water and wastewater study combined

Water and Wastewater Study Combined

WATER BASIS OF DESIGN

Proposed Whataburger

7134 E Thomas Road

Scottsdale, AZ 85251

Prepared for: Whataburger 300 Concord Plaza Drive San Antonio, Texas 78216 Prepared by:

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1001 West Southern Avenue Mesa, Arizona 85210

291394000 27 March 2020 Copyright © 2020, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

FINAL Basis of DesignReport

9379 E San Salvador Dr.Scottsdale, AZ 85258

APPROVED

BY DATE

Disclaimer: If approved; the approval is granted under thecondition that the final construction documents submitted forcity review will match the information herein. Any subsequentchanges in the water or sewer design that materially impactdesign criteria or standards will require re-analysis,re-submittal, and approval of a revised basis of design reportprior to the plan review submission.; this approval is not aguarantee of construction document acceptance. For questions or clarifications contact the Water ResourcesPlanning and Engineering Department at 480-312-5685.

APPROVED AS NOTED

REVISE AND RESUBMIT

✔

ldillon 4/21/2020

04/21/2020

Address comments below and marks ups onsite plan on the submitted plans:

1) Is the building going to have a riser room?Refer to Scottsdale typical riser detail 2) Is PVC acceptable for private water serviceline?3) Maintain 6 ft min clearance between sewerand water. Conflict with fire sprinkler line andproposed sewer. DS&PM 6-1.4154) Where currently shown tapping into ACPmain for new fire line replace section of ACPpipe with DIP and use reducing teew/valve.DS&PM 6-1.408 5) No adjacent hydrants are available and nonew hydrants shown. Confirm with firedepartment if a new site hydrant is required.DS&PM 6-1.5026) A new conforming RPP backflow preventer(BFP) must be installed adjacent to and afterthe meter. Connect BFP to meter usingcopper type K. DS&PM 6-1.417

Final Water Basis of Design

WHATABURGER SCOTTSDALE

MARCH 27, 2020

Prepared By:

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Whataburger Scottsdale│Preliminary Water Basis of Design Report March 20 | 291394000

TOC

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1

Intent .......................................................................................................................................... 1

Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 1

Distribution System Description .................................................................................................. 1

Existing Distribution System ........................................................................................................ 1

Proposed Distribution System ..................................................................................................... 1

Basis of Design ........................................................................................................................... 2

Design Methodology ................................................................................................................... 2

Water System Analysis ............................................................................................................... 2

Results ....................................................................................................................................... 2

Tables

Table 1 Water Demands ............................................................................................................ 2

Appendices

Appendix A – Site Location Map

Appendix B – Proposed Water System Layout

Appendix C – WaterCAD Analysis Results

Appendix D – Fire Flow Test Results

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Whataburger Scottsdale │ Preliminary Water Basis of Design Report March 20 | 291394000

1

INTRODUCTION

INTENT

The purpose of this water report is to support the water system for the proposed Whataburger restaurant

development located on the northeast corner of Thomas Road and 71st Street in Scottsdale, Arizona. This

report presents the basis of design criteria that will be used for the engineering design of the proposed

development utilizing current water design standards and guidelines set forth by the City of Scottsdale,

Arizona.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Whataburger Scottsdale is located within Section 27 of Township 2 North, Range 4 East of the Gila and

Salt River Base and Meridian, Maricopa County, Arizona. The site is bound to the south by Thomas Road

and to the west by 71st Street. Existing commercial developments surround the site. See Appendix A: Site

Location Map

Whataburger Scottsdale is a proposed 1.41-acre commercial development. The existing zoning of the

project is C-3.

DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM DESCRIPTION

EXISTING DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

The site is surrounded by existing commercial development. Per the City of Scottsdale Quarter Section

Map 15-44 there is an existing 24-inch DIP waterline and 8-inch ACP waterline in Thomas Road directly

south of the site and an existing 8-inch ACP waterline in 71st Street directly west of the site.

According to Figure 6.1-3 of the City of Scottsdale Design Standards and Policies Manual (DS&PM), the

site is located in Pressure Zone 1 with existing ground elevation ranging from 1250 feet in the south to 1330

feet in the north.

PROPOSED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

The proposed Whataburger site is in pressure zone 1. The water system will tap into the existing metered

service off Thomas Road for domestic service off the 8-inch ACP water main in Thomas Road. The

proposed on-site distribution will consist of a 2-inch SCH 40 PCV water line that will provide potable water.

Fire service for the proposed Whataburger will tap the existing 8-inch ACP main in 71st Street. A new

backflow meter will be installed. Refer to Appendix B for the Proposed Water System Layout Exhibit.

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Whataburger Scottsdale │ Preliminary Water Basis of Design Report March 20 | 291394000

2

BASIS OF DESIGN

DESIGN METHODOLOGY

The WaterCAD v8i water system modeling software distributed by Haestad Methods, Inc. was used to

model the proposed water network. A fire flow test was performed to determine the residual and static

pressures of the existing system. The fire flow test was performed on existing hydrants along Thomas Road

to the south of the site. See Appendix D for complete fire flow test results.

According to Section 6-1.406 of the DSPM, distribution systems shall be designed with a minimum residual

pressure of 50 psi and a maximum static pressure of 120 psi. For fire flow scenarios, a minimum design

pressure of 30 psi at Finished Floor Elevation is required.

WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS

The proposed water distribution system for the project is modeled under 4 design scenarios. Average Day,

Max Day, Peak Hour and Max Day plus Fire Flows scenarios are modeled. Average Day Demands are

based on Figure 6.1-2 in the DS&PM, with peaking factors per section 6-1.404. A fire flow of 1,000 gpm per

section 6-1.501 of the DS&PM was used. See Table 1 below for a summary of water demands.

Table 1 Water Demands

Land Use

Building

SF

Average

Daily

Demand

(gpd/SF)

Average

Daily

Flow

(gpd)

ADF

(gpm)

Max Day

Flow

(gpd)

MDF

(gpm)

Peak Hour

Flow

(gpd)

PHF (gpm)

Restaurant 3,583 1.3 4,658 3.24 9,316 6.47 16,303 11.32

Average Day, Max Day, and Peak Hour Demands are applied at hydraulic model node for the building. Fire

flow demands are applied to all junctions within the project boundary.

RESULTS

Based on the fire flow tests performed and the results of the WaterCAD analysis, the proposed water system

is capable of providing the required domestic flows at pressures ranging from 72 psi to 89 psi in the average

day, max day, and peak hour scenarios. The fire flow pressures meet the minimum requirement of 30 psi,

ranging from 30 psi to 62 psi.

Refer to Appendix C for the WaterCAD results.

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Appendix A – Site Location Map

Thomas Road

71

st S

treet

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Appendix B – Proposed Water System Layout

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

APN:130-17-029

NOLTE ARTHUR SCARROLL

MARY ELIZABETH TR

NOT A PART

APN:130-17-024L

KJF PARTNERS 16SA LLC

NOT A PART

APN:130-17-024C

ATKINSON WARD J/JOAN F TR

NOT A PART

APN:130-17-016C

STORAGE EQUITIES PS PARTNERS IV-70TH ST

NOT A PART

THOMAS ROAD

71S

T S

TR

EE

T

PR

OP

OS

ED

W

HA

TA

BU

RG

ER

3,5

83

S

QF

T

FF

: 1

23

8.9

71

34

E

T

HO

MA

S R

OA

D

SC

OT

TS

DA

LE

, A

Z 8

52

51

WH

AT

AB

UR

GE

R R

ES

TA

UR

AN

T

HEATHER

47693

.

C

AT

E

N

O

CI

F

I

T

R

E

A

AN

O

Z

I

R

U

A

.S

.

s

R

s

e

f

o

r

P

d

e

r

et

si

ge

iona

l

E

n

g

i

n

e

e

r

(C

ivi)l

ROBERTS

d

D

a

t

e

S

i

g

n

e

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

.

.

.

/

/

Exp. Date / /

0

3

0

9

2

0

03 31 20

NORTH

LEGEND

WA

TE

R L

AY

OU

T E

XH

IB

IT

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Refer to notes onmore detailed utilityplan providedseparately butappended here.

APN:130-17-029NOLTE ARTHUR SCARROLL

MARY ELIZABETH TRNOT A PART

ZONE C-3

APN:130-17-024LKJF PARTNERS 16SA LLC

NOT A PARTZONE C-3

APN:130-17-024CATKINSON WARD J/JOAN F TR

NOT A PARTZONE C-3

APN:130-17-016CSTORAGE EQUITIES PS PARTNERS IV-70TH ST

NOT A PARTZONE C-4

THOMAS ROAD

71ST

STR

EET

APN:130-17-047CRLP 2929 PHOENIX LLC

NOT A PART

PRO

POSE

D W

HAT

ABU

RG

ERPT

14M

3,58

3 SQ

FTLF

88=1

239.

80'

7134

E T

HO

MAS

RO

ADSC

OTT

SDAL

E, A

Z 85

251

WH

ATAB

UR

GER

RES

TAU

RAN

T

HEATHER47693 .C

ATE NO

CIFITRE

AANOZIR

U A.S.

s

R

seforPderetsige

ional Engineer (Civi)lROBERTS

d

Date Signe

...

..

... ... .. . .. //

Exp. Date / /

03 09 20

03 31 20

VICINITY MAP

E INDIAN SCHOOL RD

E THOMAS ROAD

N H

AY

DE

N R

D

N 6

4TH

ST

SITE

N S

CO

TT

SD

ALE

RD

E INDIAN

SCHOOL RD

E OSBORN RD

Contact Arizona 811 at least two fullworking days before you begin excavation

Call 811 or click Arizona811.com

UTI

LITY

PLA

N

NORTH

DOMESTIC WATER NOTES

FIRELINE NOTES

SEWER NOTES

LEGEND

DRY UTILITY CONSTRUCTION NOTES

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Sheet added by LDillon, submitted at same time as this report asseparate case file as 4_DR_2020_V2_Utility Plan.pdf

Replace section ofACP pipe with DIPand use reducing teew/valve.

PVC acceptable forprivate waterservice?

Is this going to ariser room? Refer toScottsdale typicalriser detail

Maintain6 ft minclearancebetweensewerand water

No new hydrantshown. Confirmwith fire.

A new conforming RPPbackflow preventer mustbe installed adjacent toand after the meter.

Appendix C – WaterCAD Analysis Results

Average Day

Max Day

Peak Hour

Max Day Plus Fire Flow

Model Pump Curve

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Active Scenario: Average DayFlexTable: Junction Table

Pressure(psi)

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Demand(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label

72206.320.0039.68J-372206.320.0039.43J-972206.320.0039.17J-1072206.320.0038.87J-1172206.320.0039.72BLDG FIRE72206.320.0040.00J-181206.320.0019.03J-272206.320.0039.30J-472206.320.0039.30J-572206.300.0039.40J-672206.300.0039.40J-772206.270.0038.80J-872206.273.2439.72BLDG DW

Page 1 of 127 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1-203-755-1666

3/27/2020

WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2[10.02.01.06]Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterWaterCAD-Whataburger Scottsdale.wtg

You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer (http://www.novapdf.com)

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

http://www.novapdf.com

Active Scenario: Average DayFlexTable: Pipe Table

Pressure Loss(psi)

Headloss(ft)

Velocity(ft/s)

Flow(gpm)

Hazen-Williams C

MaterialDiameter(in)

Stop NodeStart NodeLength(ft)

Label

0.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0J-10J-930P-140.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0J-11J-1026P-150.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0BLDG FIREJ-1124P-160.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0J-1H-120P-30.00.000.023.24140.0Asbestos Cement8.0J-2J-159P-40.00.000.023.24140.0Asbestos Cement8.0J-3J-263P-60.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0J-2H-263P-50.00.000.00-3.24130.0Ductile Iron120.0PMP-1J-117P-20.00.000.00-3.24130.0Ductile Iron120.0R-1PMP-122P-10.00.000.000.00130.0Ductile Iron6.0J-9J-3109P-130.00.000.023.24140.0Asbestos Cement8.0J-4J-3192P-70.00.000.023.24140.0Asbestos Cement8.0J-5J-4100P-80.00.010.333.24150.0PVC2.0J-6J-551P-90.00.010.333.24150.0PVC2.0J-7J-620P-100.00.020.333.24150.0PVC2.0J-8J-783P-110.00.000.333.24150.0PVC2.0BLDG DWJ-813P-12


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Average DayFlexTable: Pump Table

Pump Head(ft)

Flow (Total)(gpm)

Hydraulic Grade (Discharge)

(ft)

Hydraulic Grade (Suction)

(ft)

Status (Initial)

Pump DefinitionElevation(ft)

Label

166.323.24206.3240.00OnFire Flow Test40.00PMP-1


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Average DayFlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Flow (Out net)(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label

40.003.2440.00R-1


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max DayFlexTable: Junction Table

Pressure(psi)

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Demand(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max DayFlexTable: Pipe Table

Pressure Loss(psi)

Headloss(ft)

Velocity(ft/s)

Flow(gpm)

Hazen-Williams C



Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max DayFlexTable: Pump Table

Pump Head(ft)

Flow (Total)(gpm)


(ft)


(ft)

Status (Initial)


Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max DayFlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Flow (Out net)(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label

40.006.4740.00R-1


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourFlexTable: Junction Table

Pressure(psi)

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Demand(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourFlexTable: Pipe Table

Pressure Loss(psi)

Headloss(ft)

Velocity(ft/s)

Flow(gpm)

Hazen-Williams C



Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourFlexTable: Pump Table

Pump Head(ft)

Flow (Total)(gpm)


(ft)


(ft)

Status (Initial)


Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourFlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Flow (Out net)(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label

40.0011.3240.00R-1


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max + Fire FlowFlexTable: Junction Table

Pressure(psi)

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Demand(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max + Fire FlowFlexTable: Pipe Table

Pressure Loss(psi)

Headloss(ft)

Velocity(ft/s)

Flow(gpm)

Hazen-Williams C



Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max + Fire FlowFlexTable: Pump Table

Pump Head(ft)

Flow (Total)(gpm)


(ft)


(ft)

Status (Initial)


Label



3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max + Fire FlowFlexTable: Reservoir Table

Hydraulic Grade(ft)

Flow (Out net)(gpm)

Elevation(ft)

Label

40.006.4740.00R-1


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Max + Fire FlowFire Flow Node FlexTable: Fire Flow Report

Satisfies Fire Flow

Constraints?

Junction w/ Minimum

Pressure (Zone)

Pressure (Calculated Residual)

(psi)

Fire Flow (Available)

(gpm)

Fire Flow (Needed)

(gpm)

Label

TrueH-2301,982.571,500.00H-1TrueBLDG DW301,837.711,500.00H-2False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-3False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-9False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-10False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-11TrueJ-11301,575.221,500.00BLDG FIREFalse(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-1False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-2False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-4False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-5False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-6False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-7False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00J-8False(N/A)(N/A)(N/A)1,500.00BLDG DW


3/27/2020



4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourPump Definition Detailed Report: Fire Flow Test

Element Details

59ID NotesFire Flow TestLabel

Pump Definition Type

Standard (3 Point)Pump Definition Type ft78.54Design Head

gpm0Shutoff Flow gpm2,301Maximum Operating Flowft166.32Shutoff Head ft46.20Maximum Operating Headgpm1,943Design Flow

Pump Efficiency Type

Best Efficiency

PointPump Efficiency Type

%100.0Motor Efficiency

%100.0BEP Efficiency FalseIs Variable Speed Drive?gpm0BEP Flow

Transient (Physical)

lb·ft²0.000Inertia (Pump and Motor) SI=25, US=1280Specific Speed

rpm0Speed (Full) TrueReverse Spin Allowed?


3/27/2020

WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2[10.02.01.06]

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterWaterCAD-Whataburger Scottsdale.wtg


4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Active Scenario: Peak HourPump Definition Detailed Report: Fire Flow Test

Graph

Hea

d (f

t)

175.00

150.00

125.00

100.00

75.00

50.00

25.00

0.00

Pump Efficiency (%

)

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0

Flow (gpm)2,5002,2502,0001,7501,5001,2501,0007505002500


3/27/2020

WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2[10.02.01.06]

Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution CenterWaterCAD-Whataburger Scottsdale.wtg


4-DR-2020 3/31/2020


Appendix D – Fire Flow Test Results

4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Flow Test SummaryProject Name: EJFT 20106Project Address: 7134 E Thomas Rd, Scottsdale, AZ 85251Date of Flow Test: 2020-03-26Time of Flow Test: 7:40 AMData Reliable Until: 2020-09-26Conducted By: Eder Cueva & Steven Saethre (EJ Flow Tests) 602.999.7637Witnessed By: Ray Padilla (City of Scottsdale) 602.541.0586City Forces Contacted: City of Scottsdale (602.541.0586)Permit Number: C61729

Note Scottsdale requires a max static pressure of 72 psi for safety factor.

Raw Flow Test Data Data with a 18 PSI Safety FactorStatic Pressure: 90.0 PSI Static Pressure: 72.0 PSI

Residual Pressure: 52.0 PSI Residual Pressure: 34.0 PSI

Flowing GPM: 1,943 Flowing GPM: 1,943GPM @ 20 PSI: 2,702 GPM @ 20 PSI: 2,301

Hydrant F1

Pitot Pressure (1): 32 PSICoefficient of Discharge (1): 0.9Hydrant Orifice Diameter (1): 2.5 inchesPitot Pressure (2): 35 PSICoefficient of Discharge (2): 0.9Hydrant Orifice Diameter (2): 2.5 inches

Project Site

Static-ResidualHydrant

Flow HydrantDistance Between F1 and R217 ft (measured linearly)

Static-Residual Elevation1240 ft (above sea level)

Flow Hydrant (F1) Elevation1241 ft (above sea level)

Elevation & distance values areapproximate

EJ Flow Tests, LLC 21505 North 78th Ave. | Suite 130 | Peoria, Arizona 85382 | (602) 999-7637 | www.ejengineering.com

John L. Echeverri | NICET Level IV 078493 SME | C-16 FP Contractor ROC 271705 AZ | NFPA CFPS 1915 www.flowtestsummary.com

Page 1 4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

Flow Test Summary

Static-Residual Hydrant Flow Hydrant (only hydrant F1 shown for clarity)

Approximate Project Site

Water Supply Curve N1.85 Graph

Raw Supply w/ Safety Factor Projected

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

2100

2400

2700

3000

3300

020

4060

8010

0

Flow (GPM)

Pre

ssur

e (P

SI)

EJ Flow Tests, LLC 21505 North 78th Ave. | Suite 130 | Peoria, Arizona 85382 | (602) 999-7637 | www.ejengineering.com

John L. Echeverri | NICET Level IV 078493 SME | C-16 FP Contractor ROC 271705 AZ | NFPA CFPS 1915 www.flowtestsummary.com

Page 2 4-DR-2020 3/31/2020

water and wastewater study combined

Documents