DOCSLIB.ORG

Hydrodynamic Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hydrodynamic Report Final Report Photograph: http://www.newington-dover.com Hydraulic Modeling Analysis Spaulding Turnpike Improvements, Little Bay Bridges Newington to Dover, New Hampshire Prepared for: Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. 6 Bedford Farms Drive, Suite 607 Bedford, New Hampshire 03110-6532 Prepared by: AECOM 500 Southborough Drive South Portland, Maine 04106 September 14, 2010 AECOM Project No. 60145174 AECOM Hydraulic Modeling Analysis September 14, 2010 Spaulding Turnpike Improvements, Little Bay Bridges TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Project Location .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Project Description .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.2.1 Bridge Description...................................................................................................................... 3 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS MODEL ......................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Model Description ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1 Model Construction .................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Boundary Conditions ................................................................................................................. 5 2.2 Existing Conditions Model Verification ........................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 Tidal Height Verification ............................................................................................................. 6 2.2.2 Velocity Verification.................................................................................................................... 6 3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE MODEL ................................................................................................. 8 3.1 Model Description ........................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.1 Model Construction .................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.2 Boundary Conditions ................................................................................................................. 8 3.2 Model Results ................................................................................................................................. 8 3.2.1 Tidal Height Comparison ........................................................................................................... 8 3.2.2 Velocity Comparison .................................................................................................................. 9 4 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS MODEL .................................................................. 11 4.1 Model Description ......................................................................................................................... 11 4.1.1 Model Construction .................................................................................................................. 11 4.1.2 Boundary Conditions ............................................................................................................... 11 4.2 Model Results ............................................................................................................................... 12 4.2.1 Tidal Height Comparison ......................................................................................................... 12 4.2.2 Velocity Comparison ................................................................................................................ 12 5 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................................................................ 15 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 17 APPENDIX A: FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. 18 APPENDIX B: PLANS USED FOR THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE MODEL ...................................... 36 APPENDIX C: PLANS USED FOR THE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION CONDITIONS MODEL ......... 49 L:\work\60145174\PROJ\Reports\Final Report\FinalMemo(14-Sept-2010).doc i PROJECT NO. 60145174 AECOM Hydraulic Modeling Analysis September 14, 2010 Spaulding Turnpike Improvements, Little Bay Bridges TABLES Table 1. Tidal Height Comparison Summary ................................................................................................ 2 Table 2. Mesh Summary for Existing Conditions Model ............................................................................... 5 Table 3. Tidal Height Verification for Existing Conditions Model .................................................................. 6 Table 4. Velocity Verification for Existing Conditions Model ......................................................................... 7 Table 5. Mesh Summary for Preferred Alternative Model ............................................................................. 8 Table 6. Tidal Height Comparison for Preferred Alternative Model .............................................................. 9 Table 7. Velocity Comparison for Preferred Alternative Model ................................................................... 10 Table 8. Mesh Summary for Temporary Construction Conditions Model ................................................... 12 Table 9. Tidal Height Comparison for Temporary Construction Conditions Model .................................... 12 Table 10. Velocity Verification for Temporary Construction Conditions Model ........................................... 14 Table 11. Tidal Height Comparison Summary ............................................................................................ 16 FIGURES Figure 1. Project Locus Map ....................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 2. Model Extent ................................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 3. Model Bathymetry ........................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 4. Existing Bridge Model Geometry with Mesh ................................................................................ 22 Figure 5. Tidal Boundary Time Series ........................................................................................................ 23 Figure 6. Tidal Height Observation Locations ............................................................................................. 24 Figure 7. Velocity Observation Locations ................................................................................................... 25 Figure 8. Maximum Flood Currents for Existing Conditions ....................................................................... 26 Figure 9. Maximum Ebb Currents for Existing Conditions .......................................................................... 27 Figure 10. Preferred Alternative Model Geometry ...................................................................................... 28 Figure 11. Preferred Alternative Model Geometry with Mesh ..................................................................... 29 Figure 12. Maximum Flood Currents for Preferred Alternative ................................................................... 30 Figure 13. Maximum Ebb Currents for Preferred Alternative ...................................................................... 31 Figure 14. Temporary Construction Conditions Model Geometry .............................................................. 32 Figure 15. Temporary Construction Conditions Model Geometry with Mesh ............................................. 33 Figure 16. Maximum Flood Currents for Temporary Construction Conditions ........................................... 34 Figure 17. Maximum Ebb Currents for Temporary Construction Conditions .............................................. 35 L:\work\60145174\PROJ\Reports\Final Report\FinalMemo(14-Sept-2010).doc ii PROJECT NO. 60145174 AECOM Hydraulic Modeling Analysis September 14, 2010 Spaulding Turnpike Improvements, Little Bay Bridges EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AECOM was contracted by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. (VHB) to perform a hydraulic analysis for the proposed design of the Little Bay Bridges connecting Newington to Dover, New Hampshire. The hydraulic analysis was based on a continuation of a computer-based hydrodynamic model constructed by the University of New Hampshire (UNH), Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ocean Engineering Laboratory and bridge plans provided by VHB. The UNH hydrodynamic model, which was constructed for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared by VHB in December 2007, was verified
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strafford Mpo Years Metropolitan 2021- Transportation Plan 2045
    STRAFFORD MPO YEARS METROPOLITAN 2021- TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2045 APPROVED: June 18, 2021 Preparation of this report has been financed through funds received from the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration, and by the dues-paying members of the Strafford Regional Planning Commission. The Role of the Metropolitan Planning Organization Municipalities Strafford Metropolitan Planning Organization (SMPO) is a subdivision Barrington New Durham of Strafford Regional Planning Commission and carries out all Brookfield Newmarket transportation planning efforts. Dover Northwood Strafford MPO staff work closely with the NH Department of Durham Nottingham Transportation to implement data collection programs, assist and Farmington Rochester advocate for local transit agencies and municipal projects, and create Lee Rollinsford long-range plans which address safety and quality of life. Madbury Somersworth Officers Middleton Strafford Milton Wakefield David Landry, Chair Peter Nelson, Vice Chair Staff Tom Crosby, Secretary/Treasurer Jen Czysz Kyle Pimental Contact Us! Shayna Sylvia 150 Wakefield Street, Suite 12, Rochester, NH 03687 Colin Lentz Tel: (603) 994-3500 Rachel Dewey E-mail: [email protected] James Burdin Nancy O’Connor Website: www.strafford.org Stephen Geis Facebook: @StraffordRegionalPlanningCommission Jackson Rand Twitter: @StraffordRPC Alaina Rogers Instagram: @strafford.rpc Natalie Moles Megan Taylor-Fetter TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Join Zoom Meeting: Httos://Us02web.Zoom.Us/J/89594326201?Dwd=Mkoydzdore5rehvnbm9swe5uamk4dz09
    PEASE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PUBLIC AGENDA Thursday, March 18, 2021 Time: 8:00 a.m. Non-Public Session: 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Public Meeting to commence at 9:00 a.m. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' MEETING Pursuant to NH RSA 91-A:2 III (b) PDA Chairman Kevin Smith has declared COVID-19 an emergency condition and has waived the requirement that a quorum be physically present at the Board meeting in accordance with the Governor's Executive Order 2020-04, Section 8, as extended by Executive Order 2021-04, and Emergency Order #12, Sections 3 and 4. PDA Directors will be participating remotely and will identify their location and any person present with them at that location. All votes will be by roll call. Members of the public may participate by using the access information provided. Please note that this meeting will be video / audio recorded. Join Zoom Meeting: httos://us02web.zoom.us/j/89594326201?Dwd=MkOydzdORE5ReHVnbm9sWE5uamk4dz09 Meeting ID: 895 9432 6201 Passcode: 736741 Dial by your location: +1 929 205 6099 US (New York) ***Any member of the public having difficulty accessing the Zoom meeting listed above during the public meeting should e-mail: zoontapeasedev.orz AGENDA I. Call to Order: II. Non-public Session: (Loughlin) III. Vote of Confidentiality: (Levesque) IV. Acceptance of Meeting Minutes: January 21, 2021 & January 28, 2021 * (Anderson) V. Public Comment: VI. Old Business: A. Approvals: 1. Pease Aviation Partners, LLC (d/b/a Million Air Portsmouth) at 53 Exeter Street — FB0 Application * (Fournier) 2. Pease Aviation Partners, LLC (d/b/a Million Air Portsmouth) at 53 Exeter Street — Conceptual Site Plan Approval * (Lamson) 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Governor's Phase Budget Presentation
    Citizen’s Guide to the Transportation System New Hampshire Department of Transportation Transportation excellence enhancing the quality of life in New Hampshire Governor’s Phase Budget Presentation February 15, 2015 Capitol Investments BudgetOperating Budget OPERATING Table of Contents Operating Introduction - Citizen’s Guide ...........................................................................1-6 Aeronautics, Rail & Transit Federal Local Projects - 2021 ........................................................................ 7 Aeronautics - 2107 ....................................................................................... 8 Public Transportation - 2916 ......................................................................... 9 Railroad - 2931 .......................................................................................... 10 Rideshare-Bike/Ped Program - 3030 ............................................................ 11 Administration Executive Office - 3038 ............................................................................... 12 Debt Service - 2938 .................................................................................... 13 Transfers to Other Agencies - 2939 .............................................................. 14 General Fund Overhead - 2940 .................................................................. 15 Compensation Benefits - 2941 ..................................................................... 16 Finance & Contracts Finance & Contracts - 3001 .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 4 Complete
    Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 4 Spaulding Turnpike Improvements NHSȬ027Ȭ1(37),ȱ11238 Newington to Dover, New Hampshire Prepared for New Hampshire Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration Prepared by /Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. Bedford, NH December 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HEARING TESTIMONY 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON DEIS PAGE FEDERAL CODING United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1, October 2, 2006 .......................................................... F-1 United States Army Corps of Engineers, October 2, 2006........................................................................................ F-2 National Marine Fisheries Service, November 21, 2006........................................................................................... F-3 United States Coast Guard, November 30, 2006....................................................................................................... F-4 Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance, U.S. Department of the Interior, November 28, 2006 ................ F-5 Federal Aviation Administration, New England Region, December 5, 2006............................................................ F-6 STATE University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension, September 6, 2006.............................................................. S-1 Pease Development Authority, September 21, 2006 ................................................................................................. S-2 National Flood Insurance Program,
    [Show full text]
  • Spaulding Turnpike Improvements Newington-Dover
    Newsletter #4 Fall 2010 Spaulding Turnpike Improvements Newington-Dover NHS-027-1(37), 11238 GOVERNOR KICKS OFF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION Governor Lynch, Commissioner Environmental impacts are part Campbell and Executive Councilor of most projects and Newington- Hollingworth kicked off the start Dover is no exception. Through the of construction for the Newington- Environmental Impact Statement, Dover project on September 9, 2010 by many design alternatives were holding a groundbreaking ceremony. evaluated to achieve the transportation The ceremony was held in Hilton Park purpose and need of the project. The adjacent to the construction site where environmental impacts for these Table of Contents the new Little Bay Bridge is to be alternatives were evaluated to balance constructed between the existing Little the transportation needs and impacts What's New .................................. 1-2 Bay Bridge and the General Sullivan to the environmental resources. The Traffi c Management ...................... 2 Bridge. The $50 million construction environmental impacts for a project of Contract L Fact Sheet .................... 3 contract, Contract L, will continue this magnitude require mitigation and Environmental ............................ 4-5 through the fall of 2013 when the new is further described on pages 4 and 5. Roundabouts .................................. 5 Little Bay Bridge will be opened for Contract / Schedule..................... 6-7 traffi c. Governor Lynch indicated that DESIGN Frequently Asked Questions ......... 8 “Today is the beginning of the end of The fi nal design of the roadways and traffi c backups here on the Little Bay bridges is ongoing with consideration Who's Who of Bridge”. and incorporation of roundabouts Newington-Dover within the project occurring. See Contract L starts an eight year period page 5 for more information on Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources Page 1 of 26 Mapping Information Updated 6/2015 AREA FORM AREA NAME: BLOODY POINT
    New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources Page 1 of 26 mapping information updated 6/2015 AREA FORM AREA NAME: BLOODY POINT 1. Type of Area Form 9. Inventory numbers in this area: a. Town-wide: General Sullivan Bridge (DOV0158); b. Historic District: Newington Railroad Depot and Toll House c. Project Area: (NWN0168/ NR #10000187), NWN-DOV, ZMT-SPTP 2. Name of area: Bloody Point Area 10. Setting: Small peninsula at the northeast 3. Location: Shattuck Way between Trickey’s corner of Newington that juts into the mouth Cove and former railroad right-of-way of the Little Bay, adjacent to the Piscataqua River. 4. City or town: Newington 11. Acreage: 16.5 acres 5. County: Rockingham 12. Preparer(s): Nicole Benjamin-Ma and 6. USGS quadrangle name(s): Portsmouth, Hannah Beato NH, ME 13. Organization: VHB 7. Dataset: SP Feet, NAD83 8. SP Feet: (see #15, Location map, below) 14. Date(s) of field survey: August 2019 15. Location map Bloody Point Area New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources Page 2 of 26 last update 6.2015, map info and Word 2010 format AREA FORM AREA NAME: BLOODY POINT AREA 16. Sketch Map New Hampshire Division of Historical Resources Page 3 of 26 last update 6.2015, map info and Word 2010 format AREA FORM AREA NAME: BLOODY POINT AREA Methods and Purpose The survey of the Bloody Point Area resulted from Section 106 consultation for the Spaulding Turnpike Project in Newington and Dover, NH (Newington-Dover 11238). Specifically, the survey relates to the “S Contract” for the project (1123S), which is re-evaluating the original Selected Alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • Projects Only
    DRAFT DRAFT THE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION’S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE TEN YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2013 - 2022 Projects Only SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNOR’S ADVISORY COMMISSION ON INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION (GACIT) PURSUANT TO RSA 228:99 OF THE LAWS OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DRAFT DRAFT PROJECTS LISTED ALPHABETICALLY PREPARED BY THE NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION September 2, 2011 Rev 1.1 Ten Year Plan Category Summary FHWA Funding Preservation Red List Mandated Interstate FY Maintenance Bridges Bridges I-93 Federal Maintenance Other Eng & ROW Grand Total 2013 34.49 5.26 29.53 11.64 18.04 10.82 6.61 7.72 124.11 2014 34.05 5.76 25.45 2.79 16.90 10.02 18.40 9.52 122.88 2015 34.00 0.96 27.15 3.55 11.83 19.67 9.48 9.18 115.81 2016 34.00 2.85 44.29 3.67 11.40 17.02 5.43 10.15 128.82 2017 35.80 5.09 32.03 2.09 11.43 15.12 7.49 11.41 120.46 2018 36.50 15.90 8.50 2.09 13.43 15.68 15.45 8.91 116.46 2019 38.10 14.85 2.00 2.09 14.76 21.12 10.93 10.16 114.01 2020 39.00 17.25 1.65 5.48 14.76 19.73 10.70 7.67 116.23 2021 39.00 9.35 13.34 15.49 14.76 12.69 8.18 11.42 124.22 2022 39.00 4.35 14.29 15.62 14.76 12.69 9.41 11.42 121.54 Totals 363.940 81.614 198.221 64.501 142.071 154.558 102.079 97.577 1204.561 % GrandTotal 30.2% 6.8% 16.5% 5.4% 11.8% 12.8% 8.5% 8.1% 100.0% FHWA Funding - ALL Phases Not Inflated Category_FY_Summary_Detail_Crosstab_S1A_9-2-11.xls: Cat_FY_Sum_Detail Print Date: 9/2/2011 TEN YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN 2013 - 2022 **** Draft **** ~ Condensed ~ 9/13/2011 10:45:36 AM Name/#/Id/Category Route/Road Location, Scope of Work I$(M) Funding Sources Previous Comments: Prog.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation
    NMP 2020-2030: TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The Transportation Chapter of the Master Plan provides an overview of Newington’s transportation network, identifies current transportation issues, and recommends actions to improve transportation in and around the community. As Newington strives to enhance the Town’s economic vitality, quality of life and environment, a multi-modal planning approach to mobility becomes more important. This approach considers multiple forms of transportation, adjacent land uses and the connecting street network to develop innovative transportation solutions that balance the needs and finances of the community and protection of the environment. NEWINGTON’S TRANSPORTATION NETWORK Newington has a complex transportation network for a town where residents make up less than 1% of the daily transportation volume. The network encompasses rural roads, a major state turnpike, a deep-water port, rail service, and portions of an international airport. This network is key to mobility for its citizens and economic development in town. Future land use, particularly in the Industrial, Waterfront Industrial, and Commercial and Office Zones, will occur with improved access, efficiency and interconnections between properties. In the 1990’s the Newington Planning Board developed a transportation strategy in conjunction with the NH Department of Transportation (DOT) and Rockingham Planning Commission (RPC) based on key travel corridors for efficient access and movement. The Planning Board identified seven arterial and collector corridors. Arterial corridors are the busiest roads, providing local connections but primarily pass people and goods through Newington quickly. Collector corridors provide similar pass through, but are slower and allow for more stops, cross-flow traffic, and turnoffs for local access.
    [Show full text]
  • HAER Report Only
    HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD LAKE CHAMPLAIN BRIDGE HAER No. NY-541 Location: Spanning Lake Champlain at NY Route 185 and VT Route 17, Town of Crown Point, Essex County, New York, and Town of Addison, Addison County, Vermont. The Lake Champlain Bridge is located at latitude 44.0149, longitude -73.2524. The coordinate represents the center of the bridge at the New York/Vermont boundary. The coordinate was obtained on 4 May 2010 by plotting its location on the 1:25,000 Port Henry, NY USGS Topographic Quadrangle Map. The accuracy of the coordinate is +/- 12 meters. The coordinate’s datum is North American Datum 1983. The Lake Champlain Bridge location has no restriction on its release to the public. Structural Type: Steel continuous through and deck truss span Date of Construction: 1928-29 Designer: Fay, Spofford and Thorndike, Engineers Builders: Substructure - Merritt-Chapman and Scott Corporation, Boston Superstructure - American Bridge Company, New York Deck and Approach Paving - Scott Brothers Construction Company, Rome, New York Electrical Equipment - Alvin E. Bennett, Crown Point, New York Toll House – Charles Malone, Port Henry, New York Present Owner: New York State Department of Transportation and Vermont Agency of Transportation Present Use: Vehicular bridge, closed October 16, 2009, removed December 28, 2009 Significance: The bridge was a nationally significant engineering landmark and one of the country’s most technologically inventive and aesthetically sophisticated designs for highway bridges of its period. Opened to traffic in 1929, the bridge symbolized a convergence of four separate but related trends in transportation engineering, the origins of which can be traced to the closing decades of the nineteenth century: (1) continuous truss technology; (2) a debate within the engineering community regarding the LAKE CHAMPLAIN BRIDGE HAER No.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Informational Meeting Notes and Presentation
    Meeting Notes Newington Dover Spaulding Turnpike Widening 11238 Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 2 Bedford Farms Drive, Suite 200, Bedford, NH 03110 Tel: (603) 391‐3900 Attendees: Keith Cota, NHDOT Date/Time: January 30, 2018 Dave Smith, NHDOT 7:00 PM – 9:30 PM Bob Juliano, NHDOT Magarete Baldwin, NHDOT Project: Newington-Dover 11238 Marc Laurin, NHDOT FHWA NHS-027-1(37) Jill Edelmann, NHDOT VHB 52381.01 Jamie Sikora, FHWA Peter Walker, VHB Greg Goodrich, VHB Members of the Public Place: City Hall Auditorium Re: Public Informational Meeting Dover, New Hampshire Spaulding Turnpike Improvements & General Sullivan Bridge Notes taken by: VHB The NH Department of Transportation hosted a public informational meeting regarding the on-going Spaulding Turnpike Improvements (Newington-Dover 11238). The meeting opened at 6:40 pm, with Keith Cota, Peter Walker, Greg Goodrich and Dave Smith presenting slide show and discussing project information. (See Attachment A.) Keith Cota, NH Department of Transportation (NHDOT) Chief Project Manager, welcomed the audience and introduced the project team. He called attention to the project plans and provided a general description of the overall Newington-Dover project. He indicated that the focus of the meeting was to have a discussion on the General Sullivan Bridge (GSB), also known as “Contract S.” The Department is considering options for maintaining a bicycle and pedestrian connection between Newington and Dover, including the potential rehabilitation of the GSB. However, because the rehabilitation of the GSB may not be possible, the Department has initiated a “Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement” (SEIS) to examine alternatives for the bicycle and pedestrian connection.
    [Show full text]