SW7060809_HISTORICAL FILE_20090914

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW y�
DOC TYPE
❑ CURRENT PERMIT
❑ APPROVED PLANS
HISTORICAL FILE
❑ COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION
DOC DATE
YYYYMMDD
N

MCOOWELL VE ASSOC/AYES, P.A.
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
Post Office Box 391
1899 Weeksville Road
Elizabeth City, NC 27907-0391
September 11, 2009
Mr. William J. Moore
Environmental Engineer
Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
-.�,. RE: Stormwater Permit for Dorm Project
Elizabeth City State University Campus
Permit No.: SW7060809, dated March 6, 2007
(Mc/A: E1693)
Dear Bill:
William P. McDowell, III., P.E., P.L.S.
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
akl� 14 20C9
This letter is for the purpose of following up with our telephone conversation last week and
your e-mail to me dated September I, 2009, (a copy of which is enclosed for ease of reference).
The above referenced Permit SW7060809, dated March 6, 2007, was issued for a proposed
Dormitory project on the campus of Elizabeth City State University; however, the dorm building is
being relocated approximately 800 feet to the north due to very expensive utility extensions (chiller
lines) at the original proposed location. All permits (Erosion, Stormwater, and 404 Wetlands) were
obtained in 2007 for the original project.
The scope of the project for the new'dormitory location includes intercepting an existing
storm drain and rerouting it around the new dorm footprint, and also doing slope and diameter
improvements to the storm drain from the new dorm location to the approved storm water pond.
1 am enclosing herewith two (2) copies of adrawing which indicated both the old dorm
location and the new dorm location. Said drawing shows the location of the drainage basin, which
we refer to as Basin `C'. Both the old location, as well as the new location, are within Basin `C'.
We have purposely not changed the approved storm water pond, either in location, design, or size
since it was already in the best location for handling runoff from Basin `C'.
In your e-mail to me dated September I, 2009, you stated that we would not have to
resubmit this project and could use Permit No. SW7060809, dated March 6, 2007, as long as:

Mr. Bill Moore
September 11, 2009
Page -2-
1. The drainage basin area and pond design would not change.
2. The impervious area had not increased and that the dorm building would be located
within the same drainage basin.
3. The requirement treatment volumes / area/ methods would remain essentially the
same as originally permitted.
All three of these statements are true.
If you have any questions or need anything else from us regarding this project, please do not
hesitate to give me a call.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Sincerely,
Don A. Bunch
Senior Engineering Technician
DAB/rae
Enclosures
CC: Mr. Charles Hall, ECSU (w/ enclosures)
Mr. Anthony Hunt, Architect (w/ enclosures)

RE: Oranges to a Stormwater Approved Dorm Project a ECSU
Subject: RE: Changes to a Stormwater Approved Donn Project @ ECSU
From: "Moore, Bill" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, I Sep 2009 15:09:44 -0400
To: Don Bunch <[e-mail]> _
Good Afternoon Don,
I have the following understanding based on the info you provided about this project:
1) The drainage basin areas & pond design will not change.
2) The impervious area has not changed; dorm bldg will be relocated within same drainage basin.
3) The required treatment volumes/areas/methods will remain essentially the same as originally
permitted.
If the above circumstances are correct; then you need only send a full scale, revised plan sheet (as shown in
your attached pdf file), along with a cover letter containing explanation as provided in your Email. We will
place the revised plan in our permit file for future reference.
If relocating dorm will involve any increase in BUA, increase in drainage basin, change in pond design; then
you will need to submit a sw application, fee & request for permit modification.
Hope you & the folks at McDowell have a great week.
From: Don Bunch(mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2009 9:59 AM
To: Bill Moore
Subject: Changes to a Stormwater Approved Dorm Project @ ECSU
Bill,
This discussion concerns a proposed Dormitory project on Elizabeth City State University campus, which had
a proposed SW Pond that you approved on 3-6-07 (Permit No. SW7060809).
I discussed this project very briefly with you several months ago, at the Hardee's in Moyock, because I had
just found out that ECSU & the Architect had decided to move the proposed dorm building to a location
approximately 800' to the north, due to very expensive utility extensions (chiller lines) at the old location. (we
had just obtained all permits including Erosion Control, 404 Wetlands, & Storm Water)
I have attached a pdf file (2436" plotted @ 1" = 60') that indicates both the old & new dorm locations. The
drawing also shows the location of the drainage basin that we refer to a Basin "C", which contains
approximately 14.2 Acres. As the pdf drawing indicates the new dormitory is still within Basin "C".
The scope of the project for the new dormitory location includes intercepting an existing storm drain and
rerouting it around the new dorm footprint, and also doing slope & diameter improvements to the storm drain
from the new dorm location to the approved Storm Water Pond.
I am unsure of how to make a submittal for this change, or if a formal submittal is even necessary. I realize
that you may need additional information to complete a review, or to approve this revision within the drainage
basin that contributes to the approved pond. I will be happy to provide any additional information that you may
need, answer any questions over the phone, or plan to visit your office to go over this in more detail.
Please let me hear from you when you have time to discuss further.
I o f 2 9/ 11 /2009 10:33 AM

r
William P. McDowell, III, P.E., R.L.S.
McDOWELL & ASSOC/ATES,PA.
ENO/NEERS• SURVEYORS
Post Office Box 391
1715 Weeksville Road
Elizabeth City, NC 27907-0391
December 27. 2006
Mr. William J. Moore
Environmental Engineer
Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
RE: Erosion Control & Stormwater Management Facilities
Associated with New 284 Bed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University Campus
Your Number: Pasqu-2007-003
(Mc/A: E1693)
Dear Bill:
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
DEC 2 8 2006
I am sending to you two (2) copies of revised Plans, Sheets I of 2 and 2 of 2, dated
December 27, 2006, for the above referenced project. These plans have been revised based on
recommendations you made during a recent visit to Elizbeth City.
The revisions are as follows:
Revised the configuration of the inlet end of the outlet orifice piping to make it
easier to do maintenance / cleanout (See Sheet 2 of 2)
Revised the planting on the perimeter shelf to be "wetland species", and also
provided contact for purchasing same. (See Sheet 2 of 2)
Revised the detention pond outlet, by eliminating the riprap within the wetland
area. (See Sheet 1 of 2)
If you have any questions or desire any additional information, please do not hesitate to
give me a call.
Sincerely,
`�Rdft /a, etlf Id
Don A. Bunch
Senior Engineering Technician
DAB/rae
Enclosures
CC: Ms. Wilma Jordan, ECSU

la il`,i t5 r
ECSU 274 Bed Dorm Pond Sizing.xis
Date:August 4, 2006
Project: ECSU Proposed 274 Bed Dorm - Wet Detention Pond
McA Proj. #: E1693
A.) Determine Pond Water Surface Area (SA/DA):
AUG 11 2006
SA/DA Values listed below are from "Coastal" Chart, with no vegetative filter,
For Permanent Pool depth of 6', Total Suspended Solids (TSS) Removal = 90%
Basin "C" from ECSU Schematic BMP Plan !includes tha Prnnngnrl 97d Rail rinrml
Impervious Area %
SA/DA Value %
Contributing Basin (Ac)
Water Surface Area Ac.
30
1.6
14.2
0.227
40
2.1
14.2
0.298
50
14.2
0.383
60
3.4
14.2
0.483
70
3.9
14.2
0.554
1/ 700 S{ KEG
/9 7 94- r"-- PQ� ✓. (. 437aC_)
B.) Determine Required "Temporary Pool" (Storage Volume Above Permanent Pool):
Pond designed to hold the volume equivalent to 1" of rainfall on the entire Drainage Basin:
(Note: no allowance to be made for type of surface, "c" factor, etc. - simply 1" over entire basin)
Cal culate ?B Above::
Contribr.Area, zAc
Cu Fhof stora e 1 ' '1
.. Acre Ftof Storage .
i
°, 14 201
. •. 51544
RVI _ (minimum)
s 77? c { R
C
C.) "Temporary Pool" Volume Calculations (Volume above Permanent Pool ):
Ski /SQ
PO
Location
Elevation
Area in Sq Ft. (ACAD)
Volume (Cu Ft)
Volume (Cu Yd.)
Top Temp. Pool
5.85
25,681
Bottom Temp. Pool
3
19,794
?51;159• :: ` .-' '
1895
2.25
t I emp. Pool ueptn )
FT,"emporary,tStdrage" Required=.51,5,44 CF (Minimum).
-Provided = 51,159CF
Note: Provided Volume slightly less than required - should be OK, Since most Conservative method used
to determine the volume of the Temporary Pool, and also no volume counted in pipe system.
Page 1 of 3

J
D.) "Permanent Pool" Volume Calculations - These include Forebay(s):
Location
Location - Elev.
Area in Sq Ft.
Volume Cu Ft
Volume Cu Yd.
Top Perm. Pool
3.60
19,794
Bottom of shelf
2.60
13,852
16823
623
Bottom of Forebay,
-0.40
7,369
31832
1179
& Main Pond
Main pond Only
-0.40
5,803
Bottom Main pond
-2.40
4,091
9894
35L
.;58549; -_ 2168
E.) "Forebay" Permanent Pool Volume Calculations:
Location
Location - Elev.
Area in Sq Ft.
Volume Cu Ft
Volume Cu Yd.
Top Perm. Pool
3.60
8,222
Bottom of shelf
2.60
4,308
6265
232
Bottom of Forebay
1 -0.40
1566
8811 I
M
Forebay / Main Pond % _
15076
58549,. •
(OK Pdrd Oversized);«
-- Page 2 of 3
558
Goal = 20%

r
i
ECSU 274 Bed Dorm Orifice.xls
Date: August 4, 2006
Project: ECSU Proposed 274 Bed Dorm - Wet Detention Pond
McA Proj. # E1693
Determine the Orifice Size (Diameter) for Controlling the Detention Time of the
"Temporary Pool"
F.) Calculate Orifice Size for Outlet Structure:
Volume Calc
Detention Time for Orifice (4")
Pond Elev
Area (Sq Ft)
Volume Cu Ft
Feet of Head
"CFS
"Velocity
Flow Time Min
Avg.
5.85
25,681
12,270
1.82
0.39
4.60
524
5.00
23,398
11,051
0.90
0.28
3.50
658
4.00
20,804
10,150
0.20
0.09
2.00
1880
3.60
19,794
I otal Min 3062
Total Days 2.13
OK - Regulations = 2-5 Days
" Flow (CFS) thru Orifice sized as shown & Velocity calulated by "TR-55" Software for
a Borda" type orifice - 0.51 C.
Page 3 of 3

I 11 Lkil Ll� U V Is LD
AUG 1 2 2000
1�
FINANCIAL RESPONS ILITY/OWNERSHIP FORM
SEDIMENTATION POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
;iN-5 P&SIOPS80boloitiat any land -disturbing activity on one or more acres as covered by the Act before this
I °:t::fo,rtipfAf�gG�gN.c�pbl erosion and sedimentation control plan have been completed and approved by the
Lan.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. (Please type or print and, if
the question is not applicable or the e-mail and/or fax information unavailable, place N/A in the blank.)
Part A.
1. Project Name Erosion Control & Storm Water Management Facilities for Proposed Site Improvements
Associated with New 274 Bed Dorm at Elizabeth City State University
2. Location of land -disturbing activity: County Pasquotank City or Township Elizabeth City Inside
Highway/Street East of NC Highway 34, North of Weeksville Road
Latitude 360 17' Longitude 760 13'
3. Approximate date land -disturbing activity will commence: November 2006
4. Purpose of development (residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, etc.): Site Improvements
Associated with New 274 Bed Dorm at Elizabeth City State University
5. Total acreage disturbed or uncovered (including off -site borrow and waste areas): 9 acres
6. Amount of fee enclosed: $450.00. The application fee of $50.00 per acre (rounded up to the next
acre) is assessed without a ceiling amount (Example: a 9-acre application fee is $450).
7. Has an erosion and sediment control plan been filed? Yes xx - attached No
Enclosed
8. Person to contact should erosion and sediment control issues arise during land -disturbing activity:
Name Don A. Bunch E-mail Address I [e-mail]
Telephone [phone] Cell It Fax If 252-335-9585
9. Landowner(s) of Record (attach accompanied page to list additional owners):
State of North Carolina
Name
1704 Weeksville Road
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
10. Deed Book No. 509 Page No. 628
I0Tii=I
252-335-3959
Telephone
Provide a copy of the most current deed.
252-335-3960
Fax Number
1. Person(s) or firm(s) who are financially responsible for the land -disturbing activity (Provide a
comprehensive list of all responsible parties on an attached sheet):
Elizabeth City State University
Name
1704 Weeksville Road
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
E-mail Address
Telephone[phone] Fax Number

2. (a) If the Financially Responsible Party is not a resident of North Carolina, give name and street address
of the designated North Carolina Agent:
Name E-mail Address
Current Mailing Address Current Street Address
City State Zip City State Zip
Telephone Fax Number
(b) If the Financially Responsible Party is a Partnership or other person engaging in business under an
assumed name, attach a copy of the Certificate of Assumed Name. If the Financially Responsible
Party is a Corporation, give name and street address of the Registered Agent:
N/A
Name of Registered Agent E-mail Address
Current Mailing Address Current Street Address
City State Zip City State Zip
Fax Number
The above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and was provided
by me under oath (This form must be signed by the Financially Responsible Person if an individual
or his attorney -in -fact, or if not an individual, by an officer, director, partner, or registered agent with
the authority to execute instruments for the Financially Responsible Person). I agree to provide
corrected information should there by any change in the information provided herein.
Mr. John Smith Director of Design & Construction
Ty �®rnrt n me Title or Authority
g-9-o(,
Sig4lature Date
--------------------/--n--
l, , a Notary Public of the County of A
State of North Carolina, hereby certify that John Smith appeared personally before me this day and
being duly sworn acknowledged that the above form was xecuted by him.
Witness my hand and notarial seal, this day of 2006
C
Notary
Seal c/ '1
My commission expires b �U

ECEoWE D
AUG 12 2006
LAND QUALITY SECTION
WASHINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE
Project Narrative
Project: Proposed Site Improvements associated with New 274 Bed Dormitory
Location: Campus of Elizabeth City State University
Date: August 4, 2006
Existing Site Description:
The Elizabeth City State University campus property is generally flat, at an elevation which is
approximately 10.0 feet above MSL. The campus is divided by an existing stream which traverses the
campus in an east to west alignment, and flows in a westerly direction under Herrington Road, then into
Charles Creek, and finally into the Pasquotank River. The existing stream receives runoff from drainage
basins north and south of the stream, through a combination of ditches, catch basins, and pipes.
The existing percentage of impervious area was calculated in 2001 at approximately 28%, for the
entire campus, which included a large area of wetlands / swamp that are not suitable for new buildings.
The ECSU campus currently has 2 wet detention ponds that provide treatment for the runoff from
their respective drainage basins. (See "Schematic Storm water BMP" map on sheet 2 of 2 of the Site Plan
for the location of the 2 existing ponds, as well as the proposed pond for this project)
Proposed Development:
ECSU is proposing to construct a new 274 bed Dormitory, within drainage basin "C", as indicated on
the "Schematic Storm water BMP" map, and the provided Site Plan. Drainage Basin "C" is upstream of the
new Dormitory, and is approximately 14.2 Acres in size.
Using the ECSU "Campus Master Plan" prepared by the Freelon Group, we have calculated the
combined future and existing impervious area to be just under 50%, within Basin "C", so we have designed
the new detention pond to accommodate an impervious rate of 50%.
We propose to intercept the existing drainage that flows toward the proposed Dorm site through an
existing 24" culvert, and divert this run-off through a new pipe system to the proposed wet detention pond.
The proposed Wet Detention Pond will be No. 3 on ECSU Campus. As mentioned above, the new pond is
designed to accommodate a 50% impervious rate, and detain the flow from a 1" rainfall over the 14.2 Acre
basin for a period of 2-5 days.
The proposed pond has a water surface area is 0.45 Acre, permanent pool depth of 6 feet, and is
sized per the SA/DA chartfor Coastal counties, without a vegetative filter, which should remove 90% of TSS.
Page 1 of 1

ICr�r,. e l ` 4/'"g'.` r 5 m I\a i r � $ms M,a9 �0.C;i—) I . ,{ I Tidal
Da, ricgja ° f Flot t ti,1
A •� f .1 rrnf I 4 k- e --�aF ]IF
;'�,' i 4W ✓ ' �i5e Yr�pES U" j'�r �3 •• r f si,%a 1 Y"'�'..�\ �'I, ,: 1 1 '.iy '.LT ,'ai�4
s � f � 5 ♦��B 9" v`7_ � �s Vi \~ � I ° on c (�'/ �-. \.� � 9 5 ,(.�,,. ."M// Y q� (; -
r e
', x tF i r FrN �v +a tix , i ♦J s _
�TH` i' .- r ioR O ,
n' � lr - _ y.� r H w
�f � < ie"� x s �!.N i �IJ� n 4 Ep� ✓I �''� v..,-N�\.. s ,+,e- � 1 m. y �-'.:- -,..0�;..: Q
4 h x1x. �i2 M�chellJc'�a S- Cr'�? f o b
,Y ' i' q A� �ty> M'°%v 1�sL � "} ,*j n � to `��. 1J� ��'� � Islincl r�,l#"�` '�*.' -` r-F':�' y ' ✓ � _ y Gay W
Z
S t'F:'+ c4'.�-'!A4 .. i v a- •: \. � { r ' a I I'.a',` �'- S ' � �t � LJ � O
!t��.-==7
INTRACOAS IAL \fit
5.
�.�� fA S iF ('�/' tr.. FHLt'4Y JSP11al
Pasquotank River inr -
cm I ■PO rm r' ""x -'t <�..a r .."jqt (Class WS III Sw) It
- ELI A T CITYi �' i '" \i 3 s� lwfa oitage -
Point,'. 1 \ .\` ,
�`' "en Charles CreekA o1 f { \
Naw > f (Class C Sw) T ' Light_
1_ I��"t�#''-r^r'= "1 Wlp/rgggg{ll7yy�w od,�C fTi '�„f"lY{,f.fofbes 2 ../ C,
P<
.tp?_-
9a'`�+I1' � Pa fa � ✓.L kr Je 2ra1 y Sch �..>t Q ,�ipR3.. `'§�
' 11S"1'V lY✓mot - __ 'Y PARKVfEtY .a t.h 'u. J •y. 1N
i...
oL p �? Pas uotank \`f' 1 r a' , � : �tX' 1�i r t� 'f7 "• ,
'r � Sc h�.y��?,,. �U > • � C .i'f`L' .a, f/ e."\^''`� _
�1�16 ion
P 7
Campus of T,
Elizabeth City c2
State University`o9T `W
M +< �� � Tank.
of +• •F_ xf .�:
In
i ^s � I
7
Scale �1 "k=L 2®00'1
a,Lamsh u�r qt'°y�e
)0,f
f 1000' 2r,,.o' , ,z 2000: "-'"u'�1. • T
t A kr. F•'
7.5 Minute Series Quad
named "Elizabeth City"
showing area of
"Elizabeth City State Univ."
Plot Scale: 1" = 2000' Plot Date: 8-04-2006
Detention Pond \,4
,
3 =1 K i
"IF, k t Y t i
k'
d , f1 � ' atioller ry V
-•x1�7,,.�. sjji1 y OCR�Bayside
�l /
AP
WDOWELL & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS
P. O. BOX 391
1715 WEEKS%ALLE RD.
ELIZABETH CITY, NORTH CAROLINA
[phone] FAX [phone]

Date: Aug 04, 2006 Project: ECSU 274 Bed Dorm
Pick proposed swale with the largest area upstream of outlet &
calc. the velocity on the downstream end
Use the "Rational Method" with following assumptions:
a.) Area = 0.6 Ac b.) Coeff. (weighted) 0.60 c.) Intensity = 5" rainfall
CFS = 0.6 (0.60) (5) = 1.8 CFS
(Compute velocity in proposed swale flowing 1.8 CFS with 4:1 side slopes,
and a drainage slope of 0.25%)
Channel Calculator
Given Input Data:
Shape..
Trapezoidal ("W type with 4:1 side slopes)
Solving for .....................
Depth of Flow
Flowrate ........................
1.8000 cfs
Slope ...........................
0.0025 ft/ft
Manning's n .....................
0.0200
Height ..........................
2.0000 ft
Bottom width ....................
0.0000 ft
Left slope ......................
0.3300 ft/ft (V/H)
Right slope .....................
0.3300 ft/ft (V/H)
Computed Results:
Depth ...........................
0.6058 ft
Velocity ........................
1.6187 fps (permissible velocity for Site soils)
Full Flowrate ...................
43.5052 cfs
Flow area .......................
1.1120 ft2
Flow perimeter ..................
3.8660 ft
Hydraulic radius ................
0.2876 ft
Top width .......................
3.6713 ft
Area ............................
12.1212 ft2
Perimeter .......................
12.7642 ft
Percent full ....................
30.2883 %
Critical Information
Critical depth ..................
0.4658 ft
Critical slope ..................
0.0101 ft/ft
Critical velocity ...............
2.7375 fps
Critical area ...................
0.6575 ft2
Critical perimeter ..............
2.9729 ft
Critical hydraulic radius .......
0.2212 ft
Critical top width ..............
2.8232 ft
Specific energy .................
0.6465 ft
Minimum energy ..................
0.6987 ft
Froude number ...................
0.5185
Flow condition ..................
Subcritical
IE C LEE Y[
AUG
E
LAND QUALITY SECTION
1103MGIONAL OFFICE

Auu 1 1 2006
Project Narrative
Project: Proposed Site Improvements associated with New 274 Bed Dormitory
Location: Campus of Elizabeth City State University
Date: August 4, 2006
Existing Site Description:
The Elizabeth City State University campus property is generally flat, at an elevation which is
approximately 10.0 feet above MSL. The campus is divided by an existing stream which traverses the
campus in an east to west alignment, and flows in a westerly direction under Herrington Road, then into
Charles Creek, and finally into the Pasquotank River. The existing stream receives runoff from drainage
basins north and south of the stream, through a combination of ditches, catch basins, and pipes.
The existing percentage of impervious area was calculated in 2001 at approximately 28%, for the
entire campus, which included a large area of wetlands / swamp that are not suitable for new buildings.
The ECSU campus currently has 2 wet detention ponds that provide treatment for the runoff from
their respective drainage basins. (See "Schematic Storm water BMP" map on sheet 2 of 2 of the Site Plan
for the location of the 2 existing ponds, as well as the proposed pond for this project)
Proposed Development:
ECSU is proposing to construct a new 274 bed Dormitory, within drainage basin "C", as indicated on
the "Schematic Storm water BMP" map, and the provided Site Plan. Drainage Basin "C" is upstream of the
new Dormitory, and is approximately 14.2 Acres in size.
Using the ECSU "Campus Master Plan" prepared by the Freelon Group, we have calculated the
combined future and existing impervious area to be just under 50%, within Basin "C", so we have designed
the new detention pond to accommodate an impervious rate of 50%.
We propose to intercept the existing drainage that flows toward the proposed Dorm site through an
existing 24" culvert, and divert this run-off through a new pipe system to the proposed wet detention pond.
The proposed Wet Detention Pond will be No. 3 on ECSU Campus. As mentioned above, the new pond is
designed to accommodate a 50% impervious rate, and detain the flow from a 1" rainfall over the 14.2 Acre
basin for a period of 2-5 days.
The proposed pond has a water surface area is 0.45 Acre, permanent pool depth of 6 feet, and is
sized per the SA/DA chart for Coastal counties, without a vegetative filter, which should remove 90% of TSS.
Page 1 of 1

.y„9 1 c 1x 1i15.xFlal,f
. i'- ♦ ` 'tii` �'. s 1laq��
1/NJIAt
tail' i , �,� % .. Fq" q 1 w . IA asSl;
c, cs �� urn�a ° PasquotankRlver M�pl
(Class WS III Sw) n,
Charles Creek
(Class C Sw)
Campus of
Elizabeth City
State University M
tft,yy����
WO
1000q �O '�2000r ' 6 F''i "",
7.5 Minute Series Quad
named "Elizabeth City"
showing area of
"Elizabeth City State Univ."
Plot Scale: 1" = 2000' Plot Date: 8-04-2006
14 ?EMOU
NK�#
Slaw A, aYski q,
- IR sad.
Proposed Wet v29 14
Detention Pond Kn•; wa Y a �t 1 �
I Park ��rs' t
410
McDOWELL & ASSOCIATES, P.A. -
ENGINEERS - SURVEYORS
P. O. BOX 391
7715 WEEKSVILLE RD.
ELIZABETH CITY, NORTH CAROLINA
[phone] FAX [phone]

DW0/b1RRD Fox :252-946-9215
W Tr.y.n s mit Con-F- P-eprrt kk
P. 1 Nov6 ' 06 16 :28
Telephone Plumber
Mode
Start
Time
Pages
Result
Note
912523359585
NORMAL
6,16:26
1'11"
2
k D K
IMMA
NCDENR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
'WASHINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE
WASHINGTON, N.C. 27989
Phone:[phone] FAX:[phone]
TO: poij IJvnc 4
FAX NO. ZS2 3 35 - 9S8s`
FROM: �� MOO ~�
DATE: �//6 le.
NO. OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER): Z-
COMMENTS:
9
:e z 7Tlet4-40
Ate. G
roes-

/�� McDOWELL & ASSOC/ATES,P,A.
(/�/( per,® ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS
Post Office Box 391
1715 Weeksville Road
Elizabeth City, NC 27907-0391
August 7, 2006
Mr. William J. Moore
Environmental Engineer
Department of Natural Resources
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
RE: Erosion Control & Stormwater Management Facilities
Associated with New 274 Bed Dormitory,
Elizabeth City State University Campus
(Mc/A: E1693)
Dear Mr. Moore:
William P. McDowell, III, P.E., R.L.S.
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
-ALV.
LIA
AUG 11 2006
Enclosed please find for your review and approval, the following information on the above
referenced project:
1. Two (2) copies of Site Plan, Sheets 1 of 2 and 2 of 2, dated August 4, 2006.
2. Two (2) copies of an executed North Carolina Stormwater Management Permit
Application (SWU-101) with the "Wet Detention Pond" Supplement (SWU-102)
Check in the amount of $420.00, as payment of the required review fee for a "High
Density" application.
4. Two (2) copies of supporting information:
A. 75 Quad Sheet of Project Area (l page)
B. 8-1/2 x 11 Project Narrative (1 page)
C. Calculations for Pond Volumes, Surface Area, etc. (3 pages)
D. Copy of Wetland Delineation Map for ECSU, dated 8/20/02
E. Copy of Soil Report prepared by GET Solutions, dated 1/30/06
This project involves the construction of a proposed 274 bed dormitory and other associated
work items, such as gravel access roads for site access, proposed wet detention pond, and cleanout
of existing wetland channel / ditches, per site plan. Please see the attached "Project Narrative" for
a general description of the existing site conditions, as well as the proposed development.

Mr. William J. Moore
August 7, 2006
Page -2-
This submittal application and site plan covers all the disturbed land area associated with the
new dorm construction (9.0 acres). We have checked all proposed swales along the gravel access
roads for any excessive velocities for the soil type. (Please see the attached "Channel
Calculations.")
At approximately Station 3+00 on the proposed gravel access road on Sheet 1 of 2, the
existing drainage flow will enter our proposed swale. The existing ditch at this location is draining
nearly the entire basin, so we have proposed the portion of the proposed swale downstream of this
location to be protected by using a straw erosion control blanket on both side slopes, to the proposed
cross drain culvert, which is approximately 75 feet.
All other drainage will reach the proposed wet detention pond by the proposed system of
pipes and drop inlets. All inlet basins are designed to be sediment traps installed during the
construction period.
The proposed wet detention pond will be the third on ECSU's.campus, and is designed to
provide water treatment for an upstream basin of 14.2 acres, which will ultimately have 50%
impervious. The proposed pond has a water surface area of 0.45 acres, permanent pool depth of 6
feet, and is sized per the SA/DA chart for Costal counties, without a vegetative filter, which should
remove 90% of TSS.
Should you have any questions concerning this data, please do not hesitate to contact me.
ncerely,ct�n
h l�l. / ✓�
Don A. Bunch
Senior Engineering Technician
DAB/rae
Enclosures
CC: Mr. John Smith, ECSU
Mr. Anthony Hunt, Millennium 3 Design Group

PCOK 5 0 ') ;d(,L ( ; —" Is
.... ...........
:11--11
a, I c t t
. ..... 01
C.11M, of
iqi 1 1 i.,m arnm oyl III
P.V. L'll. IOU, Cur rittick N. C, 27929
1hi. tqjjjj,, Bruinscy, H11kfj
Drilf
NORTI I CAROLINA GFNERAL WARRANTY DEED
'I HIS llrj, IN, 17 t 1j,' ,.f A,,,., t, , t w. 90 b, —d Lnwem
CRANIU:: I 0 RAN 1 E P.
C. HOLLAND W%BSTE'R, U ...... Irried; and I THE SrATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
GUNi W(AIS-11M OWt::S, a free trader
/o State Property office
116 IiOSL J0110S Street
Raleigh, N.C. 2760)
Cued No qo-ZP,�
PAF�UOIANK CO�'JTV,Y-
wG Nub
LAND ��p1SECTION
RiGION'b'L OWa
I m , r ,. . y,, ...... 1r C.­ ,, ., ... : ­11. , ........ ,, " ...... ..... .... .. —.'. " '."­ ......... . . . . lt,"
MTNESSETJE. lhnl lh. Gemo r. f lql]ru1d1 ,.id b, Ill, !ha nr,,ij, o which .1 here I,
by I, n— —'—t� -1-j- bIll—, .�Il —drnlall 1h.'
'.I.M —,I lilmlt,-4 lm. tF., (lty ..( . . ... . I . I I . . . To..,hi,
Pa5C.UctAn'.,,
t!0!;C1iht1d in Allnuxn.d F%hihit A, Exhibit A b"irq
"Exhibit A attachcli to a Deed dated AuU.st 17.1t, 1990
f:'O:.i G. Iclla,id unmarried and Gene WCbSLCC 0,'ori, a free
trader to the siatc Of North Carolina.,,
7, 5z" , , (),[ ,LC
ftZLLECt0n
PASQWTM4XCMWY T"

ocoK 5GJPAGE G29
.. EXHIBIT A' .i
F.%IIIAIT A ATI'ACIIY.D TO A DEED DATED AUGUST 17,
1990 FROM G. i(OId.AND WFI)STER, UMA(GIi F:b AND
GERE WEBSTER OWES, A FREE TWER TO THE STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA
vela}mox yr vvorznn
nnvinnlny t en Iron rl!a .et In the eorrnetn metvfn
e[ xc Illal.v.v ]1 1ual.rs.d w-lb ev�rJ a ut evnle ult.11.h
t the .--tnne.euln 1 en° reeeneae 1 net, rl ee,rlen
rsr ufrl .hence not U�rll ,ee me. 21' ve,t Hund uc ulv,uof
)a a ereunn of 911.9e 11,t n city
rl pn et he c 0l
the rr eRrlr evnee by nlun.t cl 1 stet. IS' e e , dunce
.Into vnlver.111 rak tr1 nthn ]1 deaf ena ,q b, O l ...I
feet to a 16 Incn oe4 V<n] then— net On 10 deoreea 0V west
1A}.I} feet to .n It— riper !hence n0rfh 10 de9teee 01• vent
}S.'tit] Ieet U .n Iron Pill'........
... .. . nnttn )f , 111. a ](e w.°t
still - Pi e, veulli Pr opv tY w dlH,n:0 el 116.1] feet tr
sn Iron ]el eo ne Inq ]nerve. eovtn [0 th,n .e b. ut
2 15.00dt?tee feet o en Itrn CIPe, CCIneA lny] tlthen e.,sO 19
de•]teee ID' u.1 }60.}1 feet to o It-n tire] then.! south S)
"...le
.t veer ]5.5) lint t- en lion plre, et Irv-]
' lne u<e meth 56 Je O.eu O9' uet 119.H feet aloni Vnlrere;ty
rtr.e 1. t trrn rfrn eeca•a ln< nt
dote In lill.nnenJ<J nn}. of [•]p¢,m0�1 SuMlvinlen a e oNeJ
n Hfp loon IA, f Illr1.l.n Aet. n.1 Cecef
a lnr:p ens tee O[ weld 1.n l t S,ra•llylwlan ]ore en.l Creel t
velntete inn. Su01 lelon tote ens I..1, np e_
pill,
et outs 0, , e•, St' t l0.}1 ...eft n Imo
rll"rr thence eeuln JI Joy r<n ]0're .et 91.Y ]•we to nn Irma
rll'.r thence .man }d rlept new IS' a net alne,rnlr . nlew el
•. Ier
rnn Pore. .mna , N.In.in dltnr et u:. ae.eetn Iq,nn, r1 of
nyevoal l 1'--11 1 1 1-11 n,r nnnt }, re ne Iln
Jletn°ce el 9)t.li I!!t ea n Itrn Plrnr 1]:en[e rth 6n
dear <ee Ill w!H 8.50 D.et to rt be
nart L•'l Hem --toll of Lot
1 of 'be rlae of .reef t w<L,lee, 1-c.] b,ne, e-utn ]s
de <ee 19• I I.0 oeet to . Ile `t,, Um
M1M<etern heir, t. 01 nrin 1 1 I'll rl°I not 61-1 ri.aet.
neverllTdeln need oot »]. r,oe neI al.•nee . :ur II
Jeyreee w• v<a ILIv Ie•a .Inns r tinter lr -n°n by
u<nn t wen. to n Ire, tire, -1L+ n-ttrr......h
ni trim r r,l4e "I nncd•nr st°tlnn rrnrett]I tlen °lonpt tlm
eLl<ro <Iln< el Inn rr r, n.n .1 n.rJ or [letfnn .......
v , 11 dill. If' �<er 119.19I feet to .n Ir-n pq.e, a
r ulr u.o rucr. or vm nnnhn. r'°
moon t.(nl n] e^pmelnitely ]A ct e,, th I. pr-nrtl le
ne 111 s1-111 a IllA.,,l to eA ,rrnrt,ty let. l<] r
el.e
U",In-.1Je .1 the unnt.ru f. III ]nwY em W. Jld p.multy on
:e ve°e n,f nmtn "I uleel•ntn tlty 'urn Vnlrerelty.
t l; e�ar:l eunllrl.lnn off .111. on the e,.l .Ids. end
xC W111.11 11 on 6he moth .IJe.
1'IrC CC t Cn Cnl]C111 C[U(1 [I115 COI]\'C'j ,'I r1CC
Lill,, sand tr io nqulnt si:nped parcel of land
conzcpcd b, Cruc( "I'll :icbst0.', 111c. LC Jalncs
SLeclan Eervontl, Jr. anJ 11 (n, dated October 13,
I9'15 dnd tcty rdcd lu I;_cd Root 366 at page 70
01 elm ra sghot tnl: cwu my Ilcy is Lry'.

UCOri JOi1I'iGa G.il)
'I'L< Pmprr'y Lveiw Lm-e CouiLal uu <nl.illd by Gr.ulor by Imlrwnem uferJ<J InDCed Pook 492 a t page
Sl8
A tll.p .Auwirly lL<.Luvit JuolLd Pml•crly is ri,,-d,J in I"., ❑unk .. .. _... .... ryte ...
10 HA\'1: AN I''1'11 1101.11 U., If- ... id 1.1 er L.rld rf IsuJ mJ .❑ 4rivil<¢u .uJ .pVutluunrn Ihemto Lelon Ylnt In
nm <:r.u.f[ ur fea a Inpl<.
A,A ll:f r:lvr • illy ll:.: �.:le., ll:al l:e>nl,.r i e:l of th,, f :I lef > :nl' [, A<f 1A. ri,ht t ♦[Y
:LF a l•fee a n:phrl 11LA title .rAn al.le :-J Iraf .,Id el[e'rr ul all a n:Lu nru, <nJ lLel IranWr ..If w ItlnanJ
Jdcmll l Lc lilie vq.r :ul lFf I—ful d:,l:ne nl ill Veramu ••'L..nu...,. a .r..I fur IL. a ce Vtinm Lertinnhv>I.1,d �1'
'I':I le lu I1.. Vf ul.Frt)' A-fei::n Lu,< d—Ilit-1 i au Ll<.l lu (l:t :allow my f ff Vliu:r<;
This conveyance is mile sub)ec t. to o>: ist ing easelse nt,^, and righ Ls of way to
Le Iephone anJ uti I Lp coirpan ics.
..........r:,,r
.....•.^r.;
....::............
'_, _Ito JanlJ,rw •Ls tq 'I
.......
..... ... _.... .... x may; ..
Galu Webster Owens
s
...................................................
.....::....................
s.rr.r.., Inn.r.L
•. �.'
: ..r.r. [,:,n, rn. c,,.r, ... x.r. .r.r..a<. .G.. ilo it and..IPebs to t,.
-+ �LG1 '•: :
unnarriLd and gene Webster Uwe1 a Erec erode,
• `\P
5 ...ur:.. ... .1_ 6IX0"'41
t
...•.:r.,..�1:�
..... ....
1
.:...m.,:..:.....:,...r.e-,r:<a �..t.9sa.7.....�r_,-L-i,.:r.nC.r,:f:2;f. :.........::.
L . Lrrr.Lr L.rr, r.l rrr .............
rrr,I...r. ...lr. . Ill rlr r.r<...:r .1.1 ....11.1... If ........... .I u. ............. s...r..r..
::.'L:nam r.rr:::..on, u.._..............................._: Jn.init:Lxrur,.n.tlu Lacy..Pub l lc..ot. Yasquntaak.......
r,..icstc.uf .SortL Com.lion.is.::crll(icA.a..Fc.cn¢tta..............................._..................
t.c. c!ILt. '_3::::.:I.I1. 11; LVGus t..199(1..................... _ ................................,............_ ....... ..............
••u:.nrc.nn; .. v:kr.).r rvn:rsa.v....n..n-.:awx.',snw:rx v'v'y r.>mn. ae:nswl:.•.ae uau•u.Hs wr: unrr.rllx�:ue-.a..aa
e
1... V �. C.I�,�Ob\Cr............ ... nam..0 m oerm r.an... CASQCl1T:vK.. +.
LLl.y :,.;],ill\vn'dACU.,`V....................... o...v:..•.....:......,...r
...1 a•, r,rr..,. l r:::a. y-- :l r V.."t, .nn...-...:,C IW.a:, fvrr, 1C<.' rO br N... ."'"C
eJ for nylptr.a ton on,. ,.u1, n•rnrilea o,, t6. AA-tA Jay of Ul5
d5� 5 [an J Mfnuyy

REPORT OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
Proposed Dormitory Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No. EC05-355G
January 30, 3006
Prepared For: Elizabeth City State University
AUG 11 2006
/ 1. i"�I IJ �I sR)
Solution's; iltici":if'tk`I1f

Solutions::Inc'tr,` tz`
January 30, 2006
TO: Elizabeth City State University
226 Dixon Hall
Campus Box 749
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Attn: Mrs. Randi Knofsky, AIA
RE: Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Dear Mrs. Knofsky:
In compliance with your instructions, we have completed our Geotechnical Engineering
Services for the referenced project. The results of this study, together with our
recommendations, are presented in this report.
Often, because of design and construction details that occur on a project, questions arise
concerning subsurface conditions. G E T Solutions, Inc. would be pleased to continue its
role as Geotechnical Engineer during the project implementation.
We trust that the information contained herein meets your immediate need, and we would
ask that you call this office with any questions that you may have.
Respectfully Submitted,.
G E T Solutions, Inc.
I �x"� 0Z
Gerald W. Stalls Jr., E.I.
Project Engineer
Camille A. Kattan, P.E.
Principal Engineer
NC Reg. # 14103
c F Ssi
SEAL
014103
,_..
...A...Yl>
Copies: (3) Client
(1) Millennium 3 Design Group: Attn: Mr. John Charles, AIA
(1) Kaydos — Daniels Engineers, PLLC
504 East Elizabeth Street. Suite 2 • Elizabeth City, NC 27909 • Phone [phone] • Fax [phone]
info CDgetsolutionsinacom

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed construction at this site will consist of building a new 3-story
dormitory structure as well as related site infrastructure. The project site is
located along the north side of the existing 3-story dormitory within the Elizabeth
City State University Campus in Elizabeth City, North Carolina. A brief description
of the anticipated characteristics of the project is listed below:
• First floor finish grade elevations anticipated to be approximately 1 tot 2-
feet above the existing grade elevations.
• Combination of light gauge metal (stud) walls and structural steel framing
construction.
• Shallow foundation and slab -on -grade design.
• Maximum column and wall loads noted not to exceed 20 to 30 kips and 5
kips per linear foot, respectively.
Our field exploration program included four (4) 40-foot deep SPT borings drilled
within the limits of the proposed building location. A brief description of the
subsurface soil conditions is noted below:
RANGES OF
AVERAGE
STRATUM
DESCRIPTION
SPT I'I N-
DEPTH (Feet)
VALUES
Borings: B-1 through B-4.' `
0.5 to 0.67
Topsoil
Topsoil
0.67 to 4
1
Silty Sandy CLAY (CL)
2 to 14
4 to 23
II
SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM, SC) with varying
W.O.H. (2) to 31
33 to 40t3I
amounts of silt and clay
CLAY (CL, CH) with varying amounts of sand
W O.H.t�1 to 3
23 to 40
IIA
and marine shell fragments
Note (1) SPT = Standard Penetration Test, N-Values in Blows -per -foot
Note (2) W.O.H. = Weight Of Hammer
Note (3) SAND (SC) layer from 33 to 40-feet encountered at boring B-4 only.
• Groundwater was encountered at a depth ranging from 4.5 to 5-feet below
the current grade elevations at the boring locations.

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
The following evaluations and recommendations were developed based on our
field exploration and laboratory -testing program:
• Field-testing program during construction to include foundation excavation
observations and compaction testing of structural fill soils and existing
subgrade soils.
• An anticipated cut depth of at least 8-inches will be required to remove the
existing organic materials, trees, low lying vegetation, and associated root
mat from within the construction areas. Additionally, a cut depth of
approximately 2 to 4-inches is anticipated to be required to remove the
asphalt materials from within the building area that encroach on the
existing roadway alignment. This should be substantiated during the
subgrade preparation in the form of test pit excavations and proofroll
evaluations.
• In preparation for shallow foundation support, the footing excavations
should extend into firm natural soil or well compacted structural fill.
• Shallow foundations designed using an allowable bearing capacity of
2,500 psf (24-inch embedment, 24-inch width).
• Estimated total and differential settlements less than 1-inch and 3/4-inch,
respectively.
• Seismic design should incorporate a site classification of Class E, as
based on the results of the SPT borings and the requirements indicated in
Table 1615.1.1 of the North Carolina State Building Code (2000
International Building Code with North Carolina Amendments).
This summary briefly discusses some of the major topics mentioned in the
attached report. Accordingly, this report should be read in its entirety to
thoroughly evaluate the contents.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................ i
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Authorization............................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Description................................................................................ 1
1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services............................................................ 1
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES....................................................... 2
2.1 Field Exploration.................................................................................... 2
2.2 Laboratory Testing................................................................................ 3
3.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS............................................................ 4
3.1 Site Location and Description................................................................ 4
3.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions................................................................... 5
3.3 Groundwater Information....................................................................... 5
4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................ 6
4.1
Clearing and Grading............................................................................
6
4.2
Subgrade Preparation...........................................................................
8
4.3
Structural Fill and Placement................................................................
8
4.4
Foundation Design Recommendations.................................................
9
4.5
Foundation Excavations......................................................................
10
4.6
Foundation Settlements......................................................................
11
4.7
Seismic Design Recommendations.....................................................
11
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.............................................................. 11
5.1 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns ................................................. 11
5.2 Excavations.........................................................................................12
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS..................................................................................... 12
APPENDIX I -BORING LOCATION SKETCH
APPENDIX II - LOG OF BORINGS
APPENDIX ill - SOIL BORING PROFILE
Sokitiort"s Inc�`:;;��b

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
1.1 Project Authorization:
G ET Solutions, Inc. has completed our Geotechnical Engineering study for the proposed
Dormitory project at the Elizabeth City State University Campus. The Geotechnical
Engineering Services were conducted in general accordance with G E T Solutions, Inc.
Proposal No. PEC05-192G, dated November 17, 2005. Verbal authorization to proceed
with the services was received from Mrs. Randi Knofsky with Elizabeth City State University
on November 8, 2005.
1.2 Project Description:
The proposed development at this site is planned to consist of building a new three-story
dormitory structure, a new entrance roadway and parking areas, as well as other
associated pertinent infrastructure. The proposed structure will have a foot print area of
approximately 25,000 square feet and will consist of a combination of structural steel and
light gauge metal (stud) frame design supported by slab -on -grade and shallow foundation
members. The proposed first floor finish elevation is anticipated to be approximately 1 to
2-feet above the existing site grade elevations. The maximum wall and column loading
conditions associated with the structure were noted by Kaydos-Daniels to be on the order
of about 5 kips per linear foot (klf) and 20 to 30 kips, respectively.
If any of the noted information is incorrect or has changed, please inform G E T Solutions,
Inc. so that we may amend the recommendations presented in this report, if appropriate.
1.3 Purpose and Scope of Services:
The purpose of this study was to obtain information on the general subsurface conditions
at the proposed project site. The subsurface conditions encountered were then evaluated
with respect to the available project characteristics. In this regard, engineering
assessments for the following items were formulated:
General assessment of the soils revealed by the borings performed at the
proposed development.
General location and description of potentially deleterious material
encountered in the borings that may interfere with construction progress or
structure performance, including existing fills, surficial/subsurface organics,
or expansive soils.
Solutions, Inc;, _.;,

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1130/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: ECO5-355G
3. Soil subgrade preparation, including stripping, grading, and compaction, as
well as providing Engineering criteria for placement and compaction of
approved structural fill material, including weather and equipment effects.
4. Construction considerations for fill placement, subgrade preparation, and
foundation excavations.
5. Feasibility of utilizing a shallow foundation system for support of the
proposed building. Design parameters required for the foundation systems,
including foundation sizes, allowable bearing pressures, foundation levels,
and expected total and differential settlements.
The scope of services did not include an environmental assessment for determining the
presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic material in the soil, bedrock,
surface water, groundwater or air, on or below or around this site. Any statements in this
report or on the boring logs regarding odors, color, unusual or suspicious items or
conditions are strictly for the information of the client. Prior to development of this site, an
environmental assessment is advisable.
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY PROCEDURES
2.1 Field Exploration:
In order to explore the general subsurface soil types and to aid in developing associated
foundation design parameters, four (4) 40-foot deep Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
borings (designated as B-1 through B-4) were drilled by G E T Solutions, Inc. within the
approximate building foot print. The SPT boring was performed with the use of a power
drill rig using mud (rotary wash) drilling procedures. The soil samples were obtained with a
Split -Spoon Sampler in general accordance with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
ASTM D-1586. These samples were taken continuously from the ground surface to a
depth of 10 feet, and at 5-foot intervals thereafter.
Solutlons;t Iric'?�;;�r

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Table I — Boring Schedule
Boring Boring Depth Bonng,L'ocatton
Number
B-1 40 East Wing; South End
B-2 40 East Wing; Approximate Center
B-3 40 North Wing; East End
B-4 40 North Wing; West End
The SPT boring location was established by representatives of Millennium 3 Design Group
and identified in the field by G E T Solutions, Inc. The approximate boring location is
shown on the "Boring Location Plan" attached to this report (Appendix I, Figure 1). This
plan was developed based on the general site conceptual plan provided to G E T
Solutions, Inc. by Millennium 3 Design Group.
2.2 Laboratory Testing:
Representative portions of all soil samples collected during drilling were sealed in glass
jars, labeled, and transferred to our Elizabeth City laboratory for classification and analysis.
The soil classification was performed by a Geotechnical Engineer in accordance with
ASTM D2488.
A total of seven (7) representative split spoon soil samples were selected and subjected to
natural moisture, 4200 sieve wash, and Atterberg Limits testing and analysis in order to
corroborate the visual classification of the granular soils. These test results are tabulated
on the following page and are also presented on the "Log of Boring" sheets (Appendix II).
3

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Table II - Laboratory Test Results
Boring
No.
Sample
No;
Depth
(Ft)
Natural
Moisture
Content
M ,
4200
Sieve
M
LL/PL/PI
(%)
Classification
B-1
S-2
2-4
34.1
62.7
NT
CL
B-2
S-1
0-2
13.0
72.5
NT
CL
B-3
S-3
4-6
22.6
5.1
NT
SP-SM
B-3
S-10
33-35
60.4
57.8
64/28/36
CH
B-4
S-1
0-2
8.9
63.9
NT
CL
B-4
S-4
6-8
22.2
5.9
NT
SP-SM
B-4
S-10
1 33-35
43.0
1 33.0
NT
SC
NT=Not Tested
3.0 SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Site Location and Description:
The project site is located along the west side of the existing entrance roadway and dormitory
within the Elizabeth City State University Campus located in Elizabeth City, North Carolina.
At the time of our field investigation services, the property was generally observed to consist
of a combination of a wooded area and a grass covered area. Additionally, isolated portions
of the east building perimeter are anticipated to extend into the exiting pavement areas. The
site appeared to be relatively level with less than 1-foot change in elevation in 50 feet.
The westernmost site boundary consists of a wooded area followed by existing single and
multiple story buildings the concrete sidewalk followed by an open grass covered area. The
easternmost boundary consists of an existing asphalt paved roadway followed by an existing
three-story dormitory. The northernmost boundary consists of single and multiple story
structures. The southernmost boundary consists of a wooded area.
Solutlons�ilric: ;,� �,K'

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
3.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions:
Topsoil ranging in thickness from approximately 6 to 8-inches was encountered at the
boring locations. Beneath the surficial organic soils the underlying natural soils recovered
at the boring locations were noted to be consistent to the explored depths at the boring
location and were noted to be arranged in a two -layer configuration.
The initial soil layerwas noted to extend from beneath the surficial organic soils to a depth
ranging from 2 to 4-feet below existing grades. These soils were cohesive in nature and
were noted to consist of Silty Sandy CLAY (CL). The Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
results, N-values, recorded within this soil layer ranged from 2 to 14 blows -per -foot (BPF)
indicating a very soft to stiff consistency. These soils
The final soil layer extended from beneath the initial soil layer to the boring termination
depths of 40 feet. These soils were primarily granular in nature and were noted to consist
of SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM, SC) with varying amounts of silt and clay. The SPT results, N-
values, recorded within this soil layer ranged from W.O.H. to 31 blows -per -foot (BPF)
indicating a very loose to dense relative density. A deposit of very soft Silty CLAY (CH) with
sand was encountered at the boring locations and extended from approximately 23-feet
below existing grades to a depth ranging from approximately 33-feet to the boring
termination depths of 40-feet.
The subsurface description is of a generalized nature provided to highlight the major soil
strata encountered. The records of the subsurface exploration included in Appendix II (Log
of Boring sheets) and the Generalized Soil Profile presented in Appendix III should be
reviewed for specific information as to individual borings. The stratifications shown on the
records of the subsurface exploration represent the conditions only at the actual boring
locations. Variations may occur and should be expected between boring locations. The
stratifications represent the approximate boundary between subsurface materials and the
transition may be gradual.
3.3 Groundwater Information:
The groundwater table depth was measured at each boring location during drilling
operations and was found to occur approximately 4.5 to 5 feet below the existing site
grades.
5
Solution's,;Inc•:' '. %,

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Groundwater conditions will vary with environmental variations and seasonal conditions,
such as the frequency and magnitude of rainfall patterns, as well as man-made influences,
such as existing swales, drainage ponds, underdrains, and areas of covered soil (paved
parking lots, side walks, etc.). It is estimated normal seasonal high groundwater level will
fluctuate within 1 to 1.5 feet above the current levels. We recommend that the contractor
determine the actual groundwater levels at the time of the construction to determine
groundwater impact on this project, if needed.
4.0 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In general, this site contained very soft to medium stiff CLAY (CL) followed by loose to
dense SAND (SP, SP-SM, SM, SC). Accordingly, with minor foundation modifications, this
site will be suitable for typical shallow foundation construction (footings). The minor
foundation modifications may consist of undercut and backfill with suitable structural fill
material in order to remove very soft cohesive bearing soils, as encountered at the location
of boring B-3 (as indicated in section 4.5 of this report).
The following recommendations are based on the previously discussed project information,
our observations at the site, our interpretation of the field and laboratory data obtained
during the exploration, and our experience with similar subsurface conditions. Subsurface
conditions in unexplored locations may vary from those encountered at the specific boring
locations. If the proposed construction scheme should vary from that previously described,
we request the opportunity of reviewing our recommendations.
4.1 Clearing and Grading:
The proposed construction areas should be cleared by means of removing existing trees,
low-lying vegetation (grass), associated root mat, and topsoil. A cut depth of at least 8-
inches is expected to be required to remove the surficial organic material. This cut is
expected to be deeper in isolated areas to remove deeper deposits of organic soils, which
may become evident during the clearing.
Additionally, based on the site plan provided by Millennium 3 Design Group and our site
observations, portions of the east building perimeter are anticipated to extend into the exiting
pavement areas. Accordingly, where the building limits encroach on the existing paved
areas, a cut depth of approximately 2 to 4-inches is anticipated to be required to remove
the existing asphalt materials. This cut depth is estimated, as our field exploration services
were not performed within the existing pavement areas.
I
Sol�onsllncr��°:

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1130/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Following the removal of the existing asphalt materials, the existing Aggregate Base
Course (ABC) materials, if encountered, are anticipated to be suitable to remain in -place
for slab -on -grade and/or foundation support. This should be substantiated in the field
during construction and the subgrade evaluation process as indicated in section 4.2 of this
report.
The subsurface soils recovered at the boring location typically contained appreciable
amounts of fines. Also, based on the laboratory classification, the current (natural)
moisture contents of the surface soils at the explored locations were estimated to be near
their respective optimum moisture. Accordingly, combinations of excess surface moisture
from precipitation ponding on the site and the construction traffic, including heavy
compaction equipment, may create pumping and general deterioration of the bearing
capabilities of the surface soils. Therefore, undercutting to remove very soft soils should be
anticipated. The extent of the undercut will be determined in the field during construction,
based on the outcome of the field-testing procedures (subgrade proofroll). In this regard,
and in order to reduce undercutting, care should be exercised during the grading and
construction operations at the site.
Furthermore, inherently wet subgrade soils combined with potential poor site drainage
make this site particularly susceptible to subgrade deterioration. Thus, grading should be
performed during a dry season if at all possible. This should minimize these potential
problems, although they may not be eliminated. The project's budget should include an
allowance for subgrade improvements (undercut and backfill with select fill).
Control of surface water is very important to the successful completion of the proposed
construction. The contractor should plan his grading activities to control surface water and
minimize erosion of exposed cut or fill material. This may include constructing temporary
berms, ditches, flumes and/or slope drains to intercept runoff and discharge it in a
controlled fashion, while complying with state and local regulations.
The project's budget should include an allowance for subgrade improvements (undercut
and backfill with select fill). It is recommended that the clearing operations extend laterally
at least 5 feet beyond the perimeter of the proposed building area.
7
Sotutions,Ana: .- '

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
4.2 Subgrade Preparation:
Following the clearing operation and prior to site grading or any fill placement, the
subgrade soils within any slab -on -grade areas, including sidewalks, should be evaluated by
G E T Solutions, Inc. for stability. Accordingly, the subgrade soils should be proofrolled to
check for pockets of soft material hidden beneath a crust of better soil. Several passes
should be made by a large rubber -tired roller or loaded dump truck over the construction
areas, with the successive passes aligned perpendicularly. The number of passes will be
determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer depending on the soils conditions.
Any pumping and unstable areas observed during proofrolling (beyond the initial cut)
should be undercut and/or stabilized at the directions of the Geotechnical Engineer.
Following the proofroll operation a series of test pit excavations should be performed to
verify that all organic soils and associated root mat have been removed from within the
wooded and/or grass covered areas. Additionally, test pit excavations should be
performed within the existing pavement areas to evaluate the existing ABC materials, if
encountered, as well as the underlying soils.
Following the approval by the engineer, it is recommended that, within the construction
areas, natural soils below stripped grade should be compacted to a dry density of at least
100 percent of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698), as tested to a
depth of 12 inches. This densification will require the use of a large vibratory roller.
4.3 Structural Fill and Placement:
Following the proper compaction and approval of the natural subgrade soils by the
Geotechnical Engineer, the placement of the fill required to establish.the design grades
may begin. Any material to be used for backfill or structural fill should be evaluated and
tested by G E T Solutions, Inc. prior to placement to determine if they are suitable for the
intended use. Suitable structural fill material should consist of sand or gravel containing
less than 20 percent by weight of fines (SP, SM, SW, GP, GW), having a liquid limit less
than 20 and plastic limit less than 6, and should be free of rubble, organics, clay, debris
and other unsuitable material.
s
�Solu�oons,ljlncl

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
Based on our field and laboratory testing procedures, the on -site soils from an approximate
depth of 6-inches to 4-feet consisted of CLAY (CL) or SAND (SM) with clay and do not
appear suitable for re -use as structural fill. These soils can be used fill within green areas.
Those granular soils (SAND; SP, SP-SM) encountered beneath the soil consisting of CLAY
(CL) and/or SAND (SM) with clay do appear to be suitable for reuse as structural fill. In
order to verify the acceptance or rejection of the existing soils for reuse as structural fill
material further classification testing (natural moisture content, full sieve and Atterberg
Limits) should be performed during construction.
All structural fill should be compacted to a dry density of at least 100 percent of the
Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D698). In general, the compaction should
be accomplished by placing the fill in maximum 10-inch loose lifts and mechanically
compacting each lift to at least the specified minimum dry density. A representative of G E
T Solutions, Inc. should perform field density tests on each lift as necessary to assure that
adequate compaction is achieved.
Backfill material in utility trenches within the construction areas should consist of structural
fill (as described above), and should be compacted to at least 100 percent of ASTM D698.
This fill should be placed in 4 to 6 inch loose lifts when hand compaction equipment is
used.
4.4 Foundation Design Recommendations:
Provided that the previously recommended earthwork construction procedures are properly
performed, the proposed dormitory can be supported by shallow foundations bearing over
firm natural soil or well -compacted structural fill material. The footings can be designed
using a net allowable soil pressure of up to 2500 pounds per square foot (psf). In using net
pressures, the weight of the footings and backfill over the footings, including the weight of
the floor slab, need not be considered. Hence, only loads applied at or above the finished
floor need to be used for dimensioning the footings. However, the cohesive soils (CLAY,
CL) encountered at the location of boring B-3 were noted to be very soft from a depth of
approximately 2 to 4-feet below existing grades. Accordingly, foundation subgrade
improvements in the form of undercut and backfill are considered necessary within this
area. Additional recommendations regarding the foundation subgrade improvements are
provided in section 4.5 of this report.
E
Solutloris;;tri¢:;:� t'w°�

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
In order to develop the recommended bearing capacity, the base of the footings should
have an embedment of 24 inches beneath finished exterior grades, and wall footings
should have a minimum width of 24 inches. In addition, isolated square column footings
are recommended to be a minimum of 3 feet by 3 feet in area for bearing capacity
consideration. The recommended 24-inch footing embedment is considered sufficient to
provide adequate cover against frost penetration to the bearing soils.
4.5 Foundation Excavations:
Immediately prior to reinforcing steel placement, it is suggested that the bearing surfaces of
all footing and floor slab areas be compacted using hand operated mechanical tampers, to
a dry density of at least 100% of the Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698)
as tested to a depth of 12 inches, for bearing capacity considerations. In this manner, any
localized areas, which have been loosened by excavation operations, should be
adequately re -compacted. The compaction testing in the base of the footings may be
waived by the Geotechnical Engineer, where firm bearing soils are observed during the
footing inspections. In addition to compaction testing, hand auger borings with Dynamic
Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing should be performed within the base of the foundation
excavations to ensure that the footing bearing soils are suitable for foundation support.
As previously indicated, the shallow subsurface CLAY soils encountered at the location of
boring B-3 were noted to be on the order of very soft. Accordingly, some foundation
subgrade improvements may be required when these soils are encountered beneath the
foundation excavations. This is anticipated to consist of undercutting to remove the very
soft deposits and backfill within the use of suitable structural fill material as indicated in
Section 4.3 of this report. The foundation subgrade improvements, should be further
determined in the field during construction by a representative of G E T Solutions, Inc. in
order to provide the allowable bearing capacities provided herein.
Soils exposed in the bases of all satisfactory and remedied foundation excavations should
be protected against any detrimental change in condition such as from physical
disturbance, rain or frost. Surface run-off water should be drained away from the
excavations and not be allowed to pond. If possible, all footing concrete should be placed
the same day the excavation is made. If this is not possible, the footing excavations should
be adequately protected.
GET

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
4.6 Foundation Settlements:
It is estimated that, with proper site preparation (as previously presented), the maximum
resulting total settlement of the proposed building foundations should be less than about 1
inch. The maximum differential settlement magnitude is expected to be less than 3/4-inch
between adjacent footings (wall footings and column footings of widely varying loading
conditions). The settlements were estimated on the basis of the results of the field
penetration tests. Careful field control will contribute substantially towards minimizing the
settlements.
4.7 Seismic Design Recommendations:
It is noted that, in accordance with the NC Building Code; Chapter 16, this site would be
classified as site Class E, based on which seismic designs should be incorporated. This
recommendation is based on the limited data obtained from the 40-foot deep SPT borings
(B-1 through B-4) and the requirements indicated in Table 1615.1.1 of the North Carolina
State Building Code (2000 International Building Code with North Carolina Amendments),
where a soft cohesive soil layer (CLAY) greater than 10-feet in thickness was encountered.
Additionally, the CLAY layer was tested and found to contain a Plasticity Index greaterthan
20 and a water content greater than 40%. A CPT and soil shear wave velocity testing
along with a dilatometer test (through the cohesive soil layer) may determine that a site
Class D can be used, if needed.
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 Drainage and Groundwater Concerns:
It is expected that dewatering may be required for excavations that extend deeper than
about 4.5 to 5 feet (current groundwater level) below existing grades. Dewatering at these
levels and just into the groundwater level could probably be accomplished by pumping from
sumps. Dewatering at depths below the groundwater level may require well pointing.
GET

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
5.2 Excavations:
In Federal Register, Volume 54, No. 209 (October, 1989), the United States Department of
Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended its "Construction
Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR, part 1926, Subpart P". This document was issued to
better insure the safety of workmen entering trenches or excavations. It is mandated by
this federal regulation that all excavations, whether they be utility trenches, basement
excavation or footing excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new (OSHA)
guidelines. It is our understanding that these regulations are being strictly enforced and if
they are not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial
penalties.
The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary
excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to
maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. The contractor's responsible
person, as defined in 29 CFR Part 1926, should evaluate the soil exposed in the
excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures. In no case should slope height,
slope inclination, or excavation depth, including utility trench excavation depth, exceed
those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations.
We are providing this information solely as a service to our client. G E T Solutions, Inc. is
not assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such
responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred.
6.0 REPORT LIMITATIONS
The recommendations submitted are based on the available soil information obtained by G
E T Solutions, Inc. and the information supplied by the client and there associates for the
proposed project. If there are any revisions to the plans for this project or if deviations from
the subsurface conditions noted in this report are encountered during construction, G E T
Solutions, Inc. should be notified immediately to determine if changes in the foundation
recommendations are required. If G E T Solutions, Inc. is not retained to perform these
functions, G E T Solutions, Inc. can not be responsible forthe impact of those conditions
on the geotechnical recommendations for the project.
The Geotechnical Engineer warrants that the findings, recommendations, specifications or
professional advice contained herein have been made in accordance with generally
accepted professional geotechnical engineering practices in the local area. No other
warranties are implied or expressed.
12
Sbludoiu:lhc.��k

Report of Subsurface Investigation and Geotechnical Engineering Services 1/30/06
Proposed Dormitory
Elizabeth City State University
Elizabeth City, North Carolina
GET Project No: EC05-355G
After the plans and specifications are more complete the Geotechnical Engineer should be
provided the opportunity to review the final design plans and specifications to assure our
engineering recommendations have been properly incorporated into the design documents,
in order that the earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted
and implemented. At that time, it may be necessary to submit supplementary
recommendations. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Elizabeth City
State University as well as their consultants for the specific application to the proposed
Dormitory project for The Elizabeth City State University complex located in Elizabeth City,
North Carolina.
13

APPENDICES
BORING LOCATION PLAN
LOG OF BORINGS
III. GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE

LEGEND
— APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS
— LIMITS ❑F PROPOSED BUILDING
EXISTING
ROADWAY
Project
Project No., EC05-355G
c.
Ou tee 1/30/06
BORING LOCATION PLAN
SCALE
INA
By, Gys
No., 1

'al�'nv ental
itions,Inc.
LOG OF BORING
No. B-1
PROJECT: Proposed Elizabeth Citv State University Dormiton' PROJECT NO.: EC05-355G
CLIENT:Elizabeth City State UniversityPROJECT
LOCATION: Elizabeth Citv. North Carolina
LOCATION: See Attached Bovine Location Plan ELEVATION: INA
DRILLER: J. Brown LOGGED BY: G. Stalls. E.I.T.
DRILLING METHOD: Mud Rotan' (mash) DATE: 12-1-05
DEPTH TO - WATER> INITIAL: 8 5-feet AFTER 24 HOURS: : CAVING> -L
p`.
Description
p
o.
m
a o
E z
y
o E
'
m 0
oa
u
v
0
TEST RESULTS
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
Water Content- •
Penetration -
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
a
s
7
6
e
s
12
6
9
q
5
5
WOH
woH
WOH:.....:.....:......_.......:_...:._.
wOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
2.
7-Inches Topsoil
0.5
Mottled Grav-Tan, moist, Silty Sandy CLAY (CL), stiff
4
Gray, moist, poorly graded fine to medium SAND (SP) to poorly
graded fine to medium SAND (SP-SM) with silt, loose to medium
dense
Wet Prom 5-feet
:r.( L r
f ?'. {. 1:
'.I:r r L
:I
1:GC ii
CC).
1 X. C'I:
•I:I: I: 1 !
l X. C'1:
1:I; 1..
I; t.r
'
._..:._ : .. .:. . :.... .. ...:.....:.. _.
•
-
.:.
..:.. .:_ :.....:_...:.
.. .. _:..
'
..
_.... .................:.....:.....:.....:.....
-. :.....: ....:......:. ... i.....:.....:...
_....:.....:.....: .... :..... :..... :.....:._..
....: .... .: .. J..... :.... :.....:, ....:.. ...
...:.....: :.....:. ..:.....
b.
.:.
- - -
1,
3
6
le
24
23
Gray, wet, Silty CLAY (CH) with trace sand and marine shell
fragments, very soft
8
9
30
0
36
11
Boring terminated at 40 ft.
P14,
0. 1. = Weight Of Hammer
Fiqure PAGE 1 of 1

:::..
eon-Dical
Env' -"mental
T
Li C.
lions, lnc.
LOG OF BORING
No. B-2
PROJECT: Proposed Elizabeth Citv State Universitv Dormiton PROJECT NO.: EC05-355G
CLIENT: Elizabeth Citv State University
PROJECT LOCATION: Elizabeth Citv. North Carolina
LOCATION: See Attached Boring Location Plan ELEVATION: INA
DRILLER: J. Broum LOGGED BY: G. Stalls. E.I.T.
DRILLING METHOD: Mud Rotary (wash) DATE: 12-1-05
DEPTH TO - WATER> INITIAL: $ 5-feet AFTER 24 HOURS: -7 CAVING> L
L
o w
Description
r
T
O
a
Z
m
3 c
m u
o
"'
v
o
TEST RESULTS
Plastic Limit �-—� Liquid Limit
Water Content- •
Penetration -
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
s
6
96
6
s
9
10
12
5
7
6
e
s
1
WOH.....:.....:
WOH
WOH
WOH
WoH
WOH
WOH
WOH
2
6-Inches Topsoil
....... ....._. ...-._...._...... .
.. .... .:.. .. [.....:. .. :..... :.
..:...... :.. ...:..... :..... :.....:.....
..:... :.....:.....:.....:.....
...................... _...... ............ .. ....
-
.....:..... .:..... 1.....-. .........
: .....: ... ..:.... :.... :.. ..:. ..:.....
' ..:.....:..... .:..... 1.. ...:. ....:.....
..._...
....:... .: ....:........... :.....:. . .. :.....
.: :.. .:......:.....:. I.
.t ...:.. .:..... ......:.....:....
Mottled Gray -Tan, moist, Silty Sandy CLAY (C4dense
..27
Reddish Tan, moist, Silty fine SAND (SM) with clay,
L...
'L7:tJ.
a: r r
I: F
.....
1:
I y; I;1
....
1.I. }
3
Gray, moist, poorly gaded fine to medium SAND (S'I:
it
graded fine to medium SAND (SP-SM) with silt, loos..
dense
Wet from 5-feet
4
5
6
16
Gray, wet, Silty fine SAND (SM), medium dense
23
Gray, wet, Silty CLAY (CH) with trace sand and marine shell
fragments, very soft
.....
7
24
8
9
30
10
36
11
Boring terminated at 40 ft.
az....:._
W0.11. = 4NeigllrOfHammei
Fiqure PAGE 1 of 1

PROJECT: Proposed Elizabeth City State University Donnitore PROJECT NO.: EC05-355G
eon` cal
E..x..
n�v+ mental
CLIENT: Elizabeth Citv State University
PROJECT LOCATION: Elizabeth Citv. North Carolina
[ions, Inc.
LOCATION: See Attached Borintt Location Plan ELEVATION: INA
LOG OF BORING
DRILLER: J. BroHm LOGGED BY: G. Stalls. E.I.T.
DRILLING METHOD: Mud Rotary (wash) DATE: 12-1-05
No. B-3
DEPTH TO - WATER> INITIAL: a 4.5-feet AFTER 24 HOURS: = CAVING> f
w
N
oo
TEST RESULTS
Plastic Limit Liquid Limit
v
Description
=
a
z
3
m o
ar
aai
p�
in
Water Content- •
0
Penetration -
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0
2
3
8-Inches Topsoil
0.6
.: ....:.....:_....=. ...:..... :. ....:.....
1
Mottled Gray -Tan, moist, Silty Sandy CLAY (CL), very soft to
2
medium stiff
4
.1 tl.tt
5.1�
graded fine to medium SAND SP to poorly
' Gray, moist, poorly S ( ) P Y
""'
6
:._..:. _..:.....
g
e
6
graded fine to medium SAND (SP-SM) with silt, medium dense to
-a:I: r L 1
11
dense
L:CrJ.
14
�.
Wet from 45-feet
.ul: r. r
ii'
4
13
1s
.......... _............... ........... . . .
t:.....:.....� :.....:.....
5
.1:1;
a:cr
4:Gi 4i
.....
14
16
1s
.....:....
u
.: .....: .....� _..... .:.....:... _:.....
12
5
1
'LYrI.
6
s
....f :.....:... :....:....:.....:...
1e
rrr.1
Gray, wet, Silty fine SAND (SM), loose
.....
.....
4
e
.._............._....................... ...
7
.....
4
1
1.
.. _.. .....- ...
23
24
Gray, wet, Silty CLAY (CH) with trace sand and marine shell
fragments, very soft
1
WOH
1
....:... _:..... 1 .... .:.....
it
_f._..:.... J_....:..... :. ,.. .:. . .. :...
6
9
WOH
30
WOH
WOH
_... :.. ..'. .....:. ....:......... .. .. .. :...
10
WOH
37.fr
WOH
.....:.....:...... .. . :.. ... :... ..:. ..:.....
36
1
_....:.....:.....:. ....:.. ....:.....:. ....:...
_ J .....f ....... ............... .....
38.5
Gray, wet, Silty CLAY (CL) with sand and trace marine shell
11
2
fragments, very soft
.....:....:....:......:......:.....:.....:....
Boring tenninated at 40 ft.
42
W O.H. = Weight Of Hammer
Figure PAGE 1 of 1

%="'-�',
Env mental
tiom, Inc.
LOG OF BORING
No. B-4
PROJECT: Proposed Elizabeth City State University Dormiton, PROJECT NO.: EC05-355G
CLIENT: Elizabeth City State University
PROJECT LOCATION: Elizabeth City. North Carolina
LOCATION: See Attached Borine Location Plan ELEVATION: INA
DRILLER: J. Brown LOGGED BY: G. Stalls. E.I.T.
DRILLING METHOD: Mud Rotary (wash) DATE: 12-1-05
DEPTH TO - WATER> INITIAL: $ 5-feet AFTER 24 HOURS: CAVING> f
o
Description
9
m Z
m
m 0
oo
y
e
TEST RESULTS
Liquid Limit
WatercContent - 0
Penetration -
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
e
6
6
6
6
7
9
12
„
13
11
r
a
woH
won
WOH
3
ss12
3
8-Inches Topsoil
0.6
i :r. i.'I:
y ll:Lr
I:IF1
1 11:L(
r L1
nl L'I:
._.._.. .. t .... ..-..._..... _..
... ............................................
.. .: ... .....:......:..... 1.. _ .1, ....:... ..
-�
.
.:....:... .I:__ ..:.....:..... :. ....:.....
:....:.... __...:..... :..... :._..:... ..
...is
I
....._. .......I. _....... ..................
' I
T
I
I
...:.....:.....:.....I'....
..........:.....:..... �:..... :..... :.... .:... .
I
i
...... .._.. .......
..... ..... ................. ..
.. - -
1
Mottled Gray -Tan, moist, Silty Sandy CLAY (CL), stiff
Gray, wet, poorly graded fine to medium SAND (SP) to poorly
graded fine to medium SAND (SP-SM) with silt, medium dense
2
Gray, wet, Silty CLAY (CH) with trace sand, very soft
mixed with marine shell fragments from 22 to 28-feet
Trace marine shell fragments from 28-feet
33.5
3
6
4
5
12
7
24
g
g
30
Gray, wet, Clayey SAND (SC) with silt, very loose
...
10
WOH
WOH
WOH....
i
t
k36
Boring tenninated at 40 ft.
42
W 0.1-1. = Weight Of ]1(1111111 eP
Fiqure PAGE 1 of 1

Symbol Description
Strata symbols
Topsoil
Low plasticity
clay
Poorly graded sand
with silt
High plasticity
V�
clay
Silty sand
Clayey sand
Misc. Symbols
4
Water table during
II
drilling
Notes:
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on 12-1-05 using a
4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
2. No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or
when re -checked the following day.
3. Boring locations were taped from existing features and
elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan.
4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and
recommendations in this report.
5. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported
on the loos.

I
a J J J J J
4 fi S fi NM=13.p 2 3 6 6 NM=89
] ] 3 5
- NM=34.1 67 2 1 6 5
68
M
8 ] 1 ]
UNM=225 9 11
619
'19'h1 139 'L;I,fJ. 819I :I.0 1, .. 9
.1 :I. L I' 1 14 13 12 13 NM=22 2
6 5
'I.I;V1 y9 '1ttj 5 'I :I:M1 15 !-0Fht 11 6
...
s
—IT
r.l'.l l: I
6 10
f.11l t:
1415
"
1213
.I;GI LI
6 5
9
A:hi 4!
12
A:1 C41
15
11
"L 7: r.1
.1... i
d Cii
:I :ffi l
...Ci
f .f. C 'I:
1 .I'. C I.
57
1 .I'. L I.t
'.1. L f 1
] 10
I(11.1
4 5
5
i.l.L}1
s
{q'V.}i
]
tj.Li l
9
L7 f.l.
'LT CJ.
J 11'r.l
16
. 1 1
t. l
:I ;LII
1 .Illl:l
66
] fi
46
:I lI.Li
e9
'
S
s
<
�r�rrr'
6
IItr1
nN
24
oa
WOH
WOH
1
WOM
WOH
WOH
WON
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
2
32
—
WOH
WOH
WOH NM=604
WOH NM=4]0
_
_
WOH
WOH
WOH LL=64
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
WOH
Wip
2
WOH
WOH
1
I
40
Iral symbols
Topsoil
�® Low plasticity
clay
Poorly graded sand
with Sill
plasticity
zHigh
clay
Silty sand
0 Clayey sand
GET Solutions, Inc.
GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
State Un
PROJECT NO. EC05-355G
DRAWN

U
Symbol
Description
Strata
symbols
Topsoil
Low plasticity
clay
Poorly graded sand
with silt
High plasticity
clay
Silty sand
Clayey sand
Misc.
Symbols
Water table during
drilling
Notes-
1. Exploratory borings were drilled on 12-1-05 using a
4-inch diameter continuous flight power auger.
2. No free water was encountered at the time of drilling or
when re -checked the following day.
3. Boring locations were taped from existing features and
elevations extrapolated from the final design schematic plan.
4. These logs are subject to the limitations, conclusions, and
j recommendations in this report.
5. Results of tests conducted on samples recovered are reported
on the loqs.