20091244 Ver 1_Stormwater Info_20091208

r
r
r
i
Shops at Whispering Pines
NC 22, Ray's Bridge Road,
Whispering Pines, Moore County, North Carolina
Stormwater Management Report E
Date: February 12, 2009
Revised June 26, 2009
Revised September 15, 2009
Prepared by:
W
SPn SELL
j
15401 Weston Parkway
Suite 100
Cary, North Carolina 27513
[phone]
[phone] (Fax)
CHS Project Number 08-4083
09- Iay-?r
o R@19616141
DEC - e 2009
DENR • WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORmwA7 R BRANCH
' PLANNING & ZONING
10 PINE RIDGE DRIVE.
WIJISPFRING PILAFS, NORTH CAROLINA 2832
TELET1110NI : (910) 949-3 141 F.r-i.12)
".II.[ {? t ! ..1..?..4`Ri_T.
November 23,2009
LETTER OF APPROVAL
JDH Capital, LLC c/o William L_ Alien
3537 Beam Road, Suite A
' Charlotte, NC 28217
704-496-7160
" .E: Project Name: The Shops at Whispering Pines
' Location: NC Hwy 22/Sullivan Drive, Whispering Pines, NC 28327
Submitted By: JDH Capital, LLC Date Rec'd: 3/5/09
Plan Type: Commercial, Shopping Center
' Dear Sir:
' Our review of the above referenced erosion control plan has been
completed. We find the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this Letter
of Approval. A copy of this letter and the enclosed Grading Permit must be
' posted at the job site. This plan approval shall expire in•three (3) years
following the date of approval, if no land disturbing activity has been
undertaken, as required by Title 15A NCAC 4B .0129.
In order to insure the early coordination and implementation of the
erosion control for this project, it is requested that a pre-construction
conference be held. Representatives for the owner, engineer, contractor,
' and this office should attend. Please notify Brian Borchardt at (910) 949-
3141, Ext. 12 when scheduling this conference.
' If any area on site falls under the jurisdiction of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act.; the developer is responsible to the orders of the US
Army Corps of Engineers. Any erosion measures that fall within
' jurisdictional wetland areas must be relocated to the transition point
between the wetlands and the highlands to assure that the migration of
sediment will not occur. If that relocation presents a problem or contradicts
any requirements of the Corps of Engineers, it is the responsibility of the
developer to inform the Erosion Control Inspector so that an adequate
contingency plan can be made to assure sufficient erosion is controlled on
site.
' Following the installation of all initial erosion control measures, you
should notify this office to request an inspection prior to proceeding with
any grading.
Following completion of the project, you should notify this office to
schedule a final inspection. The purpose of this inspection is to insure that
all erosion control requirements have been meet.
This permit is valid only for the land owner(s) and financially
responsible person(s) as listed on the plans and Financial
Responsibility/Ownership Form. Any changes must be reported to this
office on an amended Financial Responsibility/Ownership Form.
With this approval the construction inspector for the Village of
Whispering Pines or his agent has the right to enter the permitted property
to provide for periodic inspection of the land disturbing activity in
accordance with North Carolina general statue 113a-61.1.
The approval of this plan, by the Village of Whispering Pines, is in
no way meant to relieve the design professional of his or her responsibility
for the project design.
This approval is subject to the satisfactory performance of the
erosion control measures under field conditions. Should it be determined
that the requirements of the Sedimentation Pollution control act of 1973
(G.S. 113A, 51-66) and the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Ordinance of the Village of Whispering Pines are not being met, revisions
to the plan and its implementation will be required.
This permit allows for a land disturbance, as called for on the
application plan, not to exceed 11.33 acres and/or the'construction limits
as shown on the plans. Exceeding these limits will be a violation of this
permit and would require a revised plan and additional application fee.
We look forward to working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
The Village of Whispering Pines
Brian Borchardt
Planning & Zoning Director
Bob Kissinger
Erosion Sedimentation Inspector

' November 23,2009
LETTER OF APPROVAL
' Stormwater Management Plan
JDH Capital, LLC c/o William L. Allen
' 3537 Beam Road, Suite A
Charlotte, NC 28217
704-496-7160
' RE: Project Name: The Shops at Whispering Pines
Location: NC Hwy 22 / Sullivan Drive, Whispering Pines, NC 28327
Submitted By; JDH Capital, LLC Date Recd: 3/5/09
' Plan Type: Commercial, Shopping Center
Dear Sir:
' Our review of the above referenced Stormwater Management Plan (;VIP') has been
completed. We find the plan to be acceptable and hereby issue this Letter of Approval. A
copy of this letter of approval and the SMP must be posted at the job site.
' In order to insure the early coordination and implementation of the SMP for this
project, it is requested that a pre-construction conference be held. Representatives for the
' owner. engineer, contractor, and this office should attend. Please notify Brian Borchardt at
[phone], £xi. 12 when scheduling this conference.
Following completion of the project, you should notify this office to schedule a final
' inspection. The purpose of this inspection is to insure that all erosion control requirements
have - n meet.
' This permit is valid only for the land ovrner(s) and financially responsible person(s)
as listed on theplans.
With this approval, the construction inspector for the Village of Whispering Pines or
' his agent has the r+t to enter the permitted property to provide for periodic inspection
Sincerely,
l' }??^ ?'!!I ''.?"JI' i r '°•r-?? alit"ran
Brian Borchardt
' Planning &Zoningg Director
file:///C l/Documents%20and%2OSettings/Gene%200pdyke/Desktop/Shops%2Oat%2O WP.htm
From: John A.K. Tucker, PE [e-mail]]
' Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:25 AM
To: Brian Borchardt
Cc: Steve DeBolt
' Subject: Shops at WP
I've completed my review of the last revised plan ( dated 9-15-09). All comments regarding stormwater
' issues have been addressed. I recommend approval of the construction drawings.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
' John
' John A.K. Tucker, PE
Consulting Engineer
PO Box 297
' Fuquay Varina, NC 27526
Phone [phone]
' Fax [phone]
file:///Cl/Documents%20and%2OScttings/Gene%200pdyke/Desktop/Shops%20at%20WP.htm10/5/2009 8:55:10 AM
t
t Table of Contents
Cover
Narrative
Pre/Post Development Flows
Pre/Post Development Flows Letter
NCDENR Stormwater Program Map
Pre-Development Calculations
Offsite Drainage Area Exhibit
Moore County Soil Map
Pre-Development Drainage Map
Pre-Development Weighted C/CN
Pre-Development Model and
Hydrographs
Wetpond Normal Pool Sizing Criteria
Normal Pool Sizing and Draw Down
NCDENR Wet Pond Supplement
NCDENR Level Spreader Supplement
Post Development Calculations
Post-Development Drainage C/CN
Post-Development Weighted Map
Post-Development Model and
Hydrographs
Stormwater Collection System
' Catch Basin Drainage Area Map
Site Stormwater Hydroflow Calculations
1 Site Rip Rap Calculations
NC 22 Bypass Hydroflow Calculations
Driveway Pipe Hydroflow Calculations
Bypass Pipe and Driveway Rip Rap
Calculations
Operations and Maintenance Manual
Level Spreader
Wetpond
Erosion Control
Sediment Basin Design
Existing Dam Breach Design
Permanent Channel Design
Diversion Ditch Design Verification

Geotechnical Report

1
G
1
1
3 (also shown on BMP Drainage Area Sheet)
4
5
6
7
8
15
17
18
25
26
27
31
35
36
37
38
52
53
54
62
64
69
74
75
76
79
83
84
86
90
96
99

Shops at Whispering Pines Shopping Center
NC 22/ Ray's Bridge Road, Whispering Pines, NC
Storm Water Management Plan Narrative
1' Existing Conditions
The site consists of one platted lot totaling approximately 11.4 acres along NC 22
at Sullivan Drive. The site has been cleared except for some trees along some
perimeter buffers and along the existing farm pond. The site consists of two
existing retail buildings located along NC 22.
The entire site drains to the existing farm pond.
i
U
M
s
ng
oore County GIS it was determined the site does not have any offsite
areas that drain to the property that will affect the proposed BMPs. The only
offsite drainage area will enter the pond through an existing pipe under NC 22.
The existing soils are defined as Candor Sand and Fuquay Loamy Sand series
soils by the Moore County soil survey. Drainage and permeability is defined by
HSG A/B numbers. The area north of the pond follows the HSG A properties and
the area south of the pond follows the HSG B properties.
The project is located in the Little River Vass Watershed.
The site is not located within the 100-year flood plain as outlined on the NC FIRM
map 3710857400J dated October 17, 2006.
Proposed Conditions
The proposed current development will consist of a new grocery store, an
adjacent and separated retail building with supporting parking and the creation of
2 out-parcels.
This report will outline the storm water management in order to meet the Village
of Whispering Pines and the State of North Carolina Stormwater Management
Criteria. The Stormwater Management system will provide water quality and
water quantity components.

1
Page 1
JoWSP w SELLS.
1
r
1
IF
[7
1
r

1

1
Water Quality
The site design will incorporate the use of one wetpond.
Wetpond (Water Quality/Quantity)
A wetpond was design following the NCDENR standards for best management
practices. The pond is designed to store the first 1-inch of runoff and drain this
volume over a 48-hour period. In addition to the first 1-inch runoff the pond is
designed reduce the post development flows to below the predevelopment flows
for the 2, 5, 10, 25-year SCS 6-hr storm and SCS 1-year 24-hour storm. Low
flow discharges will drain to a level spreader with a 30' filter strip and higher flows
will use the bypass outlet. The NCDENR supplements for the wetpond and level
spreader are attached. Also attached are the operations and maintenance
manuals for each BMP.
Storm Sewers
Storm sewers of either RCP or HDPE pipe will be utilized with catch basins
throughout the site where needed to capture runoff from parking areas and
pedestrian plazas to direct the stormwater to constructed BMPs. RCP will be
utilized in the public ROW and pavement areas.
Page 2
JENOWSPs SELLS

1
i

Qs
J
+1
s

rn
0
0
N
LO
r
CY)
U
C
to
y
U)
2
y
f6
L
U
1
e
r
t
1
1
O
J
O
LL 3
0
?LL
c r-
E-
'a G>
a) E
C C:
O
N y C
m 0 d
?a o
m
O
d d
aa` a`
C
d
E
CL
0
m
a?
0
N
0
a
3
0
U-
M
r
3
O
C
E
CL
0
m
m
N
0
a
U
Cl)
N
O
d
N
d
N
X
vi
a
E
M
co
O
v
co
0
3
1

3 Hobbs, Upchurch & associates, PA.
Consulting Engineers
k 300 S
W
Broad St
t • P
t Offi
17
B
-
.
.
ree
as
ce
ox
37
Southern Pines, NC 28388

Brian Borchardt
Planning Department
The Village of Whispering Pines
Village Hall
10 Pine Ridge Drive
Whispering Pines, NC 28327
Mr Borchardt,
The recent submittal by .IDH Capitol, The Shops at Whispering Pines, is showing a
conceptual grading and drainage plan. The Shops at Whispering Pines, located at the
intersection of Hwy 22 and Ray's Bridge Road, will show in the final submittal, a storm
1 water design based on the post development flows being no greater than the
predevelopment flows for the 2, 5,and 10 year storm events.
Sincerehy,
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
W. Douglas IlSler, r1SI ?, APl?
11

Southern Pines, NC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone] • e-mail: [e-mail]
Hampstead - Nags Head Charlotte • Beaufort'
y?
Print Page - NC: Areas Subject to Phase II Post-Construction & Other Storm\vater Progra... Page I of I
Map Legend
N Irlcrslalcs nc s:.•-,x.:.•

Local Roads ¦ orc•ar.-s

S ecordary s:c•^rx.:e•
p-?q•,-„
Roads D•.ae It -, -
Primary Rcjds ea?'"'a
¦ Sn xa:e,
?;, JS MS••xa•
.! nc n ,• xa.
?'• CoLrtics
24K
l lydrography
(Arcs)
11ydrograpl•y

.
¦ 1.241, D._ .U. ?
MLricipal
BoL rdarres
Stormwalcr
hnsdiclipr
s:awxa:c
P"c5•.^t
Lam.. S:c•-?x.:?•

s:c•-?xa:e•
NC Areas Subject to Phase II Post-Construction & Other Stormwater Program Requirements
The map representations are the best available
as of July 1, 2008. Please check with the local
government (city or county) in your location to
verify specific stormwater requirements. .
Areas subject to Stormwater Post-Construction
(Permitting) are based on existing programs anc
Session Law 2006-246. NC Division of Water
Qual!ty, 2/17/2009
h ? ?ry

4
r ,

f `
?
-A _
_
0.A 1,
c
y.

Cy
ac`
? J?y
O
.\ S M 1 ?.t 1

rs
O
Beuhaven Dr
Results
Y?e?loca
Contact : conta-ts
hst DENR Region : Fayetteville County : MOORE
Permitting : Local Basis : WS-III Protected Area Type Water Supply
Watershed
Notes : Satisfies Phase II requirements if apply
http://204.211.239.202/storiii?N,ater/print.aspx?CMD=INIT&XMIN=-79.41172738396473... 2/17/2009 '?

1
1
I

I PRE-DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS
Soil Map-Moore County, NC USDA NRCS
Hydrologic Soil Group Map-Moore County, NC USDA MRCS
Basin 1 Pre Development Detail Drainage Area Map
SCS CN and Rational Table
Predevelopment Impervious Calculations Basin 1
Basin 1 Pre Development Hydrographs and Model for SCS 6-hr 2,5,10,25 year storms and
SCS 1-yr 24 hour storm

(??nnr:t(iIC

350
37 6
109-113 ` 4*0 117 ? 121
14 =118 •,?Zp:121
?a3a 10; ' Oat 10,E
?r-- 'r? `- 426 •?
400
1:281 feet
r-,
Off 5 i 42 Drotisq t' c Are1 rhAP
1
Illy. mooregimeb.rnoorecountync.gov connectgis Map'Print..ags_tnapl4140b67a4204daOa266112a5962dc4a.jp,, Results=False 129 2009 12:13:47 PM
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Y
35' 14 39"

rip
a
35° 1 6 1'
? o
m
0
'
F ?M
T ''Y
tr . ? ?

o

n'qR Y ??C.T2,

.
x
.
ti

1?Y ?
? 8 ?? Sc`„ §!e o
M

F '
S
i
35° 14' 39"
Map Scale 13,240 A printed an A size (8.5" x 11") sheet
N Meters c`
°r A 0 30 60 120 ,80 m
N Feet
0 100 200 400 600
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 1/9/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3
Soil Map-Moore County, North Carolina
(Whispering Pines)
m
c
0
m
U
L _
O N
Z m
c_
T d
C O)
7 C
O 'C
U 0
N N_
O `C
IO 5
G v
cm
L
O
co
Z
LO
r
N?
Ids
O
6L
Z
a
Q
0
Z
w
W
J
0.
m
N
N
O
N
Q
c
O
d
CL
O
It
N
M
N
U '
n
m

M O
a O)
C
E
O

io

>
0 m

N

a y
L
d N

3 c o

7 cm
2 ci
-o

c) 7
? o c
C C
m (n to
7 C N - N
U

Q) V
0 U
(n C
-
O co

7- O
0'D
N 0
O 2! jT M U ` n O :E - ...
a
In C? Q
w Z U N cc E N

E Z

O Z O

(n
O N
> t

O
M ?
3 N
N
V1 Z . C
m
m y y
7 3 c m
y z Z
c? o m y>
o. 0
C
0 0 zz o
m p_ N 3
o o 70
0 O
a E?m y
y e E.0
m
N
j
v y 'o

O m (D

m m o y m
n
a
E

m
m J
y 0
> 3:
w y
L N C LD

n Q

Z? E

T
O

c

N
a?

Y
0
Im

M

? o
m
O .
N
w
C N

C .
+
O_ O >.
j
m
N t'
m m
N m
Q '
C
O D m 7
0
O
O
4)
y U
m
2
N '
0

:3 m

'r-
CD G

-E

N f0
O

U '
-
'o
Q

! N

M
N

L 'O 7
O-
a
N
M m 0
O
7 nj O O_ N
N> ( d
CD E m E
UL E a> U H Z u) u) o 0 o
N N

a d
CL
o
Fn
C
m
U

N

r
U N N N
T ` N C = a L

(n CL
A
U
c

E

o

W M

C?
U3
0?I t LL 1. O
_L d

N N In

G/ R
(n O ??pp

U
0
> O C C7 U O A U O cn oIT O
J
I0
A
8

L ?

r
:
O

U.
D

CL
N
++ \f
U O
a A
3 t 1
O a
c
0 20

d

c
H
`
d o

o z

?p

3
a
O y
a
o

O
O
A
a oa d
o ..
'a > 3
f
o c
O
O N
m

O
rn O
rn W
T °
U `o
a
U m
2

N
Q
N U. O U y d d
N N w
C L
> C y
y C
d U N
C >
C N
> o
Y O V Q
•0 C
m ¢ cn O
o m R
co U O
U C7 U J J a a' fn (n (n fn (n (n !n (n
m
c a
?
J
y
d =
O a
N
Q N
O M
O
O 0
O
N N
O
r O)
m
CL
T
a?
Z
U
N O
d UJ
7 w
(n ?
O
O a
(n O
L O
yU
C
O
Z
d
u_
m
u 4f
? N
O C
m«
m
7 H
C
io O
z0
q
Z)i
Soil Map-Moore County, North Carolina
Whispering Pines
Map Unit Legend
Moore County, North Carolina (NC125)
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
AeD Ailey loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent slopes 3.1 j 12.0%
CaB Candor sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes j 10 1 39.5%
DoB Dothan loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent 0.8 3.1%
slopes
FaB Fuquay loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent 7.9 30.9%
slopes 1
VaD I Vaucluse loamy sand, 8 to 15 percent } 1.8 7.0%
slopes
W Water 1.9 7.5%
Totals for Area of Interest 25.6 100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 11912009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3
35° 15 1'
35° 14'39"
Hydrologic Soil Group-Moore County, North Carolina
(Whispering Pines HSG)
Map Scale. 1 3,240 A pnnteO on A size (8.5"x 11") sheet
"v
N
N Meters
0 30 60 120 180
0 100 200 400 Feet
600
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1
di= Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
a
N
r
1/9/2009
Page 1 of 4
35° 15' 1"
35° 14' 39"
M
O
N N
N
r
c_
O
f0
U
L
0
O
Z _
T U)
7 =
O
U
o ._
`o d
o rn
g c
?o
? n
O N
O
N
U
0)
O
O
V
2
m
d
L '
Z
O X
LO
CQ 06
G N
N ?
O Q
LL o
Z 0 '
a C
Q a
O ?
N ?
C6
i
ai
L)
U 'i
a ,
N
E
Q O
Z
W d
V C
W Q O
J Q °'
S
` O
a
i a
M p
N rn

>
coi

m O L
N -D
3 c o
o
U p
Z
W
C) p c
C O E
c
a
L (n y
7 C
ID
U N

a0 _
- V N
E
N

(n c
- a 0
a) N
O
i a Z T M
w 2 co U
Z 2,-
U o c0 .L-. «.
E
a3 O O Z
y ¢ _
N
L L O
cc
3
E
L U
N N r O
D O
Z O c
0 y
o a) Q '

of

a)
` N a)

o 3
a)
>' Z `
m

O o O

>
Q ?- y a)
a7
a
c
oc 0
aN
N 3
E o
p
r E> m o
n a
i a)
tp i
a
? o y
a U °-
N y a
N ur a y>
a O N p
i N N y o y
> ; ay E
aS
f a al J
Z E Vl 2 o
O) L_ N C .Lu
O
O a7
N-
Y T d C
a)
O)
0 m fO
O m „
„
p 'pS a) C
Vj
i C
c a) V)
a Z T
c .
.,
N c6 N p T 7
N O
o
WE (1)
F (/) 2

o

°
°

y a 0= w
O C
vU) ?
O E
ad Z ¢ m

, v
=
aJ
o'
aa)) m
a) a) 0
09 O O 7 a7 a
L O w
a E u
c) I-? cnv) H U£ o
d
a7

of N
C
N

?
? at
U
r
? C C = y) ? 'O
at

•

0 y
N
YI h W
C
a) y

N

W d

y *j
O 0
i?
O aS
(n O
c¢ ¢ co m U U O z O y
O N 0ir 5

A
? ? ? ? D d
LL
m
LL

1
r
N
'
N
:
O

a?+ I T

C
T

y
0.
3 t
my
O r
O O
N N
? a)
r 07
a
T
2
7
r U)
N 'Q
T U)
a)
Z j
7 '-
y
- a)
i) o
a o
oU
c
O
Z
m
v
a 2
of d
y
0 C
0
y O
Q' R
? d
3 ?
A O
2V
?)1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
r
Hydrologic Soil Group-Moore County, North Carolina
Hydrologic Soil Group
Hydrologic Soil Group- Summary by Map Unit - Moore County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
AeD Ailey loamy sand, 8 to 15
percent slopes B 3.1 12.0%
CaB Candor sand, 0 to 4 percent
slopes A 10.1 39.5%
DoB Dothan loamy sand, 2 to 6
percent slopes B 0.8 3.1%
FaB Fuquay loamy sand, 0 to 6
percent slopes B 7.9 30.9%
VaD Vauduse loamy sand, 8 to 15
percent slopes C 1.8 7.0%
W Water 1.9 7.5%
Totals for Area of Interest 25.6 100.0%
Whispering Pines HSG
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 2.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
1/9/2009
Page 3 of 4
6S

Hydrologic Soil Group-Moore County, North Carolina
Whispering Pines HSG
Description
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation
from long-duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly
wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or
gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained
soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils
have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water
transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer
at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material.
These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their
natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: All Components
Component Percent Cutoff. None Specified
Tie-break Rule: Lower

1
1
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 1/9/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4
I 'ir

C S
s-?
lee
L
O
O
o??

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
i
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
Table 2-2.
Values of SCS CN and Rational C for various cover conditions
(Based upon SCS,1986)
Cover Description SCS Curve Num ber Rational C Percent
EM
A HSG
B . HSG
. C HMG
D HSG
A HSG
B HMG
C MG
D Impervious
J
Fully developed urban areas
Open space
Poor condition (<50%
grass) 68 79 86 89 0.36 0.58 0.72 0.78
Fair condition (50 -75%
UM) 49 69 79 84 0.15 0.38 0.58 0.68
Good condition (>50•/0 39 61 74 80 0.15 0.22 0.48 0.60
bn 'ous areas
Pavement, roofs 98 98 98 98 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96
Gravel 76 85 89 91 0.52 0.70 0.78 0.82
Dirt 72 82 87 89 0.44 0.64 034 0.78
Urban districts
Commercial and
business 89 92 94 95 0.78 0.84 0.88 0.90 85
Indushial 81 88 91 93 0.62 0.76 0.82 0.96 72
Residential areas (by lot size
118 acre (town houses,
condos) 77 85 90
1 92 0.54 0.70 0.80 0.84 65
1/4 acre 61 75 83 87 0.22 0.50 0.66 0.74 38
113 acre 57 72 81 86 0.15 0.44 0.62 0.72 30
1/2 acre 54 70 80 85 0.15 0.40 0.60 0.70 25
1 acre 51 68 79 84 0.15 0.36 0.58 0.68 20
2 acres 46 65 77 82 0.15 0.30 0.54 0.64 12
A 'cultural areas
Pasture, grassland
Poor 68 79 86 89 0.36 0.58 0.72 0.78
Fair 49 69 79 84 0.15 0.38 0.58 0.68
Good 39 61 74 80 0.15 0.22 0.48 0.60
Meadow mowed 30 58 71 78 0.15 0.16 0.42 0.56
Brush 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Poor 48 67, 77 83 0.15 0.34 ,0.54 0.66
Fair 35 - 56 70 77 0.15 ' 0.15 0.40 054
Good 30 ' 48 65 73 0.15 0.15 0.30 0.46
Woods and gm? (orchard).
Pool; 57
73
82
86.
015
0.46,
0:64
0.72
Fair 43 65 76 82 ` 0.15 _ 0.30 452 0.64
Good 32 58 72 79 0.15 0.16 .0.44 0.58
Woods
poor 4.5 x_66 77- 83 0.15 0.32 0.54 0.66
Fair 36 60 73 79 0.15 0-210j , 0,46 0.58
Good 30 55 70 77 0.15 015 0.40 0.54
Row ' . _ aops, straight, ` good 67 78 85 89 0.34: 0.56 0:70: 0.78
Row crops, contoured, good 65 75 82 86 0.30 `0.50: 0.64 0.72
Small grd* good 63 75 83 87 0.26 0.50 0.66 0.74
Farmsteads 59 74 82 86 0.1%1 0.48 0.64 0.72
In the table values of Rational C were computed
ColpightH.R Malcom, 2003
[2-101
!C = 0.020 CN_ 1.0
Hydrologic estimates
1(0
rA-
?ff
1
1
1
1
Basin 1 Impervious
Description Quantity Unit Area SF Area AC
Roadway area/parking lot: 48,235 1.11
Buildings & sidewalk - 0.00
Water 38,705 0.89
Total Impervious Area 48,235 2.00
Total Area: 399,0091 1 9.16
Percent Impervious- Total (Basin 2): 21.8%

Basin 1
Weighted "C" value calculation
C Area ac
Grass, Open Space: 0.22 7.16
Impervious Surfaces: 0.95 2.00
Weighted "C" value: 0.38
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Group B soils
CN Area ac
Grass, Open Space, good condition: 61 7.16
Impervious Surfaces: 98 2.00
Weighted "CN" value: 69
08-4083 bmps.xls
WSP SELLS
6/18/2009
R_
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
IL
v
ai
0
0
N
C
T
O
U)
L
v
N?
5?7

CL
CP

C
O
n.
N
3
CL
E
.n
U
N
O
d

v
L

?p
7 V L L _
4 N
N 70

N
C C
O
M
Q E
CL m CL
a
'-
Q

a o
Q a
O j
O
> U)
O >
N
> N 00 > Q
Q O ' "D N m
N
W
o
s
M
O n a
O
L
a p
L

2
Q Q Q
0 Q
3

c =3 :3
Z Z
O
U) U) (D U) N U) 4--
QS
O 0 0 NU NU
U)ir U)

d >+

J = e- N M V to (O
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
pre development
Description A
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value = 0.170
Flow length (ft) = 300.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 3.60
Land slope (%) = 5.00
Travel Time (min) = 17.04
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft) = 750.00
Watercourse slope (%) = 5.00
Surface description = Unpaved
Average velocity (ft/s) = 3.61
Travel Time (min) = 3.46
B C
0.011 0.011
0.0 0.0
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
+ 0.00 + 0.00 = 17.04
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
Paved Paved
0.00 0.00
+ 0.00 + 0.00 = 3.46
Totals
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015
Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0
Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00 = 0.00
Total Travel Time, Tc ............ ...................................... ............................ 20.51 min
IT
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
' pre development
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = TR55
' Total precip. = 2.64 in
Storm duration = 6 hrs

' Q (cfs)

3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
Peak discharge = 2.12 cfs
Time interval = 6 min
Curve number = 69
Hydraulic length = 695 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.50 min
Distribution = SCS 6-Hr
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume= 16,112 cult
pre development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Yr
0.0 1.0 2.0
Hyd No. 1
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
? z?
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
pre development
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 3.10 in
Storm duration = 6 hrs

Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
Peak discharge = 3.61 cfs
Time interval = 6 min
Curve number = 69
Hydraulic length = 695 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.50 min
Distribution = SCS 6-Hr
Shape factor = 484
pre development
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 1 -- 5 Yr
' 4.00
-----
3.00
-- -- -- -- - - - -
2.00
1.00
- - ------- ------
-- - --------- -
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 24,065 cult
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00

' 0.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 1
1
1 Z?
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
pre development
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method
Total precip. = TR55
= 3.90 in
Storm duration = 6 hrs

Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
Peak discharge = 6.76 cfs
Time interval = 6 min
Curve number = 69
Hydraulic length = 695 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.50 min
Distribution = SCS 6-Hr
Shape factor = 484
pre development
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Yr
7.00
6.00
5.00
' 4.00
3
00
.

2.00

1.00

0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 39,963 cuft
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.0 1.0 2.0
Hyd No. 1
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
ZZ
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
pre development
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 4.62 in
Storm duration = 6 hrs

' pre development
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 25 Yr

' 10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Peak discharge = 9.98 cfs
Time interval = 6 min
Curve number = 69
Hydraulic length = 695 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.50 min
Distribution = SCS 6-Hr
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume = 56,055 cuft
' 0.0 1.0 2.0
Hyd No. 1
i
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
-1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
23
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 6
1 predevelopment 24hr
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 1 yrs
1 Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
' Tc method
Total precip. = USER
= 3.00 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
Peak discharge = 4.22 cfs
Time interval = 6 min
Curve number = 68
Hydraulic length = 695 ft
Time of conc: (Tc) = 20.50 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
1 predevelopment 24hr
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 6 -- 1 Yr

1 5.00

4.00
1
3.00

2.00
1
1 1.00
1
0 00
Hydrograph Volume = 20,832 cult

Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Hyd No. 6 Time (hrs)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
WETPOND NORMAL POOL SIZING CRITERIA
AND NCDENR SUPPLIMENTS
-DRAWDOWN SPREADSHEET
-NCDENR WETPOND SUPPLIMENT
NCDENR LEVEL SRPEADER SUPPLIMENT
2?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
POND
MINIMUM NORMAL POOL CALCULATIONS
Total Area 11.5 ac
Impervous Areas
Building 1.18 ac includes future buildout of Food Lion and current retail
roads-parking 6.54 ac includes future outparcel imerpervious at 70% of area and pond area.
sidewalk-patio 0.24 ac current patio
total 7.96 ac
% impervious 69.2 %
1" Rainfall Draw Down Calculation
Drainage Area 11.5 ac
% Impervious 69.2 %
Pond N.P. elev ft
Rain 1 in
CN, 98
CN2 98
CN3 98
CN4 84
CN5 0
CN Average 94
Volume
IA_
Rv=0.05+0.009(IA)=
V=3630(Ro)(Rv)(A)=
Depth at calculated NP
Depth at provided NP
Draw Down
Cd
Dia.
H
Ave. Head
Q=CdA sq(2gH)
Draw Down Time
1.18 ac
6.54 ac
0.24 ac
3.54 ac
0 ac
11.50 ac
SA/DA= 2.84 % per table 10-1 NC State BMP
Manual -3ft Pond Depth
Min. SA= 0.327 ac
min. required 14227 sqft 0.33 acre
provided 15912 sqft 0.37 acre
69.22
0.673
28093 cuf
2.0 ft
1.8 ft
0.6
32.2 ft/s
0.5 in
1.8 ft
1.74 in
0.10 cfs
271824 seconds
4530 min
75.5 hr
3,15 day
Minimum Normal Pool Surface Area 1" Rainfall Draw Down Calculations
average depth
wet pond ave depth
Abat_shelf 10836 sqft
Ape,_pool 15912 sgft
Abot_pond 5506 sqft
Sediment depth 1 ft
depth NP to Bot 5 ft 0.5 ft shelf drop
Depth 3.5 ft
ave pond depth 3.0595 ft State BMP Figure 10-2b, opt. 2
Z(
1

NCDENR
Permit No.
(to be provided by DWQ)
`o?aF w a rF,9QG
P <
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM
WET DETENTION BASIN SUPPLEMENT
This form must be filled out, printed and submitted.
The Required Items Checklist (Part Ill) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information.
11. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name Shops at Whispering Pines
Contact person Shayne Leathers
Phone number 9196780035
Date 9/17/2009
Drainage area number BMP-1
11. DESIGN INFORMATION
Site Characteristics
Drainage area 500,940 fe
Impervious area, post-development 346,738 fe
% impervious 69.22 %
Design rainfall depth 1.0 in
Storage Volume: Non-SA Waters
Minimum volume required
Volume provided
Storage Volume: SA Waters
1.5' runoff volume
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff
Minimum volume required
Volume provided
Peak Flow Calculations
Is the pre/post control of the lyr 24hr storm peak flow required?
1-yr, 24-hr rainfall depth
Rational C, pre-development
Rational C, post-development
Rainfall intensity: 1-yr, 24-hr storm
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow
' Pre/Post 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow control
Elevations
Temporary pool elevation
Permanent pool elevation
SHWT elevation (approx. at the perm. pool elevation)
Top of 1Oft vegetated shelf elevation
Bottom of 1Oft vegetated shelf elevation
Sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond)
Sediment cleanout, bottom elevation
Sediment storage provided
Is there additional volume stored above the state-required temp, pool?
I Elevation of the top of the additional volume
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.8-9117/09
28,093 ft3 OK C p m p e Z *-7
35,226 ft' ?
OK, volume provided is equal to or in excess of volume required.
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
ft3
y (Y or N)
3.0 in
0.37 (unitless)
0.84 (unitless)
0.13 in/hr OK
4.22 ft3/sec PR) -12- Z y
43.83 ft3/sec Pat c
39.61 ft3/sec
391.80 fmsl
386.00 fmsl
386.00 fmsl
386.00 fmsl
385.50 fmsl
381.50 fmsl
380.50 fmsl
1.00 ft
y (Y or N)
391.8 fmsl OK
Parts I. & II. Design Summary, Page 1 of 2
Z?
Permit
(to be provided by DWQ)
111. DIESIM INFORMATION
Surface Areas
Area, temporary pool 26,543 f?
Area REQUIRED, permanent pool 14,227 fe
SA/DA ratio 2.84 (unitless)
Area PROVIDED, permanent pool, Apemp d 15,912 fe OK
Area, bottom of 1Oft vegetated shelf, Abet shelf 10,836 ff
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Abetlend 6,273 ff
Volumes
Volume, temporary pool 35,226 ft3 OK
Volume, permanent pool, Vpempcol 37,655 ft3
Volume, forebay (sum of forebays if more than one forebay) 7,868 ft3
Forebay % of permanent pool volume 20.9% % OK
SA/DA Table Data
Design TSS removal 85 %
Coastal SA/DA Table Used? n (Y or N)
Mountain/PiedmontSA/DA Table Used? y (Y or N)
SA/DA ratio 2.84 (unitless)
Average depth (used in SA/DA table):
Calculation option 1 used? (See Figure 10-2b) N (Y or N)
Volume, permanent pool, Vpenpeol 37,655 ft3
Area provided, permanent pool, Ap,,., 15,912 ftz
Average depth calculated ft Need 3 ft min.
Average depth used in SA/DA, day, (Round to nearest 0.5ft) ft
Calculation option 2 used? (See Figure 10-21b) Y (Y or N)
Area provided, permanent pool, Apefm_Pe0i 15,912 ftz
Area, bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf, Abet shelf 10,836 ftz
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Abetyeed 6,273 ft2
' "Depth" (distance b/w bottom of 1Oft shelf and top of sediment) 4.00 ft
Average depth calculated 3.00 ft OK
Average depth used in SA/DA, day, (Round to nearest 0.5ft) 3.0 ft OK
Drawdown Calculations
t
Drawdown through orifice? y (Y or N)
Diameter of orifice (if circular) 0.50 in
Area of orifice (if-non-circular) inz
Coefficient of discharge (CD) 0.60 (unitless)
'
Driving head (He) 1.74 ft
Drawdown through weir? (Y or N)
Weir type (unitless)
Coefficient of discharge (C.) (unitless)
'
Length of weir (L) ft
Driving head (H) ft
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow 4.22 ft3/sec V
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow 0.32 ft3/sec
Storage volume discharge rate (through discharge orifice or weir) 0.10 Wlsec C PR) 2 ZG
Storage volume drawdown time 2.60 days OK, draws down in 2-5 days.
Additional Information
Vegetated side slopes 3 :1 OK
Vegetated shelf slope 20 :1 OK
Vegetated shelf width 10.0 ft OK
Length of flowpath to width ratio ` 4 :1 OK
Length to width ratio 2.5 :1 OK
Trash rack for overflow & orifice? y (Y or N) OK
Freeboard provided 1.0 ft OK
Vegetated filter provided? y (Y or N) OK
Recorded drainage easement provided? y (Y or N) OK
Capures all runoff at.ultimate build-out? y (Y or N) OK
Drain mechanism for maintenance or emergencies is: 6"valve
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.8-9117/09 Parts I. & II. Design Summary, Page 2 of 2
Zg
t
(0
Q
O
O
LL
C
U
C
a)
m
O
(1)
rn
La
C
O
M
J W O 00 o m O O7 LO M LO M
<2
PD m-

o .
d n
M O
N IT
Lo
LO M
m
r r
4-
O (O
o
T r
m
CO N
o
6) LO
Lo
(Q
U N Lo _
O) N (Q O 'T 00 N f?
> T r N CN N M M
W M L() 00 O M O7 M LI) M O
W 2i ~ O ?. O . LO 00 00 r- LO LO
j O (0 0 04 LO It vi' O 000 N ?
QD U N tfl n O M O O N O O)
?- r T r N N N
-? W
Z) M
' 00
- M M
6 M T It M CO LO

Q
J LL O

O d
M
c1' v
r-
Ln (Q
00
(C
O
r- M
T
0) O
M
O co
V
r CO
W
C "' O
a0 N
r
Ln
O > U N N N N N M CM L
m co M

Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLB 0 0 0 0
U W W r OD T M N 00 0 00 r O)
F-
'
U N M (Q 00 r ?C ti T LO O
Q
Q O O N d' ? O) r " (Q Q] T
Q t Lo 0 Lo Lo L() (Q (Q 0 (Q r,
U
w F- co M CM CM CO

' O M (M M O O

r-- O

to U)
M U.)
N N O O LO

Q-j LL O

N

(O 4

O O

N d

Lo co

f- 0)

co (O

O i,-

N M

(O O

Iq _

O

?
N
0)
~

r
N
ti
co
0 J
U O M
M '4'
? M O r- Lo -q Lo (Q M O 0) L() M O M M
QO T N N M v Ln CQ I% ? ML6 (6
LLO a?
r- CD

r
N
r
LO
r
CO
r
Q W
F-
M
0
0
0
0
00
M
O
O
M O O LO
0 O O
O LO LO
) O

co
J
LL
o
O
N
00

O
00
V
6
M
LO
(V
00
T
(Q
T
O
N
r
d-
N
O r-
It co
? 0
? Q)
LN
M Co N
r- M LC
N f-
LO
O Q U M. Ln CQ f? O O r r T CQ co
- O N M 00 O
LL T ? N N N N N M

0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q
W
W' F-
L?-Ly 0
L(? 0
-F
V N
T O
M O
(O O
d- L()
M O
(M O
(M (Q
"t I?
r N
`-
(J N
O0
O d'
T
r " M
N LO
M 6
N O
N
M r
CO
M M
00
-
z
Q
0 V
(n 00
(,o 4
0c)
p
T
r
T
M
T
L)
T
I--
r
O
r
T
N
M
N
(O
N

LO

r?
I
O)

r

M

LO

I-

O)
-
T

U r ?- •
N
N
N
N
(N
(M
U) o Lo o Lo C) Lo o Lo o Ln O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O T T N N CO CM d d' LO LO (.0 r- 00 O) O T (V CO d'
O co co O0 00 O 00 co co M O 00 co 00 00 O (Y) O) O) O)
co M M Cl) M co co co M co co co co co M co co M M co

m ° Z o
0
U)
c
a?

a)

I?

i
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Dec 3 2009, 9:29 AM
Pond No. 1 - bmp 1 wetpond
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cult)
0.00 381.50 6,273 0 0
4.50 386.00 15,912 49,916 49,916
12.50 394.00 31,183 188,380 238,296
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 15.00 0.50 3.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 6.28 10.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 15.00 0.50 3.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 391.80 393.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 2.60 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 385.60 386.00 388.00 0.00 Weir Type = Riser Broad ---
Length (ft) = 71.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = Yes No No No
Slope (%) = 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a Yes Yes No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Co ntour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
Stage / Storage
0
Storage
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000
Stage (ft)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
250,000
Storage (cuft)
Z c1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Dec 3 2009, 9:29 AM
Pond No. 1 - burp 1 wetpond
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 381.50 6,273 0 0
4.50 386.00 15,912 49,916 49,916
12.50 394.00 31,183 188,380 238,296
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 15.00 0.50 3.00 0.00
Span (in) = 15.00 0.50 3.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 1 1 0
Invert El. (ft) = 385.60 386.00 388.00 0.00
Length (ft) = 71.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Slope (%) = 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .013 .013 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a Yes Yes No
Weir Structures
[A] [13] [C] [D]
Crest Len (ft) = 6.28 10.00 0.00 0.00
Crest El. (ft) = 391.80 393.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Coeff. = 3.33 2.60 0.00 0.00
Weir Type = Riser Broad -- ---
Multi-Stage = Yes No No No
Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Stage / Discharge Stage (ft)
14.00
----------- --- ------ ----- ---- -- - ------ - ---- --- -
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00 44.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
30
WAT
fop
FgO

NCDENR O Y
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM
' LEVEL SPREADER, FILTER STRIP AND RESTORED RIPARIAN BUFFER SUPPLEMENT
This form must be completely filled out, printed and submitted.
' DO NOT FORGET TO ATTACH THE REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST AND ALL REQUIRED ITEMS (NEXT WORKSHEET)I
i, 'PROJECT' INFORMATION .
Project name Shops at Whispering Pines
' Contact name Shayne Leathers
Phone number 9194687014
Date December 3, 2009
Drainage area number BMP-1
1l. DESIGN INFORMATION
For Level Spreaders Receiving Flow From a BMP
Type of BMP WETPOND bmp-1
' Drawdown flow from the BMP 1.49 cfs t 0 y r P^ cf $`
For Level Spreaders Receiving Flow from the Drainage Area Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
' Drainage area ftz Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Impervious surface area ftz Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Percent impervious % Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Rational C coefficient Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Peak flow from the 1 in/hr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Time of concentration 5.00 min
Rainfall intensity, 1 O-yr Storm in/hr Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Peak flow from the 10-yr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Where Does the Level Spreader Discharge ?
To a grassed bioretention cell? N (Y or N)
' To a mulched bioretention cell? N (Y or N)
To a wetland? Y (Y or N) Please complete filter strip characterization below.
To a filter strip or riparian buffer? N (Y or N)
¦ Other (specify)
Filter Strip or Riparian Buffer Characterization (if applicable)
Width of grass
Width of dense ground cover
Width of wooded vegetation
Total width
Elevation at downslope base of level lip
Elevation at top of bank of the receiving water
Slope (from level lip to to top of bank)
Are any draws present?
30.00 - ft
0.00 - ft
0.00 ft
30.00 ft
385.30 fmsl
385.00 fmsl
1.00 % OK
N (Y or N) OK
Level Spreader Design
Forebay surface area
Feet of level lip needed per cfs
Answer "Y" to one of the following:
Length based on the 1 in/hr storm?
Length based on the 10-yr storm?
Length based on the BMP discharge rate?
Design flow
Is a bypass device provided?
sq ft No forebay is needed.
13 ft/cfs
N (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
1.49 cfs
Y (Y or N) A bypass device is not needed.
Form SW401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer-Rev.5
Parts I. and Il. Design Summary, page 1 of 2
31
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Length of the level lip 20.00 "ft
Are level spreaders in series? N (Y or N)
Bypass Channel Design (if applicable)
Does the bypass discharge through a wetland? N (Y or N)
Does the channel enter the stream at an angle? Y (Y or N)
Dimensions of the channel (see diagram below):
M 3.00 ft
B 2.00ft
W 8.00 ft
y I C_ 1.00 ft
Peak velocity in the channel during the 1:6 yr storm 4.92 cfs
Channel lining material VMAX 350
#VALUE!
pe/' ?pyei'f' ?(1n?P?fisOvJ? v/?
vnn? ? t 2/3?Zvo?l
C tOa? e? t,? (?a s t J C' k,7 L S y r- 5-to, w7
I to eI:yIe"IQ"-
W
1 : Y

M
e B i
M
Form SW401-Level Spreader, Fifter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer-Rev.5
Parts I. and II. Design Summary, page 2 of 2
3?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Project Shops at Whispering Pines
Date 12/3/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 2 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R213)(S'/2)A
channel slope 0.74 %
Depth 0.58 ft 1 f Qruv?,? d
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area
Slope Length
wetted perimeter
Hydraulic Radius
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)=
Flow (Q)=
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf
0.0074 ft/ft
0.58 ft
T 0.27 psf
2.2 ftz
1.83 ft
5.7 ft
0.38 ft
2.2 ft/s
4.9 ft3/s ZS
y ea >'
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel
Shear Stress I Z 1 0 'M 'AIl'rw l v
3 zA
Material and Performance Specification Sheet
North American Green
14649 Highway 41 North
Evansville, IN 47725
NORTH 800-772-2040
AMERICAN FAX: [phone]
GREEN" www.nagreen.com
A tee1SEC Company C350 Turf Reinforcement Mat
The composite turf reinforcement mat (C-TRM) shall be a machine-produced mat of 100% coconut fiber matrix incorporated into a permanent three-
dimensional turf reinforcement matting. The matrix shall be evenly distributed across the entire width of the matting and stitch bonded between a
super heavy duty UV stabilized nettings with 0.50 x 0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings, an ultra heavy UV stabilized, dramatically corrugated
(crimped) intermediate netting with 0.5 x 0.5 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings, and covered by an super heavy duty UV stabilized nettings with 0.50 x
0.50 inch (1.27 x 1.27 cm) openings. The middle corrugated netting shall form prominent closely spaced ridges across the entire width of the mat.
The three nettings shall be stitched together on 1.50 inch (3.81cm) centers with UV stabilized polypropylene thread to form a permanent three-
dimensional turf reinforcement matting.
The C350 shall meet requirements established by the Erosion Control Technology Council (ECTC) Specification and the US Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Standard Specifications for Construction of Roads and Bridges on Federal Highway
Projects, FP-03 Section 713.18 as a Type 5A, B, and C Permanent Turf Reinforcement Mat.
Installation staple patterns shall be clearly marked on the turf reinforcement matting with environmentally safe paint. All mats shall be manufactured
with a colored thread stitched along both outer edges (approximately 2-5 inches [5-12.5 cm] from the edge) as an overlap guide for adjacent mats.
Material Content
Matrix 100% Coconut fibers 0.50 Ibs/ d2 0.27 kg/M2)
Nettings To and Bottom, UV stabilized Polypropylene 8 Ib/1000 ft2 3.91 k /100 m2
Middle, corrugated UV stabilized Polypropylene 24 Ib11000 ft2 11.7 kg/1 00 m2
Thread Polypropylene, UV stabilized
C350 is available in the following roll sizes:
Width 6.5 ft (2.0 m)
Length 55.5 ft (16.9 m)
Weight ± 10% 37 Ibs (16.8 kg)
Area 40.0 yd2 (33.4 m2)
Index Value Properties:
Property Test Method Typical Net Only
Thickness ASTM D6525 0.67 in 17.0 mm 0.51 in
Resiliency ASTM 6524 90% ---
Density ASTM D792 0.53 oz/in3
Mass/Unit Area ASTM 6566 12.57 oz/ d2 426 /m2 ---
Porosity ECTC Guidelines 99% ---
Stiffness ASTM D1388 3.83 oz-in ---
Light Penetration ECTC Guidelines 9.0%
UV Stability ASTM D4355/ 1000
hr 86% 86%
Tensile Strength MD ASTM D6818 625 Ibs/ft 9.12 kN/m 698 Ibslft
Elongation MD ASTM D6818 22% 30%
Tensile Strength TD ASTM D6818 768 Ibs/ft 11.21 kN/m 710 Ibslft
Elongation TD ASTM D6818 15% 20%
Bench Scale Testing* (NTPEP):
Test Method Parameters Results
ECTC Method 2 50 mm 2 in /hr for 30 min SLR** =18.32
Rainfall 100mm 4 in /hr for 30 min SLR** =19.65
150 mm 6 in /hr for 30 min SLR** = 20.48
ECTC Method 3
Shear Resistance Shear at 0.50 inch soil loss 7.5 Ibslft2
ECTC Method 4
Germination Top Soil, Fescue, 21 day
incubation 243% improvement of
biomass
Bench Scale tests should not be used for design purposes
Soil Loss Ratio = Soil loss with Bare Soil/Soil.Loss with RECP soil loss is based on regression analysis)
Updated 3/09
Performance Design Values:
Maximum Permissible Shear Stress
Short Duration Lon Duration
Phase 1
Unve etated 3.21bs/ft2
153 Pa 3.0 Ibs/ft2
144 Pa
Phase 2
Partial) Ve . 10.0 Ibs/ft2
480 Pa 10.0 Ibs/ft2
480 Pa
Phase 3
Full Veg. 12.0 Ibslft2
576 Pa 10.0 Ibslft2
480 Pa
Velocity Unve 10.5 ft/s 3.2 m/s
Velocity Veg. 20 ft/s 6.0 m/s
Slope Desi n Data: C Factors
Sloe Gradients S
Sloe Length L < 3:1 3:1 - 2:1 >- 2:1
<- 20 ft 6 m 0.0005 0.015 0.043
20-50 ft - 0.018 0.031 0.050
>- 50 ft 15.2 m 0.035 0.047 0.057
Roughness Coefficients- Unve .
Flow Depth Mannin 's n
50.50 ft 0.15m 0.041
0.50-2.0 ft 0.040-0.013
?2.0 ft 0.60m 0.012
Product Participant of: DC?.
1
316
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 9:34 AM
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 40.26 cfs
Storm frequency = 1 yrs Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 11.510 ac Curve number = 92
Basin Slope = 4.0% Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Tc method
Total precip. = USER
= 3.00 in Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484

H
dro
ra
h Volume = 84
651 cuft
y
g
p
,

post development buildout
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2 -- 1 Yr Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0
Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
33
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 1 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond
Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:17 AM
Peak discharge = 0.30 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 389.09 ft
Max. Storage = 120,179 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 46,763 cuft
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
0.00 ' ?
0 10
Hyd No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 1 Yr
10.00
19 29 39 48 58 68 77
Hyd No. 2 ® Req. Stor = 120,179 cuft
87
-' 0.00
97
Time (hrs)
3?

1

1

r
POST DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS
Weighted CN/C calculations
BMP-1 Drainage Area Map
Pre/Post Development Flows Table
Pre/Post Development Hydroflow Model
Post Development Inflow hydrographs SCS 6-hr 2,5,10,25 year storms
BMP-1 outflow hydrographs 2,5,10,25 year storms
BMP-1 Routing cross sections
Post Development SCS 1-year 24-hour inflow hydrographs
Post Development SCS 1-year 24-hour outflow hydrographs
1
1

1
35-
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Whispering Pines Food Lion
Impervious Area Calculations - Post Development
Basin I Impervious
Description Quantity Unit Area SF Area AC
Roadway area/parking lot: 284,882 6.54
Buildings & sidewalk 61,855 1.42
Total Impervious Area 346,737 7.96
Total Area: 500,940 11.50
Percent Impervious-Total: -6-92-0/61
Basin 1
Weighted "C" value calculation
C Area ac
Grass, Open Space: 0.58 3.54
Impervious Surfaces: 0.96 7.96
Weighted "C" value: 0.84
I Basin 1
WPinhti
Group B soils
CN Area (ac)
Grass, Open Space, poor condition: 79 3
Impervious Surfaces: 98 7
J
08-4083 bmps.xls
WSP SELLS
6/18/2009
36

i,
t
? i
I j
, j
l
i ?
1
1
1
i
1

L
° 8
_i? 6
J '
J?
L n
W°04
f N
C U
Z
?? 6 8
m
N
M '0 N
41 ;
L
O
CL
M
C
°
L a
F- o
? m
_1 0

W
Z
U
I_ Z
V,
W
^ 0Z U
J w?

JNN
O
a
a¢aZ
e
U) J
c
v
o n
W CL
_
U)
=

3?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

! Q
C)
0
6)
0
0
N
OD
C
T
N
L
L?L
r

Q

0

U
N
O
d
o
`
v s

0 N L t _
N
N N
c c O
Q O) Q to C
G
C
O E
O
O O '-
O
7 C o
> O > O

V > a) N p j
>
y Q.
(6
y 0
y a N 0--o
O L.
CL a a
Q_ .n a p
'O
A
2
O o o o

c N c N U U)
`+-
m
O UU a>U a>U
(n 0) Of co it v)
_
0
d ?
_
?
_J N M V LO (O
)<:Z
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 11.510 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 3.60 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Q (cfs)

60.00
' 50.00

40.00

30.00
20.00

10.00

0 00
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:50 AM
Peak discharge = 50.21 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Curve number = 92
Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume = 107,034 cuft
post development buildout
Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Yr
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 2
31
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 11.510 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 4.56 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Q (cfs
70.00

60.00
50.00
40.00
30
00
.

20.00

10.00

Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:50 AM
Peak discharge = 66.02 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Curve number = 92
Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume = 143,378 cuft
post development buildout
Hyd. No. 2 -- 5 Yr
-- - - --- - -------- - - ---- ----
- - ---------- - - -- ----- - -- ----
- ------ --- - --- -- - -------- - -- - - ------- --- --
--- - -- -- --------- - ----- -----
- ---------- ------- - ---- -- -- ------- - - ----- ----- -- - ------ - -- ------ ----- --------- ---- ---------
-
------ - ---------
Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00 0.00
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 2
qO
HYdro9raph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 11.510 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 5.25 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Q (cfs)
80.00
70.00
' 60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:50 AM
Peak discharge = 77.31 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Curve number = 92
Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
post development buildout
Hyd. No. 2 --10 Yr

Q (cfs)
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
1 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0
Hyd No. 2
Hydrograph Volume = 169,751 cult
T ---? 0.00
8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 .16.0 18.0 20.0
Time (hrs)
1 ql
r Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 11.510 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = USER
' Total precip. = 6.28 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Q (cfs)
I 100.00
90.00

80.00
r 70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00

30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
post development buildout
Hyd. No. 2 -- 25 Yr Q (cfs)
-- - -- ------------
? oa

1
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:50 AM
Peak discharge = 94.06 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Curve number = 92
Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume = 209,360 cuft
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
7,
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond
Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
' 30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:18 AM
Peak discharge = 0.37 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 389.90 ft
Max. Storage = 139,225 cuft
burp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 66,778 cuft

1
1
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
10 19 29 39
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2
48 58 68 77
® Req. Stor = 139,225 cuft
87
-1 0.00
97
Time (hrs)
q3,
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond
r Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
r
r
r Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
1
30.00
r
20.00
r
10.00
0.00
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:18 AM
Peak discharge = 0.46 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 391.26 ft
Max. Storage = 171,264 cuft
bmp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 5 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 96,810 cuft

1
1
Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
10 19 29 39
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2
48 58 68 77 87
® Req. Stor= 171,264 cult
--L 0.00
97
Time (hrs)
yy
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond
Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
Q (Cfs)
80.00
70.00
' 60.00
50.00
' 40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:18 AM
Peak discharge = 1.49 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 391.68 ft
Max. Storage = 181,202 cuft
bmp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 120,960 cuft
Q (Cfs)
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
0.00 --
0
10.00
10 19 29 39
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2
48 58 68 77
® Req. Stor= 181,202 cuft
87
-1 0.00
97
Time (hrs)
?s
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 2
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond

Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
Q (cfs)
100.00
90.00
' 80.00
' 70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
' 10.00
bmp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 25 Yr
Peak discharge = 4.92 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 391.97 ft
Max. Storage = 187,909 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 160,518 cuft
Q (cfs)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00

1 0.00 _ 0 00
0 10
Hyd No. 3
19 29 39
Hyd No. 2
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:18 AM
48 58 68 77
® Req. Stor = 187,909 cuft
87
97
Time (hrs)
"l b
1

0
1

q?

1
n
u

$
Hydrograph Plot
' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 4
' post development 24-hr
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 1 yrs
Drainage area = 11.500 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 3.00 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

' Q (cfs)
' 50.00
'
40.00

30.00

20.00

' 10
00
.
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 93,036 cult
post development 24-hr
Hyd. No. 4 -- 1 Yr

Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0
Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs)
uq
-t L
Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:55 AM
Peak discharge = 43.83 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Curve number = 92
Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484

HYdro9raph Plot

Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
' bmp routing scs 24-hr
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
' Storm frequency = 1 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 4
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond

Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
50.00
Tuesday, Sep 15 2009, 9:18 AM
Peak discharge = 0.32 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 389.39 ft
Max. Storage = 127,228 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 36,444 cuft
' 0 5 10
Hyd No. 5
bmp routing scs 24-hr
Hyd. No. 5 -- 1 Yr
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
15 19 24 29 34 39 44
- Hyd No. 4 ® Req. Stor = 127,228 cult
°1 0.00
48
Time (hrs)
670
s1
Stormwater Collection System
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

v
5 ` O
vv? V ? I
S, d
Q' v
v

M
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1>
a
t o
D
x
0)
O
O
N
to
N
O
LO
N
N
C_
o J
m
V O
0
i'
r -
o •.
i
V
y ? N
+` N
\5
? O
? N
V m
v
N
O
Z
O
w
ai
U
N
O
CL`
co
0
N
m
U)
E
3
0
`m
a
x
?4
0
m
C O
It M

_
_
J m
twi ? V ? IWi m m co I-
? m N C) O m
? _M _N ^ ? O 7 U ? ? U ? U ? p
m m ?_ m _O r O N

O)
O
W O O N O O O v N M CO O O O N
N m ?t W O M a n O r M m .- O N
f--
O co
O N
O M
O N
O O
0) C)
O (n
O O_ Cl) _N m
O 0)
O D)
O (Y)
O co

Co
Cl)
v
v
v
M
It
V
v
v'
v
v
v
v ?

O 0) Y
O co
O co O
o O O O O
. O O O O O O O O

0 V C) ?- r
- V C) O o r O
Ci O .- O ?- O O O O O .- •- •- O ._
41 M c:)- _O O O M O O O O_ O O O O O
Z
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O _
O
O
O
O
>• v O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O

m c N rn
N
0 J ?` U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U c

l0
O
V
C
m
T N ^
C
L
CL J (d 5- cli
N co O O N co O O O O N N N N :3
Nr .-- - - - .- .-- - - - - Z
O. O O M O M M O - O O O Cl) O I- d'
? O O .-- O O M O O m O O O - O N

C W v (D
co N
0) M
a) O
0) m
a) m
Oo
0)
C3 4
C) O
C) O
C3 (D
C) I?
(D O
C) I-
0
C) M M Cl) M M Cl)
at
V
CY
V'
at
cr

41 Q'o
C O O
It V'
O O O
O O
(D N
V M
r
O O
O O
O O
O '-
O m
O
O
J w " v O O v O N cV O M O O O O O O
C
? O
O V
r O
O O
N N
I? O
O O
M O
O
I? O
.-- O
O O
M M
O ?
O r`
' m

W v
M N
m N
CY) M
0) O
0)
co O
0) m
a)
C) O
Cl O (D
C) (D
O O (D
M M co co M M M V V V V . It
? d C
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
- a-..... O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

C
? ^ O

O O

m O

m O

co O

m O

O O

m O

m O

m O

m O

Il O O O O
Y
t0
U
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O -
O O
O O
O co
O co
O
cl
3
lO C y V
`
O O
O
O h
O
.-- O
O O
O M
at O
I? O r- m
O V
O m
O h
O
? (6 M O .- O O O O O (D O O O O O O
C
3
'
0
0
O
O
0
0
O
O
o
O
O
0
o

l..-
OC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
C.
O
o
Cl O
C) O
0
Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
CD
r
CL 2 m m M = 2 2 S 2 2 2 m 2 = 2

c
d 2-
w M m
co
CV
10
O
C:,
r
C)
I-
O
O
O
O
O
y
??? r M LO (D 4 O
r N i v O N O N m O
Q
L O
F-
m ? ..
C C cD
m (D
- v
6
7
O
m m
m
O
I--
N
O
N
m
M U

J d
O
(D
N
O
O
O
l
m
O
M
m
O
O
m
(D
M
- Z

I
-
V
N
O
n
m
m
O
O O
_
U
L

d
? p
C W
O=Z V W m r.- 00 m .- N
N

LL

m
J Z

N

M

V

O

(D

I-

co

m

N

M

O U
(D
0
`
a
co
0
0
N
2
m
9
cn
e
0
3
m
T
2
S?
rn
?a
a

J

1

A
m
AL+
W
' c /
E
L
O
t-W
co
F.-
L

to o
U 0 0 LL To m w r O
Q m N m
J M N co O' U Q Q U O U Q
_
m m r r
m m ao CO m N r A v O
Q U U Q Q U D Q Q U Q Q O O
N
O O ? O O O O V N M M O CO O
_m C to
' N O N V U) M '? r,? CO r M O M d)
W Q LL
) I` 00 1? M to to co LO O M N O N O O
co O O O O co O O C) _
O

O
E co M M M V M M V V V V V V V V
R (0
O M N O O O V N CO 00 O CO Cl N Q
C C N O) V V O M V I, CO r M O) r O N
c
` Q n co N M N LO co to O CO N O O O O 7
C9 M M ° C)
I C) M ° ° a ° ° °
v T v v V v V v v v
00 V I-- M v V N M M N O 00
C CO V V O (O O) V t` O N CO M N V

p Q M V M O) O N M O M C) ^ n

(1J O)
M O
M O
M O
co O
Cl) O
M O
M O
? O
? O
IT O
V O
V O
V O
V O
V
J
Ut O) O Cl) N I- O V M co V W co O) Il- N
2 O. h N N O) M O co M co N LO r M M to
Q - V to (O O) to N to O O
rn 6) O O O) O) O) O O O O O O O O
M Cl) Cl) M Cl) M M V V V V V V V)
O O O N O O C) to to LO M I- r- N
C to r CO N h to Cl? to f` r to M CO CO O) N
C
a)
W Q CO
Cl) N
O)
o N
O) M
O
l M
O
l a0 O
O) O)
O) O to
O to
O CO
O CO
O (O
O (D
C)
C M C
) C
) M M M V V V V V V p
it
N
O
O
co
O
co
M
O
O
to
O
M

ao

V

4

C
d
^. O co r to a M to
to
() to O 00
r
O)
N
Q ... (D
co N
CD M
0) 00
(3) O
a) M
co <r
0)
C) v
CD, to
C) (D
0 (O
C)
CD m
CD I?
C) 3
z

m
Q r M O LO O N O) - O O O M
O c r V to to M V r,? W tO (o to to to to
Q. U V O O O N CO O M O O O O O O

N
(n
.-
cli
N
co
to
to
N
M_
co
co
M
N
N
N
N
-
y N
M LO
M LO
M M
M
O V
O N
V CO
r I-
N M
M r
M
M LO
Cl) M
M M
r
l
C
) (D CD to Cl) V Il- (D (o M Cl) N r M r
CL= O M r- a
O m
O) V LO
V C)
M ? LO Cl) 00 O) (O O)
U w V O O O (D Cl! (D O) (q O) O) N Cl! to N
N N W M M N to to M M CO (+j
LO Cl) to
aD °
?
co
V
r--
CO
1`
tr)
O
M
p O w
V to O (V C,? (D LC) O) r M N M V
F ? M r r O W co N N O O O O

-
v L N N N 00 N LO (D r- n M O M N W N C6
E M n I` m t--: to to to to to (O (D h (D n }

O

U)
C (D (3) LO

,
E

O

N

O

M

O

N

r,

O

O

O II

'

V
N
co
M
LO
M
tO
r
r
r
00
LO
M
LO O
O
F-
a+

d
C
•

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O
Q
C
C
- LO LO to to to O LO LO LO to LO tO tO to W)
N
? t!7 M co O O O) M ? I- M M (D
X O r (P c' N N to to M .-- O ?- O
F- Lo N ?-- O O N (N r r O O O O O C)
, ao
d O
Q
(? '- N M M O O r- m m V M I- M I-- (D <
C 00 to (D O .- O I? M (D r .. O O O O

N
O
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
co

C 0 O O O LO O O O O O O V) O (o O V)
0 Co a) O) Co O) O O) rn m O) r- co 00 co 00 +
u o 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD 0 6 0 0 6 0 o E
u m
E
,
(0 w" U CO
O rn
M CO O O LO N N to M v (0 P-
Q p
F- v
M
N 00 r
O r
O M
N (D
N T m M
O V
O r
O O
O r
O O
O 0 C

C V U W I. O LO M O M M v M h - Z
Q C v (o M_ M O r O CO V r r r O O O O 0 tri
M O r O O O O O O O O O O O O (1) O

m _ (D
m (D
r` V
O
r
to
Q) O
co
OO
n
N
(D
N
O
M > 11
r
J O M N (o O O) to M 6 O to 6 (D M 'y
r r (0 r to I- V N W P- M M (D r LO C
p d
p
p
_
lL
d
c
O W r N r V W (D I- co 0) °
r
r r
r c)
N o
W
d
J r N M V M- (D r- co O) ° r r .M--
v
LO

Z
5-0
0
a
N
3
E
N
O
`m
2
E
G
O
Z
O
W
w
O
0..
r
r
r
?i
¦s
LF
O
L
c
r
L
O
cl)
r

N
M

0
O
co

LO

N
0 Lr)
N
LO
N
N
0
0
N
C ? C )
L

T

V

C)
LO
T
LO
N
T

0
0
T

LO

0
LO
LO
N
0

C ) 0 0 0 0 0

> N
0 CO
0)
O LO
D r-
d a V M M M
W
3?
M

??
. T
M
O
II

I
N'?
U? C
? ?
I I I
I ''.III II
I
I !
!II

I i VIII
II I
I I II I I

? i
II,
I i
III I
I l
I
?
I
ICI

I

I 4 I

''. I

I
I ?I, I III
i I! Iii
l
I
j I I
m
? ii

I I III

I I I.
I
I

I
I
I
I
I ? I
!
j

l)
III
I
0
0
N
N
N
3
a?
g
3
0
m
v
F
_
M v O
O
CO
0) My)

LO
N

O
LO
N

Lo
N
N

C' j
O
O
N

C . Q I n

t
V

C) W
L

Li
? Lr)

i
i I

W 0:
LID

O

LO
N
O

C
O ) C
O ) C
O ) C
O D C
O )
O
O N
C
D M
0
)

?
m c M M

0

l
t IIII
i

i
I I

III
I
I,
II'I
Ili
I II
l I
jl II I
I II
I !

i

I
i

l)
O
I
I
O
O
N
V1
N
3
N
O
O
w
N
v
T
2
sT

L O
LO
C) CD

-ell r-A
0
0
LO

C) .

i O
U')

Aj
00 NT
C
CD
CC)

0
0
v
O
LO
M

n LO O
O
co
v
d

'

a) co O
N
O
O
N

LO
O
LO

O
O

I LO
00
' LJ
O

O
L

O
O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O
j M 00 V
N ) m
0) (D
0 ti
G> V d M M M
W

I? r-
m

I
? I I

v

I ? l?

I it
I I I

O i
tp
O CO
'n j "
!

Q C

, I j

i
?
I
Ili I
l
O
tY'
M
T
O
I

m
.
O

I
O
m
.

Q
C

Y
O
M LO

i C

!
,
II
I (a
M
O
O
N
N
N
m
O
3
0
m
51
O
LO
M

LO
N
M

cli O
O
M
LO

N

O
LO
N

CD
LO

to
N
N

O
O
N
$
t

V
LO
t? R

O
LO
r

LO
N

O
O

r
Lr,

O
LO

N
O

O O O O O O
O O O O O O
N o o d O ( o N
N 1 - C ) C )
d ? Y V ? ! V d
W

? i ? i ?
, •
? t ',.
I I N ., I I

III
i i
?

I
' i
I
?
j
I
I?
?

i
I
I
?
I I I

?'
>
O
I I
I I

I
?
? '
I
I
I
I I I i ?
?
I ?I

j i I I
I I ' I
I
O
i cfl, NI I I i

i

I I I

II II

I I
i
i

I
I I I I
' i I I I f I
uj? o
I

? I ? ? I I I

p ? p
I
I
I I I

Cl)
O
O
N
N
N
3
a?
0
3
0
c
m
pO

1
1
1
1
t
A
1
r
r
r
r
r
r
C)

N
I
I i I C
i
C f)

f)

I
LO
04

I ? ? N I
I I r

i
O
O
'f 25
N
O IT IT
O lp

J
LO

I I I
I

I
!
I I
II
O C)
e-i in LO
(0 `i r
NI
fir '; v
of V
I rn
? m

Q I. m
`n
d
NI

I II

I I I ? i
C)
I Q
1

II?

? I

I. I

I
I
I
I I

I
I
I
?
!

-g
Lr.
ic L6,
61

O

1 CI In
0
j

I II
I
I I
LO
I I I I I
I I

II ;
I I

I II

j

I

O

C D ( D ( D a C )
O O O O O O
N 0 0 V O CO N
- _ CD C )

W
61
M
O
O
N
E2
m
3
0
U)
3
0
T
a
T
2
Fes II rip rap
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 2.00
Outlet velocity (fps) 10.70
Apron length (ft) 12.00
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
3 A 9
» 6 B 22
13 B or 1 22
23 2 27
FES 15
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 3.50
Outlet velocity (fps) 15.70
Apron length (ft) 28.00
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
3 A 9
6 B 22
» 13 B or 1 22
23 2 27
6Z
1

BMP1 outfall
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 1.25
Outlet velocity (fps) 2.11
Apron length (ft) 5.00

AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS

?f (inches) CLASS (inches)
» 3 A 9 «
6 B 22
13 B or 1 22
23 2 27
Level Spreader at BMP 1
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 0.33
Outlet velocity (fps) 2.98
Apron length (ft) 1.33
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
» 3 A 9
6 B 22
13 B or 1 22
23 2 27
05
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
3
>
FL
3
o
?a
T^
i
1v

S

Z
Z O
00
N
M
N
O
O

b
co
Fn
L
N
N
C
J

f O
Z
r
rr
N
r
0

m
m

0

cn
m
CL
m

U
N
O
a
6y
M
0
N
m
3
ti
E
`o
.o
T
T
N co o0
N W
C LL co
J C6 ; O)

m
LL 0
0
N
Cl)

0 N
_N O (
0 co
W p o

E 00
M Cl)

N
R 6
O LO
a
v ? N C
L
0 C
M M
ce)

G
p co co
m co O
Iu co Cl)
J
co
2 Q.
W
co rn
W 00
M M
N

C LO O
.a. O N
c
N p M 1`
_
W co 00
co M
p
N
d N N
c a ?
co
Cl) M Z
a)
CL
c
U? (q
Q c v O O
IL m
N =
co Z--

N N

> It I?t
M Lf?
O
CL - N M O
U w V r-: 0
A3 w n Cl)
) co co
w

N M
Q' C }

_ N
y C 't C)
II

V CO) (D C)
N N
p
F- al
?,
m ? o o °-
E ui N

N
U ;0 0 0

X
H N N
M M
co
O
Q ?

t1 O O

O Cl!
<
C O Cl) U1
r
0
c o U O O
v
+
v o o
CD

o o E A?
y p v
Q H co co V)
-
Im co
p r- ?p O O N co
- O co V)
N
C O M ? II
CD
J r-
N M

r
m

y
)
C
N

0 C c LL c
2 ~ J W fn
ic+ E H
0) c a p
J - N Z
0
N
w
3
w
E
0
co
0
`m
v
T

IN
C
O
N
m
O_
m
N
v..
.O
a
O
CL
L
L
-W
?
I I N
C)
LO
04
it

`. LO
N

CF)
CR i N
m co
M
? M
C)
O
W Q C !(D N
LL Z) 1

I j
II
L

i t
i v
to
I d

U').
N
r

j i
O
O

O ce)
a7
(h j
d)
Lo
C D t= r-
. .
C
0

i C14 I
- ,
I
j O
I
,
I
i
I
N
C
)
-
$ Co °o Co °o o° °o
> o °o rn rn co co
d V M C7 M co
W
M
O
O
N
N
m
3
m
E
0
0
m
2
Y

ISO
168
156
144
139
20
108
96
84

N 72
w
v
Z
z 60
G 54
W. 48

42
U.
O
o:
W
t-
36
W
?
33
Q
O
30
T
24
21
t8
15
12

l BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROAO
s
Exhibit 11
Culvert capacity under inlet control
Circular RCP
10,000
8,000 EXAMPLE
6,000 0442 Inch" (3.5 foot]
5,000 0.120 do
4,000 ILr 4 Nee
0 10.1
3,000 (I) t 0
. (2) 2.1 7.4
2.000 (3) F-2 7.7
n0 3o feet
(1) {2) (3)
E 6. 5,
1 5.
L r- 4. 4.
1,000 3.
800
600
500 /
400
300
OC
v 200 F t.5
z / us
v

w 100
z
60
a x
= so n~.
50 H ENTRANCE
W ?'
0 SCALE IA
40 0 TYPE

Modbdll O
20 (2) Stem ew .:u wW
hadoull 2
13) groove wed °5
P?y?ellny
3.
3.
2. E-
1.5 1.5
1.0 L 1.0
.9 .9
10
T
8 To use ooW (2) M (3) Protect
S horizo0lollf U osokt 11),thoo
4 - rt• otrolpM loclload Woo IAiorf!
0 "a 0 wtol", or rover" as
.6
111"t i sNd: 6
3.
2 ,
.'S s
t.0 .5
HEADWATER DEPTH FOR
HEADWATER SCALES 2113 CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS
r1E.VISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL
JAM. am
CopynghtHA Malcom, 2003
[s-121
Exhibits
?g

1
1

I
1
t
H
1

3
I
a
3
0
?a
L
T?
i
O
O
O
(4J N
O
co
W
LL
1? n 1
w N
? N
O O
C
J
O
Z
4
Lr)
co
u,
I.L
?f
1?-
?Jf'YY J CV
O 3
0
U
N
O
Cl)
m
3
m
N
E
3
0
m
x

m
to
a
1
r
1
1

11
1
r
0
0
W
^3
W
E
L
V
0 (h LO

C Cli (N
CIO U)

J W W
LL LL

O
N C
N N O
N
Lo U)

LL U-
O
O
_
+? W C) CO
o rn
a?

C R

0 oY o 0

o r
d CO CO
Z a O O
> O O

N

m
C Q
L L N
C
m ?` U U =

6
U

?. d
C N C
E
d J y - to LO
Z
a O N
>> rn m
`O
=ru - rn
rf Co
N
LO r-
C O o h O
J y O
d C O

C )
-
O
W rn
Cl)
d C
'
E
7E E 0 0
- ._..? ui ui
0 tt:
c 0 U °O L i°
u o 0

IL C IDi u CD
O
=°
m

0
c
0 i
w
Cy
c C)
o

Y o 0
u
a

c
d d
i- 0)
O N
m
c
m v
06
M O E
N
Q r

C C ?"'
N O 3
N
J N ... co 0
00
U

.?.

w
w t

)
C
O
C
Z
W W
U7
L?

m U
N
C O N O
J Z
a
0
0
h
3
E
`o
Cn
0
m
T
2

T
(0
a

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

m
L
I

1~
r`
Cl)
ce) LO

° (1) U
- W w
d LL LL
C N ?

J N C14
rj) U)
W W
O
LL LL p
N
> co
ro
_N
W C
p O r
n (o
co
E v co
cc

C) m (0
=
i Q
D O 0)
00

0) LO
_
p (D a?
co
d1
W V M
J
0) n
S Q O Cl?
D (0 N
?t M

N

> C
?

c
N O `n 0
W V Cl)
o
G 0O) (N0 E
p Ln
V co z
N
Q LO r
0 c rl? O
C _
(n O r
a
z- LO L

0) m
O M
O co
Q - H
U O W
co c0
: v (ri (6
l0 3 N
o Y- co 'IT
(n Ln
F- o co
C i
L N N

O
N C
O O
II

? LO LO
F
-
N C O O a
C LO LO C

U
w
co 0) N
x p
F- O V
o o
r?
m w
Q L CC) 0)
O 0
C O O O
cq

0 a)
C p U F C) CD

i0 U?

+
CD 0
m
E
r

Y c0 co
m
E

a?

Q
H
O O N
T
C
3
i
O V U
c ? co co
°'
O O a O

J $
N II
Y
co
co 0)
N

a d
a a
LL ?
c
O J W W
66
E ` o
a
J N Z
-?t
m
0
N
m
3
E
3
0
m
`o
2
N
(B
3
N
-`o
O
N
N
O
0
L
C
L
CE
L
rw?
v!
O
O

r
O
O
O
co

O
ti
O
CO

O

d

U ) I O
iLL co

O
M
O
N
O

O
$
O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O
co LO
°' CO co
W
N
r-
r-
T-
14 , C d '4t Iq ?t
-?-Z

?
i
I j

i

j
I I I I
I i !
j

I
I i
i i

j
I

j j

O
I

j
N
I

I
i
I j I

i I
I ?
i
j
Cl)
O
O
N
N
N
3
m
E
0
0
N
2
T
(0
3
0
-`a
t
O
U)
N
O
d
L
O
CL
! v/
IE
I4-0
'CI)
O
O

O
O

I
j
i
O

j co
j
O

I ? CO
Lo C', c
i
<V (C 1?
W rn o
LL V-- cr cy C)
O
t
O R
W LL
_

I
? I O
i
O

I M
I
O

i
i
I

I N
I
O
I
I I
II
I

O

O O O O O O
? N I? N ? N ti
W T--
'IT O O
"It O
co
co
Cf)
q3
M
O
O
N
N
N
3
m
U)
0
m

Exhibit 11

Ise Io,ooo
168 8,000 EXAMPLE I (2) (3)
I56 6.000

, D•42 Inches (3.5 foot)
6. r- 6.
144
5-
000 0120 cfs
S.
4,000 ? • Mw 6• S.
132
3'000 D foot -5.
' 4.

120 (1) 2.5 6.8 4.

2,000 (2) 2.1 7.4
(3) i.2 7.7
4•
106 3.
OD is too 3.
96 1,000 3'
600
84 -- -+ --
600 2-
Soo / ,.
2.
72 400

0
300 _
H
I.S
I.5
U
U
= 60 .
200
/
H
1.'S
z / w
c 54
a
I / W 100 =
j 48 ? 80

v

j'2
a
0

60 =

W

1.0

I.0
c c so HW
ENTRANCE ° w
SCALE ^
w 40 D TYPE b
~

W 36 30 (1) Spero ado with At
9
9
9
33 MNrdl 1] .
a
G
20
(2) Weesa with

l
n a

w

8
30 l
we z . 8
13) room end • 8
27 5 projecting
Ip fl
24 s 11, "1 12 7 r

21 6 e use scale (2) or (3) project
horizontally is scale (1),then
use strai
ht incli
d li
th
4 g
ne
no
roush
D and 0 scales, or reverse as 6
.
6
3 illustrated. •
1s L4,1?
S?
ir, IL 1: 111>7
FES Q
?
L .5
r.o . s

12 HEADWATER DEPTH -FOR
CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS
HEADWATE R SCALES 2153
REVISED MAY 1964 WITH INLET CONTROL
WREAY Of fitlMllC ROADS JAK IfdD vi-11

?- 3 A
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Dissipator Calculations
Bypass Line - FES20
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 2.00
Outlet velocity (fps) 5.77
Apron length (ft) 12.00
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
3 A 9
» 6 B 18 «
13 Bor1 22
23 2 27
Driveway Pipe #1 - FES2-FES23
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 1.250
Outlet velocity (fps) 3.73
Apron length (ft) 9.00
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
3 A 9
6 B 18«
13 B or 1 22
23 2 27
Driveway Pipe #2 - FES24-FES25
NRCD Land Quality Section
NYDOT Dissipator Design Results
Pipe diameter (ft) 1.250
Outlet velocity (fps) 0.59
Apron length (ft) 9.00
AVG DIAM STONE THICKNESS
(inches) CLASS (inches)
3 A 9
6 B 18 «
13 Bor1 22
23 2 27
?7 q
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
f
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1

OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
-.?5r
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer and Level Spreader
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be
corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity
of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
Important maintenance procedures:
- Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
- Once a year, the filter strip will be reseeded to maintain a dense growth of
vegetation
- Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the vegetation.
- Two to three times a year, grass filter strips will be mowed and the clippings
harvested to promote the growth of thick vegetation with optimum pollutant
removal efficiency. Turf grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 5 inches and
may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic requirements
(NIPC,1993). Forested filter strips do not require this type of maintenance.
- Once a year, the soil will be aerated if necessary.
- Once a year, soil pH will be tested and lime will be added if necessary.
After the filter strip is established, it will be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours
after every storm event greater than 1.0 inch (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County).
Records of operation and maintenance will be kept in a known set location and will be
available upon request.
h
ll
f
d
h
at are
oun
s
a
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems t
be repaired immediately.

1

1
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will rernediate the problem:
The entire filter strip Trash/ debris is present. Remove the trash/debris.
system
The flow splitter device The flow splitter device is Unclog the conveyance and dispose
(if applicable) clo ed. of an sediment off-site.
The flow splitter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
re air.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 3

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
BMP' element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The swale and the level The swale is clogged with Remove the sediment and dispose
lip sediment. of it off-site.
The level lip is cracked, Repair or replace lip.
settled, undercut, eroded or
otherwise damaged.
There is erosion around the Regrade the soil to create a berm
end of the level spreader that that is higher than the level lip, and
shows stormwater has then plant a ground cover and
bypassed it. water until it is established- Provide
lime and a one-time fertilizer
application.
Trees or shrubs have begun Remove them.
to grow on the swale or just
downslop of the level lip.
The bypass channel Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to
erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then
reestablish proper erosion control.
Turf reinforcement is Study the site to see if a larger
damaged or ripap is rolling bypass channel is needed (enlarge if
downhill. necessary). After this, reestablish
the erosion control material.
The filter strip Grass is too short or too long Maintain grass at a height of
if applicable). approximately three to six inches.
Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to
erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then plant a
ground cover and water until it is
established. Provide lime and a
one-time fertilizer application.
Sediment is building up on Remove the sediment and
the filter strip. restablize the soil with vegetation if
necessary. Provide limeand a one-
time fertilizer application.
Plants are desiccated. Provide additional irrigation and
fertilizer as needed.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application.
Nuisance vegetation is Remove vegetation by hand if
choking out desirable species, possible. If pesticide is used, do not
allow it to get into the receiving
water.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality local Regional Office, or the
outlet. 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-1786.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3
Page 2 of 3

LEI
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the
performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any
problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party.

I
1
L
Project name:
BMP drainage area number: Level Spreader Q,_ 6?wP_! _C wc,4 p
Print name:Mark Ball
Title:Vice President
Address:3735 Beam Rd Charlotte NC 28217
Phone: [phone]
Signature:
Date: Z// /d
Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of
the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president.
/X) a Notary Public for the State of
County of ;L Zu , do hereby certify that
9 personally appeared before in this AO
day of /)e' iw4,.L 000 , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing filter strip, riparian buffer, and/or level spreader maintenance requirements.
Witness my hand and official seal,

1

1
1
M.
`4"'f %OTAJJp ?',
C &A*2M Cl
SEAL
My commission expires /h PhV/1
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 3

Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
Wet Detention Basin Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be
corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity
of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
The wet detention basin system is defined as the wet detention basin,
pretreatment including forebays and the vegetated filter if one is provided.
' This system (check one):
® does ? does not incorporate a vegetated filter at the outlet.
This system (check one):
? does ® does not incorporate pretreatment other than a forebay.
I
mportant maintenance procedures:
- Immediately after the wet detention basin is established, the plants on the
vegetated shelf and perimeter of the basin should be watered twice weekly if
needed, until the plants become established (commonly six weeks).
- No portion of the wet detention pond should be fertilized after the first initial
fertilization that is required to establish the plants on the vegetated shelf.
- Stable groundcover should be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the wet detention basin.
1 - If the basin must be drained for an emergency or to perform maintenance, the
flushing of sediment through the emergency drain should be minimized to the
maximum extent practical.
- Once a year, a dam safety expert should inspect the embankment.
After the wet detention pond is established, it should be inspected once a month and
within 24 hours after every storm event greater than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in a
Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance should be kept in a known set
location and must be available upon request.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall
be repaired immediately.
BMP element: Potential roblem: How I will remediate the problem:
The entire BMP Trash/ debris is resent. Remove the trash/ debris.
The perimeter of the wet Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to
detention basin erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then plant a
ground cover and water until it is
established. Provide lime and a
one-time fertilizer application.
Vegetation is too short or too Maintain vegetation at a height of
lone. a roximatel six inches.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 1 of 4
?1
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The inlet device: pipe or The pipe is clogged. Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the
Swale sediment off-site.
The pipe is cracked or Replace the pipe.
otherwise damaged.
Erosion is occurring in the Regrade the swale if necessary to
swale. smooth it over and provide erosion
control devices such as reinforced
turf matting or riprap to avoid
future problems with erosion.
The forebay Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the
a depth greater than the sediment and remedy the problem if
original design depth for possible. Remove the sediment and
sediment storage. dispose of it in a location where it
will not cause impacts to streams or
the BMP.
Erosion has occurred. Provide additional erosion
protection such as reinforced turf
matting or riprap if needed to
prevent future erosion problems.
Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by
hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on
the plants rather than spraying.
The vegetated shelf Best professional practices Prune according to best professional
show that pruning is needed practices
to maintain optimal plant
health.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application to establish the
ground cover if a soil test indicates
it is necessary.
Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by
hand. If pesticide is used, wipe it on
the plants rather than spraying.
The main treatment area Sediment has accumulated to Search for the source of the
a depth greater than the sediment and remedy the problem if
original design sediment possible. Remove the sediment and
storage depth. dispose of it in a location where it
will not cause impacts to streams or
the BMP.
Algal growth covers over Consult a professional to remove
50% of the area. and control the algal growth.
Cattails, phragmites or other Remove the plants by wiping them
invasive plants cover 50% of with pesticide (do not spray).
the basin surface.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin 011,M-RevA Page 2 of 4
000
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The embankment Shrubs have started to grow Remove shrubs immediately.
on the embankment.
Evidence of muskrat or Use traps to remove muskrats and
beaver activity is present. consult a professional to remove
beavers.
A tree has started to grow on Consult a dam safety specialist to
the embankment. remove the tree.
An annual inspection by an Make all needed repairs.
appropriate professional
shows that the embankment
needs repair. if applicable)
The outlet device Clogging has occurred. Clean out the outlet device. Dispose
of the sediment off-site.
The outlet device is damaged Repair or replace the outlet device.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the local NC Division of
damage have occurred at the Water Quality Regional Office, or
outlet. the 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-
1786.
The measuring device used to determine the sediment elevation shall be such
that it will give an accurate depth reading and not readily penetrate into
accumulated sediments.
When the permanent pool depth reads 382.5 feet in the main pond, the
sediment shall be removed.
When the permanent pool depth reads 382.5 feet in the forebay, the sediment
shall be removed.
BASIN DIAGRAM
(fill in the blanks)
17 Permanent Pool Elevation 386.0
Sediment Removal . 382.5 Pe anen Pool
----------------- Volume Sediment Removal Elevation 382.5 Volume
Bottom Elevatio 381.5 -ft Min.
----------------------------
Sediment Bottom Elevation 381.5 1-ft n
Storage Sedimer
Storage
FOREBAY MAIN POND
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 . Page 3 of 4
$l
LJ
Permit Number.
(to be provided by DWQ)

1
1

I

1

I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the
performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any
problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party.
Project name:Shops at Whispering Pines
BMP drainage area number:BMP-I
Print name: W i I I"o..na L , 0-11 ec,
Title:_ IY)O.naAt- r
Address: 3 -13 S Q'R ec"rn ft.--l , 0- h o'V l o b NC n 7 D 1
Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of
the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president.
I, Lout H. M VVI+e'k-O , a Notary Public for the State of
County of Men e (e_n6I .r , do hereby certify that
V?l???? ?.-?r? _ p???? persona y appeared before me this (1-
day of QW9 , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing wet detention basin maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official
seal,
'pANN?N4Nti1
MONTF?o ?s
PUBOO
Coe#
K? ?/h - V"_,L?
SEAL
7?
.. J2j q
My commission expires .
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4
Page 4 of 4
CCL
1

1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1

Erosion Control
&03

'y
fdJ'?N, 'M'1'Y
I
?I
J
a
C
'w
4
------
I
W
Vill,

Wf
k
L4L'
G?
b.
'i
IIIP r
r I r r
`1 t1 I
I
;A
?r
?b
?o
I_

3

S ?

s s

s

C?

V '

rr r rr r rr ?r ?r r r r r rr rr +r rr ¦r r? r? r
SEDIMENT TRAP SIZES
STRUCTURE DRAINAGE DENUDED SIZ E MINIMUM WEIR VOLUME VOLUME Surface Area Surface Area

# AREA
AC AREA
AC WIDTH
FT LENGTH
FT DEPTH*
FT LENGTH
(FT)** REQUIRED
CF PROVIDED
CF sgft/cfs Required
ac Provided
ac
SB-1 1.5 0.9 30 60 4.0 4 3,240 4,050 325 0.039 0.041
SB-2 3.6 3.6 54 108 4.0 4 12,960 13,122 325 0.095 0.134
SB-3 5.0 5.0 65 130 4.0 6 18,000 19,013 325 0.132 0.194
SB-4 0.4 0.4 18 36 4.0 4 1,332 1,458 325 0.010 0.015
*INCLUDES 1' OF FREE BOARD.
** MINIMUM WEIR LENGTH = 4'
***BASIN IS DYNAMIC WITH RAISING GRADES TOP ELEVATION IS INTIAL ELEVATION
STRUCTURE FLOWS
GIVEN: C:
I:
H:
Cw:
L=
G= 233
0.5 Runoff Coefficient H= 23
7.06 IN/HR (25-YR STORM) I Tc = 10
12 INCHES Intensity Duration Frequency Equation
3
(MALCOM, ELEMENTS OF STORMWATER DESIGN)
Q/(Cw*H^(3/2))
STRUCTURE AREA Q CFS WEIR L FT
SB-1 1.5 5.2 2
SB-2 3.6 12.7 4
SB-3 5.0 17.7 6
SB-4 0.4 1.3 0
Skimmer Sizing
Structure Volume
CF Pipe Size
in Head
in Flow
cfs Time
hours
SB-1 4,050 2.5 1.25 0.053 21.2
SB-2 13,122 4 2 0.172 21.2
SB-3 19,013 6 3 0.473 11.2
SB-4 1,458 2-. 1 0.030 13.4
Notes:, 1) Based on Q=Gd"A"SQ(2GH), H=1/2 OUTLET HEIGHT
2) Draw down time to be 2-3 days
A x/19/2001)
"A
V
< $ cs
?' S v
L
9 0
I jo I a?3vd SIJIDauuOD
r rr rr r it rr rr rr r? rr +r rr rr rr r? rr rr ?r rr
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 7
' breach da
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
' Drainage area = 69.000 ac
Intensity = 3.668 in/hr
' OF Curve = Raleigh-Durham.IDF

breach da
' Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 25 Yr
180.00
150.00

120.00

90.00
'
' 60.00

30.00

0.00
Friday, Jun 19 2009, 11:17 AM
Peak discharge = 177.16 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 40.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 425,174 cuft
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Hyd No. 7
Q (cfs)
180.00
150.00
120.00
90.00
60.00
30.00
" 0.00
80
Time (min)
1 g?

Table 8.05g
Permissible Shear Stresses
for Riprap and Temporary
' Liners
1
1

t
1
t
1
1

1

1
Rev. 12/93
Appendices
Permissible Unit Shear Stress, Td
Lining Category Lining Type (lb/ft2)
Temporary Woven Paper Net 0.15
Jute Net 0.45
Fiberglass Roving:
Single 0.60
Double 0.85
Straw with Net 1.45
Curled Wood mat 1.55
Synthetic Mat 2.00
d50 Stone Size (inches)
Gravel Riprap 1 0.33
2 0.67
Rock Riprap 6 2.00
9 3.00
12 4.00
15 5.00
18 6.00
21 7.80
24 8.00
Adapted From: FHWA,11EC-15, April 1983, pgs. 17 & 37.
Design Procedure- The following is a step-by-step procedure for designing a temporary liner for
Temporary Liners a channel. Because temporary liners have a short period of service, the design
Q may be reduced. For liners that are needed for six months or less, the 2-year
frequency storm is recommended.
Step 1. Select a liner material suitable for site conditions and application.
Determine roughness coefficient from manufacturer's specifications or Table
8.05e, page 8.05.10.
Step 2. Calculate the normal flow depth using Manning's equation (Figure
8.05d). Check to see that depth is consistent with that assumed for selection of
Manning's n in Figure 8.05d, page 8.05.11. For smaller runoffs Figure 8.05d
is not as clearly defined. Recommended solutions can be determined by using
the Manning equation.
Step 3. Calculate shear stress at normal depth.
Step 4. Compare computed shear stress with the permissible. shear stress for
the liner.
Step 5. If computed shear is greater than permissible shear, adjust channel
dimensions to reduce shear, or select a more resistant lining and repeat steps
1 through 4.
Design of a channel with temporary lining is illustrated in Sample Problem
8.05b, page 8.05.14.
8.05.13

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6119/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 5 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R213)(S1/2)A
channel slope 1 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 2.4 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 29.3 ft2
Slope Length 7.59 ft
wetted perimeter 20.2 ft
Hydraulic Radius 1.45 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 6.3 ft/s (grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Flow (Q)= 185.9 ft3/s ZS C ) ?- L 5
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf
0.01 ft/ft
2.4 ft
T 1.50 psf
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel
Shear Stress
?,P ?pi? der
e6l
0

s
S n
C
? S L
? a
Il S A
? S
W ?

0
0 : w

? W
U
Z Q
Z
Q Ln

U O

ea M

I
3--*''' -
_ _ f15
11 ? ? f
f

> ? 1T t
a?? .. ?, sz I I I
i
1A ,,?
r;

\ I`
I
/II I I
I
d ?d I '
ll 1 I N /
1
I
,
I II
ll
I
I
?
ti
IIII.
I I
I
{
l,
l ?I I
?'
Y'
YYY
I
t
i
I
III II
x I; III
'x IIII I
II

__
I

l

I?
'?
I ?
I II I 1
I
4ppI11
:I{?Ifl _` ??_ I ?
I
f; 1
1
1
11
ul I

µR
f I I? ?? `L„14
s

;1 N W
I
W U
Z Q
Z ?
Q ?
U o
I
1 ..
. i ''?t1
1 _,y
I?f
III f
,I
Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 1 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R213)(S'12)A
channel slope 0.5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.61 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 1.7 ft2 Q=CIA 3 CFS
Slope Length 1.93 ft C 0.5
wetted perimeter 4.9 ft 1 7.22 IN/HR
Hydraulic Radius 0.36 ft A 0.86 AC
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 1.8 ft/s (grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Flow (Q)= 3.0 ft3/s
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.005 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.61 ft Depth of Channel

T 0.19 psf
Shear Stress ``
C' n C. 1

CI
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 0 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R21)(S'/2)A
channel slope 2 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.5 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 0.8 ft2
Slope Length 1.58 ft
wetted perimeter 3.2 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.24 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 2.7 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 2.0 ft3/s
Q=CIA 2 CFS
C 0.5
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 0.66 AC
(grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Shear Stress
T
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.02 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.5 ft Depth of Channel
0.62 psf Shear Stress

°tZ
Project Shops at whispering pines .
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 0 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R'J3)(S'/2)A
channel slope 0.67 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.48 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 0.7 ft2
Slope Length 1.52 ft
wetted perimeter 3.0 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.23 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 1.5 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 1.0 ft3/s
Q=CIA 1 CFS
C 0.5
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 0.15 AC
(grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.0067 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.48 ft Depth of Channel
T 0.20 psf Shear Stress
C ? r ri/7 2

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 1 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R213)(S112)A
channel slope 8 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.13 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 0.2 ft2
Slope Length 0.41 ft
wetted perimeter 1.8 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.10 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 3.0 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 0.5 ft3/s
Q=CIA 0.47 CFS
C 0.5
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 0.13 AC
(grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.08 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.13 ft Depth of Channel
T 0.65 psf Shear Stress
14 'M ti r, e/ I
lj

Poor i? Enkamat 7010
Turf Reinforcement Mat
Yuur Truste6 Pamrer In SoilSufubons
Description Enkamat® 7010 is a three-dimensional turf reinforcement mat (TRM) made of continuous
monofilaments fused at their intersections. Ninety-five (95%) percent of the Enkamat is
open and available for soil, mulch and root interaction, creating one of the most effective
turf reinforcement mats available. Enkamat is manufactured from nylon to eliminate the
buoyancy factor associated with submerged conditions and provides permanent TRM
protection in vegetated channels and slopes.
Recommended • Permanent erosion control for vegetated channels and banks with expected shear
Applications stresses <_ 8 psf.
• Permanent erosion control for moderate to steep slopes (51 H:1 V).
• Support and enhance performance of ecosystem plants.
• Substrate for hydraulically applied Flexible Growth Medium TM (FGM) and Bonded Fiber
Matrix (BFM) to create the GreenArmorTM System.
Technical Data Mechanical Properties Test Method Units Roll Value
Typical MARV
Tensile Strength ASTM D6818 kN/m (Ibs/ft) 2.5 (170) 2.2 (150)
Thickness ASTM D6525 mm (in) 10(0.4) 7.5 (0.3)
Mass/Unit Area ASTM D6566 g/m2 (oz/yd2) 270 (8.0) 220 (6.5)
UV Stability ASTM D7238 % 80
& D6818
Resiliency ASTM D6524 % 90
Performance Properties Test Method Units Typical Roll Value
Permissible Velocity
30 minute, unvegetated Flume test' 2 m/s (ft/s) 3.7(12)
30 minute, vegetated Flume test' m/s (ft/s) 5.8(19)
50 hour, vegetated Flume test' m/s (ft/s) 4.2(14)
Permissible Shear Stress
30 minute, unvegetated Flume test'.2 kN/m2 (Ibs/ft) 0.1 3.3
30 minute, vegetated Flume test' kN/m2 (Ibs/ft2) 0.38 (8.0)
50 hour, vegetated Flume test' kN/m2 (Ibs/ft2) 0.29 (6.0)
Manning's n Range' Flume test' () 0.022 - 0.042
1. Flume test performed at independent large scale laboratory -data and details available upon request. 2. Testing performed on
vegetation type and height, use engineering field experience and examine a range of Manning's n values during design GreenPrmor- System 3. Depending on
' Packaging Data Physical Properties Units Nominal Value
Roll Dimensions m 0.99 x 152 1.93 x 27.5
[width x length] (ft) (3.25 x 500) (6.33 x 90)
Roll Area m2 (yd2) 150 (180) 53 (63.3)
Estimated Roll Diameter cm (in) 111(44) 48(19)
' Estimated Roll Weight kg (I b) 82(180) 18(39)
Color Observed Black Black

Profile Products Enkamat is a registered trademark of Colbond, Inc. and is manufactured exclusively for distribution by Profile Products in North
America.
750 Lake Cook Road, Ste. 440 To the best of our knowledge, the information contained herein is accurate. However, Profile Products cannot assume any
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089 liability whatsoever for the accuracy or completeness thereof. Fina l determination of the suitability of any information or material
800-508-8681 for the use contemplated, of its manner of use and whether the suggested use infringes any patents is the sole responsibility of

www.profileproducts.com the user. Profile Products 20080
04/2008 701 ODS
? a?

IUOO sllOsdsM'MMM
S£00 '9L9 6L6 • £ISLZ ON 'tieO • OOL aj!nS ABm lied JOISOM LOVSl
einjonilsai)uI 4 uolle»odauail
ST1 3S•dSM
oa:=
Y00
QMOU
Z VW) It
of (to
a
L IZU ON'3110lbVHO
9 31ins'OVOU INV39 SELF
C)j1'1Vi1dd0 Har
ON 'S3NId 9N%3dSIHM
S3NId ONREdSIHM
i`d SdOHS 3Hl
t
t ~
?{
6
OJ CL

Z J
LU V

U

Faw0
!?'; IIII
L, [A
I; ICI l
`,1 e I?I?II' l `,i ? ??
II
? z --,,.-
-
a _
o -?=
I,
SIN
,
,
I,
' I I
I I I
r /
- -- --
_
N ?fl ?al ,
,
L_ -
IC .
.
I
--------- ------- ----
----------- ------
----------- ------ ------
J d
- .. 9- a
?ol
\1 _
--- --- -- -----
1
I' I
;
i
r?
zo I
R' z
v F I ?
II ? I.
` ---__ wwmaw
I
I
I- f ? II ?I II;'r
I /
I I66
I' Il
I
d,
i! I Ij ? f ;d
I ,
' I II-
9 ICI '? ;;
,.•. -- ------ ----- -
I / I t ?\ 4
6,
11 .
= --
r+ { I'D - as r ' a1 g
l
- . ---- a,
-
w ,
V
w
l
za }
fill
i
r
? itf,r
f _ -- -
c ,/ 1
l Ip l 1
ts 61
,
I?
e I ,
I I ?. 4ras __ - ,?
{ e I _
JI, ;
---- --- ---- ----------- --
? II
?_ - _ - - -
-T -------- 0__- _ -_ 7-7-77
-r - i
- ------- ---------
I / L_J I l
1 I?
s.)wrTS b? i'N . .
m
ws
k ypN z u
0 U
Z
0
I ?
I , ¦
I ?
aka ii:
o ¦
LLJ
J I¦
I e ?
13
III
W
0 F=
a S <
o a a a v ?5 ?. ?5

Yr
{
5

? ? Fi F .- p
yyy
b
? j LL ? C C ? ?
o

_
xx
? << ? ry
- 0
C
j
q
r!?H Z4Y ? N N = ? ? N ??

H w ? ? y oh ? ? N ? R
6
v Iw cvo. -so • a • u•s n .n . ti oo. x e ooz zz s

Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 0.2 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 3 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R13)(S'12)A
channel slope 5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.89 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 2.6 ft2 Q=CIA 16.25 CFS
Slope Length 2.81 ft C 0.45
wetted perimeter 5.8 ft 1 7.22 IN/HR
Hydraulic Radius 0.44 ft A 5 AC
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 6.4 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 16.3 ft3/s
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.05 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.89 ft Depth of Channel
?? v?i5ty n ?i t? Lt 2
T 2.78 psf Shear Stress
V 5 Z ?e-f4 L
5-t"?

Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
Designer SSL
Trapezoidal Channel Calculations (Open Channel Flow)
Channel Crossection Data
Bottom Width 0.2 ft Mannings Equation
Side Slope 2 ft/ft Q=1.49/n(R2/3)(SU2)A
channel slope 5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.74 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 1.2 ft2
Slope Length 1.65 ft
wetted perimeter 3.5 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.35 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 5.5 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 6.9 ft3/s
Q=CIA 6.86 CFS
C 0.45
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 2.11 AC
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.05 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.74 ft Depth of Channel
T 2.31 psf Shear Stress
vi v er5 lo,i ?? fc Li Z
USG c, }ur??Qu?cQ Oe taL rt
94

t
0
E
1
1

1
I Geotechnical Reports
1
ql

1
September 8, 2009
Whispering Pines' Retail Investors, LLC
c/o JDH Capital
3735 Beam Road, Suite `B
Charlotte
North Carolina 28217
,
Attn: Mr. Darren Tuitt
Re: Addendum to Geotechnical Engineering Report
'
Whispering Pines Shopping Center
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 71095030
Dear Mr. Tuitt:
ire-1 racon
' Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) is pleased to present this Addendum for the proposed
shopping center in Whispering Pines, North Carolina. This addendum should be utilized as
a supplement to our Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated August 13, 2009. Findings,
conclusions and recommendations given in this addendum are subject to the General'
Comments presented in the original report.
Project Information
Terracon conducted a Geotechnical evaluation for this site in October 2006. A report of our
findings and recommendations was issued as Terracon Project No. 71067778 on November
3, 2006. Groundwater observations and borehole infiltration testing was performed for the
original evaluation with results presented in a letter dated January 14, 2009. After the
original investigation the, development was reconfigured and a subsequent geotechnical
investigation was performed with our findings and recommendations 'issued on August 13,
2009. After the latest report was issued, Terracon was informed that additional testing was
' necessary to evaluate the soils in the vicinity of a proposed detention pond.
The purpose of this evaluation was to observe groundwater levels, provide an estimate of
the seasonal high water table (SHWT) and perform borehole permeability testing for
development of the proposed detention pond. Our scope of services included auger
probing, performing in=situ testing, laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and preparing
this letter of our findings and recommendations.
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2020 Starita Road, Suite E Charlotte, NC 28206 [704] 509 1777 terracon.com
' o '
1
Whispering Pines Shopping Center
September 8, 2009
Field Exploration
Whispering Pines,, North Carolina'
Terracon Project No. 71095030
Terracon drilled three borings to depths of 15 to 20 feet below existing grades to observe
groundwater levels and perform borehole permeability tests. The borings were advanced at
the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plan in the Appendix.
General boring locations were determined by WSP SELLS. The borings were located in the
field by Terracon' personnel by taping distances and estimating right angles relative to
existing site features. The location of the borings should be considered accurate only to the
degree implied by the methods °used'
The borings were performed by an ATV-mounted power drilling rig utilizing hollow stem
auger drilling procedures. Terracon personnel visually classified the soil samples, in general
accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
Groundwater Observations
Groundwater levels were measured' in the open boreholes at the completion of drilling;
operations and prior, to performing the permeability tests. A summary of the groundwater
level observations are provided in the table below,
TABLE 1. GROUNDWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS

1

c - Approximate Groundwater Depth {ft} Boring
Lo
ation: Surface

Elevation (ft)
After Boring
Completion
2 Days After
Completipn Termination `

Depth (ft}
P-01 399 18 16.5 20.5
P-02 392 15 15 15.5
P-03' 400 17.5 16.5 20.5
It appears that the groundwater levels are reasonably close to the water level of the
adjacent pond and will likely fluctuate with changes in the water level of the pond. The soils
encountered were generally orange and tan and did not show signs of mottling or gray soils.
Based on the borings and ground water observations, we estimate that the SHWT is
' approximately 14 feet below the existing ground surface in the location of Borings P-01 and
P-03 and approximately 12 feet below the existing ground surface in the location of Boring
P-02.
It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal
variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the
1

I--I
Whispering Pines Shopping Center Whispering Pines, North Carolina
September-8, 2009 Terracon Project No. 71095030;
borings were performed. In addition, perched water will develop within sand seams and
layers over lower permeability clay soils or rock following periods of heavy or prolonged
precipitation. Therefore, groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life
of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated above. The possibility of
groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and
construction plans for the project.
Infiltration Evaluation
Upon completion of the borings, a 2-inch diameter PVC casing was placed in each boring.:
The bottom 5 feet of each PVC casing was slotted. Filter sand was then poured into the
annulus between the casing and borehole up to approximately. 5 feet above the bottom of
the casing. A 1-foot bentonite layer was placed above the sand and the remaining depth of
the annulus was filled with borehole cuttings. The PVC casing extended approximately 2 to
3.5 feet above the ground surface and water was poured into the casing to allow the
annulus and surrounding soil to become saturated. After approximately 2 days, water was
again poured into the casing to allow for additional saturation for approximately 1 hour.
Water was then added to the PVC and the rate at which the water dropped was measured
by the failing head test method. This provided information for determining the borehole
permeability of the existing soils.
Field and Laboratory Test Results
Terracon performed moisture content.tests and soil classification tests (wash 200 tests) on
representative samples obtained from the borings. These tests were performed to confirm
visual soil classification of the soils tested.
1 Testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. A summary
table of the field and laboratory test results is presented below.
TABLE 2. BOREHOLE PERMEABILITY' TEST, RESULTS
T Estimated USCS
Water

Location Sample
Content % Passing Borehole Classification
Depth (ft) 200 Sieve . Permeability-
(°l?)
(in/hr)
P-01 16-17.5 18.1 9.4 1.2 SP-SC*
P-02 11-12.5 8.5 4.3 0.9 SP*
P-03 16 - 17.5 17.4 4.9 1.2 SP*
*Based on visual observation
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Whispering Pines Shopping Center
September 8, 2009
Closure'.
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
7erracon Project No. 71095030
Please contact us if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. We are
available to discuss our recommendations with you. We have enjoyed assisting you on this
project and look forward to serving as your consultant on future projects.
Sincerely,
1
Consultants, Inc.
Jo an P. Manke, P.
eotechnical Engineer
Attachments: Boring Location Diagram
Unified Soils Classification System
Copies: Addressee (3)
,\0\ III(Itllj
R0
x C,4
O S/Q t
r-.
Scott A. Saunders, P. E. 33901
Geotechnical Department Ma??!!?' 'GINV?'.t Cn
Registered, North Carolina 033gp?q' SA1l
???11111tO
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
Approximate Boring Location
BORING LOCATION PLAN
WHISPERING PINES SHOPPING CENTER
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
11 -
Note: Ali locations are approximate.
lrerracon
PROJECT NO.: 71095030
DATE; September 2009
DRAWN BY: SAS
SCALE: UNKNOWN FIGURE NO. 1

1
1

1
1

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soil Classification
Group'
Symbot Group Name°
Coarse Grained' Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu a 4 and 1 5 Cc s31 GW Well-graded gravelF

More than 50%o retained More than 500% of coarse
fraction retained on Less than 5%d -fines'
Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E
GP'
Poorly graded gravel`
on No. 200 sieve No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines Mote Fines classify as 14L or MR. GM Silty gravel',',"
than 12°k fines' Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel'-'-"
Sands Clean Sands Co? $ and 1 s Cc :5 3E SW Well-graded sand'
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes Less than 5% fines'
< fi and/or 1 > Cc > 3E
SP
Poorly graded sand`
No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH! SM Silty sand'-"'
More than 12% fines' Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand'-H`
Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line' CL Lean clay--'
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50
No. 200 sieve PI < 4 or plots below "A" line' ML Site-L-4
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay,-"
0.75 OL
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silty` l
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A' line CH Fat clayt1"
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI lots below'A"-line . MH Elastic Siltw'"
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay"`"?
< 0.75 OH
Liquid limit- not dried Organic SiltIlL.I.1
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
"Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve
If fieldsample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles
or boulders, or both" to group name.
'Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
oSands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols. SW-SM welt-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
2
E Cu = DmlDro Cc= (1 X
DI°x16
'If soil contains > 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
to - r
7 --- < i
4 - ML or OL
0 _.. ,_.
? 30 then PI-0,9 (LL-8) /
CU
? i
20
0- i ? MH or OH
"If fines are organic, add "with organic fines' to group name.
' If soil contains 2 15%° gravel, add "with gravel' to group name
' If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or "With
gravel,' whichever is predominant.
L ff soil contains ? 30% plus No. 200• predominantly sand, add
"sandy" to group name.
"'If soil contains 2 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
"gravelly'to group name.
"PI >_ 4 and plots on or above "W "line.
0PI < 4 or plots below *A" line.
P P I plots on orabove `A" line.
QPI plots below "A" line.
+60
For classification of fine-grained
soils and Orw-grained fraction
50 - of Coarse-grsinsd soils
E
ti
u
f W
li
q
on o
-
ne
a
a HodzorM at PJ_-4 to LL=25.5.
X 40 then P1.0.73 (LL-20)
W ,? 1t

l *?
Z Equation of "U' - line
Vert" at LL-18 to PI-7
H
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
8o 90 100 110
Irerracon
1
1

1
1

1
January 14, 2009
Consultants, Inc.
2020 Starita Road, Suite E
Chadotte, North Carofina-28206
Phone: [phone]
JDH Capital, LLC Fax 704-509=1888
3735 Beam Road', Suite B www.terracon.com
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Attn: Mr. Mark Ball
Re Results of Groundwater Observations and Borehole Permeability Testing
Approximate 16.8-Acre Site
Ray's Bridge Road and NC Highway 22
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 71095001
Dear Mr. Ball:
' Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) is pleased to submit this report for groundwater
observations and borehole infiltration testing' at the above referenced property.
1 Project Information
Terracon conducted a Geotechnieal evaluation for this site in October 2006. `A report of our
findings and recommendations was issued as Terracon Project No. 71067778 on November
3, 2006.
The purpose of this investigation was to further observe groundwater levels and perform
borehole permeability testing for development of the storm-water management plan. Our
scope of services included auger° probing,. performing in-situ testing, laboratory testing,
engineering analyses, and preparing this letter of our findings and recommendations. A
total of 10 borings were performed at the project °. site, the locations can be found on the
attached Boring Location Plan. One permeability test and one groundwater observation
hole were made at each location indicated.
Field Exploration
Terracon drilled five borings to depths of 10 to 15 feet below existing grades to observe
' groundwater levels and five borings to depths of 3 to 7 feet below existing grades to perform
the borehole permeability tests. The borings were advanced at the approximate locations
shown on the Boring Location Plan in, the Appendix.
l
Boring
ocations were determined b WSP SELLS The borings were
Y located in the field by
Terracon personnel by taping and estimating right' angles relative to existing site features.,

1
Approximate-16.8--Acre Site Terracon Project No. 71095001
Ray`s Bridge Road and Nc- Highway 22 January .14,. 2009
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
The location of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
methods used-
The borings were performed by an ATV-mounted power drilling rig utilizing hollow stem
auger drilling procedures. Terracon personnel visually classified the soil samples, in general
accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System.
' Groundwater Observations
Upon completion of the groundwater observation borings, a 101o, 15 foot length of 1-inch
diameter PVC casing was placed in each boring,. The bottom 5 feet; of each PVC casing
was slotted and, backfilled with filter sand. Groundwater levels were observed at the
completion of drilling and after a period of approximately 24 hours.
i
All of the boreholes were dry- at the completion of drilling operations and after a period of
' approximately 24 hours.. This indicates that groundwater was not encountered within the
boring termination depths of 10 to 15 `feet at:the time of our observations,:
It should be recognized that fluctuations of the groundwater table will occur due to seasonal
variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not evident at the time the
borings were performed. In addition, perched water will develop within sand seams and
layers over lower permeability clay soils or rock following periods of heavy or prolong
precipitation. Therefore,- groundwater levels during construction or at other times in the life
of the structure may be higher or lower than the levels indicated on the boring logs. The
possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the
design and construction, plans for the project.
Infiltration Evaluation
Upon completion of the permeability borings, a'7.5-foot length of 2-inch diameter PVC
casing was placed in each Boring. The bottom 2.5 feet of each PVC casing was slotted:
Filter sand was then poured into the annulus between the casing and borehole to depths of
2 to 5 feet below the ground surface and the remaining depth of the annulus was filled with
powdered bentonite. The PVC casing extended approximately 1 to 4 feet above the ground
surface and water was poured into the casing to allow the annulus and surrounding soil to
' become saturated. The water in the PVC casing was recharged for approximately 1-hour
and allowed to sit. The next day, water was again poured into the casing to allow for
additional saturation for` approximately 1 hour. Water was then added` to the PVC and the
rate at which the water dropped was measured with a' 'falling head test. This provided
information for determining the borehole permeability of the existing soils.
i

Approximate 16.8'-Acre Site Terracon Project No. 71095001
Ray's Bridge Road and NGHighway '22'. January 14, 2009.
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Field and Laboratory Test Results
Terracon performed moisture content tests and soil classification tests (wash 200 tests} on
' representative samples obtained from the borings These tests were performed to confirm
visual soil classification of the soils tested.

1
Testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. A summary
table of the field and laboratory test results is presented below.
TABLE 1. BOREHOLE PERMEABILITY TEST r RESULTS

D et tf?_ ate fi
k?-
LaatioR ry G4?1BClt
' Dept?ftj e mea6il?fy a on?
ft ?
% .2b_
ve
...
P-1 5' 37 NEE` 10.4 8 SP**
P-2 6` 16,0 N/E* 32.0 0,02 SC**
P-3 5' 5.2 N/E* 9.1 7 SP**
P-4 2' 9.9 NfE* 19.7 1.5 SC**
P-5 5' 14.0 N/E* 34:5 0.03 SC**
Not encountered
**Based on. visual observation
General Comments
The analysis and recommendations presented in this letter are based upon the data
obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information
discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between
borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent
of such variationsmay not become evident until during or after construction.. If variations.
appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental
recommendations can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication
any environmental or biological (e.g. mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or
identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materiels or conditions. If the owner is
concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be
undertaken.
This letter has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to
the project discussed and has beer' prepared in accordance with generally accepted
1
Approximate 16.8-Acre Site
Ray's Bridge Road and NC Highway 22
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Terracon Project No..71095001
January'14, 2009
geotechnical engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended
or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the
responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the
project as outlined in this report are planned;, the conclusions _and recommendations
contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes
and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing.
Closure
Please contact us if you have any questions or comments regarding this letter. We are
available to discuss our recommendations with you. We have enjoyed.: assisting you on this:
project and look forward to serving as your consultant on future projects-
Sincerely, 11=11 I CcJLN I
Consultants, Inc.
AW*;,//J0Z
Michael P: Skeen, E. I.
Staff Geotechnical Professional
Attachments:.
0 CAR'//
Q 5''.-
-- •? SEAL.
Scott A Saunders,
Senior Geotechnical,Engineer ' ??IE;•?2`'
Registered,.North Carolina 03390s?,/?A,
Boring Location Diagram
Unified Soils Classification System,
Copies: Addressee (3)
i
OPT •??
PysBR`D?ER?` ? O
R
-4 pp,
O O
RETAIL O

_ O
\
\
\
\
P-2 \

\ \\ DETENTION POND
\ P4
\ RETAIL/ \? \
RESTAURANT,
LANDSCAPE
N \ !P \
\
MEDICAL OFFICES/
\ OFFICES
EX. RETAIL \ \
\ /N
IF
LEGEND
- - - SUBJECT SITE 0 60
APPROXIMATE PERMEABILITY TEST AND
GROUNDWATER OBSERVATION LOCATION Approximate Scale
THIS DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES (Feet)
P°edw1 . MPS PmiwNa. 71OM1 I ?On BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM FIG. No.
D- By DWD Scale. ASSHOWN
Checked By. Fe N.. PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
MPS/MRF GE0710MI-I
HWY 22 & RAYS BRIDGE ROAD
APproaed BCH patm JAN. 2009 2020 Slarila Rd. Suite E Chatone, North Carolina 28206
Boasaam? (704)509-IW CARTHAGE,NC
O O O
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests"
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50
No. 200 sieve
Coarse Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu ? 4 and 1 < Cc !g 3E
More than 50% retained More than 50% of coarse Less than 5% fines` Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E
fraction retained on
on No. 200 sieve No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH
than 12% fines° Fines classify as CL or CH
Sands Clean Sands Cu z 6 and 1 s Cc :9 3E
50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines°
Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E
fraction passes
No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH
More than 12% fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH
Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above 'A' line'
PI < 4 or plots below "A' line'
organic Liquid limit - oven dried
< 0.75
Liquid limit - not dried
inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line
PI plots below 'A' line
organic Liquid limit - oven dried
Silts and Clays
Liquid limit 50 or more
Highly organic soils

Liquid limit - not dried
Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor
"Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add 'tivith cobbles
or boulders, or both" to group name.
`Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
°Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
z
ECU = D6o/Dio Cc= -(133o
Duo x D6o
F If soil contains ? 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
GIf fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
60
50
< 0.75
Soil Classification
Group
Symbol
Group Name'
GW Well-graded gravel`
GP Poorly graded gravel'
GM Silty gravel'-'-"
GC Clayey gravel'-'"
SW
SP Well-graded sand'
Poorly graded sand'
SM Silty sand'-"
SC Clayey sand-"'
CL Lean clay"-"'
ML Silt'`""
OL Organic clay"",."
Organic siltKL-"-l
CH Fat clayK""
MH Elastic Silt"`"
OH Organic clayKL".P
Organic silt" L" °
PT Peat
"If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.
If soil contains ? 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name.
' If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
KIf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or 'with
gravel," whichever is predominant.
If soil contains ? 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
"sandy" to group name.
"'If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
"gravelly" to group name.
"PI ? 4 and plots on or above "A" line.
oPl < 4 or plots below "A" line.
P PI plots on or above "A" line.
aPI plots below "A" line.
For classification of fine-grained
soils and fine-grained fraction
of coarse-grained soils 0
??? ce
Equation of 'A' - line
'
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.
• '
then PI=0
73 (LL-20) - ?
.
Equation of U" - line - -
0
o? _
Vertical at LL=16 to Pi 7,
then P1=0.9 (LL-6? ,_..-_. _._ .. .-------
Oy

G?
- MH o r OH
i
ML or OL
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
W 40
O
}Z
M- 30
U
? 20
0-
10
7
4
0
60 90 100 110
Irerracon
wnispenng rmes
Shayne Leathers
rage 1 of 1
From: Saunders, Scott A. [[e-mail]]
' Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:56 AM
To: Mark Ball
' Cc: Shayne Leathers
Subject: Whispering Pines
' Mark,
Here is the letter with findings of the infiltration testing at the Whispering Pines project. Please let me know if you
' have any questions or need additional information. I will send three originals by mail.
<<Binder1. pdf>>
1 Thanks,
' Scott A. Saunders, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer I Geotechnical Department
Terracon
' 2020-E Starita Road I Charlotte, NC 28206
P 704-509-1777 1 F 704-509-1888
[e-mail] I www.terracon.com
' Terracon provides geotechnical, environmental, construction materials, and facilities consulting engineering services
delivered with
reliability, responsiveness, convenience, and innovation.
' This electronic communication and its attachments are forwarded to you for convenience. If this electronic transmittal contains Design Information or
Recommendations and not just general correspondence, Terracon Consultants, Inc., and/or its affiliates ("Terracon) will submit a follow-up hard copy
via mail or delivery for your records, and this hard copy will serve as a final record. In the event of conflict between electronic and hard copy
documents, the hard copy will govern. This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it are the property of Terracon and may contain information
' that is confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. The information it contains is intended solely for the use of the one to whom it is addressed,
and any other recipient should destroy all copies.

1

1/15/2009
wmspenng rlnes rage 1 Ul L
1
' Shayne Leathers
From: Saunders, Scott A. [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 11:28 AM
To: Shayne Leathers
' Cc: Mark Ball; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: Whispering Pines
Shayne,
Based on the original borings, the groundwater is probably around 20 to 25 feet below ground because the soils
where wet at those depths. Groundwater probably wont fluctuate more than about 2 feet. The only way to actually
determine the SHWT is to monitor groundwater long term in a well that extends 25 or 30 feet below ground. I
originally estimated 30 ft borings for the wells but shortened them to 10 to 15 ft based on the understanding that if
the SHWT was below those depths that we wouldn't need to go deeper. The SHWT is likely below the bottom of
' the infiltration trenches and probably somewhere between 20 to 25 feet below ground.
If needed I can revise our letter to state that the SHWT is greater than 10 to 15 feet below ground and is likely
present between depths of 20 to 25 feet.
' Scott
' From: Shayne Leathers [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 9:19 AM
' To: Saunders, Scott A.
Cc: 'Mark Ball'; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Whispering Pines
Scott,
Thanks for the report. I do have one question regarding the groundwater table.
The report indicates that groundwater was not encountered within the boring termination depths of 10 to 15 feet at
the time of observations. Further on down the report states the possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should
be considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project.
We are used to seeing a statement stating the SHWT is "12' ft below grade" or something similar. I anticipate the
bottom of our stormwater devices will be at the elevations we requested the perc test. However we need to keep
our devices 2 ft above the SHWT. We are left with an uncertain SHWT, ourselves and the agencies that review
' our stormwater plans do not know the SHWT, for example the SHWT could be at the infiltration test elevation of P-
1.
Is there anyway to obtain the SHWT elevations or have it determined?
S. Shayne Leathers, P.E.
Assistant Project Manager
FE WSP SELLS
15401 Weston Pkwy. Suite 100
Cary, North Carolina 27513
T: 919.678.0035
F: 919.678.0206
' Cell: 919.422.6462
shayne.leathers(cDwspsells. com
2/12/2009
wmspenng rines
www.wspsells.com
ragc /_ ui
From: Saunders, Scott A. [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 7:56 AM
To: Mark Ball
Cc: Shayne Leathers
Subject: Whispering Pines
Mark,
Here is the letter with findings of the infiltration testing at the Whispering Pines project. Please let me know if you
have any questions or need additional information. I will send three originals by mail.
«Binder1.pdf>>
r
Thanks,
Scott A. Saunders, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer I Geotechnical Department
Terracon
2020-E Starita Road I Charlotte, NC 28206
P 704-509-1777 1 F 704-509-1888
sasaunders (cDterracon.com I www.terracon.com
Terracon provides geotechnical, environmental, construction materials, and facilities consulting engineering services delivered
with
reliability, responsiveness, convenience, and innovation.
This electronic communication and its attachments are forwarded to you for convenience. If this electronic transmittal contains Design Information or
Recommendations and not just general correspondence, Terracon Consultants, Inc., and/or its affiliates ("Terracon) will submit a follow-up hard copy via
mail or delivery for your records, and this hard copy will serve as a final record. In the event of conflict between electronic and hard copy documents, the
hard copy will govern. This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it are the property of Terracon and may contain information that is confidential or
otherwise protected from disclosure. The information it contains is intended solely for the use of the one to whom it is addressed, and any other recipient
should destroy all copies.
2/12/2009
t
r ?
? r
I
I F:

!I
?I
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
NC HIGHWAY 22 & RAY'S BRIDGE ROAD
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
PROJECT NO. 71067778
November 3, 2006
Prepared For.
JDH Capital, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
Prepared by.
1rerracon
Raleigh, North Carolina
I
is
Irerracon
November 3, 2006 Consulting Engineers & Scientists
j 5240 Green's Dairy Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Phone [phone]
r JDH Capital, LLC Fax [phone]
3735 Beam Road, Suite B www.terracon.com
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Attn: Mr. Darren Tuitt
j ` Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
NC Highway 22 & Ray's Bridge Road
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Project No. 71067778
Dear Mr. Tuitt:
l We are submitting, herewith, the results of our subsurface exploration for the proposed
I development at NC Highway 22 and Ray's Bridge Road in Whispering Pines, North Carolina.
The purpose of this exploration was to obtain information on subsurface conditions at the
J proposed project site and, based on this information, to provide recommendations regarding
1 the design and construction of foundations and site development for the facility.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any
'
questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service to you in an way, please
do not hesitate to contact us.
eeeooeq°s
Sincerely, gee Nao
Irerracon
j
r.'
iJ
r
?I
r

Matthew S. Balven, P. E.
Project Geotechnical Engir
Registered, North Carolina
zi ix+or3FAL
a-
'L.,FHEt`? ?. Barney 7Hale, P. E.
e- S. BAS ?•°` Principal
130731@8°°°8B°{°es Registered, North Carolina 11285
Attachments
Copies to. Addressee (3)
Delivering Success for Clients and Employees Since 1965
More Than 80 Offices Nationwide

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
--------_w
PROJECT DESCRIPTION

(i SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES ---------------------
Field Exploration _-°----?----- ----- ___--_-_2
2
Laboratory Testing
---- ------ -__--
-2
SITE CONDITIONS ------- --------_ -_-??-___-__- _?__-__ -_____3
- SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS-— ?
3
-
? Regional Geology Y
+
-
-._._3
Subsurface Soil Conditions 3
' i Groundwater -------- ------4
Seismic Site Classification- -4
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS -----4
Geotechnical Considerations ----------------------------------------- --------4
Site Preparation
Earthwork------------______---------------______
Excavations ------____--------------------__-.?_ _--__ ._ ......-._...---- g
Foundation Systems ------_
Slabs--------- ______
------------__-------------- -7
Pavements -_.______---------------------------_--------_____-__ g
i'
GENERAL COMMENTS ____.?----______-?-------?-------____------------_____g
II
APPENDIX
Site Location Plan
Boring Location Plan
Boring Logs

I General Notes
Unified Soil Classification System

i

I ?

i
II
n
ji
ij
?I
I
r
;i
1 i I
?I
r?
I
.I
II
i
.i
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
NC HIGHWAY 22 & RAY'S BRIDGE ROAD
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
TERRACON PROJECT NO. 71067778
INTRODUCTION
Terracon has completed the geotechnical exploration for the proposed 16.8 acre
development at the intersection of NC Highway 22 and Ray's Bridge Road in Whispering
Pines, North Carolina. Our scope of services included drilling soil test borings, performing
laboratory testing and engineering analyses, and preparing this report of our findings and
recommendations. Twenty-one borings extending to depths of approximately 5 to 100 feet
below the existing ground surface were drilled at the site for the geotechnicai exploration.
Individual boring logs and a boring location diagram are included with this,report. The
purpose of this geotechnical study was to explore the general subsurface conditions at the
project site and to evaluate these conditions with respect to the design and construction of
earthwork, foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the project.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
We understand the project is comprised of six parcels totaling approximately 16.8 acres
located southeast of the intersection of NC Highway 22 and Ray's Bridge Road in
Whispering Pines, North Carolina. The parcels are currently mixed use consisting of vacant
land, residential, and commercial properties.
Based on the plan with the anticipated layout for the development, the site will be divided to
the north and south by a pond extending approximately through the middle of the site. The
development of the northern half includes an approximate 35,000 square foot supermarket,
an approximate 12,500 square foot retail center, an approximate 1.4 acre outparcel, and
associated parking and drive areas. The southern half of the site includes the addition of
parking areas and drive lanes for access to two retail centers.
We expect the structures will be one-story with slab-on-grade floors. Structural loads have
not been provided at the time of this report but are expected to be light to moderate.
Based on the topography shown on the provided site plan, the existing grades range from
392 to 404 feet above mean sea level for the northern half and from 400 to 420 feet in the
southern half. Based on these grades, we expect up to approximately 4 to 6 feet of cut/fill
may be required to develop final site grades in the northern half and 10 feet of cut/fill may
be required in the southern half.
?i
rf

I
i

Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
Whispering Pines, NC
SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
Field Exploration
Terracon Project No. 71067778
November 3, 2006
The subsurface exploration consisted of drilling and sampling 21 borings at the site to
depths ranging from about 5 to 100 feet below existing grade. The boring locations were
established in the field by Terracon by taping distances from available reference features.
The boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the
methods used to define them:
The borings were drilled with an ATV-mounted rotary drill rig using hollow stem augers to
advance the boreholes. Representative soil samples were obtained by the split-barrel
sampling procedure in general accordance with the appropriate ASTM standard. In the
split-barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch
O.D. split-barrel sampler the last 12 inches of the typical total 18-inch penetration by means
of a 140-pound hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration resistance
value (N). This value is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils
and the consistency of cohesive soils. The sampling depths and penetration distance, plus
the standard penetration resistance values, are shown on the boring logs. The samples
were sealed and returned to the laboratory for testing and classification.
Field logs of each boring were prepared by the drill crew. These logs included visual
classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the drillers
interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs included
with this report represent an interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based
on laboratory observation and tests of the samples. .
Laboratory Testing
l!
The laboratory testing program consisted of performing water content, Atterberg limits, and
t percent material passing the No. 200 sieve (P200) tests on representative soil samples.
Information from these tests was used in conjunction with field penetration test data to
j evaluate soil strength in-situ, volume change potential, and soil classification. Results of
i .; these tests are provided on the boring logs.
As part of the testing program, the samples were visually examined in the laboratory and
classified in accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification
System based on the texture and plasticity of the soil. The estimated group symbols for this
system are shown on the boring logs. A brief description of the Unified System is included
with this report.
L,
2
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
SITE CONDITIONS
r l The site is located southeast of the intersection of NC Highway 22 and Ray's Bridge Road
.! in Whispering Pines, North Carolina. The site is comprised of six parcels consisting of

j vacant land as well as residential and commercial properties. In the north portion of the
site, an existing thrift store and gas station are located along Highway 22, an abandoned
office building and house are located towards the center of the north portion of the property.

'
I I The structures in the north portion of the property are one-story, and we understand they
will be demolished. An existing one-story strip mail is located in the south portion of the site
near Highway 22. We understand the buildings in the south portion of the site will remain.
A large pond is located near the center of the site. The land adjacent to the pond is
wooded. Based on the topography shown on the provided site plan, the existing grades
range from 392 to 404 feet above mean sea level for the northern half and from 400 to 420

I? feet in the southern half.
..
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Re
ions[ G
l
g
eo
ogy
j Whispering Pines is located in the western portion of the Coastal Plain Physiographic
Province in an area locally known as the Sandhills. In this setting, marine deposits associated
i with periods of migrating shorelines and fluctuating sea levels are the dominate subsurface
-? materials. According to the 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina, the primary geologic
formations in the area are the Middendorf and Cape Fear formations. These formations are

I characterized by sand, sandstone, and mudstone with gray, yellow, and orange coloration.
_._}
Subsurface Soil Conditions
.? Approximately, 3 to 7 inches of topsoil was encountered at the surface at the majority of the
i
borings. Exceptions occurred at borings B-1, B-3, and B-13 where approximately 2 to 3
I JI inches of gravel was encountered and at boring B-5 where approximately 1 inch of asphalt
was encountered. The surface materials were generally underlain by sand containing
varying amounts of clay. The sand was typically yellowish-brown, reddish-brown, gray, and
-? tan in color and ranged from loose to dense in relative density. The soil visually classified
as SP, SP-SC, and SC in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS).

LJ Seams of sandy clay (CL) were also encountered at some of the boring locations. The
borings, with the exception of B-9, were generally terminated in sand at depths ranging from
5 to 25 feet. Boring B-9 was extended to a greater depth, and generally encountered sand
`j or sandy clay, as described above, to its termination depth of 68 feet. Refusal to wash
drilling procedures was encountered on possible sandstone at boring B-9 at the termination
'
I depth.
1 3

I_I1
1
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
r Standard penetration test values (N-values) in the sand and sandy clay generally range
from 5 to 64 blows per foot (bpf). A very dense sand seam was encountered at boring B-12
at *approximately 13.5 feet that exhibited an N-value of 50 blows for 3 inches penetration
j k (50/3-).
More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each boring location
l are given on the boring logs in the Appendix. Please note that wetlands delineation, the
assessment of environmental conditions or chemical testing for the presence of
contaminants in the soil or groundwater of the site were beyond the scope of the
geotechnical services provided.
r ? Groundwater Conditions
I Groundwater levels were measured in the open boreholes while drilling and immediately
l after boring completion. Groundwater was not encountered in the borings at this time.
Wash drilling, used at boring B-9, involves the use of a drilling slurry which obscures the
indication of groundwater. However, soil moisture and the gray coloration found in several
I soil samples indicate groundwater maybe present between depths of 20 to 25 feet during
the wetter months of the year.
Fluctuations in the groundwater level on the order of 1 to 2 feet are typical in the Coastal
Plain, depending on• variations in precipitation, evaporation and surface water runoff.
Seasonal high groundwater levels are expected to occur during or just after the typically
wetter months of the year (November through April).
f
Seismic Site Classification
Based on boring B-9 and our experience with the geology in the area, the project site
` corresponds most closely with a Site Class Type D as described in Section 1615.1.1 of the
2006 North Carolina State Building Code (2003 International Building Code with North
{ Carolina Amendments). This type classifies as a "stiff soil profile°, with an average standard
penetration resistance (N-value) between 15 and 50 blows per foot in the top 100 feet.
ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS
Geotechnical Considerations
The borings generally encountered medium dense to dense sand with varying amounts of
clay and occasional sandy clay seams. Based on the results of our borings, the structures
J
can be supported on shallow footing foundations bearing on medium dense to dense sand,
or new fill material. The soils encountered at the borings generally appear suitable for the
support of shallow foundations; however, we recommend close examination of the materials

' 4
I

}
. I
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines,, NC November 3, 2006
P
be performed during subgrade preparation and footing construction to confirm suitable
bearing conditions. Unsuitable soils, if encountered, can be addressed through localized
overexcavation (undercutting) and replacement with new engineered fill.
Some loose sand was encountered near the surface at borings B-2, B-4, B-6, B-7, B-9, B-10,
and B-11. In their current condition, these soils are marginal for the support of foundations,
floor slabs, and pavements. To improve these materials, we recommend the sand be rolled
with a smooth-drum vibratory roller after stripping.
r?
Provided subgrade preparation is performed as recommended in this report, we expect the
site soils to be suitable for the support of on-grade floor slabs and pavements. However, the
near surface sandy clay and clayey sand encountered at some of the boring locations is
moisture sensitive and will become unstable when wet. Due to the potential for unstable
subgrades during wet weather, we recommend earthwork operations be performed during
I warmer, drier periods of the year.
Site Preparation
Site preparation should begin with the demolition of the existing structures and debris removal.
As part of the demolition, buried concrete foundations or septic systems associated with the
i.
existing structures should also be removed. Existing utilities that are to be abandoned should
be removed or filled with grout. The excavations resulting from utility removal should be
properly backfilled with compacted structural fill as described in the Earthwork section of this
report. Any utilities that are to remain in service should be accurately located horizontally and
vertically to minimize conflict with new foundation construction.
Ll
All topsoil, vegetation, debris, and other unsuitable material should be removed from the
construction areas. We anticipate an average stripping depth of 6 inches to remove the
-? topsoil and rootmat located in across the site and in the wooded area. Topsoil may be re-
used in areas to be landscaped.
I
To repair disturbed near surface soils and develop uniform subgrade support, we recommend
the exposed subgrade soils in areas to receive fill or at the subgrade elevation in cut areas be
Li densified in-place using a medium to heavy weight, vibratory smooth-drum roller. Vibratory
rolling should be performed in all building and pavement areas, and should be performed after
a suitable period of dry weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade. The
vibratory rolling should consist of six passes, with the second set of three passes being
perpendicular to the first set of three passes. The geotechnical engineer's representative
' should observe the rolling operation to aid in delineating problem soil areas.
After densifying the near surface soils with a smooth-drum roller, the exposed subgrade soils
should be proofrolled to detect any remaining loose or soft soils. Proofrolling should be
i? 5
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 79067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006

r
I?1
II
i.
i
performed with a moderately loaded dump truck or similar construction equipment. The
geotechnical engineer's representative should observe this operation to aid in delineating
unstable soil areas. Soils which rut or deflect excessively during proofrolling should be
undercut as directed by the geotechnical engineer and replaced with compacted fill material.
Considering the moisture sensitive nature of the on-site soils, we expect potential
undercutting can be reduced if the site preparation work is performed during typically drier
months of the year (May through October).
Earthwork
Structural fill and backfill placed at the site should consist of a soil that is free of organic
material or debris. With the exception of topsoil, rootmat, the on-site soils may be reused as
structural fill. The on-site sand, clayey sand, and sandy clay can be reused as fill, but are
moisture sensitive and will require careful moisture control. Excess topsoil may be placed in
areas to be landscaped.
Structural fill should be placed in 8- to 10-inch thick loose lifts at a moisture content within
three percent of the optimum moisture content of the material as determined by ASTM D 698
(standard Proctor). Each lift of fill should be uniformly compacted to a dry density of at least
95 percent of the maximum dry density of the material determined according to ASTM D 698
(standard Proctor).
The geotechnical engineer's representative should perform in-place field density tests to
evaluate the compaction of the structural fill and backfill placed at the site. We recommend a
minimum testing frequency of one test per lift per 2,500 square feet of fill area within the
building footprint and one test per lift per 5,000 square feet of fill area within the pavement
areas. For utility trench backfill, we recommend a testing frequency of one test per lift per 100
feet of trench. Additional testing may be required if variable conditions are encountered during
construction.
Excavations
The majority of the site soils may be excavated with conventional construction equipment,
such as bulldozers, backhoes, and trackhoes. Wet conditions can significantly reduce the
stability of excavation sidewalls. For this reason, all excavations should be evaluated for
stability by a competent person prior to entry by personnel. All excavations must strictly
adhere to the most current federal, state and local OSHA regulations.
6
i
' Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC
November 3, 2006
l Foundation Systems
We recommend that the proposed building be supported on shallow foundations bearing on
suitable natural soil or properly compacted fill. All low strength near surface soils should be
removed and replaced as recommended in the Site Preparation section. A net allowable
1 bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) should be used for design of the
1 footings. The net allowable bearing pressure is that pressure which may be transmitted to
the soil in excess of the surrounding overburden pressure.
Shallow foundations should be designed to bear at least 18 inches below finished grades for
frost protection and protective embedment. Column footings should be at least 24 inches
- square and wall footings should be at least 16 inches wide.
t
We estimate the total settlement for the building will be less than 1-inch, which is typically
tolerable for steel-framed structures. Differential settlement between column footings and
along wall footings should also be tolerable (less than about %-inch).
We recommend close observation and testing of footing bearing conditions during footing
construction to verify that suitable bearing materials are present. If unsuitable materials are
' encountered, they should be overexcavated to a depth recommended by the geotechnical
engineer and replaced with washed, crushed stone, such as NCDOT size No. 57. When
washed, crushed stone is used as the replacement material, additional compaction of the
! f stone is not required. Based on the borings, we do not anticipate a reed for extensive
overexcavation and replacement of the foundation bearing soils.
.) The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile,
the structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footings, the thickness of
compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. Assuming that footing
construction and site grading is performed in accordance with our recommendations, we
expect total settlement will be about 1 inch or less. We expect the differential settlement to
I
u be on the order of 1/2 the total settlement.

The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil prior to
_j placing concrete. Concrete should be placed as soon as possible after excavating to
minimize bearing soil disturbance. Should the soils at the bearing level become disturbed
or saturated, the affected soil should be removed prior to placing concrete.

Slabs
J' Subgrade preparation and fill construction below floor slabs should be performed as
outlined in the Site Preparation and Earthwork sections of this report. Additionally, we
_i recommend the floor slabs be supported on a 4-inch thick layer of washed, crushed stone.
7
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
i I Whispering Pines, NC
November 3, 2006
j The purpose of this layer is to help distribute concentrated loads and act as a capillary
break beneath the slab.
The need for a vapor retarder, and where to lace it, should p t, s d be determined by the architect
based on the proposed floor treatment, building function, concrete properties, placement
techniques, and the construction schedule. When moisture retarders are used, precautions
! should be taken during the initial floor slab concrete curing period to reduce differential curing
and possible curling of the slabs. The recommendations provided in ACI 302 should be
' followed.
ii
The floor slabs should be designed to resist the anticipated dead and live loads. We
recommend that the floor slabs be designed using a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of
125 pounds per cubic inch. We recommend that construction joints in the slabs include
dowels to improve load transfer across the joints and to reduce the potential for differential
'
j vertical displacement across the joints.
j Pavements
The soils encountered in the borings are generally adequate for pavement support. Prior to
constructing pavements, the subgrade should be rolled with a vibratory roller as outlined in the
Site Preparation section of this report. Loose or excessively wet soils encountered during
vibratory rolling or proofrolling operations should be undercut and backfilled as directed by the
geotechnical engineer. Upon completion of any necessary undercutting and fill placement, the

r t subgrade should be adequate for support of the pavement sections recommended below.
! ._I Pavement thickness design is dependent upon:
I • the anticipated traffic conditions during the life of the pavement,
' subgrade and paving material characteristics, and
• climatic conditions of the region.
i
J
Traffic patterns and anticipated loading conditions were not available; however, we anticipate
i I that traffic loads will be produced primarily by automobile traffic and a limited number of
_ delivery and trash removal trucks. Two pavement section alternatives have been provided.
1 The light-duty pavement sections are for car traffic only. Heavy-duty pavement sections
j assume a total of 30,000 ESAL's (18 kip Equivalent Single Axle Loads) for the fife of the
pavement and should be used for car traffic with delivery truck loading. If heavier loading is
required, Terracon should review these pavement sections. Based on our experience with
J similar soil types, we have based our design on a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 8 for the
on-site soils.
8

I H

111
11

Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
Recommended paving material characteristics, taken from the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, are included with
each pavement design recommendation. We note that the 2002 NCDOT Standard
Specifications for asphalt materials are based on "Superpave' mixes (S-9.5A and 1-19.013).
Asphalt materials that have been traditionally used for commercial projects (Type 1-2 or Type
H) are covered under the 1995 NCDOT Standard Specifications.
Recommended minimum pavement sections are given below. Other pavement sections could
be considered.
THICKNESS (INCHES)
PAVEMENT TYPE MATERIAL Light-Duty Heavy-Duty
Rigid Concrete

(4,000 psi) 5 6
Crushed Stone
(NCDOT ABC, Type A or B) 4 4
Flexible Asphalt Concrete / Surface

(NCDOT Type S-9.5A or 1-2) 2 1.5
Asphalt Concrete / Binder

(NCDOT 1-19.08 or Type H) - 2
Crushed Stone

(NCDOT ABC, Type A or B) 6 8
Asphalt concrete aggregates and base course materials should conform to the applicable
?..? North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) "Standard Specifications for Roads
and Structures", Sections for Aggregate Base Course material, Hot Mix Asphalt Base Course,
and Surface Course. Concrete pavement should be air-entrained and have a minimum
Ll compressive strength of 4,000 psi after 28 days of laboratory curing per ASTM C-31.
GENERAL COMMENTS
Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so
comments can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical
recommendations in the design and specifications. This will help reduce the potential for
LJ ! misinterpretation of the recommendations provided in this report. Terracon should also be
retained to provide testing and observation during excavation, grading, foundation, and
construction phases of the project. Testing and observation by the geotechnical engineer of
1 record provides documentation regarding compliance with the recommendations provided in
the geotechnical engineering report and the project specifications. Terracon shall not be
held responsible for others' interpretation of subsurface conditions. Therefore, we
9
L
I ?
r Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
1
I ? recommend that the owner retain Terracon for foundation and earthwork phases of the
project.
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data
obtained from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information
discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between
borings, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent
of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations
appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental
recommendations can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication
any environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or
f 1 identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials, or conditions. If the owner is
j i concerned about the potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be
undertaken.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication
any evaluation or assessment of existing or proposed slopes on the site. If the owner is
concerned about slope stability on the project, other studies should be undertaken.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to
the project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted
eotechnical engineering
g practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended
or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the
responsibility of others. In the event that changes in-the nature, design, or location of the
project as outlined in this report are planned, the conclusions and recommendations
contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes
?.? and either verges or modifies the conclusions.of this report in writing.
?I
U
10
r
4
1 ?I
r fl
I?
11
`l
r?
r:
i.
r-
i
is
r '
r
APPENDIX
? -i
I
€
i
ii
J
I
f A
'I MU`
I ,
If
1
I?
f
S
I '
ve,-3 -
k.R MY
'NIP _4
?;?'???
22
Film
xm:
L' I.
51
u. Rz
s ?S' sir^
F r y
IL.
7 u 4
1. ;MT-0
CUR=
Aa?l
•
' I f
m
t 4 d ^ I 0" N 4 1 ih'` ?4 i
?i
6P -A
lvz_ .01
i
Fl-
22
u..•,a
? PROXIMATE SITE LO ` o
` AP CATION
_= Me F
+* "
L'
• ( di ?r p r i t-.. .. '.. ..]:w3Iv?,Fr? 1i it` ? ?.. - ??
EM ff
2
- fZOlNBUfZY?R
G
f? J l
0 62'
Rte=
?? t ? ? Abp' ?' I
h ?T
mpr
r t
ZE;
,?-
SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM irerracon
PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO.: 71067778
NC HIGHWAY 22 & RAY'S ROAD DATE: 11/1/2006
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA DRAWN BY: MSB
SCALE: NTS DRAWING NO. 1
Reference: 2006 Delorme Street Atlas

r,
?I
rl
II
I
1
?I
,I
t_
?po
R4pG?R?p? ' 'B-2 \\
B, °
ETA] ° t;-4 \
\ RETAIL B'9 \
&5 B-,3
B-11 B-1
\ B-1 -
\ GROCERY _ - \
DETENTION POND
\ B-14
RETAIL/
\ RESTAURANT..'
LANDSCAPE
\ B-16 \
B-15 \
G B-17
MEDICAL OFFICES/
EX RETAIL B-18 \ OFFICES
B-19 \
B-20 21
LEGEND
- - SUBJECT SITE
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION
I TMS DAW" 15 FOR GUiSM=P.Tft CNLY. NO I6 WTNft =FMC@ISTAWn0NPUR 0M
"ooo'
,r
0 60
m- EL
Approximate Scale
(Feet)
P?MFW. Mse P'`""6 71067778 BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM FIG
N

1 .
o.
DWI) ASSHOwN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
area, ??, ?'A.dsc'°°? PROPOSED 16
8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
MSBIMRF Weo7i%Trm .

W?
oer
:D aid aaoh
MIS HWY 22 & RAYS BRIDGE ROAD
BCH NoVEMBER2I106 ?eT
a WHISPERING PINES, NC
?I
l
{4
i
l I
I

I
l
t
r
I,
r,
?I
t.
l .1
t
1
1 ?
0
h
f } c
o
c
U
f n
r a
U
2
o
r
a
! u
c
L
c
a
l?
LOG OF BORING NO. B-1
page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
0
DESCRIPTION J
M `-
> e t
5 ? a
W
z
U `K o: w Z 1z0

w CO
o
D uU 0
w ??
a I-Z } 00LU

?
Z a-
tom ?0
?0 a i
? ¢ z?
Do)
. 0.3 GRAVEL

FINE CLAYEY SAND, yellowish brown, Sc 1 SS 11 3.9 P200=14%
medium dense, moist

Sc 2 SS 18
6.0

SC 3 SS 32
• 8

FINE SAND
yellowish brown and brown
,
,
medium dense to dense, moist

10
0 5P 4 SS 29
.
SP 5 SS 18
15

BORING TERMINATED 15.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soli and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL 4 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL err Icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
1
l?
j,
?I
' {I
( l
i
r`
Irl
i. f
I i
C
k
11
` I c
c
' c
c
u
c
u
2
I
r
I ii
L
U
0
i
0
LOG OF BORING NO. B-2
page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m °w f
U
_
3f >
w W
>
zcn z
o_w F
z ZH
zZ
a.
0
0- U) m ut
a. o .? W?-
z =) OW

CJ
w
O
co 7)
z
min
U n
?sn
0.3 TOPSOIL
7
FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan, loose SP 1 SS 6
to medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 22
5
BORING TERMINATED 5.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVA BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL Q 24 hours I
!71 l BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL S 1 rerracon
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL not encountered MSB JOB # 71067778

I
r?
1!
I
I
'I
II
t

11

t`
0
? u
t
C
' a
C
? I C
u
°
a
1 c
S
C
LOG OF BORING NO. B-3
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
j DESCRIPTION r Z
= 3 > z if Lu z Z Z
Q a U
co a F-C F-Z 3- oUm
Z of ?m 0 O o aN
::- 0.2 GRAVEL.

FINE SAND, tan, loose to medium dense, SP 1 SS 13 1
4 P200=5%
moist .

SP 2 SS 9
FINE SAND, with clayey seams, yellowish 5.0
brown, medium dense to dense, moist SP 3 SS 10

SP 4 SS 18
10.0
15
SP
5
SS
50
BORING TERMINATED 15.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual-
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL =
1
1 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
?i
i
i ;.
I`
rf
j
i
1
1
+ 1
I ?
t
t
f u
I (
C
t
G
` J 0
u
' n
u
0
S
1 a
c
i S
1 t u
u
c
. .
LOG OF BORING NO. B-4
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
I DESCRIPTION m > e a
L)
a
=
co w
z
w
w
Z

0
? m w o
W
a. -j t
-
?0
0 w
0
o z co
n 4 =3 to
? 0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND. yellowish brown; loose to SP 1 55 5
medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 18

BORING TERMINATED 5.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL Y I rerracon
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
LOG OF BORING NO. B-5
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m >
=
U

a

0

W Of

>

zrn
H
W z
F-
z
-
Z F
u-
zz
a
U Z F- cc t
nm 'SL) 0 c. D(nn
0.1 ASPHALT

FINE SAND, yellowish brown, loose, SP 1 SS 7
s moist
FINE SAND
trace sift
trace organics
,
,
,
dark brown, dense, moist SP 2 SS 34
FINE SAND, with clayey seams, yellowish 5.0
brown, medium dense, moist SP 3 SS 27

.,.: 8

FINE TO MEDIUM CLAYEY SAND
,
yellowish brown, medium dense to dense, SC 4 SS 21 14.2 LL=36,
i 10
0 PI=21
mo
st . ,
P200=28%
SC ' 5 SS 30
BORING TERMINATED 1$'Q
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL 7

1 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL
1
re
rracon
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
? rl
?F-1
I'.
i.
I
i
I. i
II

1(

1I'
1
1
s
i I t
L -' c
c
u
h
i <
i C
t
`J C
f
u
0
u
?? r 5
r
o
I ; o
i U
? a
1 'u
I
LOG OF BORING NO: B-6
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > a' w a
U
2 ?
3
t!J
W W
>
Z to Z
WW
Z F~
Z Z
a U a U ?p Hz ??
? D Z I}- Cr tom ?0 ? 4 ?co
7.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan, SP 1 SS 6
loose, moist

SP 2 SS 6

FINE CLAYEY SAND, yellowish brown 5.0
and red, medium dense to dense, moist SC 3 SS 21

SC 4 SS 18
10.0

SC 5 SS 40
15.0

19.5 SC 6 SS 38
FINE SAND, with clayey seams, yellowish 20.0
brown, medium dense to dense, moist

.
25 SP 7 SS 27
BORING TERMINATED 25.0- -
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL 9 t
i BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL T I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
1
1
;I
rf
I
I?
{
i
ii
i.
11
t.;
I i'
c
I
F
?f
1 ?: o
0
u
u
C
u
? o
u
0
u
a
j u
?f
Cc
. o
1
LOG OF BORING NO. B-7
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > °w
3
U > w z Z
o
:E Lo
U w
w >
U
z? of
w
} z
putt

7 EL
w U) U a. w d? Q p
' o: Z
C 0 Z) Z F ? tom SU Oa Drn
- .-'7 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan, SP 1 SS 6
loose, moist

_.:
.: SP 2 SS 8
. 5
FINE TO MEDIUM CLAYEY SAND, 5.0
yellowish brown and red, medium dense to SC 3 SS 23
dense, moist

SC 4 SS 13
10.0
SC 5 SS 30
15
0
.
?. 18
FINE SAND
with cla
e
seams
ello
i
h
,
y
y
, y
w
s

brown, medium dense to dense, moist SP 6 SS 53
20.0

' SP 7 SS 28
.; •.
•:: 25

BORING TERMINATED 25.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-18-06
WL 1 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-18-06
WL 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
n
I!
?f
?I
I
f ..I
i
I:
1
I'
I
I
r
C
i C
1..; o
I <
P
F
I C'
C
J O
C
to
9
S a
L.;
U
0
I I V

1?8
I`. c
I?
LOG OF BORING NO. B-8
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > w a
U

a !Y W

Z

Z
w 1-
Z
r
O
H U M WW O ? ?--
U U w
U'
- o z I: ix inm ?
U U it
n Z
U?
Tt • . 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, with clay, brown to reddish SP 1 SS 13
brown, medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 14
5

FINE SAND, yellowish brown, medium 5.0
dense, moist SP 3 SS 17

SP 4 SS 22
10
0
.
12
FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown,
medium dense to dense
moist
, SC 5 SS 29
15.0
SC 6 SS 46
20.0
22
FINE SAND. with clayey seams, light gray
and yellowish brown
dense
moist
,
, SP 7 SS 44

BORING TERMINATED 25.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL - 1
1
i BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL s 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778

U?
LOG OF BORING NO. B-9
Page 1 of 2
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS

DESCRIPTION O
2 co
>: of o o fl.
Z
U of W
z
w
W r _
W U`
a..
Q
w v1
rA Fn W
a O
w ?
a- F
-
ao
a" O w
z?
U' D z of rn m U 0 a ? U)
_7 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, SP 1 SS 6
brown, loose, very moist
3
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
,
SP
2
SS
7
tan, loose, wet
5.0
7
FINE TO MEDIUM CLAYEY SAND,
reddish brown and yellowish brown
loose
,
to medium dense, very moist SC 3 SS 9
10.0
SC 4 SS 18
15.0-
17
SAND with clay,
reddish brown to yellowish brown
dense
,
,
very moist SP 5 SS 38
20.0

• -.:' 24 SP 6 S 4

SAND,

2 S 0
yellowish brown to tan, dense, wet 5.0

29
CL
7
SS
8
SANDY CLAY,

i light gray, stiff to very stiff, wet 30.0
i
CL 8 SS 21
35
.0
i
L
Continued Next Page
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-31-06
WL Q BORING COMPLETED 10-31-06
WL s erracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
r)LWL HEJ JOB # 71067778
ii
it
1
I)
?I

1'I

L
f ]
LJ
I'
ii
0
11 <
i ;
I
u
L_j 0
i I a
I 2
u
v
a
q
i a
u
L
u
a
a
LOG OF BORING NO. B-9
Pa e z of z
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
O 0 w
:z
W
DESCRIPTION > E- H
z
v
a c
m ?
O
z z
w
w zo
p
M
w to
v
Z) w
>-
w
a_1 1
-
¢0 ?
? W

o i
D
z
F-
W
to m
U
E3 a z?
? to
SANDY CLAY
,
light gray, stiff to very stiff, wet CL 9 SS 16
40.0
42
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with clay
seams
,

light gray, loose to medium dense, wet

SP

10
I
SS

7
45
0
.
SP 11 SS 12
50.a
SP 12 SS 17
55.0
:?•?: 5a
FINE CLAYEY SAND
,
orangeish brown and light gray, medium SC 13 SS 9
dense, wet 60•0
SC 14 SS 19
65.0-
68
BIT REFUSAL ENCOUNTERED AT 68
FEET ON POSSIBLE SANDSTONE
BORING TERMINATED
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-31-06
WL Q t BORING COMPLETED 10-31-06
WL I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL HEJ JOB # 71067778

r ,
Ij
?f
I,
i•.
i
t
i
j
l J
r
1 r
(j
r ?
' S
1 (
I ?
(
t
0
E
u
? I (
C
u
u
? C
u
0
r
r
a
C
i ?
u
L: 3
i C
?I
t!
LOG OF BORING NO. B-1 O
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLES TESTS
0 DESCRIPTION Co > a: z a
ev
z
_ > x
w w
>
zrn
11f w F
Z U- 0
zZ
<¢ a. U a.
} O
w t 0
a0 rz } pw

U w
d cn
D Z)
Z
N
W
(nm ¢O
?U a 6
00- Z?
nto
' .'. ` 0.6 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan, SP 1 SS S
loose, moist

SP 2 SS 8
5
0
.
SP 3 SS 21

FINE CLAYEY SAND
li
ht
ra
and
,
g
g
y
yellowish brown, medium dense to dense, SC 4 SS 24
moist 10.0
SC 5 SS 35
15

BORING TERMINATED 15.0
The stratification lines represent the appro)dmate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL -V _
1
i BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL s 1rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778

1
? i
r..1
I?
I
' I!
1

ii
I.I

i?
I
I c
! f
c
0
F
u
Q
C
s
i 0
C
a
u
a
u
i ?
i a
1 a
i 4
a
?u
LOG OF BORING NO. B-1I
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION co
>:
Q
U
=
Z >_
u, a
w w
>.
z z
WLu ~
Z u
z2
a w co j a O a_ ¢O a z?
0 n D z ? 0: coM 150 o Q Z) U
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND, with clay, yellowish brown, SP 1 SS 6
loose, moist

SP 2 SS 8 6.1 P200=10%
5

FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown and 5.0
yellowish brown, medium dense, moist SC 3 SS 18

SC 4 SS 11
10
0
.
SC 5 SS 33
15.0
5 18
FINE SAND
red to tan
dense
moist to
,
,
,
wet SP 6 SS 43
20.0
SP 7 SS 48
BORING TERMINATED 25.0
The straflfication lines represent the approximate boundary fines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-1 M6
WL S_Z -
i
i BORING COMPLETED 10-1 M6
WL T l rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ

WL
MSB R
JOB # 71067778

1 r?
1
I!
I
i ?
t I i
i?-
?
Q
e
1
L
co
W
I ? a
i
w
a
W
W
I_J
LOG OF BORING NO. B-12
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS

j
DESCRIPTION J
m =
> c t
5 0 Q.
U
z
= 2
co
w W
> c
zcn Z
o: F
z FL~
z
z
ct
0-
CO
a.
o
?0
z
r z
ow
0 0 n Z ti ? vaim ?L) 0 g Du
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE CLAYEY SAND, brown, medium SC 1 SS 10
.. 3 dense, moist

SANDY CLAY
brown
ver
stiff
moist
,
,
,
y CL 2 SS 33
5

FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown, 5.0
medium dense to very dense, moist SC 3 SS 23

SC 4 SS 19
10
0
.
(very dense seam encountered at 13.5 SC 5 SS 50/3"
f
t
ee
) 15.0
:. 18
FINE SAND
with cla
e
seams
li
ht
ra
.
y
y
,
g
g
y

and yellowish brown, medium dense to SP 6 SS 58
dense, moist to wet 20.0
SP 7 SS 27
BORING TERMINATED 25'0
The stratification lines represent the approbmate boundary fines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-18-06
WL 7 t BORING COMPLETED 10-18-06
WL s Irerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ

L

SB 0
c?
Z
0
a
w
JOB # 71067778
0
m

LOG OF BORING NO. B-13
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m LU °
U
a
? 0 W
' Z
W 3-
? Lt
oZ
? m W o F W
Z
o 0 z wm 3:0 co
0.2 GRAVEL

SANDY CLAY, reddish brown, very stiff, CL 1 SS 14
moist

CL 2 SS 24
6 5,0
FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown, SC 3 SS 23
medium dense to dense
moist
,
SC 4 SS 35
10.0
(becoming less clayey)
SC 5 SS 64
15.0
'. 16
FINE SAND, with clayey seams, light gray
and yellowish brown, dense, moist to wet
SP 6 SS 45
20.0
SP 7 SS 48
BORING TERMINATED 25.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
Q BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
LWL 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
L MSB JOB # 71067778
FI
I;
rI
t
?l
it
fl
i
j
?l
l
i
'1
L'
a
I?
u
i
c
u
c
o
o
i u
u
C
a
1
LOG OF BORING NO. B-94
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS
0
DESCRIPTION O
m
>
o '
?W
_ m > ZC ?W j ZZ

W (n
U
M LU
o_
o 3:
aQ W F-
¢Z
O

: ow
z?
C7 ? D Z m mm ?U 0
? a n?
. 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, with clay, yellowish brown to SP 1 SS 37
brown, medium dense to dense, moist

SP 2 SS 38
5
0
.
SP 3 SS 58

SP 4 SS 49
.. ?o
BORING TERMINATED 1 10.0- -
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL ? 1
1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL 9
1
rerracon
RIG CME 550 M11
FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
rl
r
.k
?S
1
l
li
' II
l I
'l
' L s
0
u
r
I u
i
? i
l_: o
C
4
C
0
u
v
u
I U
U
c
i
I
Lam'
LOG OF BORING NO. B-15
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
o °

U DESCRIPTION m
M >
~
? W 3
z

Z
a
U)
W W
>
O
Z rn
It w -
] C7
z z

o 0
Z)
z 0.
H U
W ?_ p
fnm QO
SU a
D a zfr
?N
. 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE TO MEDIUM CLAYEY SAND, SC 1 SS 17 15.5 LL=44,
yellowish brown and reddish brown, PI=27

medium dense to dense, moist ,
P200=30%
SC 2 SS 29
5.0
SC 3 SS 22

a
SANDY CLAY
li
ht
ra
and
ellowish
M ,
g
g
y
y
10 brown, very stiff, moist CL 4 SS 49
BORING TERMINATED 10.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL ? 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL T I T ] 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
n
?r
I I r]
I

III
11.1

I `-
1
? c
i ?
? c
r
C
F
I c
c
L_
c
i I o
u
0
u
e
u
I
c
U
u C
u
a
? o

LOG OF BORING NO. B-16
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
o DESCRIPTION m >

CL
zw
?
v c
>-
It

ro of
W F

z
E

?-
S
W H CO
0 W
CL o
w 1 LU
Q0 ?
a O W
z

U' W
0 co
M Z)
z
H
it a-1
lnm
?U
o a ?

A
co
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE CLAYEY SAND, light gray and SC 1 SS 21
yellowish brown, medium dense, moist
V1
5
SC
2
SS
26
FINE SAND with clay, light gray, medium 5.0
dense to dense, moist SP 3 SS 27

SP 4 SS 28
10.0
N

:-: 15
SP
5
SS
43
BORING TERMINATED
I 15.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL err ??on
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
it
I,
?f
1i
I
it

II
i
1
1
?i
`I
L

I?
u
i 3
u
n
0
1
LOG OF BORING NO. B-17
page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION > °w n
U
z
=
m a.
w W
>
zcn z
o:w H
z LL F
zZ
Q
m a
U1 U
U)
D W O wz 0111
0
0
D
Z
H
?
?m
0
0 Q
Dcco
o.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, yellowish brown and tan, SP 1 SS 8
loose to medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 28
5

BORING TERMINATED 5.6
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL t BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL err Icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
8
LOG OF BORING NO. B-18
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION > Z
U
a }
m W
>
Zt/?
W
Z
CO h = O
n D z vei m ?? o ii z U)i
V• • 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND. with clay, tan, medium SP 1 SS 13
:. dense, moist Sr -
3
SANDY CLAY
ellowish brown
ver
stiff
, y
,
,
y

5 moist CL 2 SS 24
BORING TERMINATED 5.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL 9
1 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL 3-Z I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
'. I
?i

I
I t
Ir
4
i.
f-,

' I
? f
}
I
C
I f ?
1 i) u
0
u
r
I f c
I
I? o
u
i
C
G
u
2
0
8
r
u
0
a
?J
LOG OF BORING NO. B-19
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 &. Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLES TESTS

DESCRIPTION J
O
M

} Iti
W a
U >= of
M W
o Z
W?
0 LL 0
Z
LULU I O
C7 O D Z F- ? to Co ? 0 O a z N
- 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, with clay, brown, medium SP 1 SS 9
.-. dense, moist Zr
3 _
FINE CLAYEY SAND
ll
wi
w
h br
. ye
n
o
s
o

and reddish brown, medium dense to

5
0 Sc 2 SS 19 12.1 P200=24%
dense, moist .
SC 3 SS 29

SC 4 SS 48
10.0
(with
ra
cla
seams below 13 feet
g
y
y
)

- Sc 5 SS 42
•- 15

BORING TERMINATED 15.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL Q -Y
1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL I 1 -v 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778

I;
<<
1i
I F]
V I
11-1
1,I
' If
II
L?
l.1
?j
11
I?
?I
?
1
u
u
I? u
n
S o

LOG OF BORING NO. B-20
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > o LU
Z
c? r
cn of
W O
w
>
z Z
?
z L
O

Qo

w
D

M

w w
.
w
z
?
V
O (0
Z ?
I-
W ~a_
v) co 0
?U of u
0 CL ?
cn
0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE CLAYEY SAND, brown and reddish SC 1 SS 20
brown, medium dense to dense, moist

SC 2 SS 37
5.0
SC 3 SS 30

FINE SAND
with cla
reddish brown
,
y,
,

medium dense to dense, moist

10
0 SP 4 SS 39
.
SP 5 SS 25
15
BORING TERMINATED 15.0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
-V BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
[
W $ 1 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
W
L MSB JOB # 71067778
ff
? t
l
Il
I?
I
i
i
J
l Ii
{I
l{
f I
lJ
l ? c
1 c
a
c
u
v
i ?
i o
u
u
0
v
I ?
' I a
n
8
c
U
3
LL
a
c
i a
1
LOG OF BORING NO. B-21
Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road PROJECT
Whispering Pines, North Carolina Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SA MPLE S TESTS
Q
-?
DESCRIPTION 0
M _
F [] Q
Z F
U C
Z
t:
11- Z Z

a
w
(n
?
o
a?
-z W
z

0
D
Z }
F-
tY
!!3M
?i U
w n
=
'C-0-
0.3 TOPSOIL .

FINE CLAYEY SAND, yellowish brown, SC 1 SS 17
medium dense, moist

SC 2 SS 23

V?A FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown,

5.0
dense, moist SC 3 SS 35
1
SC 4 SS 31
10
BORING TERMINATED
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: In-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL Q 1
1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL -T 1 rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778

GENERAL NOTES
j DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:

1
-, SS: Split Spoon -1 318" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS:
ST: Thin-Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Hollow Stem Auger
Power Auger
RS: Ring Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger
DB: Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B RB: Rock Bit
_
-i BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary
l?
The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch
_ f penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value".
r-
I

i
1
S
,t
V
i
i
1 ?.
1
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling NIE: Not Encountered
WCI: Wet Cave in WD: - While Drilling
DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal
AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other
times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In
low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have
more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine
Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are
plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be
added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis
of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Standard
Unconfined Penetration or
Compressive N-value (SS)
Strength, Qu, psf Blows[Ft Consistency
< 500 <2 Very Soft
500 - 1,000 2-3 Soft
1,001 - 2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff
2,001 - 4,000 7-12 Stiff
4,001 - 8,000 13-26 Very Stiff
8,000+ 26+ Hard
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS
Standard Penetration
or N -value (SS)
lows t
0-3
4-9
10-29
30 - 49
50+
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF S AND AND GRAVEL
Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of
constituents Dry Weight
Trace < 15
With 15 - 29
Modifier > 30
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of
constituents Dry Weight
Trace < 5
With 5-12
Modifiers > 12
Relative Densitv
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Maior Component
of Sample Particle Size
Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm)
Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm)
Gravel 3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)
Sand #4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.075mm)
Silt or Clay Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm)
PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Term Plasticity index
Non-plastic 0
Low 1-10
Medium 11-30
High 30+
1rerracan
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name°
Coarse Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu z 4 and 1 5 CC :g 3E GW Well-graded gravel'
More than 50% retained More than 50% of coarse
fraction retained on Less than 5% fines` Cu <4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP Poorly graded gravel'
on No. 200 sieve No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel-G-"
than 12% fines`
Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel`-"
Sands Clean Sands Cu >_ 6 and 1 < Cc s 3E SW Well-graded sand'
50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines'
fraction passes Cu < 6 and/or f > Cc > 3E SP Poorly graded sand'
No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand`-`u
More than 12% fines' Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand-'
Fine-Grained Soils Sifts and Clays Inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above A' line' CL Lean clay"s"
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50
No. 200 sieve PI < 4 or plots below `A" fine' ML Stlt""
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay'"
< 0.75 OL
Liquid limit - not dried Organic sittK' "'°
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above 'A' line CH Fat clay"'-"
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI lots below "A° line MH Elastic Silt'"
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay"-"p
< 0.75 OH
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt"LAA
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat
"Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles
or boulders, or both' to group name.
c Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded
gravel with sift, GW GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
'Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
ECu = D601DIo Cc = (D-d
Dro x Dao
F If soil contains >_ 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
Gif fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM.
60
50
IL
X 40
W
G7
Z
> 30
t--
U
Q 20
IL
10
7
4
0
:on 111-6196
0 10 16 2D 3o 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
"If fines are organic, add 'with organic fines" to group name.
If soil contains >_ 15% gravel, add "with gravel" to group name.
If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
K if soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or 'with
gravel,' whichever is predominant.
L If soil contains ? 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
"sandy' to group name.
"If soil contains z 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
`gravelly" to group name.
"PI z 4 and plots on or above "A" line.
°PI <4 or plots below "A° line.
P PI plots on or above "A" line.
°PI plots below `A` line.
For classification of fine-grained
soils and fine-grained fraction
of coarse grained soils
- i
I '
pe
,
!
Equation of "A"- line
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.
then PI=0
73 (LL-20) 7 `
of
}
.
Equation of 'U'- line
Vertical at LL=16 to PI-7, o?
G?
then P1
0
9
LL
6
=
.
(
-
)
G
?
.' MH o
I r OH

!9:'.

c , rte.-..
ML
OL
'
I
I or i
i
lrerra