49 0.00 LC8 0.00 131.46 39.19 0.00 LC9 0.00 132.16 39.50 0.00 49 0.00 130.33 53.01 0.00 LPS3 0.00 130.33 50.84 0.00 51 0.00 129.36 52.58 0.00 LC7 0.00 129.36 38.28 0.00 53 0.00 127.77 51.90 0.00 LC6 0.00 127.77 37.60 0.00 55 0.00 126.39 51.30 0.00 TFC 0.35 126.39 51.30 0.00
Page 5 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 57 0.00 125.83 51.05 0.00 LC5 0.00 125.83 36.76 0.00 59 0.00 124.85 50.63 0.00 LPS2 0.00 124.85 48.47 0.00 60 0.00 123.56 50.07 0.00 61 0.00 122.00 49.40 0.00 62 0.00 120.72 48.84 0.00 LC4 0.00 123.56 35.77 0.00 LC3 0.00 122.00 35.10 0.00 64 0.00 119.91 48.49 0.00 65 0.00 119.41 48.27 0.00 66 0.00 119.21 48.19 0.00 LC2 0.00 119.91 34.19 0.00 LPS1 660.00 111.38 42.63 0.00 LC1 146.09 117.60 33.19 0.00 71 0.00 119.40 51.73 0.00 IL1-S 144.72 118.08 36.86 0.00 72 0.00 118.94 51.54 0.00 IL2-N 0.00 118.94 37.24 0.00 IL2-S 161.94 117.83 36.76 0.00 74 0.00 119.09 48.13 0.00 75 0.00 118.81 48.01 0.00 76 0.00 118.79 51.47 0.00 MV1 0.00 118.79 37.17 0.00 MV2 18.50 118.76 37.16 0.00 MS2 0.00 118.74 47.98 0.00 MS1 0.00 118.74 45.82 0.00 MS3 0.00 118.29 45.62 0.00 MS4 470.00 117.13 45.12 0.00 MS5 0.00 117.35 45.21 0.00 84 0.00 118.57 47.91 0.00 87 0.00 118.13 47.72 0.00 91 0.00 117.95 47.64 0.00 92 0.00 117.95 47.64 0.00 93 0.00 117.94 47.64 0.00 CHC2 113.28 117.63 26.27 0.00 CHC1 0.00 117.83 33.29 0.00 13 0.00 117.83 47.59 0.00 14 0.00 117.73 47.55 0.00 OE 11.11 117.91 29.86 0.00 CHC3 0.00 117.94 26.41 0.00 BE 12.50 117.89 33.32 0.00 25 0.00 119.40 37.44 0.00 30 0.00 133.31 54.30 0.00 11 0.00 117.94 47.64 0.00 12 0.00 117.94 47.64 0.00 16 0.00 117.94 47.64 0.00
Page 6 Node Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Node Demand Head Pressure Quality ID GPM ft psi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 0.00 117.92 47.63 0.00 21 0.00 132.32 53.87 0.00 15 0.00 117.73 47.54 0.00 R1 -2016.64 140.00 0.00 0.00 Reservoir Link Results: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 -152.16 3.88 18.97 Open 2 -164.31 1.05 0.75 Open 3 73.78 1.88 4.96 Open 4 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 6 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 8 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 10 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 11 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 12 -238.09 1.52 1.49 Open 13 41.84 0.47 0.24 Open 14 41.84 0.47 0.24 Open 15 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 17 41.84 0.47 0.24 Open 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 19 41.84 0.47 0.24 Open 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 21 41.84 0.47 0.24 Open 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 23 41.84 1.07 1.74 Open 24 -279.93 1.79 2.00 Open 25 -279.93 1.79 2.00 Open 28 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 29 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 30 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 39 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 40 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 42 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 43 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 44 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 46 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 47 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open
Page 7 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 48 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 49 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 50 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 52 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 53 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 54 -310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 55 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 57 1706.33 4.84 7.91 Open 58 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 59 1706.33 4.84 7.91 Open 60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 61 1706.33 4.84 7.91 Open 62 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 65 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 66 1706.33 4.84 7.91 Open 67 0.35 0.01 0.00 Open 68 1705.98 4.84 7.90 Open 69 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 70 1705.98 4.84 7.90 Open 71 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 72 1705.98 4.84 7.90 Open 73 1705.98 4.84 7.90 Open 74 1705.98 4.84 7.90 Open 75 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 76 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 77 1399.32 3.97 5.48 Open 78 1399.32 3.97 5.48 Open 79 739.32 2.10 1.68 Open 80 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 81 660.00 7.49 39.85 Open 82 146.09 3.73 17.59 Open 86 144.72 1.64 2.40 Open 87 161.94 1.03 0.73 Open 88 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 89 161.94 1.84 2.95 Open 90 593.23 1.68 1.12 Open 91 593.23 1.68 1.12 Open 92 79.11 0.50 0.19 Open 93 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 94 18.50 0.47 0.38 Open 95 60.61 0.69 0.48 Open 96 60.61 1.55 3.45 Open 97 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 98 60.61 1.55 3.45 Open 99 -32.16 0.82 1.07 Open 100 514.12 1.46 0.86 Open
Page 8 Link Results: (continued) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Link Flow VelocityUnit Headloss Status ID GPM fps ft/Kft ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 105 377.23 2.41 3.48 Open 108 23.61 0.15 0.02 Open 109 12.50 0.14 0.03 Open 126 306.66 1.96 2.37 Open 127 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 26 310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 27 310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 32 -2016.64 5.72 10.78 Open 33 1706.33 4.84 7.91 Open 34 514.12 1.46 0.86 Open 35 136.89 0.87 0.53 Open 36 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 37 113.28 1.29 1.52 Open 38 113.28 1.29 1.52 Open 83 0.00 0.00 0.00 Open 84 -11.11 0.13 0.02 Open 101 -11.11 0.13 0.02 Open 102 -12.50 0.14 0.03 Open 103 -12.50 0.14 0.03 Open 110 -32.16 0.82 1.07 Open 31 310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 56 310.31 1.98 2.43 Open 111 -2016.64 5.72 10.78 Open 106 -32.16 0.82 1.07 Open 107 -32.16 0.21 0.04 Open 114 30.38 0.34 0.13 Open 85 11.11 0.28 0.15 Open 104 12.50 0.32 0.19 Open
APPENDIX C
WASTEWATER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CALCULATIONS
Pump Station 1 Marina Condo AreaPump Flow Rate 115.94 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 1 to MH 19/Pump 2 4 728 115.94 2.96 120 0.01 8.35 11.69 1.59 9.94
Static Head (ft)= 5.32Total Head Loss(ft)= 15.26
Pump Station 2 Hotel/Condo Spa & BungalowsPump Flow Rate 218.16 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 2 to MH16/Pump 8 4 2155 218.16 5.57 120 0.04 79.70 11.69 5.64 85.33
Static Head (ft)= 6.95Total Head Loss(ft)= 92.28
Hawkes Nest Plantation Pump Station Hydraulics12/20/2007
Pump Station 3 Ocean/Beachfront EstatesPump Flow Rate 23.61 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 3 to MH34/Pump 4 2 253 23.61 2.41 120 0.018 4.46 11.69 1.06 5.51
Static Head (ft)= 7.20Total Head Loss(ft)= 12.71
Pump Station 4 Marina Village/Casino Hotel CondoPump Flow Rate 185.47 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 4 to MH25/Pump7 4 1509 185.47 4.74 120 0.03 41.32 11.69 4.07 45.39
Static Head (ft)= 6.71Total Head Loss(ft)= 52.10
Pump Station 5 Island Lots 1Pump Flow Rate 31.94 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 5 to MH55/Pump 6 2 148 31.94 3.26 120 0.03 4.56 11.69 1.93 6.49
Static Head (ft)= 7.76Total Head Loss(ft)= 14.25
Pump Station 6 Island LotsPump Flow Rate 66.67 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump 6 to MH25/Pump 7 3 787 66.67 3.03 120 0.02 13.15 11.69 1.66 14.82
Static Head (ft)= 8.95Total Head Loss(ft)= 23.77
Pump Station 7 - Lagoon Island CondoPump Flow Rate 398.58 gpm
Pipe Pipe Size Pipe Length Flow Velocity Hazen Williams Slope Friction Loss Sum K Minor Loss Total MinorDescription in ft gpm ft/s C ft/ft ft ft and Friction Head
Pump7 toMH5/Pump 8 6 1608 398.58 4.52 120 0.02 25.20 11.69 3.72 28.91
Static Head (ft)= 5.27Total Head Loss(ft)= 34.18
WASTEWATER PUMP INFORMATION
FU
SC
AT
1.0
(20
0312
01)
PERFORMANCE CURVEDATE PROJECT
1/1-LOAD 3/4-LOAD 1/2-LOAD
POWER FACTOR
EFFICIENCY
MOTOR DATA
COMMENTS INLET/OUTLET
IMP. THROUGHLET
RATEDPOWER .....
STARTINGCURRENT ...
RATEDCURRENT ...
RATEDSPEED .....
TOT.MOM.OFINERTIA ...
NO. OFBLADES
PRODUCT TYPE
CURVE NO ISSUE
MOTOR # STATOR REV
FREQ. PHASES VOLTAGE POLES
GEARTYPE RATIO
NPSHre = NPSH3% + min. operational margin
Performance with clear water and ambient temp 40 °C
CP3085.183 MT
2007-04-27 FLYGT US Catalog 61-438-00-3003 1IMPELLER DIAMETER
148 mm
15-07-4AL 12- 11
60 Hz 1 230 V 4
--- ---
0.9873.5 %
---
0.9974.0 %
---
1.0068.5 %
---
- / 3.0 inch
2.5 inchNEMA Code Letter: D
1.6 hp
30 A
7.2 A
1705 rpm
0.021 kgm2
1
FLOW[USgpm]
HE
AD
[ft]
PO
WE
R
[hp]
EFF.[%]
NPSHre[ft]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 4000
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
10
20
30
40
1.2
1.6
2.0
DUTY-POINT FLOW[USgpm] HEAD[ft] POWER [hp] EFF. [%] NPSHre[ft]210 14.0 ( 1.56) 34.7 (47.6) 10.8B.E.P.
BE
ST
EF
F. P
OIN
T
O *O
VE
RA
LL E
FF
.
PU
MP
EF
F.
O *S
HA
FT
PO
WE
R
CURVE
© Copyright 2004 Zoeller Co. All rights reserved.
266 - 267 - 268 Series(For Pump Prefi x Identifi cation see News & Views 0052)
“WASTE-MATE”SUBMERSIBLE
SEWAGE/*EFFLUENT PUMPOR DEWATERING PUMP
2” NPT DISCHARGE
FEATURES AVAILABLE• Automatic• Nonautomatic (for variable level systems)• 2” NPT Discharge (2” & 3” Model 268)• ½ HP, 1 Ph, 115V, 200-208V, or 230V• Passes 2” Spherical Solids• BN and BE267 pumps available packaged with a
Piggyback Variable Level Float Switch• ½ HP, 3 Ph, 200-208V, 230V, or 460V
Automatic
“267”
COMPARE THESE FEATURES
• Float operated, submersible (NEMA 6) 2-pole
mechanical switch.
• Durable cast construction. ASTM Class 25 Cast
iron, switch case, and pump housing.
• Cast iron base on 267, 268.
• Engineered Plastic base on 266.
• Non-Clogging Vortex Impeller Design. Engineered
plastic impeller with metal inserts on models 266,
267 & 268 (1 PH). Model 267 available with cast
iron impeller option. (Cast iron impeller standard
on 3 PH models.)
• Not effected by materials normally found in
drainage and sewage sumps.
• Stainless steel screws, bolts, handle, guard, and
arm and seal assembly.
• UL Listed 3-wire neoprene cord and plug.
10 ft. cord standard for automatic.
15 ft. cord standard for Nonautomatic.
• Square Ring & Gasket - Neoprene.
• Motor - 266/267/268 Series - ½ HP 60 Hz, 1725
RPM, oil-fi lled, hermetically sealed, automatic
reset thermal overload protected (1 PH only).
• Oil lubricated bearings.
• Carbon and ceramic shaft seal.
• Passes 2-inch spherical solids.
• 2” NPT Discharge.
• Model 268 contains combination 2” NPT Female
and 3” NPT Male discharge.
• On point - 12”. Off point - 4” (Automatic units).
• Corrosion resistant powder coated epoxy fi nish.
SECTION: 2.30.020FM0390
0804Supersedes
0303Product information presented here refl ects conditions at time of publication. Consult factory regarding discrepancies or inconsistencies. MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 16347 • Louisville, KY 40256-0347
SHIP TO: 3649 Cane Run Road • Louisville, KY 40211-1961(502) 778-2731 • 1 (800) 928-PUMP • FAX (502) 774-3624
visit our web site:www.zoeller.com
* May be used in those states where codes do not restrict solids size in effl uent systems.
** See back page for UL & CSA listings.
ALL MODELS ARECOMPLETELY SUBMERSIBLEHERMETICALLY SEALEDWatertight - dust tight.
Manufacturers of . . .
Note: The sizing of effl uent systems normally requires variable level fl oat(s) controls and properly sized basins to achieve required pumping cycles or dosing timers with nonautomatic pumps.
Nonautomatic “267”
for variable level systems
Automatic
“268”
Tested to UL
Standard UL778
R LU**
**
Certifi ed to CSA
Standard C22.2 No.108
© Copyright 2004 Zoeller Co. All rights reserved.
All installation of controls, protection devices and wiring should be done by a qualifi ed licensed electrician. All electrical and safety codes should be followed including the most recent National Electric Code (NEC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA).
For information on additional Zoeller products refer to catalog on SImplex Panels, FM1596; Piggyback Variable Level Switches, FM0477; Electrical Alternator, FM0486; Mechanical Alternator, FM0495; Sump/Sewage Basins, FM0487; Single Phase Alarm Systems, FM0732; Watertight Junctions Boxes, FM1597; and Disconnect & Rail Systems, FM0787.
SELECTION GUIDE
1. Integral fl oat operated mechanical switch, no external control required. 2. For automatic use single piggyback variable level fl oat switch or double
piggyback variable level fl oat switch. Refer to FM0477. 3. See FM1228 for correct model of simplex control panel. 4. See FM0712 for correct model of duplex control panel or FM1663 for a
residential alternator system.
CONSULT FACTORY FOR SPECIAL APPLICATIONS
MODEL A B C D E F G H266 4-3/4 8-5/16 6-13/32 4-3/4 6-15/32 2” NPT 14-1/32 6-3/32 267 4-3/4 8-5/16 6-13/32 4-3/4 6-15/32 2” NPT 14-9/32 6-11/32 268 4-3/4 8-13/32 6-13/32 4-3/4 6-15/32 2”/3” NPT 14-1/32 8-13/32
• Minimum recommended basin size (Small load applications) Simplex - 18” x 30”.
Duplex - 30” x 36”.• High water alarms available.
RESERVE POWERED DESIGN For unusual conditions a reserve safety factor is engineered into the design of every Zoeller pump.
SK375
267 MODELS Control Selection Listings Model Volts-Ph Mode Amps Simplex Duplex CSA UL M267 115 1 Auto 10.4 1 4 Y Y BN267 115 1 Auto 10.4 ** 4 Y Y N267 115 1 Non 10.4 2 or 3 2 or 4 Y Y D267 230 1 Auto 5.5 1 --- Y Y E267 230 1 Non 5.5 2 or 3 4 Y Y ** BE267 230 1 Auto 5.5 ** --- Y Y * H267 200-208 1 Auto 6.2 1 --- N N * I267 200-208 1 Non 6.2 3 4 N N * J267 200-208 3 Non 2.6 3 4 N Y * F267 230 3 Non 2.6 3 4 N Y * G267 460 3 Non 1.5 3 4 N N
**
268 MODELS Control Selection Listings Model Volts-Ph Mode Amps Simplex Duplex CSA UL M268 115 1 Auto 10.4 1 4 Y Y ** BN268 115 1 Auto 10.4 ** 4 Y Y N268 115 1 Non 10.4 2 or 3 2 or 4 Y Y D268 230 1 Auto 5.5 1 --- Y Y E268 230 1 Non 5.5 2 or 3 4 Y Y ** BE268 230 1 Auto 5.5 ** --- Y Y * H268 200-208 1 Auto 6.2 1 --- Y N * I268 200-208 1 Non 6.2 3 4 Y N * J268 200-208 3 Non 2.6 3 4 Y Y * F268 230 3 Non 2.6 3 4 Y Y * G268 460 3 Non 1.5 3 4 N N*No molded plug **Single piggyback switch included
266 MODELS Control Selection Listings Model Volts-Ph Mode Amps Simplex Duplex CSA UL M266 115 1 Auto 10.4 1 4 Y Y** BN266 115 1 Auto 10.4 ** 4 Y Y N266 115 1 Non 10.4 2 or 3 2 or 4 Y Y D266 230 1 Auto 5.5 1 --- Y Y E266 230 1 Non 5.5 2 or 3 4 Y Y ** BE266 230 1 Auto 5.5 ** --- Y Y * H266 200-208 1 Auto 6.2 1 --- N N * I266 200-208 1 Non 6.2 3 4 N N * J266 200-208 3 Non 2.6 3 4 N Y * F266 230 3 Non 2.6 3 4 N Y * G266 460 3 Non 1.5 3 4 N N
• For “M” and “D” models, the approximate gallons pumped out per cycle are:
Tank Diameter Gallons Pumped 18” Simplex 8 Gallons 24” Simplex 15 Gallons 30” Duplex 22 Gallons 36” Duplex 33 Gallons 48” Duplex 60 Gallons
Caution: Maximum temperature of sewage or dewatering must be limited to 130°F (54°C). For over 130°F (54°C) special quotation required.
Standard All Models - 266 - Weight 41 lbs. ½ HP. 267 - Weight 47.5 lbs. ½ HP. 268 - Weight 51 lbs. ½ HP.
5
10
15
20
25
0
2
4
6
LITERS
GALLONS
FLOW PER MINUTE
ME
TE
RS
FE
ET
TO
TA
L D
YN
AM
IC H
EA
D
0 100
20 40
200
60
300
80 100
400
120
500
140
PUMP PERFORMANCE CURVE
MODEL 266/267/268
013225A
013225B
MODEL
Meters Liters
266/267/268
5 4841.5 128
10 3373.0 89
15 1894.6 50
20 386.1 10
Shut-off Head: 21.5 ft.(6.6m)
Feet Gal.
TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD/FLOW
PER MINUTE
SEWAGE AND DEWATERING
FU
SC
AT
1.0
(20
0312
01)
PERFORMANCE CURVEDATE PROJECT
1/1-LOAD 3/4-LOAD 1/2-LOAD
POWER FACTOR
EFFICIENCY
MOTOR DATA
COMMENTS INLET/OUTLET
IMP. THROUGHLET
RATEDPOWER .....
STARTINGCURRENT ...
RATEDCURRENT ...
RATEDSPEED .....
TOT.MOM.OFINERTIA ...
NO. OFBLADES
PRODUCT TYPE
CURVE NO ISSUE
MOTOR # STATOR REV
FREQ. PHASES VOLTAGE POLES
GEARTYPE RATIO
NPSHre = NPSH3% + min. operational margin
Performance with clear water and ambient temp 40 °C
CP3127.181 HT
2007-04-27 FLYGT US Catalog 61-462-00-3006 1IMPELLER DIAMETER
245 mm
21-12-4AL 12- 13
60 Hz 1 230 V 4
--- ---
0.9683.0 %
---
0.9984.5 %
---
1.0083.0 %
---
-/ 4 inch
2.2 inchNEMA Code Letter: A
7.5 hp
66 A
30 A
1745 rpm
0.12 kgm2
1
FLOW[USgpm]
HE
AD
[ft]
PO
WE
R
[hp]
EFF.[%]
NPSHre[ft]
0 100 200 300 400 5000
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0
10
20
30
40
4
5
6
7
8
9
DUTY-POINT FLOW[USgpm] HEAD[ft] POWER [hp] EFF. [%] NPSHre[ft]319 48.3 ( 7.46) 43.4 (52.3) 14.7B.E.P.
BE
ST
EF
F. P
OIN
T
O *O
VE
RA
LL E
FF
.
PU
MP
EF
F.
O *S
HA
FT
PO
WE
R
CURVE
© Copyright 2005 Zoeller Co. All rights reserved.
SECTION: 2.30.010FM1784
0305Supersedes
0803
ALL MODELS ARECOMPLETELY SUBMERSIBLEHERMETICALLY SEALEDWatertight - dust tight. MODELS AVAILABLE
• Automatic or Nonautomatic
AUTOMATICMODEL
COMPARE THESE FEATURES
• 115V single phase/60 Hz, .4 HP,
5.5 Amps, 3400 RPM.
• Thermal overload protection.
• Non-corrosive engineered plastic motor
housing, pump housing, base, and impeller.
• Oil Free.
• No steel sheet metal parts to rust or corrode.
• All stainless steel screws, switch arm, and
lower motor housing.
• 2-pole fl oat operated mechanical switch.
• Solid polypropylene fl oat.
• UL Listed 15' cord with 3-prong plug.
• Maximum temperature for dewatering -
110°F (43°C).
• Passes 2" inch spherical solids.
• 2" NPT discharge.
• Non-clogging vortex impeller.
• On point— 13" • Off point— 5-3/4"
• Major width - 9-5/16" • Height - 15-7/8"
Model 211(For Pump Prefi x Identifi cation
see News & Views 0052)
“AQUA-MATE”SUBMERSIBLE PUMP
FOR
SEWAGE/EFFLUENT OR DEWATERING
PASSES 2" SOLIDS
2" NPT DISCHARGE
Manufacturers of . . .
Product information presented here refl ects conditions at time of publication. Consult factory regarding discrepancies or inconsistencies. MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 16347 • Louisville, KY 40256-0347
SHIP TO: 3649 Cane Run Road • Louisville, KY 40211-1961(502) 778-2731 • 1 (800) 928-PUMP • FAX (502) 774-3624
visit our web site:www.zoeller.com
Note: The sizing of effl uent systems normally requires variable level fl oat(s) controls and properly sized basins to achieve required pumping cycles or dosing timers with nonautomatic pumps.
(Tested to UL778 andCSA22.2 108 Standards)
© Copyright 2005 Zoeller Co. All rights reserved.
SELECTION GUIDE1. Integral fl oat operated mechanical switch, no external control required.2. For automatic use single piggyback variable level fl oat switch or double piggyback vari-
able level fl oat switch. Refer to FM0477.3. See FM1663 for a residential alternator system.
• Variable level Float Switches available.
• Variable level long cycle systems available.
• Alarm systems available.
CONSULT FACTORYFOR SPECIAL APPLICATIONS
RESERVE POWERED DESIGNFor unusual conditions a reserve safety factor is engineered into the design of every Zoeller pump.
MAIL TO: P.O. BOX 16347Louisville, KY 40256-0347
SHIP TO: 3649 Cane Run RoadLouisville, KY 40211-1961
(502) 778-2731 • 1 (800) 928-PUMPFAX (502) 774-3624
Manufacturers of . .
www.zoeller.com
All installation of controls, protection devices and wiring should be done by a qualifi ed licensed electrician. All electrical and safety codes should be followed including the most recent National Electric Code (NEC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA).
For information on additional Zoeller products refer to catalog on Piggyback Variable Level Float Switches, FM0477; Sump/Sewage Basins, FM0487; and Single Phase Simplex Pump Control/Alarm Systems, FM0732.
Single Seal Control Selection Model Volts - Ph Mode Amps Simplex Duplex M 211 115 1 Auto 5.5 1 3 N 211 115 1 NonAuto 5.5 2 2 & 3
014718A
014718B
Recommended for 2" pipe only.
FLOW PER MINUTE
0LITERS
GALLONS
0
1208040
2010 30
200160
40 50
TO
TA
L D
YN
AM
IC H
EA
D
10
2
5
15
4
ME
TE
RS
25
6
FE
ET PUMP PERFORMANCE CURVE
MODEL 211
80
280240
60 70
320
90
20
19.5 ft. (5.9m)
Gal.
Shut-off Head:
15
10
5
Feet
4.6
3.0
32
53
1.5
Meters
82
MODEL
121
201
310
Liters
211
TOTAL DYNAMIC HEAD/FLOW
PER MINUTE
SEWAGE AND DEWATERING
6 1/8
15 7/8
2" - 11 1/2 N.P.T.
4
3 7/16
4 3/4
6 3/16 3 1/8
SK2092A
FU
SC
AT
1.0
(20
0312
01)
PERFORMANCE CURVEDATE PROJECT
1/1-LOAD 3/4-LOAD 1/2-LOAD
POWER FACTOR
EFFICIENCY
MOTOR DATA
COMMENTS INLET/OUTLET
IMP. THROUGHLET
RATEDPOWER .....
STARTINGCURRENT ...
RATEDCURRENT ...
RATEDSPEED .....
TOT.MOM.OFINERTIA ...
NO. OFBLADES
PRODUCT TYPE
CURVE NO ISSUE
MOTOR # STATOR REV
FREQ. PHASES VOLTAGE POLES
GEARTYPE RATIO
NPSHre = NPSH3% + min. operational margin
Performance with clear water and ambient temp 40 °C
CP3152.181 SH
2007-04-27 FLYGT US Catalog 63-269-00-2365 2IMPELLER DIAMETER
180 mm
25-14-2AF 29D 11
60 Hz 3 230 V 2
--- ---
0.9088.5 %
---
0.8688.5 %
---
0.7887.5 %
---
-/ 4 inch
1.6 inchNEMA Code Letter: J
23 hp
425 A
54 A
3520 rpm
0.066 kgm2
1
FLOW[USgpm]
HE
AD
[ft]
PO
WE
R
[hp]
EFF.[%]
NPSHre[ft]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 3500
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
10
20
30
40
50
12
16
20
NPSHre=36 ft
DUTY-POINT FLOW[USgpm] HEAD[ft] POWER [hp] EFF. [%] NPSHre[ft]318 105 ( 19.2) 39.0 (44.0) 40.6B.E.P.
BE
ST
EF
F. P
OIN
T
O *O
VE
RA
LL E
FF
.
PU
MP
EF
F.
O *S
HA
FT
PO
WE
R
CURVE
Mar
ina
Con
cept
1A
Haw
kes
Nes
t Mar
ina
Gra
nd T
urk,
B.W
.I.S
epte
mbe
r 17,
200
7
Mar
ina
Con
cept
1B
Haw
kes
Nes
t Mar
ina
Gra
nd T
urk,
B.W
.I.S
epte
mbe
r 17,
200
7
Mar
ina
Con
cept
2A
Haw
kes
Nes
t Mar
ina
Gra
nd T
urk,
B.W
.I.S
epte
mbe
r 17,
200
7
Mar
ina
Con
cept
2B
Haw
kes
Nes
t Mar
ina
Gra
nd T
urk,
B.W
.I.S
epte
mbe
r 17,
200
7
