22_0108 Burnside Island Final Water Report Co.pdf

ENGINEERING REPORT

FOR

CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION

BURNSIDE ISLAND

PREPARED FOR:

CHATHAM COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

EMC PROJECT NO.: 22-0108

JUNE 2023

Ben Image

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Report

Introduction……………………………………………………………1

Existing Conditions.……………………………………………….….1

Water System Analysis..………………………………………….….1

Proposed Improvements.………………………………………….…2

Rainwater Harvesting.………………………………………………..3

Opinion Of Probable Cost..……………………………………….….3

Conclusion……………………………………………………. ………3

Exhibits

Exhibit “A” Study Area

Exhibit “B” Water Distribution Models and Printouts

Exhibit “C” Proposed Improvements

Exhibit “D” Opinion of Probable Cost

Exhibit “E” GA EPD Documentation and Miocene Aquifer Report

Introduction:

In 2022 Chatham County contracted with EMC Engineering Services to determine the feasibility of providing fire protection on Burnside Island. The sections that follow will provide existing system conditions, water system analysis, and proposed improvements to provide fire protection.

Existing Conditions:

The Burnside Island project area is in the southeastern portion of unincorporated Chatham County and can be seen on Exhibit “A.” The island is approximately 400 acres in size and is bordered by Shipyard Creek to the north, the Moon River to the east and south and marsh to the west. The island has been developed and consists of single-family residences. The existing water system is owned and operated by Water Utility Management. The existing water lines consist of 1”, 2”, 3” and 4” lines. There are some 6” lines on the east end of the island where newer residences are located. There are two wells located on the island that supply water. One well is in Rio Vista Park that is bounded by Island Road. The other well is located on Hunt Drive between Amanda Drive and Hardee Drive. The water system supplies water for domestic use only. There are no fire hydrants to provide fire protection to the properties on the island. The 1” – 4” size lines are undersized (less than 6”) for fire protection and the 6” lines on the east end of the island have no hydrants connected to them. There are 365 parcels in the project area.

Water System Analysis:

Water Cad Version 10 by Bentley Systems, Inc. has been used to analyze the water system.

Since there are no existing fire lines or hydrants in the Burnside Island project area, the software has been used to model and size a pipe network to provide fire protection. The existing water system has not been analyzed because the existing pipes are undersized to provide fire protection. The model consists of junctions at different locations and fire hydrants. Fire hydrants have been placed to be at maximum distance of 500 ft from properties. The model includes elevation and minor loss data.

The model that has been created for Burnside Island is for stand-alone fire protection and will not be used to provide domestic water service to the properties in the study area. The model uses a well and an elevated storage tank to provide water for the fire protection system. The model parameters for the fire system are to provide 1000 gpm at a residual pressure of no lower than 20 psi. The height of the elevated storage tank and pipe sizes were adjusted until the design conditions were met. Two alternatives were modeled with the well and storage tank at two different locations. Alternative 1 has the well and tank located in the Rio Vista Park and Alternative 2 has the well and storage tank located on property that is owned by the State of Georgia on McAlpin Street. The water distribution models can be seen in Exhibits “B-1” and “B-2”. The model results are summarized as follows:

Alternative 1:

Water Supply Source: Well with an elevated storage tank at the Rio Vista Neighborhood Park.

The storage tank will have a capacity of 150,000 gallons and will be 135 ft. above the ground.

Required pipe sizes: 19,035 lf of 8” waterline, 3,770 lf of 10” waterline, 825 lf of 12” waterline (pipe lengths have been rounded to the nearest 5 ft.)

Fire Hydrants: 28

Alternative 2:

Water Supply Source: Well and elevated storage tank on property owned by the State of Georgia on McAlpin Street. The storage tank will have a capacity of 150,000 gallons and will be 140 ft.

above the ground.

Required pipe sizes: 17,555 lf of 8” waterline, 2,800 lf of 10” waterline, 3440 lf of 12” waterline (pipe lengths have been rounded to the nearest 5 ft.)

Fire Hydrants: 28

Proposed Improvements:

The proposed water systems can be seen in Exhibits “C-1” and “C-2”. The water lines for the new systems will be located within existing road right of ways. Because there are already existing utility lines and storm drainage located in the right of ways outside of the existing pavement, the new water lines will be planned to be laid under the pavement at this time. Easement acquisitions from property owners to place the waterlines out from under the pavement may not be practical due to the number of individual property owners that would have to be dealt with. Fire hydrants will be spaced at a maximum of 500 ft. The elevated storage tanks will have a 150,000-gallon capacity to provide a flow rate of 1000 gpm for up to two hours. All proposed lines will be either PVC or ductile iron with a minimum diameter of 8”. Valves will be placed throughout the systems as needed. The well and storage tank will be installed in the Rio Vista Park or on property owned by the State of Georgia depending on which alternative is chosen. The estimated well diameter is 6”-8”. The proposed water lines will be installed by direct bury as much as possible. In areas where direct bury cannot be utilized the waterlines will be installed by horizontal directional drill or jack and bore. Areas where this method may be utilized would be in places where specimen trees need to be preserved or existing features do not need to be disturbed. Water lines will be installed under the tidal creeks on the island by horizontal directional drill.

The proposed wells will be installed in the Floridan Aquifer. Initial conversations with GA EPD indicate that this is feasible if the wells are used for fire protection only. A copy of the correspondence from GA EPD is included in Exhibit “E.” The other aquifer that is available to draw water from is the Miocene Aquifer. Exhibit “E” has a document titled Engineering Assessment of the Miocene Aquifer in Coastal Georgia. This document outlines the findings of an investigation to determine if the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers which are formed by two Miocene deposits could be used for a source of water. The report states that the upper Brunswick Aquifer is only present in Chatham County and is less than 20 feet below the ground surface. Per the report the aquifer produces yields of 5 to 15 gpm. Based on the shallow depth and low yield outlined in this report, the Miocene Aquifer is not recommended as a water source for the fire protection system.

Rainwater Harvesting:

Rainwater Harvesting involves the collection of rainwater from roof tops and storing it in a tank/cistern for future use. For this project harvested rainwater would be a supplemental source of water for fire protection to the primary system. Gutters and downspouts would be used to collect the water. After the water leaves the downspout, it would flow through a pipe that is part of a central collection system to a tank/cistern. At the tank/cistern rainwater would need to be filtered prior to storage. There would also be a first flush diverter to prevent debris from entering the tank/cistern.

The pros of having a rainwater collection system are:

• Free source of water

• Supplemental system to the primary fire protection system

• Environmentally friendly

The cons of having a rainwater collection system are:

• Place for the tank/cistern

• Dedicated conveyance system

• Installation of gutters and down spouts on private residences

• Maintenance of the components (gutters, down spouts, filtration, first flush bypass, conveyance piping)

• Installation of a conveyance system

• Additional cost beyond the primary fire protection system

• Collection systems are mostly installed for single large structures such as factories, office buildings, multi-family housing or public park areas.

Rainwater Harvesting is not recommended for the Burnside Island project area because:

• Space for a tank/cistern

• Need for pumps in the conveyance system to carry collected rainwater over the bridges that are located on the island.

• Maintenance of system components on private property.

Opinion of Probable Cost:

An opinion of probable cost has been prepared for each alternative and are included in Exhibit “D.” The costs include the items needed for the installation of the primary fire protection system.

A contingency has been added to each alternative. The costs are:

Alternative 1: $7,432,000 Alternative 2: $7,670,420

Conclusion:

It is recommended that Chatham County should proceed with the design and construction of the recommended fire protection systems in Burnside Island. The installation of fire lines and hydrants will provide a much-needed service for the citizens in each project area. A phased approach has not been provided since there is no existing fire protection in the study area. Recommendations for project phasing can be provided based on the alternative chosen and the availability of funds for the project.

EXHIBIT “A”

STUDY AREA

© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS

LIMITS OF STUDY, TYP.

SHEET

OF

Pr ep ar ed fo r:

SURVEY DATE:

SE

R

VI

C

ES

, I

N C

E

M C

E N

G

IN

EE

R

IN

G

SCALE:

DATE:

PROJECT NO.:

SURVEYED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" =

0'

C ha th am C en te r S ou th , S ui te

A Sa va nn ah , G

A

Ph

2)

-6

Fa x:

(9

) 2

-4 sa va nn ah em c-en g.

co m w w w

.e m c-en g.

co m

EN

VI

R

O N

M

EN

TA

L

C

IV

IL

M

AR

IN

E

AL

BA

N Y

• A

TL

AN

TA

AU

G U

ST

A

• B R

U N

SW

IC

K

• C

O

LU

M

BU

S G

R

EE

N

VI

LL

E

• S

AV

AN

N

AH

ST

AT

ES

BO

R O

TH

O M

AS

TO

N

VA

LD

O

ST

A

D

AT

E N

O

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C

R

IP

TI

O

N

EX

H

IB

IT

"A

S

TU

D

Y

AR

EA

BU

R

N

SI

D E

IS

LA

N D

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

, G

EO

R G

IA

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

F

IR

E

PR

O

TE

C

TI

O N

BO

AR

D O

F C

O U

N

TY

C O

M M

IS

SI

O N

ER

S

22-0108

KPL

BWL

BWL

1" = 250'

APRIL 2023

250' 250'

250'

125'

AutoCAD SHX Text

GA SPC EAST ZONE NAD 83

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRID NORTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CENTER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD CREEK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

NORTH ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

EASTRIDGE ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SULLIVAN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

CUSHING POINT

AutoCAD SHX Text

VISTA POINT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MCALPIN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISLAND ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HUNT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AMANDA DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOX SQUIRREL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HARDEE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FAYE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MELINDA CIRCLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CROSS STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text O:\2022\22-0108 CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION\DWG\22-0108_BURNSIDE_B01.DWG 4/27/2023 11:47 AM 4/27/2023 11:47 AM4/27/2023 11:47 AM

EXHIBIT “B”

WATER DISTRIBUTION MODELS AND PRINTOUTS

PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT, TYP.

PROPOSED WATER LINE, TYP.

PROPOSED WELL W/

ELEVATED TANK

J-5

H-15J-8

H-14

H-1

J-1

H-2

H-3

H-4

H-5

H-6

J-2

H-8

H-7

H-9

H-10

H-11

J-3 H-17

H-18

H-12

H-13

H-16

H-19 H-20

H-21

J-6

H-22

H-23

J-7

H-24

H-25

H-26

H-27 H-28

PROPOSED JUNCTION, TYP.

500', TYP.

600', TYP.

500', TYP.

500', TYP.

LIMITS OF STUDY, TYP.

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W 10"W

10"W 10"W

"W

10"W

12"W 12"W

8"W

10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 8"W 8"W

8" W

8"W 8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W 8"W 8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

8" W

8"W

8" W

8" W

SHEET

OF

Pr ep ar ed fo r:

SURVEY DATE:

SE

R

VI

C

ES

, I

N C

E

M C

E N

G

IN

EE

R

PROJECT NO.:

SURVEYED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" =

0'

C ha th am C en te r S ou th , S ui te

A Sa va nn ah , G

A

Ph

2)

-6

Fa x:

(9

) 2

-4 sa va nn ah em c-en g.

co m w w w

.e m c-en g.

co m

EN

VI

R

O N

M

EN

TA

L

C

IV

IL

M

AR

IN

E

AL

BA

N Y

• A

TL

AN

TA

AU

G U

ST

A

• B R

U N

SW

IC

K

• C

O

LU

M

BU

S G

R

EE

N

VI

LL

E

• S

AV

AN

N

AH

ST

AT

ES

BO

R O

TH

O M

AS

TO

N

VA

LD

O

ST

A

D

AT

E N

O

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C

R

IP

TI

O

N

EX

H

IB

IT

"B

-1

W

AT

ER

D

IS

TR

IB

U

TI

O

N S

YS

TE

M A

LT

. 1

BU

R

N

SI

D E

IS

LA

N D

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

, G

EO

R G

IA

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

F

IR

E

PR

O

TE

C

TI

O N

BO

AR

D O

F C

O U

N

TY

C O

M M

IS

SI

O N

ER

S

22-0108

KPL

BWL

BWL

1" = 250'

APRIL 2023

250' 250'

250'

125'

AutoCAD SHX Text

GA SPC EAST ZONE NAD 83

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRID NORTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CENTER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD CREEK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

NORTH ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

EASTRIDGE ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SULLIVAN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

CUSHING POINT

AutoCAD SHX Text

VISTA POINT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MCALPIN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISLAND ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HUNT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AMANDA DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOX SQUIRREL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HARDEE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FAYE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MELINDA CIRCLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CROSS STREET

O:\2022\22-0108 CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION\DWG\22-0108_BURNSIDE_B01.DWG 4/27/2023 11:47 AM 4/27/2023 11:47 AM4/27/2023 11:47 AM

PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT, TYP.

PROPOSED WATER LINE, TYP.

J-5

H-15

J-14

H-14

H-1

J-1

H-2

H-3

H-4

H-5

H-6

J-2

H-8

H-7

H-9

H-10

H-11

J-3 H-17

H-18

H-12

H-13

H-16

H-19 H-20

H-21

J-6

H-22

H-23

J-7

H-24

H-25

H-26

H-27 H-28

PROPOSED WELL W/

ELEVATED TANK

PROPOSED JUNCTION, TYP.

500', TYP.

600', TYP.

500', TYP.

500', TYP.

LIMITS OF STUDY, TYP.

8" W

"W

"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

12"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

12"W

12"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W 10"W

10"W 10"W

"W

12"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 8"W 8"W

8" W

8"W 8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W 8"W 8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

8" W

8"W

8" W

8" W

12"W

SHEET

OF

Pr ep ar ed fo r:

SURVEY DATE:

SE

R

VI

C

ES

, I

N C

E

M C

E N

G

IN

EE

R

PROJECT NO.:

SURVEYED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" =

0'

C ha th am C en te r S ou th , S ui te

A Sa va nn ah , G

A

Ph

2)

-6

Fa x:

(9

) 2

-4 sa va nn ah em c-en g.

co m w w w

.e m c-en g.

co m

EN

VI

R

O N

M

EN

TA

L

C

IV

IL

M

AR

IN

E

AL

BA

N Y

• A

TL

AN

TA

AU

G U

ST

A

• B R

U N

SW

IC

K

• C

O

LU

M

BU

S G

R

EE

N

VI

LL

E

• S

AV

AN

N

AH

ST

AT

ES

BO

R O

TH

O M

AS

TO

N

VA

LD

O

ST

A

D

AT

E N

O

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C

R

IP

TI

O

N

EX

H

IB

IT

"B

-2

W

AT

ER

D

IS

TR

IB

U

TI

O

N S

YS

TE

M A

LT

. 2

BU

R

N

SI

D E

IS

LA

N D

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

, G

EO

R G

IA

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

F

IR

E

PR

O

TE

C

TI

O N

BO

AR

D O

F C

O U

N

TY

C O

M M

IS

SI

O N

ER

S

22-0108

KPL

BWL

BWL

1" = 250'

APRIL 2023

250' 250'

250'

125'

AutoCAD SHX Text

GA SPC EAST ZONE NAD 83

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRID NORTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CENTER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD CREEK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

NORTH ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

EASTRIDGE ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SULLIVAN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

CUSHING POINT

AutoCAD SHX Text

VISTA POINT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MCALPIN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISLAND ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HUNT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AMANDA DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOX SQUIRREL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HARDEE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FAYE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MELINDA CIRCLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CROSS STREET

O:\2022\22-0108 CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION\DWG\22-0108_BURNSIDE_B01.DWG 4/27/2023 11:47 AM 4/27/2023 11:47 AM4/27/2023 11:47 AM

Scenario: Fire Flow Analysis

J-8

J-2

J-6

J-7

J-1

J-3

J-5

R-1

H-17

H-16

H-15

H-14

H-13

H-12

H-11

H-10

H-9

H-8

H-7

H-6 H-5

H-4

H-3

H-2

H-1

H-28

H-27

H-26

H-25

H-24

H-23

H-22

H-21

H-20

H-19

H-18

Color Coding Legend

Pipe: Diameter (in)

<= 8.0

<= 10.0

<= 12.0

Other

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/20/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben Text Box Alternative 1

Fire Flow Node FlexTable: Fire Flow Results Table

Is Fire Flow Run Balanced?

Junction w/ Minimum Pressure (System)

Pressure (Calculated

System Lower Limit) (psi)

Pressure (Zone Lower

Limit) (psi)

Pressure (Calculated Residual)

(psi)

Pressure (Residual

Lower Limit) (psi)

Fire Flow (Available)

(gpm)

Fire Flow (Needed)

(gpm)

Fire Flow Status

Satisfies Fire Flow

Constraints?

Label

TrueH-6252021203,5001,000PassedTrueH-8

TrueH-28262024203,5001,000PassedTrueH-12

TrueH-8422041203,5001,000PassedTrueH-13

TrueH-8502048203,5001,000PassedTrueH-14

TrueJ-5442037203,5001,000PassedTrueH-15

TrueH-9272020202,7811,000PassedTrueH-7

TrueH-28212020202,7201,000PassedTrueH-19

TrueH-4222020202,7081,000PassedTrueH-5

TrueH-10262020202,7011,000PassedTrueH-11

TrueJ-5472020202,6921,000PassedTrueH-16

TrueH-4242020202,5861,000PassedTrueH-3

TrueJ-1282020202,5431,000PassedTrueH-6

TrueJ-1232020202,4331,000PassedTrueH-2

TrueH-9302020202,4161,000PassedTrueH-10

TrueH-10302020202,4151,000PassedTrueH-9

TrueH-3302020202,3541,000PassedTrueH-4

TrueH-18212020202,2701,000PassedTrueH-17

TrueH-28212020202,2481,000PassedTrueH-20

TrueJ-1352020201,7711,000PassedTrueH-1

TrueH-17342020201,7661,000PassedTrueH-18

TrueH-28352020201,6451,000PassedTrueH-22

TrueH-28202020201,5421,000PassedTrueH-24

TrueH-28392020201,5121,000PassedTrueH-21

TrueH-28302020201,4241,000PassedTrueH-23

TrueH-28202020201,3311,000PassedTrueH-26

TrueH-28292020201,3131,000PassedTrueH-25

TrueH-28202020201,1411,000PassedTrueH-27

TrueH-27272020201,0151,000PassedTrueH-28

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/24/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben

FlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade (ft)

Flow (Out net) (gpm)

ZoneElevation (ft)

LabelID

135.000<None>135.00R-1105

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/24/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben

FlexTable: Pipe Table Minor Loss Coefficient (Unified)

Velocity (ft/s)

Hydraulic Grade (Stop)

(ft)

Hydraulic Grade (Start)

(ft)

Flow (gpm)

Hazen-Williams C

MaterialDiameter (in)

Stop NodeStart NodeLength (ft)

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-6J-1900

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-2H-6572

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-8J-2623

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-17J-3333

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-12J-3563

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-7J-6561

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-24J-7298

0.8000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-26H-24609

0.8000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-27H-26828

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-28H-27828

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-21H-201,074

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-22J-6715

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-23J-7670

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-25H-24671

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-1H-1650

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-2J-1223

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-3H-2591

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-4H-3928

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-5H-4620

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-3H-5523

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-5H-8569

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-7J-2373

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-9H-7991

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-10H-9961

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-11H-10838

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-3H-11275

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-18H-17550

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-15H-14599

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-5H-15218

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0H-16J-5511

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC8.0J-8J-5365

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC10.0H-13H-12903

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC10.0H-8H-13970

Page 1 of 276 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/27/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben

Coefficient (Unified)

Velocity (ft/s)

Hydraulic Grade (Stop)

(ft)

Hydraulic Grade (Start)

(ft)

Flow (gpm)

Hazen-Williams C

MaterialDiameter (in)

Stop NodeStart NodeLength (ft)

0.0000.00135.00135.000130.0PVC10.0H-19H-12919

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC10.0H-20H-19861

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC10.0J-6H-20116

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC12.0H-14H-13626

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC12.0H-14J-8116

1.2800.00135.00135.000130.0PVC12.0J-8R-182

Page 2 of 276 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/27/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben

Pressure Pipes Inventory

Volume

(MG)

Length (All Materials)

(ft)

Length

(PVC)

(ft)

Diameter (in)

0.0519,03119,0318.0

0.023,7683,76810.0

0.0082482412.0

0.0723,62223,622All Diameters

Lateral Inventory

Total Length (ft)

Count

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT

06787 USA +1-203-755-1666

4/17/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-1.wtg ben

Scenario: Fire Flow Analysis

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT

06787 USA +1-203-755-1666

4/20/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

Alternative 2

Fire Flow Node FlexTable: Fire Flow Results Table

Is Fire Flow Run Balanced?

Junction w/ Minimum Pressure (System)

Pressure (Calculated

System Lower Limit) (psi)

Pressure (Zone Lower

Limit) (psi)

Pressure (Calculated Residual)

(psi)

Pressure (Residual

Lower Limit) (psi)

Fire Flow (Available)

(gpm)

Fire Flow (Needed)

(gpm)

Fire Flow Status

Satisfies Fire Flow

Constraints?

Label

TrueH-6522022203,5001,000PassedTrueH-1

TrueH-8462044203,5001,000PassedTrueH-2

TrueH-8412040203,5001,000PassedTrueH-3

TrueH-8402022203,5001,000PassedTrueH-4

TrueH-8392037203,5001,000PassedTrueH-5

TrueJ-2372021203,5001,000PassedTrueH-6

TrueH-14362032203,5001,000PassedTrueH-8

TrueH-14272025203,5001,000PassedTrueH-13

TrueH-28222020203,1701,000PassedTrueH-12

TrueH-9262020203,1291,000PassedTrueH-7

TrueH-18252020202,5831,000PassedTrueH-11

TrueH-10292020202,5021,000PassedTrueH-9

TrueH-28212020202,4931,000PassedTrueH-19

TrueH-9312020202,4071,000PassedTrueH-10

TrueH-15222020202,2101,000PassedTrueH-14

TrueH-18202020202,1951,000PassedTrueH-17

TrueH-28202020202,1301,000PassedTrueH-20

TrueJ-5232020202,0601,000PassedTrueH-15

TrueH-17342020201,7481,000PassedTrueH-18

TrueJ-5312020201,7271,000PassedTrueH-16

TrueH-28342020201,6151,000PassedTrueH-22

TrueH-28202020201,5231,000PassedTrueH-24

TrueH-28382020201,4961,000PassedTrueH-21

TrueH-28302020201,4141,000PassedTrueH-23

TrueH-28202020201,3281,000PassedTrueH-26

TrueH-28292020201,3111,000PassedTrueH-25

TrueH-28202020201,1481,000PassedTrueH-27

TrueH-27272020201,0261,000PassedTrueH-28

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/24/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

FlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade (ft)

Flow (Out net) (gpm)

ZoneElevation (ft)

LabelID

140.000<None>140.00R-1105

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/24/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

Coefficient (Unified)

Velocity (ft/s)

Hydraulic Grade (Stop)

(ft)

Hydraulic Grade (Start)

(ft)

Flow (gpm)

Hazen-Williams C

MaterialDiameter (in)

Stop NodeStart NodeLength (ft)

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-17J-3333

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-12J-3563

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-14H-13626

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-7J-6561

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-24J-7298

0.8000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-26H-24609

0.8000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-27H-26828

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-28H-27828

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-21H-201,074

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-22J-6715

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-23J-7670

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-25H-24671

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-5H-14481

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-4H-3928

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-5H-4620

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-6J-1900

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-2H-6572

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-8J-2623

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-7J-2373

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-9H-7991

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-10H-9961

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-11H-10838

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-3H-11275

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-18H-17550

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-15H-14599

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-5H-15218

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0H-16J-5511

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC8.0J-14H-1339

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC10.0H-13H-12903

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC10.0H-19H-12919

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC10.0H-20H-19861

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC10.0J-6H-20116

0.0000.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0H-2J-1223

Page 1 of 276 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/27/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

Coefficient (Unified)

Velocity (ft/s)

Hydraulic Grade (Stop)

(ft)

Hydraulic Grade (Start)

(ft)

Flow (gpm)

Hazen-Williams C

MaterialDiameter (in)

Stop NodeStart NodeLength (ft)

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0H-3H-2591

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0H-3H-5523

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0H-5H-8569

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0H-8H-13970

1.2800.00140.00140.000130.0PVC12.0J-1J-14311

1.2800.00140.00140.000120.0PVC12.0J-14R-1250

Page 2 of 276 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT 06787 USA +1-203- 755-1666

4/27/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

Volume

(MG)

Length (All Materials)

(ft)

Length

(PVC)

(ft)

Diameter (in)

0.0517,55517,5558.0

0.012,7982,79810.0

0.023,4373,43712.0

0.0823,79023,790All Diameters

Lateral Inventory

Total Length (ft)

Count

Page 1 of 176 Watertown Road, Suite 2D Thomaston, CT

06787 USA +1-203-755-1666

4/20/2023

WaterCAD [10.03.05.05]

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterBurnside_B-2.wtg ben

EXHIBIT “C”

PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

RIO VISTA

NEIGHBORHOOD

PARK

PROPOSED WELL W/

ELEVATED TANK

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W 10"W

10"W 10"W

"W

10"W

12"W 12"W

8"W

10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 8"W 8"W

8" W

8"W 8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W 8"W 8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

8" W

8"W

8" W

8" W

H-15

H-14

H-1

H-2

H-3

H-4

H-5

H-6

H-8

H-7

H-9

H-10

H-11

H-17

H-18

H-12

H-13

H-16

H-19 H-20

H-21

H-22

H-23

H-24

H-25

H-26

H-27 H-28

LIMITS OF STUDY, TYP.

SHEET

OF

Pr ep ar ed fo r:

SURVEY DATE:

SE

R

VI

C

ES

, I

N C

E

M C

E N

G

IN

EE

R

PROJECT NO.:

SURVEYED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" =

0'

C ha th am C en te r S ou th , S ui te

A Sa va nn ah , G

A

Ph

2)

-6

Fa x:

(9

) 2

-4 sa va nn ah em c-en g.

co m w w w

.e m c-en g.

co m

EN

VI

R

O N

M

EN

TA

L

C

IV

IL

M

AR

IN

E

AL

BA

N Y

• A

TL

AN

TA

AU

G U

ST

A

• B R

U N

SW

IC

K

• C

O

LU

M

BU

S G

R

EE

N

VI

LL

E

• S

AV

AN

N

AH

ST

AT

ES

BO

R O

TH

O M

AS

TO

N

VA

LD

O

ST

A

D

AT

E N

O

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C

R

IP

TI

O

N

EX

H

IB

IT

"C

-1

P R

O

PO

SE

D

IM

PR

O

VE

M

EN

TS

A

LT

. 1

BU

R

N

SI

D E

IS

LA

N D

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

, G

EO

R G

IA

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

F

IR

E

PR

O

TE

C

TI

O N

BO

AR

D O

F C

O U

N

TY

C O

M M

IS

SI

O N

ER

S

22-0108

KPL

BWL

BWL

1" = 250'

APRIL 2023

250' 250'

250'

125'

LEGEND

H-XX - PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT

- 8" WATER LINE

- 10" WATER LINE

- 12" WATER LINE

8"

10"

12"

AutoCAD SHX Text

GA SPC EAST ZONE NAD 83

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRID NORTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CENTER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD CREEK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

NORTH ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

EASTRIDGE ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SULLIVAN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

CUSHING POINT

AutoCAD SHX Text

VISTA POINT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MCALPIN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISLAND ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HUNT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AMANDA DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOX SQUIRREL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HARDEE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FAYE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MELINDA CIRCLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CROSS STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING WELL SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING WELL SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING PUMP SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

O:\2022\22-0108 CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION\DWG\22-0108_BURNSIDE_B01.DWG 4/27/2023 11:47 AM 4/27/2023 11:47 AM4/27/2023 11:47 AM

STATE OWNED

PROPERTY

8" W

"W

"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

12"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8" W

8" W

12"W

12"W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8" W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W 10"W

10"W 10"W

"W

12"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 10"W 8"W 8"W

8" W

8"W 8"W

8" W

8" W

8"W 8"W 8"W

8"W

8"W

8"W 8"W

8"W

8" W

8"W

8" W

8" W

H-15

H-14

H-1

H-2

H-3

H-4

H-5

H-6

H-8

H-7

H-9

H-10

H-11

H-17

H-18

H-12

H-13

H-16

H-19 H-20

H-21

H-22

H-23

H-24

H-25

H-26

H-27 H-28

12"W

PROPOSED WELL W/

ELEVATED TANK

LIMITS OF STUDY, TYP.

SHEET

OF

Pr ep ar ed fo r:

SURVEY DATE:

SE

R

VI

C

ES

, I

N C

E

M C

E N

G

IN

EE

R

PROJECT NO.:

SURVEYED BY:

CHECKED BY:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

GRAPHIC SCALE: 1" =

0'

C ha th am C en te r S ou th , S ui te

A Sa va nn ah , G

A

Ph

2)

-6

Fa x:

(9

) 2

-4 sa va nn ah em c-en g.

co m w w w

.e m c-en g.

co m

EN

VI

R

O N

M

EN

TA

L

C

IV

IL

M

AR

IN

E

AL

BA

N Y

• A

TL

AN

TA

AU

G U

ST

A

• B R

U N

SW

IC

K

• C

O

LU

M

BU

S G

R

EE

N

VI

LL

E

• S

AV

AN

N

AH

ST

AT

ES

BO

R O

TH

O M

AS

TO

N

VA

LD

O

ST

A

D

AT

E N

O

R

EV

IS

IO

N D

ES

C

R

IP

TI

O

N

EX

H

IB

IT

"C

-2

P R

O

PO

SE

D

IM

PR

O

VE

M

EN

TS

A

LT

. 2

BU

R

N

SI

D E

IS

LA

N D

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

, G

EO

R G

IA

C H

AT

H

AM

C

O U

N

TY

F

IR

E

PR

O

TE

C

TI

O N

BO

AR

D O

F C

O U

N

TY

C O

M M

IS

SI

O N

ER

S

22-0108

KPL

BWL

BWL

1" = 250'

APRIL 2023

250' 250'

250'

125'

LEGEND

H-XX - PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT

- 8" WATER LINE

- 10" WATER LINE

- 12" WATER LINE

8"

10"

12"

AutoCAD SHX Text

GA SPC EAST ZONE NAD 83

AutoCAD SHX Text

GRID NORTH

AutoCAD SHX Text

CENTER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD CREEK

AutoCAD SHX Text

SHIPYARD ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

NORTH ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

EASTRIDGE ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

MOON RIVER COURT

AutoCAD SHX Text

SULLIVAN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

CUSHING POINT

AutoCAD SHX Text

VISTA POINT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MCALPIN STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

ISLAND ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HUNT DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

AMANDA DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FOX SQUIRREL ROAD

AutoCAD SHX Text

HARDEE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

FAYE DRIVE

AutoCAD SHX Text

MELINDA CIRCLE

AutoCAD SHX Text

CROSS STREET

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING WELL SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING WELL SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

AutoCAD SHX Text

EXISTING PUMP SITE (OWNED BY WATER UTILITY MANAGEMENT)

O:\2022\22-0108 CHATHAM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION\DWG\22-0108_BURNSIDE_B01.DWG 4/27/2023 11:47 AM 4/27/2023 11:47 AM4/27/2023 11:47 AM

EXHIBIT “D”

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

6/5/2023

Item Description Est. Qty. Unit Unit Price Total Price

1 Clearing 8.1 AC $10,000.00 $81,000.00

Remove and Replace Misc. Items (Trees, Shrubs, Signs, Traffic Striping, etc.)

1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00

$121,000.00

1 Grading 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00

2 Mucking 3,500 CY $20.00 $70,000.00

$145,000.00

1 Construction Exit 3 EA $2,500.00 $7,500.00

2 Silt Fence 23,630 LF $4.00 $94,520.00

3 Temporary Grassing 26,260 SY $1.00 $26,260.00

4 Sodding 26,260 SY $4.00 $105,040.00

$233,320.00

1 8" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 16,535 LF $75.00 $1,240,125.00

2 10" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 3,390 LF $95.00 $322,050.00

3 12" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 525 LF $115.00 $60,375.00

8" FPVC Waterline - Horizontal Directional

Drill

2,500 LF $150.00 $375,000.00

10" FPVC Waterline - Horizontal

Directional Drill

380 LF $190.00 $72,200.00

12" FPVC Waterline - Horizontal

Directional Drill

300 LF $230.00 $69,000.00

7 8" Valve in Manhole 22 EA $3,500.00 $77,000.00

8 10" Valve in Manhole 6 EA $3,800.00 $22,800.00

9 12" Valve in Manhole 2 EA $5,100.00 $10,200.00

10 Fire Hydrants 28 EA $3,500.00 $98,000.00

SUBTOTAL SECTION 3

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Chatham County Fire Protection - Burnside Island Alternative 1

EMC PROJECT NO.: 22-0108

CHATHAM COUNTY , GEORGIA

prepared for:

CHATHAM COUNTY

SECTION 1: CLEARING

SUBTOTAL SECTION 1

SECTION 2: EARTHWORK

SUBTOTAL SECTION 2

SECTION 3: EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL

SECTION 4: WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

11 Water Well 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00

12 Elevated Storage Tank 1 LS $900,000.00 $900,000.00

Borrow Material For Trench Backfill As

Directed By The Engineer

12,100 CY $15.00 $181,500.00

$3,528,250.00

1 Remove and Replace Asphalt Pavement 17,750 SY $60.00 $1,065,000.00

2 18" Curb and Gutter 3,650 LF $25.00 $91,250.00

3 Remove and Replace Driveways 3,600 SY $75.00 $270,000.00

$1,426,250.00

SECTION 6: MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS

1 Mobilization 1 LS $140,000.00 $140,000.00

2 Property for Well and Tank 1 LS $40,600.00 $40,600.00

3 Construction Staking & As-builts 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00

4 Traffic Control 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00

5 Pothole Existing Utilities 15 EA $500.00 $7,500.00

$263,100.00

$5,716,920.00

$1,715,080.00

$7,432,000.00

30% CONTINGENCY

GRAND TOTAL BURNSIDE ISLAND ALT 1

SUBTOTAL SECTION 4

SECTION 5: PAVEMENT

SUBTOTAL SECTION 5

SUBTOTAL SECTION 6

TOTAL

6/5/2023

Item Description Est. Qty. Unit Unit Price Total Price

1 Clearing 8.1 AC $10,000.00 $81,000.00

Remove and Replace Misc. Items (Trees, Shrubs, Signs, Traffic Striping, etc.)

1 LS $40,000.00 $40,000.00

$121,000.00

1 Grading 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000.00

2 Mucking 3,500 CY $20.00 $70,000.00

$145,000.00

1 Construction Exit 3 EA $2,500.00 $7,500.00

2 Silt Fence 23,630 LF $4.00 $94,520.00

3 Temporary Grassing 26,260 SY $1.00 $26,260.00

4 Sodding 26,260 SY $4.00 $105,040.00

$233,320.00

1 8" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 14,900 LF $75.00 $1,117,500.00

2 10" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 2,520 LF $95.00 $239,400.00

3 12" PVC Waterline - Direct Bury 3,100 LF $115.00 $356,500.00

8" FPVC Waterline - Horizontal Directional

Drill

2,655 LF $150.00 $398,250.00

10" FPVC Waterline - Horizontal

Directional Drill

280 LF $190.00 $53,200.00

12" FPVC Waterline-Horizontal Directional

Drill

340 LF $230.00 $78,200.00

7 8" Valve in Manhole 19 EA $3,500.00 $66,500.00

8 10" Valve in Manhole 4 EA $3,800.00 $15,200.00

9 12" Valve in Manhole 5 EA $5,100.00 $25,500.00

10 Fire Hydrants 28 EA $3,500.00 $98,000.00

SUBTOTAL SECTION 3

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Chatham County Fire Protection - Burnside Island Alternative 2

EMC PROJECT NO.: 22-0108

CHATHAM COUNTY , GEORGIA

prepared for:

CHATHAM COUNTY

SECTION 1: CLEARING

SUBTOTAL SECTION 1

SECTION 2: EARTHWORK

SUBTOTAL SECTION 2

SECTION 3: EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL

SECTION 4: WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

11 Water Well 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000.00

12 Elevated Storage Tank 1 LS $900,000.00 $900,000.00

Borrow Material For Trench Backfill As

Directed By The Engineer

12,100 CY $15.00 $181,500.00

$3,629,750.00

1 Remove and Replace Asphalt Pavement 17,750 SY $60.00 $1,065,000.00

2 18" Curb and Gutter 3,650 LF $25.00 $91,250.00

3 Remove and Replace Driveways 3,600 SY $75.00 $270,000.00

$1,426,250.00

SECTION 6: MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS

1 Mobilization 1 LS $140,000.00 $140,000.00

2 Property for Well and Tank 1 LS $122,500.00 $122,500.00

3 Construction Staking & As-builts 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000.00

4 Traffic Control 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000.00

5 Pothole Existing Utilities 15 EA $500.00 $7,500.00

$345,000.00

$5,900,320.00

$1,770,100.00

$7,670,420.00

30% CONTINGENCY

GRAND TOTAL BURNSIDE ISLAND ALT-2

SUBTOTAL SECTION 4

SECTION 5: PAVEMENT

SUBTOTAL SECTION 5

SUBTOTAL SECTION 6

TOTAL

EXHIBIT “E”

GA EPD DOCUMENTATION

AND

MIOCENE AQUFER REPORT

ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT OF THE MIOCENE AQUIFER SYSTEM

IN COASTAL GEORGIA

Jonathan S. Radtke', Christopher D. Hemingway' and Robert Humphries'

AUTHORS: 'Senior Hydrogeologist, 'Project Hydrogeologist, and 'Geologist, Golder Associates Inc., 3730 Chamblee Tucker Road, Atlanta, GA 30341.

REFERENCE: Proceedings of the 2001 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held March 26 -27, 2001, at the University of Georgia. Kathryn J. Hatcher, editor, Institute of Ecology, the University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.

Abstract. Under contract to the Georgia Geologic Survey, Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) performed an investigation to characterize the water-bearing properties of the Miocene aquifer system in coastal Georgia (also referred to as the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers). The investigation focussed on specific areas where a cap has been imposed restricting further withdrawals from the Upper Floridan Aquifer.

At selected sites in Bryan, Chatham, Effingham and Glynn counties, Golder installed pumping wells and observation wells within the Miocene aquifer(s) and performed 72-hour pumping tests. Results of the investigation revealed that the lower Brunswick aquifer is absent at the sites in Chatham, Effingham and Bryan counties. Furthermore, the upper Brunswick aquifer at these locations is poorly developed, producing sustainable yields of only five to 15 gpm. However, there are Miocene wells within the Brunswick aquifer in Bryan County that produce upwards of 100 gpm, indicating significant variation in the hydraulic properties of the Miocene aquifer system in this area.

Both the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers are present at the Glynn County site. While the upper Brunswick aquifer at this location is capable of producing only about 10 gpm, the lower Brunswick aquifer can produce a sustainable yield of over 300 gpm. In addition to providing water resource information to planners, developers and industry, the data produced from this investigation will also be incorporated into regional groundwater flow and transport models being developed by the USGS for management of groundwater resources throughout coastal Georgia.

INTRODUCTION

Extensive use of the Upper Floridan Aquifer system has caused cones of depression in the potentiometric surface along the Georgia Coastline (particularly around the communities of Savannah and Brunswick) and salt water intrusion has become a significant concern. Consequently, the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) has developed an Interim Strategy for Managing Salt Water Intrusion in the Upper Floridan Aquifer of Georgia. Key components of the strategy are to conduct research that will lead to development of measures to stop salt water intrusion and to develop a long term management plan to protect the Upper Floridan Aquifer. Consistent with these components, the Miocene aquifers, often referred to as the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers, are being considered as an alternative water source to the Upper Floridan aquifer. Potential use of the Miocene aquifers is of particular interest in Glynn County, Chatham County, and portions of Bryan and Effingham counties where a cap on further groundwater withdrawals from the Upper Floridan Aquifer has been imposed.

An investigation was conducted to characterize the Miocene aquifer system in these areas and determine to what extent these aquifers can be developed without adversely affecting the Floridan aquifer system or developing problems of their own. The investigation included installation of test wells and observation wells at four sites in Bryan, Chatham, Effingham and Glynn Counties, and performance of pumping tests at each site. The data were analyzed and evaluated to provide estimates of specific aquifer parameters and to determine the water-bearing capacity of the aquifer(s) at each location.

Information derived from this investigation can be used by local governments, commercial developers and industry for their water-supply planning. Specifically, the investigation provides information as to whether the Miocene aquifers offer an alternative source of water to the Upper Floridan Aquifer in the capped areas. The investigation also provides critical input parameters for regional groundwater flow and solute transport models currently being developed by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and others.

BACKGROUND

The majority of the Miocene related work completed to date has focussed on identifying formation sequences using existing corehole data and geophysical logs (Clarke et al, 1990). Limited work has been performed defining the hydraulic characteristics of the Miocene aquifers (Steele and McDowell, 1998).

Hydrogeology of Miocene Aquifer System The upper and lower Brunswick aquifers are formed by two Miocene depositional sequences. Each sequence forms a geologic unit consisting of a basal carbonate layer, a middle clay layer, and an upper sand layer. The upper sand layers represent the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers (Clarke, Hacke, and Peck, 1990).

The upper Brunswick aquifer consists of poorly sorted, fine to coarse, slightly phosphatic and dolomitic quartz sand and limestone. The aquifer ranges in thickness from less than 20 feet in Chatham county to 150 feet in Wayne County (Clarke, Hacke, and Peck, 1990). In general, the thickness of the upper Brunswick increases toward the south-south west along the Georgia coastline. Typically the upper Brunswick aquifer is separated from the overlying surficial aquifer by a confining unit consisting of phosphatic silty/sandy clay or limestone. Because few individual wells have tapped into the upper Brunswick there is limited hydrologic data available for this aquifer. As of 1990 there had been no pumping tests performed on the upper Brunswick.

The lower Brunswick also consists of poorly sorted, fine to coarse, slightly phosphatic and dolomitic, quartz sand and limestone. This unit is absent in the Savannah, GA area because the permeable upper sand layer has been eroded away or was never deposited. As with the upper Brunswick, the lower Brunswick aquifer thickens to the south and is thickest in the Glynn County area.

The upper and lower Brunswick aquifers are separated by a confining layer that consists of silty clay and phosphatic limestone or dolomite.

Hydrographs from existing wells screened in the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers exhibit water level fluctuations and trends similar to one another, indicating a hydraulic connection between the aquifers.

Likewise, the water levels fluctuate in response to seasonal climatic changes and regional pumping from the Upper Floridan aquifer, indicating some degree of communication with overlying and underlying aquifers.

The degree of interconnection is largely dependent upon the thickness of the confining layers separating the aquifers.

The lower Brunswick aquifer is absent throughout most of Chatham and Effingham counties and occurs sporadically throughout Bryan County. Production wells installed near Richmond Hill in Bryan County were reportedly screened in the lower Brunswick aquifer. Analyses of pumping test data from these wells yielded transmissivity values of 2200 to 2700 ft. 2/day (Jordan, Jones and Goulding, 1999). Although the upper and lower Brunswick units are relatively thin throughout much of the county, these data indicate that the potential for water supply from these units is good in some areas.

Several of the wells installed in the lower Brunswick aquifer are flowing wells. Well yields from the lower Brunswick aquifer in Glynn County range from as little as 3 gpm to over 1,000 gpm. Transmissivity values range from less than 1400 ft 2/day to 4700 ft 2/day (Clarke, Hacke, and Peck, 1999). Based on these data, the lower Brunswick aquifer in Glynn County is expected to have greater groundwater production potential relative to the other three counties.

AQUIFER ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

The Georgia EPD selected test sites in each of the subject counties. These locations are shown on Figures 1 and 2. The aquifer assessment program consisted of the following activities:

■ Drilling and installation of a test well and corresponding observation well in the upper Brunswick and lower Brunswick (if present) aquifers at each site;

Figure 1. Test locations in Bryan, Chatham and Effingham counties.

/' Glynn County

(Thalman Site

Bryn,swick, Figure 2. Test locations in Glynn County.

■ Performance of a 72-hour pumping test in each test well to obtain data to adequately characterize the water-bearing properties of the aquifer(s);

■ Analysis of pumping test data to calculate specific aquifer parameters such as transmissivity, storativity, hydraulic conductivity, etc.; and

■ Evaluation of the pumping test results to determine the viability of the aquifer as an alternative water source and provide an estimate of sustainable yields.

Drilling and Well Installations At each site, a pilot hole was advanced using mud rotary techniques through the Miocene deposits down to the top of the Floridan Aquifer. Lithologic logs were produced and downhole geophysical surveys were conducted for each pilot hole. Marker horizons depicted on gamma logs within the Miocene deposits were used to identify the depositional sequences within the Miocene deposits. These data, along with resistivity data, were used to identify the Brunswick aquifers and select the appropriate screen intervals for the pumping and observation wells.

At the Bryan, Chatham and Effingham sites, only the upper Brunswick aquifer was encountered. One pumping well and one observation well were installed at each of these locations. The screen intervals were set at depths of 230-265 feet below ground surface (ft.bgs) in Bryan County, 175-200 ft.bgs in Chatham County and 155-175 ft.bgs in Effingham County.

At the Glynn County site, both the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers were present. A total of four wells (one pumping well and one observation well in each aquifer) were installed at this site. The permeable portion of the upper Brunswick aquifer occurred at approximately 285-300 ft.bgs while the permeable portion of the lower Brunswick aquifer occurred at approximately 430-490 ft.bgs.

Aquifer Testing Constant rate pumping tests were conducted at each test site to provide data for analysis of aquifer parameters and estimates of sustainable yields. The test wells were pumped for a period of 72 hours followed by a recovery phase. Pressure transducers and dataloggers were used to accurately measure and record water levels in the pumping and observation wells.

Prior to each pumping test, water levels in each well were monitored for a minimum of seven days to determine static water levels and assess ambient potentiometric trends. The subsequent pumping test data were corrected accordingly prior to analysis. The data were also corrected for barometric pressure effects.

The upper Brunswick aquifer wells at the Chatham County and Effingham County sites were each pumped at a rate of about five gpm with drawdowns of approximately 90 feet and 105 feet, respectively. The upper Brunswick well at the Bryan County site was pumped at a rate of 15 gpm with a drawdown of about 55 feet.

The upper Brunswick well at the Glynn County site was pumped at a rate of seven gpm with a drawdown of approximately 80 feet. The lower Brunswick well at this location was more prolific, producing 340 gpm with a drawdown of about 60 feet.

Aquifer Test Analyses The pumping test data were analyzed to obtain estimates for transmissivity, storativity, and hydraulic conductivity. Methods for analyzing the aquifer test data were selected to provide appropriate aquifer parameter estimations in order to facilitate an accurate and comprehensive evaluation of the water-bearing characteristics of the Miocene Aquifers at each site.

To increase the reliability of the calculated aquifer parameters, the skin influenced portion of the data was identified and distinguished from the undisturbed formation properties. Also, to the extent practical, the degree of heterogeneity from changes in unit thickness or variation in properties away from the well were evaluated. This was accomplished using pressure derivative analysis methods (Spane and Wurstner, 1993). The data were also evaluated to determine possible effects from recharge boundaries and from leakage from overlying and underlying units.

AQUIFER TEST RESULTS

The pumping test data from each site were analyzed for transmissivity (T), storativity (S) and hydraulic conductivity (K). Using the pressure derivative approach, the relative heterogeneity of the aquifer away from the pumping well was evaluated along with the presence (or absence) of aquifer recharge boundaries and leakage. Aquifer test results for each site are summarized in Table 1.

The tests performed in Bryan, Chatham and Effingham counties did not exhibit significant leakage or indicate the presence of recharge boundaries within close proximity to the test sites. These tests did indicate some degree of heterogeneity within the aquifer (i.e. increasing or decreasing T away from the pumping well).

The Glynn county tests indicated slight communication between the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers. Any potential effects on the Upper Floridan Aquifer were inconclusive. However, data from the lower Brunswick test suggest that leakage from the overlying and underlying confining units was occurring and that a potential recharge boundary exists in the area. The apparent recharge boundary could be associated within increase in leakage from the Upper Floridan Aquifer at some distance away from the pumping well or may be a response to external influences such as the cessation of pumping in nearby wells. The tests did indicate a decrease in transmissivity away from the test well.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMENDATIONS

The water-bearing capacity of the Miocene aquifer system varies significantly throughout coastal Georgia.

Based on the results of this investigation, the Miocene aquifers do not provide a viable alternative to the Upper Floridan Aquifer in Effingham and Chatham counties.

Table 1. Aquifer Test Results

County Units Effingham Chatham Bryan Glynn

Aquifer Upper Upper

Brunswick Brunswick

T 1V2fclay 10 12

K 11.0w 0.5 0.5

S 1E-04 1E-05

Q E,P411 5 5 15

Qis qpm,s 0.1 0.4 0.3

T = transmissivity

K = hydraulic conductivity

S = storativity

Q = pumping rate

Q/s = specific storage

The occurrence and thickness' of the upper and lower Brunswick aquifers is variable throughout Bryan County. The pumping test conducted during this investigation near Belfast indicated a relatively low transmissivity (85 ft2/day) and sustainable well yield (15 gpm) for this area. However, lower Brunswick wells installed near Richmond Hill in Bryan County have reported transmissivities on the order of 2200- 2700 ft2/day. This indicates that the Miocene aquifers are capable of producing suitable quantities of water for public and private use in some areas of the county.

Installation of additional test wells would be useful to further delineate where significant yields may be obtained within the Miocene aquifer(s) in Bryan County.

The upper and lower Brunswick aquifers in Glynn County are generally thicker and more prolific than in other areas. The lower Brunswick aquifer appears to be present throughout the county and wells screened in this aquifer are capable of yielding 300 gpm or more.

However, with increased usage, it is important to properly manage the aquifer to avoid problems in the future. Development of accurate regional groundwater models will be helpful in predicting long-term impacts and will provide a useful tool for management of the aquifer. Additional monitoring wells may be required, specifically in coastal areas experiencing rapid growth, to monitor the effects of increased pumping from the Miocene aquifers.

LITERATURE CITED

Clarke, J.S., Hacke, C.M., M.F. Peck, 1990. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Coastal Area of Georgia, Dept. of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Division Bulletin 113. pp.

11-13, 26-29.

Steele, W.M. and R.J. McDowell, 1998. Permeable Thickness of the Miocene Upper and Lower Brunswick Aquifers, Coastal Area, Georgia, Georgia DNR, EPD, GGS, Information Circular

103. pp. 23-30.

Peck, M.F., J.S. Clarke, C. Ranson III, and C.J.

Richards, 1999. Potentiometric Surface of the Upper Floridan Aquifer in Georgia and Adjacent Parts of Alabama, Florida, and South Carolina, May 1998,…