20091244 Ver 1_More Info Received_20091214

' poWSP m SELLS
Transportation & Infrastructure
December 14, 2009
Lia Gilleski
DWQ 401 Oversight/Express Review Unit
2321 Crabtree BLVD, Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
SUBJECT: Shops at Whispering Pines
CHS PROJ # 08-4083
DWQ EXP #:09-1244
Dear Ms. Gilleski:
NORTH CAROLINA
CONKECT!C'J
MASSACHUSE 1 TS
NFW HAMPSHIRE
NEV,,, )ERSFY
NE'vV'(ORK
FTNf'-6YIV4\Ni A,
SOt)?i-? CAROLINA
VIRGINIA.
Via Hand Delivery
15401 Weston Parkway
Suite 100
Cary, NC 27513
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
www.wspsells.com
UDC . .. i1
WSP Sells is in receipt of your stormwater comments dated December 9, 2009. We
have attached 3 copies of revised plans calculations for your review.
1. Stormwater Management Plan
a. Please either extend the top of the forebay berm to the temporary pool
elevation with a reinforced spillway section cut in the middle of the berm to
the permanent pool elevation, or provide another measure to elongate the
flow path between the inlet and outlet. For example, a sloped middle section
joining flat surfaces at either end of the berm (such that the berm section
close to FES-11 will be at temporary pool elevation and the section slope to
FES-15 will be set at the permanent pool elevation).
Response: We have revised the forebay area to provide a berm at 388
near FES-11 and end near FES-15. The area around FES-15 will be at
the normal pool elevation.
b. Please revise the plans and supplement form to locate the permanent pool
in the middle of the 10-foot wide vegetated shelf, with 0.5 feet below and
above the permanent pool elevation (See DWQ Stormwater BMP manual p
10-2 Major Design Elements).
Response: We have revised the pond grading and the supplement
form. NP is at 386 top of berm is at 386.5 and bottom of berm is at
385.5. We have also added additional .5 contours for these elevations
for clarity on the grading plan.
c. Please show the vegetated shelf with contour elevation on the plans
reflecting a 10:1 slope.
December 14, 2009
Lia Gilleski
DWQ 401 Oversight/Express Review Unit
Page 2 of 3
Response: Vegetated shelf is shown per response to comment b
d. Include a completed Required Items Checklist (Part III of the Supplement
Form) which will indicate where items or pertinent information can be found.
Anti-flotation calculations or the outlet structure cannot be found.
Response: We have attached the checklist to both the wetpond
supplement and the level spreader supplement. See the calculation
package. We have also added the anti-flotation calculations the Town
approved.
e. The drawdown orifice size should be changed from 0.5 inches, as this draws
down over 5 days. The selected size should be between 1.8 and 2.8 inches
preferred. A submerged orifice outlet configuration which draws water below
the permanent pool elevation is recommended.
Response: We have revised the orifice calculations and changed the
orifice to 2.5 inches.
f. The operation and Maintenance Agreement for the Wet Pond should be
revised to reflect the correct pond information.
Response: The agreement has been revised to reflect the current pond
elevations.
g. Please start storage or volume accumulation in the pond from the top of
sediment cleanout elevation, and make necessary revisions in the report
(design section and supplement form).
Response: The table has been revised along with the supplement
form.
h. Please provide a detailed planting plan for the proposed wet pond (standard
format included: scientific name, common name, source of the plant
material, plant spacing, wetland indicator status, etc. as well as planting
specifications). Plans selection should reflect the shallow water (a minimum
of three different plants) and shallow land (a minimum of three different
plants) on the vegetative (littoral) shelf. Please note: Seeding is not an
acceptable planting method within the 10ft littoral shelf.
Response: We.have provided a detailed bmp landscape plan on sheet
C9.1.1.
` December 14, 2009
Lia Gilleski
DWQ 401 Oversight/Express Review Unit
Page 3 of 3
We trust that the above items will satisfactorily complete. If you should require any
additional information, do not hesitate to contact me. Any questions related to the
application and PCN should be directed to Bill Mullin at Dr. J.H. Carter iii and
Associates, inc.
Sincerely,
WSP-Sells
S. S eathers, P.E.
Is ant Project Manager
Enclosure:
C: Ed Tang, P.E. - WSP-Sells
Darren Tuitt - JDH Capital, LLC.
Bill Mullin at Dr. J.H. Carter iii and Associates, inc.
L:\Weston\Civil\Projects\Sells Projects\08-4083 Whispering Pines\05-Administration\01-Correspondence\Letters\12-11-
09-wp-401dwgt-response-to-comments 1.doc

Shops at Whispering Pines
NC 22, Ray's Bridge Road,
Whispering Pines, Moore County, North Carolina
Stormwater Management Report
Date: February 12, 2009
Revised June 26, 2009
Revised September 15, 2009
R fwl s,rs- be-c- 11) 7-001
Prepared by:
W
p SP • SELLS
ww-
15401 Weston Parkway
Suite 100
Cary, North Carolina 27513
[phone]
[phone] (Fax)
CHS Project Number 08-4083
S C q \ F '?
4?'.
QV
1

VILLAGE O WHISPERING PINES
PLANNING & ZONING
10 PINE RIDGE DRIVE
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA 283?
TELEPHONE: [phone] Ext.I2
hhorchard ci,v,hishe_rint ? Piliesnc.riet
November 23,2009
LETTER OF APPROVAL

1
1
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 Recd: 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 inspectorfor 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 Bob Kissinger
Planning & Zoning Director Erosion & Sedimentation Inspector
file:///CI/Documents%20and%20Settings/Gene%200pdyke/Desktop/Shops%20aVlo2O W P.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]

1
1

file:///CI/Documents%20and%20Settings/Gene%200pdyke/Desktop/Shops%20at%20WP.htm10/5/2009 8:55:10 AM

VILLAGE F WHISPERING PINES
PL ?v'?'vT NG & ZONING
10 PPE RIDGE DRIVE
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA 8327
TELEPHONE: [phone] Eat 12
}7t3itll€4?4?!t411i4?3 :'.y}tC}C:Si1C i.
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 221 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 Storrnw.ater Management Plan ?SMP) 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], Ext: 12 when scheduling this conference.
Fallowing completion of the project, you should notify this'offce 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 theplans.
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
Sincerely,
TheViJlac_e of ???`h3 Pine

Brian Borchardt
Planning &Zoning Director

w

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
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
i
Geotechnical Report

1
3 (also shown on BMP Drainage Area Sheet)
4
5
6
7
85
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
P
ri
Shops at Whispering Pines Shopping Center
NC 22/ Ray's Bridge Road, Whispering Pines, NC
Storm Water Management Plan Narrative
I 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.
'
Using Moore 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.
1 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.

Page 1
$EmWSP a SELLS

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 ONNEWSPo SELLS

rn
0
? o
c7 N
N
4 O
U)
cly
1
- cli
U

00-0)
r
C
Q' a)
Z E O M
CO 0 (j ? P-
O >
t d
d ?
w(n mo
0 (6
U a
N
O
c
O
J
O 0
LL 3
_o
LL
c
a m
rnE
c a
L O
(D
a > ?.
w d c
t o 0
U) Q
° o
a
m
w ° >
? (c D
0 d a)
as a
C
O
O
O
E N
I- c
O
U
O
N ?
a)
Q
U
O
H
O (6 O
a) o ?
? U O
? I a)
d
co
O
O_
N (Go
Q Q
ca
(D '-
Q ?
(D U p
a U) cu (a (o O
c (3
A m
(a
CD y
Q a O
a) U L?
m ns r-
ca o
c ,c 0
m
E
a
O O
O n3 c
c'
W ? m
a°
U)
3
O
LL
m
O
c
m
E
Q
O
d
m
y
O
a
U
c
En
a)
U
N
(m
s
U
U
U)
0
a.
m
°-
X
N
Q
E
Cl)
co
O
00
0
3

i _
Hobbs, Upchurch & Associates, P.A.
Consulting Engineers
300 S.W. Broad Street - Post Office Box 1737 • 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 JDH 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 stone
water design based on the post development flows being no greater than the
predevelopment flows for the 2, 5 and 10 year storm events.
1 Sincerely
HOBBS, UPCHURCH & ASSOU TES, P.A.
W. Douglas Hyler, ASL A, APA

Southern Pines, NC Telephone [phone] Fax [phone] - e-mail: [e-mail]
Hampstead - Nags Head Charlotte • Beaufort
Y?
Print Paue - NC Areas SuhjeCt tO Phase If Post-ConstrUCUOII & Other Stornmater Pro?ra... Paoe 1 of 1
INC Areas Subject to Phase II Post-Construction & Other Stormwater Program Requirements
Map Legend

Local Roads ¦ OVC'aov"y

Semrdar
V
p.? rN...
cg•, >
P'io
Roads P•,- a A-,
Primary Roads
¦ SA na:e•>
J s n g-,
N AC M$..N„
1-7 CO6rtics
24K
yd ra pry
(Arcs)
hydrograpf•y
¦ l.24A Cc rsc^s
n MF.ricipal
8OUrdarles
Stormwater
hrisditlior
Cca>u
5:?.'?INa:e'
Lcca S:c•n.va:e•
P•cyvr
¦ Ac•••cca>:a s:a:e
s:r-?Na:eP•cya-?
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 and
Session Law 2006-246. NC Division of Water
Quality, 2/17/2009
F

,y
ao-

? 1
t S!A'197 i
r
l
an
?J\ J

? S:
`? ? eR SM19.11
of

Results

Contact
contact: I s'. DENR Region : Fayetteville County : MOORE
Water Supply
Permitting : Local Basis : WS-III Protected Area Type
Watershed
Notes : Satisfies Phase II requirements if apply
http://204.211.239.202/stoi-ni?ti ater/priiit.aspx?CM D=I N I'I'&,XMIN=-79.4117273 8396473... 2/17/2009
11

1

PRE-DEVELOPMENT CALCULATIONS
Soil Map-Moore County, NC USDA NRCS
Hydrologic Soil Group Map-Moore County, NC USDA NRCS
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
L1

1

f?,?nn?;l(iIS
k
1
117 - 40
10g ----113 `446.
390

14 ?--?=118 ,t?4 122 ?_-
426
e
434 - 1 f I 432
440
' 1:281 feet
Off 51-1'e OrotimK?c Areou root fD
http: nworegisweb.moorecountync.go% coanwgisMap'Print ...ags_map14140b07a4204daOa266112a-?902dc4a.jpg&Results=Ealsel29 2009 12:13:47 PM

35°15'V
35° 14 39'
Soil Map-Moore County, North Carolina
(Whispering Pines)
Map Scale 1 3,240 d printed on A size (8.5" z 11") sheet
N Meters
K n 0 30 60 120 180
N Feet
0 100 200 400 600
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
1/9/2009
Page 1 of 3
35° 15' 1"
35° 14' 39
M
"a e
N N
O+ O?
r n
m
c_
0
`m
U
L
0 N
O m
Z C
c rn
M .c
U CD
N N_
O ?C
O
S
v
m
2
O
U)
00 n
M O
y C
o

N

? E

?

O m

m
? m
L
a) N

?i C ?

7 ?
Z m
a
o y 7 C
y o
c
E
N a7
C m fn N ? O _
= V a)
Z
lag
°
O`
U m
c
c0
y L O
O f o
y
Q X E (D m m
n `N N N Z U N v E w
Q O E U nZ 0 O N r 3?(ac
a)
.u < U N a0
? U) Z O m O D Q 00
O °. N ? 3 C L0 N O m T m 0
Z
U.
0
N

C
o

(D
?Q N°
Eoo

(u
0

0
o
y?E?
y T
E E v cc a
. p -0 - E
/?
LL ?. O
U y j o00
d O
2 3 N n Y y
N
Q o
v N N
a
m Z6 J
Z
z) N R y
m=
N in y
rn L C
o N o m
a s
N U) Y Q N N N d m m m
E O Lm a) c
o
7
°
m
2 oc
0 m?(%
U) a
V C Q?
0 N Lcna
n m w .C
m
U y
O N
(D 7 0- m
a> (q C
a a°
2 E
n Z Q
7 T
(n m m
y L a a 7
2' n
O.a

a w
0 N N
m m
7- o j
N
- 2 4m
m E m E
2 F a E (n H Lm in c H v E o
N y
c
m

OQ C
O
U
L
(n y ? 'O ? y y

O ?O
L O O
iv (n
c y N
N N
0 O
2 O
?

O

LL T O L
O
L a1 O L

? .?

y yyy
J

m

N
C m

_
N

N
O

m p

U
o
> O c C7 U) O 7
U ai
O U c 7 J
J m
LL

m

Z

8•
!a
U.
O
0

W

U) r O

-

a c+
o
a 3 ?
W
J
o
Q O
Q O
C
G

y

Y
y a
E

r

y
? a?i a 0 c o w .a o m

n « a
m
3
O
D ?.
d >,
_
o p
L O
m

O
to
>.
d
v U)
O O
C,

Q a
(n
Q O
m
N 41 O
LL ?,
- T N
m O a) d
> >
m (a t?
V
C L L
m y
>
0 O
C
y C
d U Q7 >, j Y 'p C
O
W
m Q O
(n '0 m m U U (5 U• J l
J _ rG n. w (n (n N O
(n N (n N fn
a,
c a
?
n J ®
X •
X
®
<
?c
®
O
>
+
..
?I
O .G
$
NI
c?
y
O N
Q N
o"
0 0
N N
r O)
CL
T
a)
2
7
?U
N O
T f7
a)
7 '-
U
o n
N o
L O
yU
c
O
Z
a?
v
y
m
N
O C
0 .+
? Z
A m
7 y
" C
m O
2 0

Soil Map-Moore County. North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Whispering Pines
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
-- - 12.0%
-
CaB T Candor sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes 10.1 39.5%

- 111
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
VaD 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%
Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 1/9/2009
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 d printed on A size (8.5" x 11") sheet.
v
N Meters
m 0 30 60 120 180
Feet
0 100 200 400 600
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1
r_ Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
n
1/9/2009
Page 1 of 4
35° 15' 1'
35° 1439'
co
0
m
U
L
r
0
z _
0
U)
7 =
U N
m c
o a
o rn
g c
CL
7 O.
o
c?
U)
U
rn
O
O
L
T
ami '
L ?
N ?
I
Z ? 1
,
Q x
F. it7 i
cQ co
C N
A/ N
o Q
o ,
LL c
Z
? I
a ,
O I
`r
N
M
I
m
U
? F
CL 16
C
m
E N
Y
L
N
l`

U V O

Z m

f0 3 C
N 7 _C
N
U m Nj -
U)
c r? O
O
N S o, E
- I N
o vi
O` m
U m
C
0?0 o E
N L o

w
m c l
w °' ?
U
Z
o r
o m
V r
N
0
c 7 Z . U
L N v E
z o
m
E
L U.oz
y" O o?
Z o n
m 3'`°c
n a)
m
m
`?? 0 'Z ° <
o
n
m
m
c
o 73c
o zz o
;
E cc
7
o o
o monlu
E' m w
EO
a)
` sari
of _
L o
O
a) L
) c
2 n
(D m?
y
E
U
w m
> >
J 'O io
°? m o N
O j
2 m
3 N E
L
y a? m
m
I L N
Z E N
C w
O L C N
O ON O m -0 -

aTi(D
Z
mO1,
w
amim
m o
oo- 'i?
2 0
O C
E m
U)
7
fn m a
m cc Q
m
m m
`y O .0.
O.
O M a •C
Z L
N
1 N N

mm U CO -E

7.00 O_ m

w fn m

_Z N m 0.
O
dEcE
0) m
A2 0)
a E
(o) g U
H w
U to
U
H Ou E o
N

O
O
Q to

>
m
2
c

T

Z
U 3
t
W
_ 4
_C _

a
O
V
C
=
N
N
W
U
O 0
W Q l0 N N lCC h
t0 u!
50

J
IL
N
a
g
cn
?, o 0 o
m a a m m U 0 o
s
z

- 5
?,
2 0
d
05
.? m
ow =
?,
0 O
0
2
5 m

W
H

???? ? D

V
i
Y O 4,

m

CL
}
c

n

R +
4
a` (nn ° 3 H
0) v
O
O O
N iy
r O
m
a
m
Z
7
rU
N O
N (n
0 0
C
o
?U
m
O
z
J
m
N
O C
0%
? m
? N
" C
m O
2U
?1
1
it
Hydrologic Soil Group-Moore County, North Carolina
Whispering Pines HSG
I I Hydrologic Soil Group

1

1

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 B 3.1 12.0%
percent slopes
CaB Candor sand, 0 to 4 percent A 10.1 39.5%
slopes
DoB Dothan loamy sand, 2 to 6 B 0.8 3.1%
percent slopes
FaB Fuquay loamy sand, 0 to 6 B 7.9 30.9%
percent slopes
Val) Vaucluse loamy sand, 8 to 15 C 1.8 7.0%
percent slopes
W Water 1.9 7.5%
Totals for Area of Interest 25.6 100.0%
' USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 1/9/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4

C!
I Hydrologic Soil Group-Moore County, North Carolina
' 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
Whispering Pines HSG
Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 1/9/2009
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4

C S
o cyl
a
J d
w S
c? Q
C
O
W \
4
`)t

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Table 2-2.
Values of SCS CN and Rational C for various cover conditions
(Based upon SCS,1986)
Cover Lion SCS Curve Number Rational C Percent
IISG
A HSG
B . HSG
. C HSG
D HSG
A HSG
B
C
HC HSG
D Impervious
Fully developed urban areas
Open space
Poor condition (<50%
gmss) 68 79 86 89 0.36 0.58 0.72 0.78
Fair condition (50 -75% 49 69 79 84 0.15 0.38 0.58 0.68
Good condition (>50% 39 61 74 80 0.15 0.22 0.48 0.60
Impervious 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 0.74 0.78
Urban districts
Commercial and
business 89 92 94 95 0.78 0.84 0.88 0.90 85
Industrial 81 88 91 93 0.62 0.76 0.82 0.86 72
Residential areas (by lot size
118 acre (town houses,
condos 77 85 90 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
1/3 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
Agricultural areas
Pasture stand
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 0.15 034 _0.54 0.66
Fair 35 56 70 77 0.15 0.15 0.40 0.54
Good 30 48 65 73 0.15 0.15 0.30 0.46
Woods and _ orchard gmss
Poor 57 73 82 86 0.15 0.46 0.64 0.72
Fair 43 65 76 82 0.15 0.30 0.52 0`64
Good 32 58 72 79 0.15 0.16 0:44 0.58
Woods
poor 45 .66 77 83 0.15 0.32 0.54 0.66
Fair 36 60 73 79 0.15 0.20 0:46 0.58
Good -30 55 70 77 0.15` 0.15 0:40 0.54
Row straight, crops, 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 ` gain, good M 75 83 87 0.26 .50 .
66 0.74
Farmsteads 59 74 82 86 1 0.1%1 0.48 !
j 0.721 1
In me table values of Kattonal U were computed
Copyright H.R Malcom, 2003
[2-101
!G=0.020CN-1.0
Hydrologic estimates
l(?
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
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: 399,009 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
Group B soils
CN Area ac
Grass, Open Space, good condition: 61 7.16
Impervious Surfaces: 98 2.00
Weighted TN" value: 69
08-4083 bmps.xls
WSP SELLS
6/18/2009
R-
i
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
a
v
CF?
0
0
N
00
C
7
tII
L
v
f V ?
?rj
3

m

O
C
a)
3
Q

U
N
O

o

4
7 4 L t O
0 N
N N
?
C C C O
Q E N O CC
G
o E
Qo?omQ
o 7FU :3 -2 -C
U
> b a)
N
O -a `O N
CL
cu
y N d N Q 'D
° L
Q
o_M aM Q 0
L

O O O O

N N 4-

O U U a) U a) U
u)cnxcnmcn cu

d ?
d _
M V to f0
I.13'
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 B C
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value = 0.170 0.011 0.011
Flow length (ft) = 300.0 0.0 0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 3.60 0.00 0.00
Land slope (%) = 5.00 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) = 17.04 + 0.00 + 0.00
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft) = 750.00 0.00 0.00
Watercourse slope (%) = 5.00 0.00 0.00
Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved
Average velocity (ft/s) = 3.61 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) = 3.46 + 0.00 + 0.00
Channel Flow
Totals
17.04
= 3.46
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
Hyd No. 1
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
- 1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
Z0
'
HYd rograph 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

Q (cfs)
' 4.00

' 3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
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
Hydrograph Volume = 24,065 cult
pre development
Hyd. No. 1 -- 5 Yr
0.0 1.0 2.0
Hyd No. 1
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
zc

HYd ro9raph Plot

' Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
S pre development
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
' Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 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
¦
¦
Q (cfs) pre development
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 cult
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)
TZ,
I 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

Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:35 AM
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
¦
¦
pre development
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 25 Yr
' 10.00
¦
8.00

6.00
¦
4.00
¦
2
00
.
¦
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 56,055 cuft
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
Hyd No. 1
¦
4.0 5.0 6.0
- 1 0.00
7.0
Time (hrs)
Z'?'

HYd ro9raph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 6
' predevelopment 24 hr
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 1 yrs
Drainage area = 9.160 ac
Basin Slope = 4.0%
' Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 3.00 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs

Q (cfs)
5.00

4.00

3.00

2.00

1
00
.

0.00
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 11
Shape factor = 484
Hydrograph Volume = 20,832 cult
predevelopment 24hr
Hyd. No. 6 - 1 Yr
C
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00

f 0 2 4 6 8
Hyd No. 6
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Time (hrs)
-LT

1
1
' WETPOND NORMAL POOL SIZING CRITERIA
AND NCDENR SUPPLIMENTS
-DRAWDOWN SPREADSHEET
-NCDENR WETPOND SUPPLIMENT
NCDENR LEVEL SRPEADER SUPPLIMENT
1

1
1
I

1

2f?
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 5.4 ac includes future outparcel imerpervious at 70% of area and pond area.
sidewalk-patio 0.23 ac current patio
total 6.81 ac
% impervious 59.2%
"
1
Rainfall Draw Down Calculation
Drainage Area 11.5 ac
% Impervious 59.2 %
Pond N.P. elev ft
Rain 1 in

CN, 98 1.18
CNZ 98 5.4
CN3 98 0.23
CN4 84 4.69
CNs 0 0
CN Average 92 11.50
Volume
la= 59.22
Rv=0.05+0.009(IA)= 0.583
V=3630(Rp)(Rv)(A)= 24336
Draw Down
Depth Provided
2.0
Cd 0.6
' g 32.2
SA/DA= 2.37 % per table 10-1 NC State BMP
Manual -3ft Pond Depth
Min. SA= 0.273 ac
min. required 11872 sqft 0.27 acre
provided 13000 sqft 0.30 acre
average depth
ac wet pond ave depth
ac Abot_shelf 9623 sgft
ac APerm Pao, 13000 sqft
ac Abot_Pond 5661 sqft
ac Sediment depth 1 ft
ac depth NP to Bot 5 ft 0.5 ft shelf drop
Depth 3.5 ft
ave pond depth 3.2145 ft State BMP Figure 10-2b, opt. 2
Dia. 2.5 in
Ho 1.896 ft Driving Head
Ho/3 0.63 ft
Q=CdA sq(2gH) 0.130 cfs
Draw Down Time 2.2 day
1
1
1
1
Minimum Normal Pool Surface Area 1" Rainfall Draw Down Calculations
Zf6
1
f
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
f
1

Anti-Flotation Calculation
BMP-1
Total weight of water = 62.4 lb/ft3 Concrete collor height= 2.438 ft
Total weight of concrete = 150.0 lb/ft3 Concrete Collor length= 4.67 ft
Total weight of cmu = 140.0 lb/ft3 Concrete collor width= l ft
cmu width= 0.68 ft pipe outer dia= 2.626 ft
Riser Top elev 391.8 ft pipe outer dia= 0.4167 ft
Riser btm elev 385.3 ft (at slab)
Riser inside dim long 4 ft
riser inside dim width 4 ft
slab dim long 9.33
slab dim width 8.33
depth 2.5

Concrete Weight
Riser Volume 38.4 ft3 Riser Weight= 5371 lb
Collor Volume 5.8 ft3
Slab Volume 194.3 ft3
Collor Weight= 875 lb
Slab Weight= 29145 lb
Total Weight= 35391 ib
Weight-of soil above slab
soil wieght 100 ib/ft3
ave height of soil 1 ft Soil Weight= 5582 lb
Total Weight= 40973 lb
Riser Displacement Volume
336.7 ft3 Total bou ant force= 21008 lb
e
Permit
1

RV
A A
WDENR

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 III) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information.
(to be provided by DWQ)
O?O? ? AT ?9QG
o
IaPROJEGTn'INFORMATION
Project name Shops at Whispering Pines
Contact person Shayne Leathers
Phone number 9196780035
Date 12/10/2009
Drainage area number BMP-1
11I.-DESIGN.-INFQItMATION
Site Characteristics
Drainage area 500,940 fe
Impervious area, post-development
% impervious 296,643 fC
59.22 %
Design rainfall depth 1.0 in
Storage Volume: Non-SA Waters
Minimum volume required 24,336 fe OK
Volume provided 32,255 ft3 OK, volume provided is equal to or in excess of volume required.
Storage Volume: SA Waters
1.5" runoff volume fe
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff fe
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff fe
Minimum volume required fe
Volume provided fe
Peak Flow Calculations
Is the pre/post control of the lyr 24hr storm peak flow required? Y (Y or N)
1-yr, 24-hr rainfall depth 3.0 in
Rational C, pre-development 0.37 (unitless)
Rational C, post-development 0.84 (unitless)
Rainfall intensity: 1-yr, 24-hr storm 0.13 in/hr OK
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow 4.22 fe/sec
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow 43.83 fe/sec
Pre/Post 1-yr, 24-hr peak low control 39.61 ft3/sec
Elevations
Temporary pool elevation 388.00 fmsl
Permanent pool elevation 386.00 fmsl
SHWT elevation (approx. at the perm. pool elevation) - ` 386.00 fmsl
Top of 10ft vegetated shelf elevation 386.50 fmsl
Bottom of 1 Oft vegetated shelf elevation 385.50 fmsl
Sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond) 381.50 fmsl
Sediment cleanout, bottom elevation 380.50 fmsl
Sediment storage provided 1.00 ft
Is there additional volume stored above the state-required temp. Pool? Y (Y or N)
Elevation of the top of the additional volume 3880 fmsl OK

Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.8-911 710 9
Parts I. & II: Design Summary, Page 1 of 2
z?
E

1
1
1

s

1
t
1

(0

N
O
LL
O
C

7
U
C
(D
m

O

N

(0
U)

C
O
d

J W
Q 2 O M LO (C)
O) O
O) O O
d' LO
(C)
LL O V r- 4
o f = O Oy) ? U-) ? O N (C) N

>
U
N
(C)
O
-
-
N U')
N CD
M
w
, 2i O 00 O

00 LI)

(D LI) LO
CD O
C)
LL It O "T (D O
? 0)

f? CY)

O

N

00
J
Q 0
U O -4-
N O
LC) 00
r_ O M C' ti
O L'
- r- N N

0 W

?
O
00
m
"t
7
0
0
Lo

O
J LL O cY N M
00 00
Lr) 00
cl) LO
(V O O)
a U U C) (C) r" O = cr! ?
> N N N N cM CO (M M

Q I- 0 C)
LC) O
O O
r-- L0
O 0
(C) 0
'It 0
N 0
(O
W
~ LL
a 9- 9- N LO O M 0) L()
' t7 M -q

Q
U) n O M r- O d 00 N (C)
O tt Lo U) Ln (.C) (C) (fl ti
U
w
w

O r Lo M LO LO LC) Lo LQ

O LO

LO Lq Ln

O LC)

O O
cy.) LL')
00 U)
LO
LL (D

to
H
M
-
N
N
O)
M
M
N
CC)

O

04

M

r-
M
O
O
N
-?
< 0 0
? O
.- (D
r- M
(V c-
(M 0
CM 00 r-
Ln O
'V' N
N V
N 0)
V
Cr
Lr)
h
V
r-
M
LC)
r--
()
N N
LO o
o
OD
Q

co w

O

O

=

00

M

0

0

0

O
LO
O
O
LO
O
(O
-
O
O)
O
O
LO
N
Lo
U-)
a
r
L.LI J ? L()
M O
O ,
(C) CO
N (fl
00 =
LC) t--
r
00 CM
U)
O N
r? CO
LO I
- N
LO CO
(y) ti
M N
M LO
N
O O U N LO Lf) (fl tD r- 00 00 O V r?
r O
N N
N V (9 M O

LL N N N CM
r
:D
O O LO O O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O
O W LL
' g g. a O
(D 't
01) 0 00 r` L,) r,- C) V N N M N N M OMO
Z
Q It O M ?Y r? 00 O O d (fl t" M M M
O c- r- .- r- c- M (.C) 00 c- M LO r O
U N N N N N CO
LO O
- U) O LO O LO (7 LO O M O O O O O O O O O
O r - N N CO ('M V' -' LO LO (C) r? 00 O O r- N M ,T
00
M 00
M 00
('7 00
M OD
M 00
M 00
M 00
M 00
M 00
M 00
M M
M 00
M 00
M 00
M O
M O)
M O)
M O)
M O)
M
N
ar d

m ,
N
Z
O
Cn
C
O
E
m
Cn
z,-+A
Permit
1

1
1
r
1
r

1
1
(to be provided by DWQ)
Surface Areas
Area, temporary pool 18,629 fe
Area REQUIRED, permanent pool 11,872 fe
SAIDA ratio 2.37 (unitless)
Area PROVIDED, permanent pool, Ap,,,_pcd 13,000 fe OK
Area, bottom of 1Oft vegetated shelf, Amt a,eff 9,623 ft
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), Ab"tj,d 5,661 W
Volumes
Volume, temporary pool
Volume, permanent pool, Vp._,,
Volume, forebay (sum of forebays if more than one forebay)
Forebay % of permanent pool volume
SAIDA Table Data
Design TSS removal
coastal SAIDA Table Used?
Mountain/Piedmont SAIDA Table Used?
SAIDA ratio
Average depth (used in SAIDA table):
Calculation option 1 used? (See Figure 10-2b)
Volume, permanent pool, Vp- -,,d
Area provided, permanent pool, Ap,._,a
Average depth calculated
Average depth used in SAIDA, d.„ (Round to nearest 0.5ft)
Calculation option 2 used? (See Figure 10-2b)
Area provided, permanent pool, Ap._,,d
Area, bottom of 1Oft vegetated shelf, kt_,,ji
Area, sediment cleanout, top elevation (bottom of pond), kt-, d
"Depth" (distance blw bottom of 1 Oft shelf and top of sediment)
Average depth calculated
Average depth used in SAIDA, d.„ (Round to nearest 0.5ft)
Drawdown Calculations
Drawdown through orifice?
Diameter of orifice (if circular)
Area of orifice (if-non-circular)
Coefficient of discharge (CD)
Driving head (Ho)
Drawdown through weir?
Weir type
Coefficient of discharge (C.)
Length of weir (L)
Driving head (H)
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow
Storage volume discharge rate (through discharge orifice or weir)
Storage volume drawdown time
32;255 ft3 OK
30,276 ft3
5,776 ft3
19.1% % OK
85%
n (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
2.37 (unitless)
N (Y or N)
30,276 ft3
13,000 ff
ft Need 3 ft min.
ft
Y (Y or N)
13,000 fe
9,623 fe
5,661 fe
4.00 ft
3.20 ft OK
3.0 ft OK
Y (Y or N)
2.50 in
in2
0.60 (unitless)
0.63 ft
(Y or N)
(unitless)
(unitless)
ft
It
4.22 ft3lsec
3
e-
a
0.51 ft
/sec P
d
0.13 ft3lsec P0) e Z
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 It 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" value
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.8-9/17/09
Parts 1. & II. Design Summary, Page 2 of 2
1 z5
Permit No.
(to be provided by DWQ)
i11 ftEQ?J1WTEMS_HECK{ST . =rs ??i"Ec' 4 z .4'^ a z.,. y? r rca , .
Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will
result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project. Initial in the space provided to
indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a
requirement has not been met, attach justification.
Page/ Plan
Initials
gf L Sheet No.
?? i 1
Plans (1" - 50' or lar
er) of the entire site showin
:
.
g
g
- Design at ultimate build-out, A,S 5 h o w ?1
- Off-site drainage (if applicable), C °(, -Z".
4
- Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin), 6
7r 2-
-Basin dimensions, C-1 I
-Pretreatment system, C'1 i I F ut e 4,o V
-High flow bypass system, Cq, 1 t,S 1-S c +"
Maintenance access, C -1, l r4 C. , , t? t:,- F' r ccy0,-A ? 44 1,,e CA,_
'
- Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), C'2 P? C
, Cpl 01
Overflow device, and &J, ( 6 V $ e r-
- Boundaries of drainage easement. 62., 0
2. Partial plan (1" = 30' or larger) and details for the wet detention basin showing:
- Outlet structure with trash rack or similar, C61% `
-Maintenance access, C
- Permanent pool dimensions, C It
?
- Forebay and main pond with hardened emergency spillway, c,7
-Basin cross-section, C 1, Q
Vegetation specification for planting shelf, and (f , l
- Filter strip. G,l , 01 C °l 1'
3. Section view of the wet detention basin 0" = 20' or larger) showing: C?
- Side slopes, 3:1 or lower, C,I I
- Pretreatment and treatment areas, and CZ i 1. IF" e b *k
- Inlet and outlet structures. C 9 t 0 C t

4. If the basin is used for sediment and erosion control during construction, clean out of the basin is specified
on the plans prior to use as a wet detention basin. C `{ • 6A ( q a O ( '1 ( I
A
rL C
5. A table of elevations, areas, incremental volumes & accumulated volumes for overall pond and for forebay,
to verify volume provided. L A ( G V ) k -t t cvi & p.or 9 e- Z S'G
yy L I t 6. A construction sequence that shows how the wet detention basin will be protected from sediment until the
entire drainage area is stabilized. C
ti's J7. The supporting calculations.
rri t? dt LG 8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.
plt? e- $ o
lk 9. A copy of the deed restrictions (if required).
Cj ?7 li 6d I G (7
10. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. County
soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin-Rev.8-9/17/09 Part III. Required Items Checklist, Page 1 of 1
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 4:37 PM
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 (sgft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 381.50 6,273 0 0
4.50 386.00 13,000 43,364 43,364
5.50 387.00 16,441 14,721 58,085
12.50 394.00 31,183 166,684 224,769
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 15.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 6.28 10.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 15.00 2.50 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 (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 / Storage
0
Storage
40,000 80,000
120,000 160,000 200,000
Stage (ft)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
240,000
Storage (cuft)
Z
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 4:37 PM
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 13,000 43,364 43,364
5.50 387.00 16,441 14,721 58,085
12.50 394.00 31,183 166,684 224,769
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 15.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 6.28 10.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 15.00 2.50 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 (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft) Stage / Discharge stage (ft)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
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)
NCDENR
O?CF INA??T!q', ..
O lii? >c
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

Project name Shops at Whispering Pines
Contact name Shayne Leathers
Phone number 9194687014
Date December 10, 2009
Drainage area number 3MP-1
II.AESIG(NFgRMATION
For Level Spreaders Receiving Flow From a BMP
Type of BMP WETPOND bmp-1
Drawdown flow from the BMP 1.31 cfs I nyr (?A e_ y S)
For Level Spreaders Receiving Flow from the Drainage Area
Drainage area
Impervious surface area
Percent impervious
Rational C coefficient
Peak flow from the 1 in/hr storm
Time of concentration
Rainfall intensity, 10-yr storm
Peak flow from the 10-yr storm
Where Does the Level Spreader Discharge?
To a grassed bioretention cell?
To a mulched bioretention cell?
To a wetland?
To a filter strip or riparian buffer?
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?
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?
Form SW401-Level Spreader, Fitter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer-Rev.5
J
Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
ft Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
ft, Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
% Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
cfs Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
5.00 min
in/hr Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
cfS Do not complete this section of the worksheet.
N (Y or N)
N (Y or N)
Y (Y or N) Please complete filter strip characterization below
N (Y or N)
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
sq ft No forebay is needed.
13 ft/cfs
N (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
1.31 cfs
Y (Y or N) A bypass device is not needed.
Parts I. and It. Design Summary, page 1 or 2
d1
Length of the level lip
Are level spreaders in series?
Bypass Channel Design (if applicable)
Does the bypass discharge through a wetland?
Does the channel enter the stream at an angle?
Dimensions of the channel (see diagram below):
M
B
W
y
Peak velocity in the channel during the 10-yr storm
Channel lining material
20.00 ft
N (Y or N)
N (Y or N)
Y (Y or N)
pel- pHfi-FP?S??> i
..Q v-1 1 1 21?,l 2001
3.00` ft
2.00 ft
8.00 ft
1.1
5.221 cfs Pit, t uSrr1? 001 ` 5'yr .54
C e 4 4
VMAX 350 1 ( d ?+ h P v G

-------------
M
Y
M

Form SW401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer-Rev.5 Parts I. and IL Design Summary, page 2 of 2
1

?
a

¦

X
r
A
1
r
r

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)(S112)A
channel slope 0.74%
Depth 0.601 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area
Slope Length
wetted perimeter
Hydraulic Radius
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)=
Flow (Q)=
2.3 ft2
1.90 ft
5.8 ft
0.39 ft
2.3 ft/s
5.2 ft3/s 76' y4Ikr'
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.0074 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.601 ft Depth of Channel
T 0.28 psf Shear Stress )'Z • d P 5 F -07 `t°'''--e le

Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 5:59 PM
Hyd. No. 3
bmp 1 routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.51 cfs
Storm frequency = 1 yrs Time interval = 2 min
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 Max. Elevation = 389.08 ft
Reservoir name = bmp 1 wetpond Max. Storage = 107,689 cuft

Stora
e Indication method used W
t
d
ti
t
t
l
g
. e
pon
rou
ng s
ar
e
evation = 386.00 ft. Hydrograph Volume = 78,984 cuft

bmp 1 routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 1 Yr Q (cfs)
50
I .00
40.00
30.00
20.00
i 10.00
0.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0 10 19 29 39 48 58 68 77 87 97
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Req. Stor = 107,689 cuft Time (hrs)
3 `?

I

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
d

3S
1
1
1
l
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
i
1
1
1
Whispering Pines Food Lion
Impervious Area Calculations - Post Development
Basin 1 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: gg yob,
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
Basin 1
Weighted CN value calculation
Group B soils
CN Area ac
Grass, Open Space, poor condition: 79 3.54
Impervious Surfaces: 98 7.96
Weighted "CN" value: 92
08-4083 bmps.xls WSP SELLS
6/18/2009
36

woo'sllesdsm-mmm
9£00'819'6t6A £L9LZON'tie0. OOl93InSAemn and uO1s9M lOb9t
sinjonilsoijul V u01481jodsusil
S113S•dSM<df
'mLlF Alss3we Weras dsN W 4icinviod ww=Hll itamnima stwif03sn 83HL0
r• y ?j?;jj ;{ '? ??t
`. ?? r{ 1. 1 1 ? I 1 q ? ,;
/
Lf'OH, 333
UL,
WJUN
At "
iht
71
,
t..? , ......__.... ,
,
,
i
.
10
a.
f ? ? I ? ? P i? '•'li
;iri .? Ae s >r
.. ? ,?raLY .t Yi't'r•f•r ? wig 8'904 33?r• ? ?'. /
• .i. 1 i L.,7 fLf,A?,'?
7 I "mss \4'' Nrif
f YC' R iL:Y .?fyrf!.?s, . $ D O tii z V-)) I4 t .
?• .?{ L• y ??```` •, S J N UU L? lit.
LI
.4i,i',r1^o:1 .'?yG '?•'? d??a 4.. •° 1 n zz?H" i'?i
4? Lt
¢ cy I;Aa^yy!,yp ", l' Vii; u ~ o LLJ
y ?c
?°o I j
•, 7.C-.}..C%ttt?Pv ,."L?' ??'trt.t? eyf,,/ £ l 804 333 N W m o
h,}, v t° I U I 'y"
,
)I
bL. t '9
, YI
tp
zoo
ZU))m
WWz
mWo
LIZBZ ON'31L01WHO
B 3L'ns •OVO4 vivas SELF
011'1V11dVO Har
ON 'S3NId JNIN3dSIHM
S3NId ONW3dSIHM
lb SdOHS 3H1
?A
a ? Q
?
a
W
CV
a U
m

'mAMW NV simm T y S-ngs dam G
0
w
LIJ
M
Wo
N
W
?boN Z „
o v ?i
N Z
0
,
I ]?( i
i?Cl ! ? ? , I
•` I
1 r {t I' ;
, r
Aw .'
4- z
9
.1
,
?.r
i E
'V
.- E
t 1 i.
....._«_.. r
I '
;••:, •• .... .. SYLUVIB bV IdHY-Lq' ?`KIB.,. rIMVC-f0 .Meq Md W1 CYM-YO u/. AYIy Ot?O

IN

N Q
C)
0
0)
0
0
0
N
co
C
3
A

rn
?
L
v
N 4W
m

Q
m

C
O
Q
(D
3
Q
E

U
N
O
tL

o
_0

D
7 V L L _
FD
.Q N N N 60
c 0
N a?
m
N
c E Q-
Q
E
m
O Q- O '- O
Q
O j C C/)

' _
> > • O
=3
0) 0)
CL
U N U

)
Q`
N

O

f Q'
Q" to
2
?
?

L
0)
a a
a
a p
L

O O O O
C C C ` C
c Ir cc qtr ZW O

L co Cl) N N _
4-

O U U m U m U
U U w U w co

d ?

J = .- N M V to (O
3's
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
1
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
3`C
f 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

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
Q (cfs)
70.00
1 60.00
50.00 - -- - -
40.00 - ---- - -- --- -
30.00
- - - -
- ------- - - ------ ------- -------
20.00
10.00
0 00
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
0.0 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)
C)
"C
Hydrograph 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
¦
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
Q (cfs)
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
Hydrograph Volume = 169,751 cult
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
0.00
0.0 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)
I
I ??
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Thursday, Jun 18 2009, 8:50 AM
Hyd. No. 2
post development buildout
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 94.06 cfs
Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 11.510 ac Curve number = 92
Basin Slope = 4.0% Hydraulic length = 350 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 5.00 min
Total precip. = 6.28 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484

= 209
lt
H
d
h V
l
360
y
rograp
o
ume
,
cu

post development buildout
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 2 -- 25 Yr Q (cfs)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
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
Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
u Z
l
Hydrograph Plot
1 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.
bmp 1 routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Yr
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
-- -- - -------- - - - -----------
20.00
10.00
_ -- - --- --
_ - - __ - -
- - ----- ------
0.00
Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 5:59 PM
Peak discharge = 0.62 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 389.82 ft
Max. Storage = 125,225 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 98,249 cult
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0 10 19 29 39 48 58 68 77 87 97
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Req. Stor = 125,225 cult Time (hrs)
N3
¦ HYd ro9raph Plot

r 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
t
Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 5:59 PM
Peak discharge = 0.77 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 391.06 ft
Max. Storage = 154,726 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
r
r
bmp 1 routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 5 Yr
70.00
60.00
r -
50.00
40.00
30.00
r
20.00
r
10.00
r
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 128,807 cuft
0 10 19 29 39 48 58 68 77
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Req. Stor = 154,726 cuft
1
87
Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
--L 0.00
97
Time (hrs)
`t`t
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

e Indication method used
Stora Wet
ond routin
start elevation = 386
00 ft
g .
p
g
.
.

bmp 1 routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Yr
I 80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
' 20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0 10 19 29 39 48 58 68 77 87 97
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Req. Stor = 170,123 cuft Time (hrs)
Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 5:59 PM
Peak discharge = 1.31 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 391.71 ft
Max. Storage = 170,123 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 153,292 cuft
HYd ro9raph 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
0.00
0
bmp 1 routing
Hyd. No. 3 -- 25 Yr
Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 6:0 PM
Peak discharge = 5.21 cfs
Time interval = 2 min
Max. Elevation = 392.12 ft
Max. Storage = 179,950 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 192,273 cuft
Q (Cfs)
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
10 19 29 39 48 58 68 77 87 97
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Req. Stor = 179,950 cuft Time (hrs)
??p

1
1
F

1
1?
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4 3-
I I

Hydrograph 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

Thursday, Dec 10 2009, 6:1 PM
Peak discharge = 0.56 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 389.36 ft
Max. Storage = 114,167 cuft
Storage indication method used. Wet pond routing start elevation = 386.00 ft.
¦
bmp routing scs 24-hr
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 -- 1 Yr
50.00
40.00
30.00 -
---- ----- -- --
20.00
10.00
------------
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 57,603 cuft
0 5 10 15 19
Hyd No. 5 - Hyd No. 4
¦
¦
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
24 29 34 39 44
C 1 Req. Stor= 114,167 cult
- 0.00
48
Time (hrs)
41
??
1
1
n
1

1
1
1
1
sl

1

1
1

1

Stormwater Collection System
SZ
rr ?r r ¦r rr r rr rr rr r? rr rw rr rr rr r rr rr r?,
'?n
??
4
5 `
1 `
x V

VII
? ?

d
S,
m J ?
J

? 0
`
,
V
?`o {W
ti$
r r rr r?r rrr rr ?° rr r? r? ¦r r rr rr rr rr r rr rr err
O
O
N
LO
N
t0
O
LO
r
N
O
C_
J
m
m
v O
° Z
t
0 0 \?
°
m
m " V
., _r °
\t ?
m N
V m
V
C
C?
CG
N
Z
WW
N
_ai
U
N
O
L
0
N
m
d
3
m
E
`o
3
0
m
x

R
a
1
1

1
1

I It
r?
O
ii.
A
L
-W
co
1

N to M

J V' ? (n O
D U 0
4 m
- m co r O m N m rn
N ^ o I 6 3 9 U U o N
m m r r m 00 1? (O m N_ o
r t(j ?_ ?

O
W O LO N O O C) N M 00 O w a N
O N O 'IT V' O M OR r M O O) N N
C ,_ v

_ ih

O co

O N

O M

O N

O to

O n

O LO

O O M N.

_ O

O O

O O

O 0)

O
(0
M M IT M It V' IT
N
H

o aY LO
co tO
co O
C) tO
V O
O LO
r to
I'- to to
V LO O
O O
O O
O W)
n O
O
o o r o r o 6 o O o r r r o r
a) M O O O O M O O O O O O O O O
Z 7
? C _
O _
O
O _
O
O
O _
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O r
O
>• v O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

C O
4)
l0 CL 4)
Q J ?.` U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U

O
V
E
T C N
=
t
d JN W tO to N M W 00 LO to N N N N Z

t' Q O O CO O M Cl) O O to O CO CO tl- V'
O OR r LO O M tO tO O tO O W r O N

C W ... (D N
0) M
m co
0) a)
CD M
co v
m
C) v
C? to
C) 0
CD (O
C) r,?
C) (o
CD, P-
M M
M
M
M
M
Cl)
V'
V'
IT
IT a
d
d Q u
C_ O o W
V V'
tO O to
t(7 O
O N O O
to O
tO O
tO
tO M
tO
tO
J N `r V' O O V' O N W O M O O O O O O
O V' O O N O O O LO LO LO M Il- ?
tO r W N tO M tO I? r LO M W M ' O

O N
O) N
O M
O M
O
00 O
to M
O
O tO
O tO
O Q
O (p
O (p
O to

M
Cl)
M
M
M
M
M
M
V'
It

V

V

V'

V' O

V'
? d C
'
£
? O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
- w v to LO to LO tO O LO LO to LO to LO to to to

C O O O LO O O Cl O O O to O LO O LO
(p Q V
:3 co 0) O co O O O 0) 0) O P- 00 00 co co
R V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

3
O
LL O (0 co h O LO co O (0 ? O v O) r
L L tO tO co Cl r O co V' h O O O O
m - M O r O O O O O O O O O O O O
C
3 y
Od O O O CD, O O O O O O O O O O O
.w O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
Y 0 0 0 0 6 C) 6 6 0 6 0 6 6 0 6
v
CL 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 ?E 2 ?i
d V= CD- co N O II- O 1l- O- O co O O N
M (O N O
i V' CO N O N O W V' .Q.
a a
t

O) (o
h t(7
Qj r
LO
d) m

(Y)
W

f-

N

(O

N

O

M

J v
O
Ce)

M
N
(D
tO
O
1
rn
'
LO
M
O)
O
tO
O
M
M Z

O
? V N M r? O M W t()
U)

y d -C 'p W
Q C Z W r N V W O n O O r r
N

LL

N
C
J Z

r

N

M

'

O

M

n

O

O

?

r

N-

M

?

O _ U
O)
O
D.
N
M
3
CO
e
0
0
`m
S
S5
L'D
(Q
a
1
11
1

1

1
1

' O
1
1 AL'
W
c
E
co

Q O M r
U) m O
C w Q V Q _
m m M h (D
Q m N co tt)
J M N r O' M V Q i V V

m co O h M Lb N r tt O
Q U U Q Q U Q U Q Q Q Q N
Lh
> O O tn O O O O v N M W O M O r
m C N O N tt Lo M tt h CO r M O M O
W Q LO h O h M to, LO Cl) to O M N O N O O
CD O O O O
' CO O O O
a
O
M M M co IT M M tt tt ct tt t
t tt T
R f0
O LO N O O O tr N M M O M O N Q
C O. N O tt O M ?' h a0 r M O r O N C
` Q h W N Cl) N LO co LO O M N O O O O 7
O
o O
M O
It O
t O O O O _
' O
' O O O d'
c t tt co
tt
tt
tt
V
V
d
tt
tt
tt
CO 't h CO t! V N W N N O O
C (D It h tt O M O tt h O N Oa M N tt
Q M v m O O N (D (D co h h h

ll.l O
M O
M O
Cl) O
M O
M O
M O
M O O O O
tt O
tt O
tt O
st O
V
J
C9 O O M N h O tt Cl) CO O Ca O h N
= p, _ h N N O M O a0 M a0 N O r M M to
Q It to W O LO N to (D (D h h h h
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
M Cl) M M M Cl) M It It IT IT tt tt LO
O tt O O N O O O to to to M h h to

m C to r CD N h to M
O to h r to M CD M O N
C
Q N N M co O to to (D (D M co

W W
M O
M O
M O
M (D
M CO
M O
M O
M O O O O O O O
'
p
tt tt tt tt tt V

O O O Cl) O M co O r O LO O M CD h tt m
C Ll a CO r LO O M LO LO O to a CO r O N
Q CD
Co N
O M
O W
O O
O M
CO V
O
O tt
O to
O (D
O (D
O h
O' (D
O h
O 7
Z
M M M M M M M ? ? tt tt tt tt ? tt
d
Cl r O tr a V) O N O O O O O
p c r V Lo to (D th h tp to to to O to to
C O V' O O tt O N CO O M O O O O O O
L
'
a m
N C
Z--
t
v
CC)
LO
to
N
co
co
to
to
N
N
N
N
N - - -
75 N
M LO
co to
(O M
Cl)
O
O N
It CO
h h
N 0
(D h
Cl)
Cl) to CO
M M
h
M O (D to M 4 h to to M M N m M r
Q- O
Ce) Cl? r? 40 O ? IT V M (D M M CO O M O
V D V O O O (D N (C) O
04 (D O O N N Lo N
N N (O M M N Uj Lo c) M m (M
3

2
- H ? v r- CO

O

h ° IT
00

M
tt

to
h

O
co
h

(
LO
O
CO
0 U
? LO ? ? r D N CO tt
M r r O a0 M N N O O O O
C i
ram„ C N N N co N LO co h h M O Cl) N M N }
(D h h (D h to to to - to to (D (D h (D h
O

j? C
•£
O
N
O
O
O
?
N
O
O
h
O
(9
O

? fn CO to to (D to r r r W LO (D U) O
F
-
G7 C
•£
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O Q
`
to to to to to O to to to to to LO to LO to ?

V
C
to
c)
(D
O
O
O
M
tt
h
M
M
(D N

x (D
N N
Lo
to
M
r
O
r
O

l0 H to N r O O N N r r O O O O O O h
'M
i O
Q y- N M (D O O h O M ct M h M h (D
CO LO (D O r a h CO (D r r O O O O
O
a
N O r O O O O O O O O O O O O
(O

(j O
co O
O O
O LO
W O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O O
O to
h O
co W)
co O
co to
M
+
Q' U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E N
7?; E

m (a
Q U
lv CO
O O
M
CD W
r
r O
(D O
(D tO
h N
M N
M w
V m
r tt
O M
r h
O N

Q
F-
co
N
r
O
O
N
N
.--
r
a
O
O
O
O
O O C
n
` G U CO h r O tO M O (D ? O qt O h Z
Q C `0 to V) CD O r O 00 V h O O O O O tO
- M O r O O O O O O O O O O O O U) O
?,. C
Gi (D
Di (D
t- to
Di
o
r
LO
O
M

Cu

h

N

co

N

O

M - >

w
11
J O Cl) N O O O to M O O L6 O (D M 'y
r r (O r to h ? N CO h O O CD r to ? c

C
N
O
p

a
c

-O
c

LL
. d

C
O W r N r tt W (D h 00 (D a U
N

W
10 O
M tt (O M h O O r eN- - Z
5-0
O
a
N
N
3
E
`o
0
l0
V
2
V;
G
' O
H
Z
O
W
N
O
a`
O
L
CL
' L
3
a?
L
1°
co

N
? ? II
, M

I

0)
:y O

O
O O co
?v 'c ? I III III
m Q
U oc U')

?
I I N
I
I
I II iil
II,

I i N
- l LO
N
N

O
4 ? 1

r
N

II
Il

Lo
r v

I I ?
d
O
LO
I
' LO
C.

Q
r
c
'_
LO
I

L

I N
O

C q q p 9 o
O

CN
N
CD
M
0)
Iq
co
LO
I-
d 'q d M M co
W
5
Cl)
0
0
N
y
N
3
a?
E
`o
3
0
m
a`
G
of
O
F-
U)
Z
_O
W
N
O
d.
t
a..
o
r
L
-W
co
N
M °
O
co
r N
Cl
C LO
Q Of N
O
LO
N
I I
III
' ICI Ill
it LO
N
N
-r I III III
v C) C)
C'i
N. C)
mot, °
N
r ° j
V
LO
M e,%
; I
V
--t ,I
O
i II E-0 W
I 'III ?
II
i I
ii L
j
04
o
Li D
s Ili II
O
LO
I
LO
N
I
O
C) O o 0 o O
0 0 0 0 0 0
C) r-
_ N M ? LO
04 C) 0') 00 tl-
d d M M co
W
0
Cl)
O
O
N
N
N
3
a?
E
0
3
0
ICU
a
a
2
G
' O
I-
Z
O
W
' O
d
1.
L
O
a.
+
AAL
W
3
a?
L
V+

Lo O
`

C)
C) LO

O
O
LO

6) r-
6 (C)
O
LO
c:
2

O
O

O
LO
M

Lo Iq O
O
co
C1
Iq co
Rf
d
Q'

(D ?o
O
L
N
O
O
N

O
LO
r

O
O

Cl)
O
w : DO 3) -44

0
O
v O O
O O
O O
O O
O o
O
c
M o
N N O
0
) O
c
o M
p? ? t co c o c o
W
51

CO

I O

! C
Nap I

I I
I
'?
I, li ?I I
I I
I ? O

O

O

?' I
III
?I
I

'
$ I
i ?
I
I
I

O . O
M

'
I

I
'
I m - O I
I -? >
c V' I j

I ?
IC
?
'
?

IO
i
v I
Q0 ?
tr)
I ? ? I
O I

,. c I

I
I

Cl)
0
0
N
N
N
3
a?
E
0
3
0
m
a`
T
Z
O
H
Z
O
W
O
W
O
' L
L
1
L
v?
O
M

Lo
N
M
4 0
0
O
M
LO
N
O
LO

5
0) N
Lr)
N

L.?
CL
J N

O
O
N v
t
Lo 0

O
LO
T

LO
N
T
O
O
T

C)
Lf)

I LID
IN
0

C
O ) C
O ) C
O D C
O ) C)
O CD
O
N
> N oO
T V
T O
T (D
O N
O
m v ? v v v ?
W
O
I i ? I it

i
I

i
I
C C
I
I _ c N
III ? I I

I III

i I
I

I I

w I

i

?

I

I

i

i

O
ct'
>
?
I

? I
I i
I i
I I
I I I
I
,
t
I

j I O • I I j

I I ?' o'I I i i II

I

I

? I

I I

I If I

I ,

?
i

v
I

?J TI
' I i
i i
I I
co
O
O
N
N
N
3
a?
E
0
0
m
T
CCN
G
I-
10
Z
O
11J
N
O
d
O
0-
L
' 4
v/
O

N

Lo
D LO

N
N

O
O
N

LO

r

0

v

L
V
LO
N
r
?
O
O
r

LO

0
L-i LO
La

L
N
O

C D
O C D ( D
v O
O
O
O
O
N ? O
O O
d N T
?
t
?
t
d
?t
d
W
0

I i j I

I
I
I n
?
C

N

r

I

I
0
i
i I O ?
I I N
i
I O

I I
I
I I '
?
?
I
I .
I
i i
I
I
I I
i
? I
? v!?
of r
I

I
? OI
? I N'',
N I j
I I
,
I ?
j
I
I
I I II
?i j
I
I
I

I

I

j

i

I
I

I

i

I i

I
I
I ! I

I

?

I

I
I
? j I I ' I I
? i I I
?
I
I I
II I
oI? I
I
I II
I
D i p
j
I
I I
I

I
I
?
i

I I
I
M
O
O
N
N
N
3
a?
E
`o
3
0
m
a
T
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
BMP 1 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
(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
?5
l?
?0
Q.
$
C)
O
N
M
N
CO
O

co
W
LL-

N

C
J
O
Z
rr
r
r
r
rr
N J
Jl/
- 1
? r
p r
1
?? f+ I

m

L
rt/

cu
Q-
>1
IV1
iF-
U
N
O
L
a
Cl)
0
0
m
3
E
`o
0
`m
x
6y
m
m
a
r.
Q.
NW
rim
O.
A?
`W
?L
W
^3^+
V?
v E
L-
0
'-W
V?
1
0
N O O
co m
w -?
Im
LL Op O
C6 C7
N
m LL N
O
O
_
a W

E
C) to
m
N

6
c
C CD c
Cl) Cl)
0 4) °o °o

7 V r
N Cl) M
Z
C O O
.
.
> O O

N

c CL h
N

?
J ?'
U U c
w
m
0
v a?

T m

C
N

E
d _
J W Z-- N N Z
C_ b V-
4) N 00
C W `r 00 co
Cl) M
d

C O o
O V
to (O
J N -
C) O
t: C to O

ET V O
M
E W m co
m M
y d C O
O
C '
w LO N
r

N
^
0
C p U C) C)

V
m V O O

LL m N tl O O
m - O co
C

y
CD C)
OCIv
-
C
V O O
.
.
Y O O

m m -. O O
d C m
mm? O 6
rn
m E
i
Q
l n
E
GI 0).-.
C C O C
? -
r- r- O
J N N m
V)
U)
M
Y
C T
m
c O
O . Z W
N

LL

m
C p U
N
O
J Z N
`- d
65
0
0
N
N
d
3
0
N
E
O
y
O
N
O

m
0
?o
a

t

I
I

F
0
m
F-
-4
E
L
0
co
61
N
cn m
m w
G LL ap
J O> ? O

m
LL O
O
N
M
> C) CD
N
m
W C
p O w
co 0
E M co co 0)
m
? m
O to 0
'p
C
D CO N C
?
C9 O O
M M
Cl)
C r
In
o
co
m c
O
W M M
J

2 LO co
Q ao C*?
M O
co co
M M
N
C V O m
m O Cl) ? c
_
W CO M p
a.?
L
m

st
m

?

C N o0
co co g z
Cl) M

Q
p e W IT
In m
a o 0
a. m

N I* It

Cl) LO
6
6
(
L

Q - CY)
M O
U v r- 00
3
° ? rn
m
o
? ,
v c
c -Cl
_ c
Cl) N

c L6
>
LO
_ N
y C V O II

V to N N 0
_
F- m
„
m c o o °.
C E Sri N
N
CD CD
N N
x
-X F M Cl)
00
d O
Q
V O O
O N
O M (O
r
C) C)
v o o E

m
p v C) o
o o E
c
a` co co

?
-
m
E o o rn
c
°. o o a6
_
- o ao
N
C O _M T II

J ?
N M m
'N
m
-_
m -p LL C

O O
~ J
W .--
V

y O
?n = ? Q
J ? N Z
T
m
0
0
N
3
E
0
rn
0
c
m
v`
m
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
' a
o
r
x
O
O
-\ O
v N
00
O
c9
u
U7
W
w
,tom
O ?
J
O
Z
m
u?
cn
w
LL-
rr !
o ?
a3i
L
O
U)
W
U
N
^L
A
a
0
3
0
E
`o
3
0
`m

VI
Cl) LO
N

C
C14 (14
N
U)

J W W
LL LL

N N O
O
O
U) (D
W W N
LL LL O

O
W O
E
C

_R co
0

0
- E
N
0 Y
0
o O°
0
U
d co M
Z
? c
o 0
> " 0 6
N
y a O cl.
N
J ?` U U =

m
0
u ?
L
IL -1
Z- LO LO
Z
Q O N
> =) O O
C m
Cl)
d
a) CL

C O o

to r"
h O
J N v O
C V O
>
" LO LO C)
W rn
V' M
? d C
C £ O O
- w ... to to

m O
c o v
° t°n
C) o
.v
3
o
6L rn m
L d co co
r- O
cl ca O O
C
o C7 O C)
C
Y O O

m
c a
3

-3Z, 0
_ _

E m .?

d
O N
V

c d1 C
m W
c? Zo
O)
y
Q w
4, Im
N O
N
c C
J m W >

L
C 0
O
Q . Z W W
N

LL
d
C O U
N
O
.J Z r N `
a
M
0
0
N
m
3
E
`o
3
m
2
--O
LA
l0
CL

1
1

1
1
1
1
11
L
r_
R'f
t2
L?
r
i

E
'O
1
Cl) LO
(N CN

W W

C N sT
J N N
(n (n
O
W W O
LL LL O
N
> 00 O
m $ o r
? (
W p (D o
E _
Cl)
N
R f0
O Cl)
L1 O O? C
` co
C7 V V
0') LO

> C (O m

d p
?
lu 7 (h
J
o n
3: d (0 Cl)
D (D N

CY)
Cl)

N
O
> c n
V N
C
_N p to O
rn _
W v co
o
> ?
0
c CL
D L
Z
m
a
0 o U") r`
ti o
D y o
a ?
N C
.,
U) LO
0) (n
to t
O M

C. - y
3
U O 00
o 0
v
, ui co
3

p
O o It
a U
- .
F
- o Cl)
c
_
`C
N N
y
r r }

N C
O O
rl
a U) LO
F-
o o Q.
E Lo Sri
a>
U
p co v
x F o o
m 0

a co 0)

0 0 o
co

c co U 0 0
'n 'n
+
o o a>
E

N (D co
E
D
a>
O
rn
y
H' O O T C
co
3
Q V CO co f`
I, C l0 7 (A
_
O O - O

J
N
c 11
aT'
(O
O co i
y
C

o
c
~
LL .4..I
c
O
=3

J W w v

O
U)

rn
2 w
F-
O
04
/L
m
0
N
3
E
U)
3
0
N
T
x
O
O
! i
I I

I

'
IC
I 0
I
I I j

O
i ICI it i !
I
i
I
I i
I '
I I
Q t
d

cc,
IC-N

Q

)
ic?
r
[r

>; N
r
I L ? o
?y
\')
Q

I
!

I

I !

'I N

I

I !
i
I
!

o

I

I

I I

!
I
i

O

O
d co O
L6 O
N O
O O
O O
M
W N N N r r -
M
O
O
N
N
N
3
a?
E
0
0
m
T
-:?Z
r
(II
r ?
v
t
O
N
N
O
r
r
r
r
r
L
r-
r
i
CL
Q?
3
Cl)
r
E
0
1
O
O
I
i I
O
rn
OM
W
, O
I ?
II
0
I
=0 c
10 -
W w
O
LL Cr C"
O O
r
Cy U-)
N?CO
W
LL D J
O
M
O
N
j
i
O
r
O
C) C) CD CD
C) C) C) C) CD
d N r--? (Ni
tl? N i`
W It It M M ?
q3
co
O
O
N
!A
N
3
m
E
`o
0
m
T
2

Exhibit 11
t
0
160 10,000
168 6,000 EXAMPLE (?? (2) (3)
156 76,000 0.42 laeha (3.5 feet) 6.
144 5,000 0.120 efe 5.

132 4,000 tm a mw 6• 5.
o feet

3000

5'
4.
120 11) 2.5 G G 4.
2,000 (2) !.I 7.4
(3) 2.2 7.7
4•
108 3.
so is feet 3.
96 1,000 3.

84 Boo
--?
--
600 2-
500
a
2.
72 400
U) E
300 t??/ 3
L5
1
5
Z N
/ .
Z 60 v
` 200 W
W 1.5
0 54 Z

O a
11- 48 /
( 80

v / 2
31
60
IL
1.0
I.0
U.
H
c
50 HW ENTRANCE
SCALE
°
40 p TYPE Ip
W
W
38
30 (1) Square edge with
3 g
9
2 headwall •9

a 33 ?

?
20 (2) Groove with a
w
30 h wall Z .6 .8
(3) reeve end •8
27 L?5 Projecting
10 O

L
w°
? 7
24 8
'?
, .
T
,
6 o use 09010 (2) or (3) project
-21 horizontally to scale (1), then
4 use straight inclined line through
0 and 0 scales, or reverse as
illustrated
.6
6
3
. .
Is
-

2 2S 04 i'v 5
?S o .S?-

r.o
•5 .5 .5
HEADWATER DEPTH-FOR
CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS
H EADWATER SCALES 2153
REM Wft@LiCROADS Ak on REVISED MAY M4 WITH INLET CONTROL
?.> VI-11

-?- 3 A
i
' 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 Bor1 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 c
13 Bor1 22
1 23 2 27
?q
C
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL

1
1

t
1
1

1

1

1
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: a
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 hi 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.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall
be repaired immediately.
BMP element: Potential "problem- How I will remediate 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) clogged. of an sediment off-site.
The flow splitter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
repair.
Form SWU40I-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev .3 Page I of 3
AX /
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remedate 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
downslo a 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. restabilize the soil with vegetation if
necessary. Provide lime and a one-
time fertilizer application.
Plants are desiccated. Provideadditional 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-tinge
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 SWU40I-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Suffer O&M-Rev.3 Page2 of 3
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.

1
I

I
U
D

1
Project name:The Shops and Whispering Pines
BMP drainage area number: Level Spreader a.-t _ ?!wP_?_ C wG'E p gki
Print name:Mark Ball
Title:Vice President
Address:3735 Beam Rd Charlotte NC 28217
Phone: [phone]
Signature:
Date: -A.& +!d I
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.
m fiy a Notary Public for the State of
/"?? f12aL , County of do hereby certify that
personally appeared before me this AO
day of ".4&41e j cU'07 and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing filter strip, riparian buffer, and/or level spreader maintenance requirements.
Witness my hand and official seal,
M.
?q kOTAJrp yam,
WCOW EvL
C Jft 4 2MI ?
SEAL
My commission expires / hybe/1
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3
Page 3 of 3

Permit Number:
(to be provided DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: &"d I
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
This system (check one):
? does ® does not
incorporate a vegetated filter at the outlet.
incorporate pretreatment other than a forebay.
Important 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.
- 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 problem: 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
long. a roximatel six inches.
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4
Page 1 of 4
-al
t
t
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
Permit Number:
(to be provided b? DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: bv?
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 O&M-Rev.4
Page 2 of 4
/1a

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: ? ?-D
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 re air. 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 381.5 feet in the main pond, the
sediment shall be removed.
When the permanent pool depth reads 381.5 feet in the forebay, the sediment
shall be removed.
BASIN DIAGRAM
ill in the blanks)
0 Permanent Pool Elevation 386.0
Sediment Removal . 381.5 Pe anen Pool
----------------- Volume Sediment Removal Elevation 381.5 Volume
-------------------------------------------- ------
Bottom Elevatio 380.5 -ft Min.
Sediment Bottom Elevation 380.5 1-ft n
Storage Sedimer
Storage
FOREBAY MAIN POND
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4 Page 3 of 4

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.
Project name:Shops at Whispering Pines
' BMP drainage area number:BMP-l
Print name: W i ? I 'l OM Q,? 1 e4r,
Title:
Address: 3`1 ,:?5 (??, l' c?-rn , 0h4-w t o 4 _ fvc n ? D 1 ']
Phone: () - Q Cy - l
Signature: 4s.? C'L "?
Date: 11 (?

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, ?v 1 H. M ID4,c- i, , a Notary Public for the State of
?riin nwv i 1 %e_%.QI , County of Mc e V_ ( nbu.r do hereby certify that
\IJA person y appeared before me this I-7
day of 0009 , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing wet detention basin maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official
seal,
N??a.papti.
? • o?ti. ?P®'s
e ,pTAR 1' cv
y PUBOO
SEAL

My commission expires_ ?Ir?:7q
Form SW401-Wet Detention Basin O&M-Rev.4
Page 4 of 4
aZ

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Erosion Control
q,77

7
t _
W
a?
4e `r
4f
wp
1

c

S d

s s
°c s

? S
j

W

r
?
i
"
? •,
+
'
t ! y '?
?'
?
?
l
r
?
;
?
'
i ____ _._"
"
'+? %?'y
",p,'`A,.

I
^ "
r
JI V A

,

1
I? lr?e
I
I
f ?
I
I
I
I{((
II
IfB
IQ
I

r rr rr rr rr r rr r rr r? rr rr rr rr ?r rr r? rr ?r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ca
Q d I, LO
v > M O - O
so a O o 0
?a

ev
O LO N o
a? o o ? o
y 0 0 0 0

v U-)
N LO
N LO
N LO
N
IS M M M M
In
W Q
W O
?p

?> ?L

t[) C,4

? C)

? 00

Lo
M

J U
00
p
v

(Y

'
?t _

W Z
>a 0
c
W
W
D
C) O O N N W
U (O O LL
0CJ M N
c- 00
r - O
+
? > W Z
0 M ?
=
N N N O
Fn 2 II II II Q
~ *
r
- 0 j 0 = U
~
u
H ?t v c? v W
(D
H W
J w 0
c
-.1 U)
Z Q Z
Z W

W a F-
LL o o

rt o o

d -

U)

J

N W
Q
Z
O W
O
F-

Z
C9 F-
o
w
O
o
M
(D
j O
C? U
>- J
Z W O r ?- Cl) W 6 Q
C
W J J
W L
O N
v
N d v
_
N m O N

p ?
o
M
v
Lo
Lo
O
00
?-
W (j w w
2m
J
N
V
Cfl
o
Z
< Z . lJJ
C) Q' N
Q
0 M
j W U
a Q O
O (O
M O V
O
Q Ln OO N =
0 r M U LL. N
N
f? M
W
=
o=
W co F_
?
aW 0
Q Lo
- (o
co o
Lo v
O WZ
W
P
i 11
U- 2 U J Q
w LO
O (D
l C)
a L
L - ? Q C
) 6 O
LL
Q LL_ W Z
O
O
W 0 W
w
U)
F•

U ?*

m N

m M

m

`?
m Ill

0 2 Z
::) DZ

F- W
U _

F-
U
?
N
M
i
?

(n
(n
(n
(n -- > m m m m
U?m Z) ? (n (n (n (n

N Z - F-
co
N

N N N -,;r
E m c- - r- C7
0 N N ? ?-

V
U) M
LO
O N
?
.- M
I`
•ct O
M
O
U. 0 0 0 0
=
d N N M
C

N

E
G1 •-
nj
'ct
O
N
co
'a
rv

lL
O

LO
N
, CY)

co
-
7
U
O ? p U
)
v
; ri rn

?-
N
M 1
V m m m m•
U) C0 CO U)

In
A
11
J
:V
r
L cn
V co
n?
o
? N
II
C
O
D 3
n
N
n
U
AM
0
0
N
rn
CO
.J 1
a ?
?D
SIDIO;DUUOD

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
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
breach da
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 25 Yr
180.00
- ----------
150.00
120.00
- - ---
90.00
- -
60.00
- ---------- - - -----
------ -----------
- -
- --
--- - ---- -- ------- ------
0.00
Hydrograph Volume = 425,174 cuft

0 10 20 30
Hyd No. 7
Q (cfs)
180.00
150.00
120.00
90.00
60.00
30.00
0.00
40 50 60 70 80
Time (min)

1
Appendices
1
1
1
1
F

1

r
i
1
F1
u
r
I Rev. 12/93
Table 8.058
Permissible Shear Stresses
for Riprap and Temporary
Liners
Permissible Unit Shear Stress, Td
Lining Category Lining Type (Ib/ftz)
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, HEC-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

Project Shops at whispering pines
Date 6/19/2009
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(R21)(S")A
channel slope 1 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 2.4 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area
Slope Length
wetted perimeter
Hydraulic Radius
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)=
Flow (Q)=
29.3 ft2
7.59 ft
20.2 ft
1.45 ft
6.3 ft/s (grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
185.9 ft3/s ' ZS ( 1 ?- G5
Shear Stress
T
62.4 pcf
0.01 ft/ft
2.4 ft
1.50 psf Shear Stress
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel

qI
O

V)
0
WU

z Q _. y

Q

u C5

's *19
fh

0
a
V)
J Q`
W v
za
z

c..
s ?
v s
S
o
I y ?
i ' ' _tl s
I I r
I I I ,`
i tt ? I
1 ? I
? I
4 ?I I
- ; W l
j I., tiff's i d
I
' I
1 II
L.I _ y
i L
IIr'
4 i
?I
II Il ?,,

1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
t
1
1
f
1
1
1
1
1
t
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 0.5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.61 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 1.7 ft2
Slope Length 1.93 ft
wetted perimeter 4.9 ft
Hydraulic Radius 0.36 ft
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 1.8 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 3.0 ft3/s
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf
0.005 ft/ft
0.61 ft
T 0.19 psf
Q=CIA 3 CFS
C 0.5
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 0.86 AC
(grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel
Shear Stress

C?UA e.I
CI
1
1
1
r
i
i
r
i
f
1
1
y
t
1
t
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(R2J3)(S1/2)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
y
(grass maximum allowable velocity 5 ft/sec)
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf Unit weight of water
0.02 ft/ft Channel Gradient
0.5 ft Depth of Channel
T 0.62 psf Shear Stress C h N VI 0 e 1
aZ
I
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(R213)(S112)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

fq-?,
i
1
i
i
1
1
t
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
S1RIlOlVFE

« ORN
ARFA OENIOED
MEN 512
w103R E N
LEiHi7R
oEPTR' ..R
LERGIII VmL
IEOIRREO VOLU
pROV1
cF
eq- S-A
R qW,
SB-1 1.3 09 30 60 4.0 4 3,240 4,050 315 0.0]9
bbl 3.6 36 5! 100 40 4 12,900 13,122 313 0.096
SB3 3.0 SO fi5 130 40 fi 18,000 19.01] 325 0132
.04 0.4 0? 1B 36 4.0 4 1,331 1,0.58 323 0010
6b1 1.5 5.2 2
bbl 38 127 4
583 SO 17.7 8
SBJ 0.4 1.3 0
m-, sitie
StruoLN Volume Pip. Sit. (lead
L4 Flew TYm
SS-1
4,050
26 1.26
0.059
21.2
583 13.121 4 2 0.172 21.2
SBJ 19,m] 8 9 0.423 11.2
bb4 1,68 2 1 9.OY1 19.6
O O
0
V ?
4+ Ol
a ?
uj
C U
Z E
dd Z U
Q
O d
a
o
N
« ° 3
m 2
L
O
a S
rn Sz
M 3
C
e
L a
F. C
O
>
O
PRELIMINARY NOT
RELEASED FOR
CONSTRUCTION
U)
?-- z
^
) a- Z
`J JA (D W J
o z n. < o z
(D p u
?? /??1 LL ?
U m
v/
W co Q ?U
W 0- _
2U?
2
NSIONS
0lCTk8t17M M1CNVl91
MMR AM aemir. T
RE
REDEVELOPMENT
ROSION
ONTROL PLAN
M
C4.2
T6
1
1
1
1
r
i
i
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(R213)(S112)A
channel slope 5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.89 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area
Slope Length
wetted perimeter
Hydraulic Radius
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)=
Flow (Q)=
2.6 ft2
2.81 ft
5.8 ft
0.44 ft
6.4 ft/s
16.3 ft3/s
Q=CIA 16.25 CFS
C 0.45
1 7.22 IN/HR
A 5 AC
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf
0.05 ft/ft
0.89 ft
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel
T 2.78 psf Shear Stress
01 5/o n 0/ fc- ?I 2
(; 5,e lt' 8 +a t
4,-4-
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(R213)(S112)A
channel slope 5 % (maximum slope typical)
Depth 0.74 ft
n 0.03
Numbers
flow area 1.2 ft2 Q=CIA 6.86 CFS
Slope Length 1.65 ft C 0.45
wetted perimeter 3.5 ft 1 7.22 IN/HR
Hydraulic Radius 0.35 ft A 2.11 AC
Velocity/Flow
Velocity(v)= 5.5 ft/s
Flow (Q)= 6.9 ft3/s
Shear Stress
62.4 pcf
0.05 ft/ft
0.74 ft
T 2.31 psf
Unit weight of water
Channel Gradient
Depth of Channel
Shear Stress
?? v P? S ia? /J? fc Lr Z
USG Cj?'Nr1?K?cC Pe -tut
q4

1
I
1

1
1
I
A

I Geotechnical Reports
t

ql
Irerracan
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:
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.
1 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 I704] 509 1777 terracon.com
t
s
L _'I,
Whispering Pines Shopping Center Whispering Pines, North Carolina
1 September 8, 2009 Terracon Project No. 71095030
Field Exploration
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
lever observations are provided in the table below.
TABLE 1. GROUNDWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1

F
1
1
Approximate Groundwater Depth (ft) Boring ,
Location Surface

Elevation (ft)
After Baring
Completion
2 Days After
Completion. Termination
-
Depth (ft)-
P-01 399 13 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
L
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 falling 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.
Testing was performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM standards. A summary
table of the field and laboratory test results is presented below.
1

TABLE 2. BOREHOLE PERMEABILITY TEST RESULTS
Water Estimated USCS

Location Sample
Coritent' % Passing Borehole Classification
Dept,ha(ft) 200 Sieve Permeability

(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*
tfasea on visual observation
1

Whispering Pines Shopping Center
September 8, 2009
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 71095030

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,
1
consultants, Inc. GA
Jo4 an P. Manke, P.. Scott A. Saunders, P. E. - 3 9 t
eotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Department
Registered, North Carolina 033?Ciq'
Attachments; Boring Location Diagram
Unified Soils Classification System
Copies: Addressee 3
1
1
1

1
1

woo s;;esdsm mmm
9£00'9L961,6 • E1,9LZ ON 'tiB`J • 00I, elln8 RemMjBd uolseM 1OKI,
oinjonais¦.iaul quol>j¦laod¦u¦il
ST1 3S' •dSM
zpZ
o
}4?
So
Q?Q
ZQ?
,z
Of Ix 0
a. O
LLZBZ 014'31101tltlH7
e 311ns'OtlOH Wtl3s SELF
all lVildb'a Haf
aN 'S3NId EAW3dSIHM
S3NId JNI2EdSIHM
iV SdOHS 3Hl

&
s Z
a
N
g
D a
z J ?-
0? U

c
L
aw
Ci: ? I I I
i I
r + ?
0 Ii
o?
V w ,. I
_ 3 P'? 1
?np,
0 2. '-5- - -
l
o
_ y -
`? 1 {
Ell
-- ----------
:•'' ,.-''it
J ,.
r I
I
+
' k f!
1
,r I,1 1?
i
r `
/ I
I I , E
I
y
IE I - /.? % 1 11 r
o
F I "` I? I
I
_ l ; IL
' ?i'' t I r
gO 1I
\• f Irr'I',I
,r I Xo?o I.
I
wm?aw
+
I
,II
.,
I I ` I ' I,'il
I ?.. i' III s ?, ' I
Ii II,•
--- -----------
I e8,
y : I , -' R II ` t III, ,
------------
01' -_ f ¦ I
-' r
-------------
w
.l ' _. _} _? I1v
za
it II 1 ? 14
r--
s
a??a'? ?I(I I 1
II )w
,r
/ )I '9-
,
1 '.I
r
d I A
1 o
r?
Pd"ME'l?V? 911
^
. .n
f
II,3 I
------------
I
. _ F
,
--
-
7R7
r
r ,
?.. ,
-------------------
W
wa
0 4
?bpN a Z u
0 vV
z
0
li:
¦
I i ¦ I
¦
¦

i 13
# $ o

?F
p?
I?

rc
K?
?
? 'E N O
<q
U f
f
SS
yy 0
y
y
%%
l ?

YyS +!grv 4
? 'm 6 N N
? r
..
?-

z

i
S x
Nn
E
gs .
?J
r
e
? r
P`02 I
can.,+: o p
!? p
P ? = 1 i
f ? ? I
a, RCP
Iif N
U:
m ?? o
P-03 P-01 ;
1 t
I
--- r f I f ( 1 ?? 1- n,
-?- - Approximate Boring Location
Mote: All locations are approximate.
BORING LOCATION PLAN erra on
WHISPERING PINES SHOPPING CENTER, PROJECT NO.: 71095030
DATE: September 2009
DRAWN BY: SAS
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA SCALE: UNKNOWN FIGURE NO.1
1
1

1
1
1
r
L
L
1

1
UN'IFIE'D 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 ?! 4 and 15 Cc s 3E GW' Well-graded graveir
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 gravelF
on No. 200 sieve No_ 4 sieve Gravels with Fines More Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravefrl-"
than 12% fines' Fines classify as CL or CH GC -Clayey gravel','-'
Sands Clean Sands Cu >$ and 1 5 Cc 5 3E SW Well-graded sand'
50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines°
fraction passes < 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°i Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand",'
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" Fine' ML Silt "'
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic day""
<0.75 OL
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt"
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay",'-"
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI iots;belowA" line MH Elastic Silff°
organic liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay"M.P
a 0.75 OH
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt"-' Q
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.
cGravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM welt-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
e Cu DadD1a Cc= Dta x Dso
F if soil contains _> 15% sand, add;'bvith sand" to group name.
If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM:.
"If fines are organic, add 'with organic fines" to group name.
If soil contains z 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.
If soil contains ? 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
sandy" to group name.
MY soil contains Z 30%° plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
"gravelly" to group name.
"Pt > 4,and plots on or above 'A" line.
oPI < 4 or plots below `"A line.
PPI plots on or above "A" line.
QPI plots below A" line.
60,
For ctaissification of fine-grained
soils and ru"rained fraction
g0 of coarse-grained sails
-------- m

'
Equaton of "A- - line a? .
}p
a Horizontal at Pi=4 to LL=25.5_
X 40 then PI=0.73 (LL-20) 0
D Equation of 'U' - rit=e t of
?
? Vertical at LL-161o Pt=7. G
30 then FW.9 (LL-8)
C)
0-
20 . .' G
MH or OW
ro
ML
4
or OL
0

-
0 iQ 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
1
1
1
1
Form
1
Irerra n J
1?ena?ar
Consultants, Inc.
January 14, 2009
JDH Capital, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
2020-Starita.Road, Suite E
Charlotte, North Carolina 28206
Phone:: [phone]
Fa)c 704-509-1888
www.terracon.com
Attn:: Mr. Mark Ball
' R
R
lt
f G
dw
e:
esu
s o
roun
ater 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.
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.
The purpose of this investigation was to further observe groundwater levels and perform
borehole permeability testing for development of the storm-waster management plan. Our
scope of services included auger probing, performing imsitu 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.
Boring locations were determined by WSP SELLS:. The borings were located in the field by
Terracon personnel by taping and estimating right angles relative to existing site features.
1
I
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 10 to 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 2,4 hours.
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

r 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 Iogs. The
possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the
design and construction plans for the project-
I
f
t
ti
t
n
il
ra
on Evalua
ion_
Upon completion of the permeability borings, a! 7.5-foot length of 2-inch diameter PVC
casing was placed in each Boring. The bottom 25 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' ex tended 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.

w

Approximate 16.8-Acre Site
Ray's Bridge Road and NC Highway 22'.
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 7109WO1
January 14, 2009
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.
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 RESULTS
Not encountered
**Based on visual observation

t w
Depth VI(atgr #t r ''
°/aass[ng 6re a ?.U CS ,
Loea (ER
r
Content
aDe
R }.`

-2
Pe
?nealrty
ryCla qn
)w 1
..
.,
P-1 5' 3.7 N1E* 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**
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 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
identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous, materials 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 been prepared in accordance- with generally accepted

r

1

1
1

t
t
1

i
Rp,VS 6R ' ? ? \_
O O \
RETAIL \
O \
O \
\
\
P-3 RETAIL GROCERY-
\ P-2 -
?
DETENTION POND tl
\ P4 `\ \
RETAIL/ \? \
RESTAURANT
??
s \ LANDSCAPER ?
\ P \
\
MEDICAL OFFICES/
\ OFFICES
EX. RETAIL \-\ \

IF

LEGEND
- - - SUBJECT SITE

$
APPROXIMATE PERMEABILITY TEST AND 0 60
GROUNDWATER OBSERVATION LOCATION
THIS DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND R NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PlA2POSFS
- Approximate Scale
(Feet)
I'Mied wr- PmjectNo.
MPS 71095001 BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM FIG
No

D-Br DWD
Scale. AS SHOWN .
.
ChedceC Dy
MPSIMRF Fk Na
GEOnossoma Consulting Fag-ee-. A Scientists
PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
Appaed er.
BCH Datar
JAN 2009
2020 Sterna Rd. Suite E Charlotte North Carolina
28206 HWY 22 & RAYS BRIDGE ROAD
Boa sos nn a4s)
w9-1 w CARTHAGE, NC
\ ? N
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
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 s Cc s 3E GW Well-graded gravel`
More than 50% of coarse Less than 5% fines`
More than 50% retained fraction retained on
Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E GP F
Poorly graded gravel'
on No. 200 sieve No. 4 sieve Gravels with Fines Mo re Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravelFG "
than 12% fines` Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravelF,`•"
Sands Clean Sands Cu >_ 6 and 1 s Cc s 3E SW Well-graded sand'
50% or more of coarse Less than 5% fines°
fraction passes
Cu < 6 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"'
Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line' CL Lean Gay"'
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50
No. 200 sieve PI < 4 or plots below "A" line' ML Silt"`"
organic Liquid limit - oven dried
Organic clay"""
< 0.75 OL
Liquid limit - not dried Organic siltKI"•O
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat clay"`"
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI plots below "A" line MH Elastic Silt`,L?m
organic Liquid limit - oven dried
Organic clay""
< 0.75 OH
Liquid limit - not dried Organic silt' °
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 fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.
e If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles ' If soil contains >_ 15% gravel, add "faith gravel" to group name.
cor boulders, or both" to group name. ' If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area
soil is a CL-ML
silty day

Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded ,
,
.
K If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200
add "with sand" or' with
gravel with silt, GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay, GP-GM poorly ,
gravel," whichever is predominant.
graded gravel with silt, GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
D
Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded If soil contains 2! 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
"
"

sand with silt, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded sandy
to group name.
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with day ""If soil contains >_ 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
"gravelly" to group name.
ECU = D60ID10 Cc= (D30z "PI >_ 4 and plots on or above "A" line.
D1a x D6o °PI <4 or plots below "A" line.
F If soil contains ? 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name. P PI plots on or above "A" line.
cif fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM. OR plots below "A" line.
60 -- I --- -- ,.

For classification of fine-grained ;
e'
soils and fine-grained fraction
i
5o of coarse-gralned soils V?
Equation of 'A" - line
a Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.

fX 40 - then P"- .73 (LL-20)
' R,
0 __-

C3 Equation of 'U" - line t
o
Z
_ vertical at LL=16 to Pi=7,
30 ' then 'P1=0.9(LL-8)
U i E ?' Oy ?

F- ? pt
G
(n 20
Mai or OH
10

,J....
71
4 ML or OL

i _._. T.. -_.

0 10 16 27 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
J:_... Irerracan-
1
1
Whispering Pines
Shayne Leathers
Page 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>>
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(cD-terracon.com 1 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
Whispering Pines Page 1 of 2
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
?x 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@wspsel Is.com
2/12/2009
Whispering Pines Page 2 of 2
i
www.wspsells.com
From: Saunders, Scott A. [maiIto: [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>>
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(aDterracon.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
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,
Irerracon
Raleigh, North Carolina
;i
November 3, 2006
, i
JDH Capital, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217

Attn: Mr. Darren Tuitt
' Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
NC Highway 22 & Ray's Bridge Road
Whispering Pines, North Carolina
Project No. 71067778
ff Dear Mr. Tuitt:
Irerracon
Consulting Engineers & Scientists
5240 Green's Dairy Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27616
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
www.terracon.com
' r We are submitting, herewith, the results of our subsurface exploration for the proposed
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
proposed project site and, based on this information; to provide recommendations regarding
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 any way, please
i do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely, e```>>aoe???ee®ai
SEAL `
/J 03073Y x G. A,?
Matthew S. Balven, P.E. °??`??GI?IEEQ? mey C. P. E.
r Project Geotechnical Engine `i?"?? °
J a ?'. BA?- Principal
' I Registered, North Carolina 030731se®8e8g°e°Registered, North Carolina 11285
1
I
Attachments
i Copies to. Addressee (3)
l_
' Delivering Success for Clients and Employees Since 1965
I More Than 60 Offices Nationwide
?I
1
1
INTRODUCTION
1
' -, PROJECT DESCRIPTION -------____--------------_-__-----___-_-___-_1
SITE EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
i Field Exploration
I Laboratory Testing--------------------_---______-_.______?-___?-_2

4 SITE CONDITIONS
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS« --- 3
Regional Geology - .._-g
Subsurface Soil Conditions----------------------____-_
' i Groundwater Conditions----__.- - --------
Seismic Site Classification - -q
' ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS ---------------------- ----------_-______-_____-____q
Geotechnical Considerations --------------------_-- -------__-_?-______ ____?
Site Preparation---
Excavations
j Foundation Systems
' Slabs--------------------------------------____ ------r----------_____--_---------7
Pavements ----- - ____----------_---__------------- --------_----__---------------8

°i GENERAL COMMENTS
-- g
_- ____________
APPENDIX
Site Location Plan
Boring Location Plan
' Boring Logs
General Notes

i
'J
i ?
I Unified Soil Classification System
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I
pl
i, GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT

?I
' r PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
I NC HIGHWAY 22 & RAY'S BRIDGE ROAD
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
TERRACON PROJECT NO. 71067778

11
'I
?t
r?
I
.J
1
1
1
1
i
?I
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 geotechnical 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
ij
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.
(j
;I
it
I?
.j

1 ?1
Ii
1
1
1
1
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
i
classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the driller's
interpretation of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs included
i 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.t .
The laboratory testing program consisted of performing water content, Atterberg limits, and
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
'J
with this report.
L.?
2
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
SITE CONDITIONS
i
i 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
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
it
office building and house are located towards the center of the north portion of the property.
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
1 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
feet in the southern half.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Regional Geology
I ; 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 i with periods of migrating shorelines and fluctuating sea levels are the dominate subsurface
L 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
characterized by sand, sandstone, and mudstone with gray, yellow, and orange coloration.
Subsurface Soil Conditions
.a
Approximately, 3 to 7 inches of topsoil was encountered at the surface at the majority of the
i .I borings. Exceptions occurred at borings B-1, B-3, and B-13 where approximately 2 to 3
(i 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
I 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).
Seams of sandy clay (CL) were also encountered at some of the boring locations. The
l
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
. Li . 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.
3
r ?
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
i 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 E (5013").
? More detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered at each boring location
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.
? Groundwater Conditions
I?
{ 1 Groundwater levels were measured in the open boreholes while drilling and immediately
'
J 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 slung which obscures the
l indication of groundwater. However, soil moisture and the gray coloration found in several
' soil samples indicate groundwater maybe present between depths of 20 to 25 feet during
the wetter months of the year.
i
Fl
t
ti
i
h
uc
ua
ons
n t
e 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

fi wetter months of the year (November through April).
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 classes 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
i?
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
can be supported on shallow footing foundations bearing on medium dense to dense sand,
i 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
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
l be performed during subgrade preparation and footing construction to confirm suitable
r
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,
f l and B-11. In their current condition, these soils are marginal for the support of foundations,
l 1 floor slabs, and pavements. To improve these materials, we recommend the sand be rolled
with a smooth-drum vibratory roller after stripping.
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
j 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...1
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
f vertically to minimize conflict with new foundation construction.
?i
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
L J, 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
j a suitable period of dry weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade. The
L.- 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
5
I?
1-,
!il
l?
!i
it
t
?i
I
t

i
1
1
i
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Terracon Project No. 71067778
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
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 backfiil, 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
1
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
I I 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
a? 1 bearing pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) should be used for design of the
footings. The net allowable bearing pressure is that pressure which may be transmitted to

i- 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
I
'
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
i stone is not required. Based on. the borings, we do not anticipate a reed for extensive
,
overexcavation and replacement of the foundation bearing soils.
I
.l
? The foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile,
l 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 be on the order of 1 /2 the total settlement.
u
The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil prior to
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.
U
Slabs
-' 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
1 Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
?i 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 place it, should 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.
i1
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
r j vertical displacement across the joints.
i Pavements
I
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
subgrade should be adequate for support of the pavement sections recommended below.
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,
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.
The light-duty pavement sections are for car traffic only. Heavy-duty pavement sections
assume a total of 30,000 ESAL's -(18 kip Equivalent Single Axle Loads) for the life 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
similar soil types, we have based our design on a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) of 8 for the
on-site soils.
1
f

s r.
?!I
?Il
f'
r'
I H
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 1-19.06).
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 5 6
(4,000 psi)
Crushed Stone 4 4
(NCDOT ABC, Type A or B)
Flexible Asphalt Concrete / Surface
2
1.5
(NCDOT Type S-9.5A or 1-2)
Asphalt Concrete / Binder _ 2
(NCDOT 1-19.0B or Type H)
Crushed Stone 6 8
(NCDOT ABC, Type A or B)
I 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,
Ll and Surface Course. Concrete. pavement should be air-entrained and have a minimum
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
! 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
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
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development Tersacon Project No. 71067778
I
Whispering Pines, NC November 3, 2006
r,
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
i 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
y 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
1 identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials, or conditions. If the owner is
f 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
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.
` 10
LF-1
?I
r;

jl
'I
l
1
I 1
4
!i
I?.
APPENDIX
I?
1
r?
r
{
i ,
I
'I
it
i!
1 11
s
.J
ti 2ava}.
{f Y
22
FAi._._?tN :':f ?mr
F-L 11
is k 1 _ n-
f?
SRiO
w
St" Pyy
47
,, .. _t_? ? R°??`? Y? ??r? :S? _,. _ i f r????? ?'???c??? ?? 5 do
ooo_n i nnnr??r?
SITE LOCATION DIAGRAM
PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
NC HIGHWAY 22 & RAY'S ROAD
WHISPERING PINES, NORTH CAROLINA
Irerracon
PROJECT NO.: 71067778
DATE: 11/1/2006
DRAWN BY: MSB
SCALE: NTS DRAWING NO. 1
Reference: 2006 Delorme Street Atlas I
i?
r,I
i
t
I i (I

1
I
I
II
?i
is
R`pGRR?p? j2 ° ,i
Rp?s R O V
RETAI ° 4F& 4
o°
o ?
O B
RETAIL B'9
&M5 / B-1
1 y?
B-1 "
GROCERYC/ - `
DETENTION POND
B-14 `\ t
RETAIL/
RESTAURANT\-,
LANDSCAPE
B-16 t
B-15 ?
EX. RETAIL•
I ci±cArn
- - SUBJECT SITE
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION
THIS MOM 1S FOR GE45KLOCAMON ONLY, AND$N'OTWTB ® FOR CM6iRI1CT0NPURP05ES
B-17
Z
MEDICAL OFFICES!
B-18 OFFICES
BB-19
B-20
N
r
0 60
Approximate Scale
(Feet)

MS13
owe, 7106r776
9 BORING LOCATION DIAGRAM FIG. No.
DWD AS SHOWN GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
aWoa,. FANa PROPOSED 16.8 ACRE DEVELOPMENT
MSB/MRF cEOrta9mea

??
ODIC
524
9
7
'al
)arRwd Ral
02781
6 KW 22 & RAYS BRIDGE ROAD ry
L
BCH NOVEMBERMN 131%
791
(9
7323.2
9159
271 (979)
8739555
1 WHISPERING PINES, NC
ri
i.
fit
i
I
I
t?
i
I?
{
?I
i?
I 7
I
k
c
I ` C
ti I c
0
u
! r
'? I C
C
`J C9.
u
U
? f
1
u
0
u
4 r
r
i B
v
1 • o
C
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
SAMPLE S TESTS

DESCRIPTION J
} C
w e ? CL
W ?
U
_ ?
=
fn
W
>
2l4
rrWZ
Z
ZZ
Q !- to
a in w O '3:
o W Z } 0 W

C7 luu
? i
M :D
z W
it a _
tnm ¢ o
?0 of 6
? Q Z
Dc
0.3 GRAVEL
FINE CLAYEY SAND. yellowish brown, Sc 1 SS 11 3.9 P200=14%
medium dense, moist

Sc 2 SS 18
5.0

SC 3 SS 32
8

FINE SAND
ellowish brown and brown
, y
,
medium dense to dense, moist SP 4 SS 29
10.0

??
? SP 5 SS 18
:` 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 -V Y BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
MSB JOB # 71067778
i?
r'
1.
I:
{
Ud
r
r)
Ir?
?I
f
i
I
i +
1
1
1
i l
0
• , u
`c
? c
u
u
i i
o
u
O
u
?I
a
r
°
u
u
0
P
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 co > °w
U
z
S !}
c)
w M
>
z F
Ww H
z K N
zZ
a
w
uUi Co w
o O
w
~? FW-z
as } OUW
?
0 ? 7) z ? ? a
WED 3:0 6
? a z
0m
0.3 TOPSOIL
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 OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
Q .24 hours ? BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
E s Irerraccln RIG CME550 FOREMAN RJ
WL not encountered MSB JOB # 71067778
1
1
r?
?i
?I
I
r?
li
i,
1 ?.
it
1. i
S
S
C
C
a
k
i ?
I I C
C
v
? I t
L
u
0
1 ) 2
r
o
a
j v
u
I I u
U
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
SA MPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m >- °w
Za
~
v
z o
m w zc z
w E
? u-
z
n
`E o ?
U o o
V F- O a..
F- >- o
U a
o ? z w vim Gov o a z?
:: • 0.2 GRAVEL

FINE SAND, tan, loose to medium dense, SP 1 SS 13 1.4 P200=5%
moist

-.. 5 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
r: 15
SP
5
SS
50

i BORING TERMINATED 15'0
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
_
BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL T erracon
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
r
!
r 1
rtl
rf?
1 ?{
{.J
?! c
I
0
F
! U
c
L
u
7
{ ! o
r
c
O
u
a
' I <
a
r
s °
g
u.
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

DESCRIPTION 0
m
> CL
Z i
L) o w E LL
z
= i
I— w
lu >
O zuO zw

r Z Z Z
a
C7 a. c/) n_
H v r-0
(nm
o }
t5
o 0?
z
0 =1 Z W c
-) n 7) cf)
0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, yellowish brown, loose to SP 1 SS 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 re rr acon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 7106777$
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
SAMPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > a
U

1: a

Lu w

z z ~ ??
Z
a v 'E w
}
w 0 z r o?,
W Q)
D ?
Z
I-
a a-
Wm d p
?S0 of
D a z
?cn
0.1 ASPHALT

FINE SAND, yellowish brown, loose, SP 1 SS 7
3 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,
10
o P1=21
moist . ,
P200=28%
.?

.

95
SC
-5
SS
30
BORING TERMINATED 95.0
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
WL Q .L
1 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL T 1 rerracon
- RIG CME550 FOREMAN RJ
WL
MSB JOB # 71067778
I r-
i.

? I
rf
rl
(1
I?
i. l
Jt
c
j C
I c
L
0
0
u
h
c
I ? c
C
C
0
V
LL
I ?
f Z
LL
6
v
t
,
i
s
LL
U
U
C

LOG OF BORING NO: B-6 Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
JDH Capital, LLC
SITE NC Hwy 22 & Ray's Bridge Road
Whispering Pines, North Carolina PROJECT
Proposed 16.8 Acre Development
SAMPLE S TESTS
I
U
=
n

0 DESCRIPTION

2

a
? M
>-
rn

CO
D
X
W

Z

a

I--- >
W
>

(U
M
-
Z G7

F.p
tanm a
Z
of W

?z
0

Z

>-
? O. Z i
ti~
Z z
z
0W
?U)
a-3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan,
loose, moist SP 1 SS 6

SP 2 SS 6
RNE CLAYEY SAND, yellowish brown 5'0
and red, medium dense to dense, moist SC 3 SS 21

10A SC 4 SS 18

15.0 SC 5 SS 40

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-sftu, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06.
Q
WL 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06

WL err icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ

WL MSB JOB # 71067778
11
f ?.
r
r
?i
r..l
,
r,
II
Ir -;
r!?
r?}
{
i.{
rl
I
I_
r ` J f
, C
C
i
? c
c
t
u
fl { C
l? a
C
u
f o
I i
u
0
u
r?
i a
I
r ?
g
u
u
C
C
G
rG
i
r~
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
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION co > CL
°w

U
o:
w
z
F
O
? 2 w 0 z0 Pz pw
< n
o v z }o w ?-1 ¢o 3-
C! b z?
F co [n U a rn
-.• 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
ellowish
,
y
y
, y

brown, medium dense to dense, moist SP 6 SS 53
20.0
SP 7 SS 28
25
25.0
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 10-18-06
WL
BORING COMPLETED 10-18-06
WL
1 T ? rr icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
F11 ..
i
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
SAMPLE S TESTS

DESCRIPTION -j
0

w U)
CL
z
_ _ a
W > zco a? w z zZ
a
a F-
w U)
U) M
> W o
w
a? W?-
QO
w oW
z
p
C7 D z r W a
tom U ?
wo a i
ZD U-)-

.
. 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, with clay, brown to reddish SP 1 SS 13
brown, medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 14
5 Sr
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
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.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL 2 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL - I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL, MSB JOB # 71067778
li
it
II
i
?i

r?
i
l
r ?
f
tI
I ..l
ij
i'
I I S
LJ T
uP
F
1 + C
l C
?I <
c
a
o
U
I c
Z
n
u
0
v_
r
s
I u
U
tl
?J
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 m a
v

= >-

cn a!

w w

>

z z

o w F=

z
K F
Z Z

W cn
(1) m
z w O
-? w?-
o Ow
z
o enM U n ?
.,.-:..- 0.3 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, SP 1 SS 6
.. 3 brown, loose, very moist

FINE TO MEDIUM SAND
,
tan, loose, wet SP 2 SS 7
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

SAND, SP 6 SS 40
yellowish brown to tan, dense, wet 25.0- - -
29
ANDY CLAY,
30
0 CL 7 SS 8
light gray, stiff to very stiff, wet .
CL 8 SS 21
35
0
.
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 1Z 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-31-06
WL err Icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL HEJ JOB # 71067778
1 1-?
i
'i
I!
I)
? f

i 1

f l
l .?
(1
L.
I i
LOG OF BORING NO. B-9
Page 2 of 2
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 } e
S °w c
v
C c N w
> z z
a: w F z o
L
v m
D
w
~ w F-
QO O
z

0
W
?
i
D

Z }

I-

o_
a-1
rnM

'SU
cr 6
O n
?
Dfq
SANDY CLAY
,
light gray, stiff to very stiff, wet CL 9 SS 16
0

42
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with clay
seams,
light gray, loose to medium dense, wet SP 10 SS 7
5
0
.
SP 11 SS 12
50.a

SP 12 SS 17
55.0

58
PINE 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
be
tween soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-31-06

L BORING COMPLETED 10-31-06
L erracon
RIG CME 550 OREMAN RJ

HEJ JOB # 71067778
1 i
I
i?
Ij
II
i'
l

`l
' !J
L J
I?
Ij
r?
LOG OF BORING NO. B-10
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 ?
co c

>

o m

°w
U
z
=
co EY
w w
>
Z
rrw }-
z U_
Z

a.
c) ? W

0 W
0
?
N Z)
Z }
?-
o!
W
(n m ¢O
? O o ?
D a ZH
cn
' . ` 0.6 TOPSOIL
FINE SAND, yellowish brown to tan, SP 1 SS 5
loose, moist

SP 2 SS 8
0
5
.
SP 3 SS 21

FINE CLAYEY SAND
li
r
ht
d
,
g
g
ay an

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 appropmate 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 BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
i
I'
I?
j
i }
it
1
1
`I
i
i i
' I

t
i ?
k
u
t n
C
u
? o
n
u
0
I ?
n
!-J
i a
I a
I u
C
a
I
LOG OF BORING NO. B-11
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 > LU a
T
U
_
_ j a
LL1 I
>
Z to 1-
rr H
Z Z F
-
Z Z
Q
tr b

W U

U)

:3 a

} 00

LU ?p

a. HZ

0 >- Uit
o
a
Z
I
-
o
'
m
U
r?
0 a
DO
0.3 TOPSOIL

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

5 SP 2 SS 8 6.1 P200=10%

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

. 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 stratification lines represent the approximate boundary fines
between soff and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-19-06
WL -7
i BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL
-
- - Y I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
W L JOB # 71067778
I
I
?l
?I
?I
i i
i
i1

• c
C
C
0
0
L
r
i 1 c
V
C
v
u
I I n
a
u
a
?J n
a
c
• , u
C
u
a
C
a

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
SAMPLES TESTS
-°? DESCRIPTION Co
}
w
U

z

=

co 4!

w W

>

z
cn

Z
w

?
h
FL
Z
a.
Q a
0 M
U
0 ED U1 U Fp ti
F-z
U }
a UD
C7 Z o: coom U
? 0 D?
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
25 SP 7 SS 27
BORING TERMINATED 25.0
The stratification fines represent the approbmate boundary lines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-18-06
WL - 1
I
i BORING COMPLETED 10-18-06
WL s lrerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
W MSB JOB # 71067778
1
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
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION m °w °
0
z
v) a.,
w W
>
zU)
=w
z LL
zz
0
IL

W
v

(a
g

z
W
0-

O

0
0

t-z

r

L)M
t7 o
5
ti
R
ai m
4
o n
D (o
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

25 SP 7 SS 48

i 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 Q t BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
WL _ re rr acon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
i?
r1
?r
I
,
Ii
LI o
a
u
u_
a
i I
0
V
O
V
O
? I $
8
? u
u
C
a
I
LOG OF BORING NO. B-14
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
O
0

DESCRIPTION JO
cc

Z z
U >
m w
z z ~ LLo

w co

W

0 w

o_ O

U w ?

ap wZ

¢O }

0!
w
o of
zE-
C7 O D Z ir co in U o a 0 fo
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
'. 10
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 I rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
I
F1
rr?
ll
rl
I,
i?
l
?l
F
t
1
a
h
, I <
I ?
L. , -e
a
a
I I n
uc
°
0
u
P
i °
u
°
i
I °
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
SAMPLES TESTS
DESCRIPTION m > f
x
U ?
3f >- w Z t= Ii a
a 0 in a Ov H0 WZ
O > 0M
C? 0 Z) Z Fes- M (0 U
'S 0 c n a)
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

SANDY CLAY
li
ht
ra
and
ellowish
,
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 SZ L BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL 7 l rerracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
it
n
;C
Il
? I
l
fl
I?
[_ f
? e
{ f
i
' c
1 c
-J
F
C
1 c
L_
c
II a
r
LJ -
0
;
r°
r
r
8
c
C
L
C
r
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
SA MPLE S TESTS
DESCRIPTION °m °w
v M w -
Z z L a: 1--
Q Q

0 U

(0

z W CL

?
U
W ?
E- p
CL Nz >_

It 0
Cr
C7 l X vim ?0 n Dcn
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE CLAYEY SAND, light gray and SC 1 SS 21
yellowish brown, medium dense, moist

SC 2 SS 26
5

FINE SAND, with clay, light gray, medium 5.0
dense to dense, moist SP 3 SS 27

SP 4 SS 28
10.0
'. 15
SP
5
SS
43
BORING TERMINATED
s 15.0
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
WL t BORING COMPLETED 10-19-06
L
WL err Icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
W
L MSB JOB #. 71067778
it
it
1i
1 f?
1
1I
1
1 I?
J s
C
C
h
i C
C'
•J C
u
0
C
7
u
0
i
j a
? u
C_
U
a
C

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
SAMPLES TESTS
O m } a
DESCRIPTION 1- =

U
z
W
w
>
z cn
a w H
z
1
?
z z
< w a j a 0 F-1 1W-Z r 00:
c? n D z H W UcL -1
3
it s
D U)
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND, yellowish brown and tan, SP 1 SS 8
loose to medium dense, moist

SP 2 SS 28
• 5
BORING TERMINATED 5.0- -
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
BOR
ING COMPLETED 10-20-06
L a rr acon RIG CME 550 OREMAN RJ
WL
MSB
JOB # 71067778
L1
' r4
I i-l
i
I
ail

l?
r
{

?l

I r
u
a
o
1 2
i
c
h c
u
0
a
Li
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 m >: a
W
U D W
Z h- Z
F-
if 0
Z
rr

_
0
n
D
z
it
ao
30
o a-
?~
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND. with clay, tan, medium SP 1 SS 13
3 dense, moist

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-sftu, the transition may be gradual.
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED 10-20-06
WL ?-7- 1 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL I err Icon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
LL MSB JOB # 71067778
i i
'. I
i
i
r?
?l
?i.
tilt
I4
l?
li
i?
?j
r
o
i
t
u
L'
u
2
I I
n
. 8
fl
c
a
u
?J
LOG OF BORING NO. B-9 9
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 J
m
}
w -

_
= }
U3
U! w
>
z cA ~
M W E
z z?
Z Z
CL F_

w (j) M

a

w
.?

O

x

W

a 0)i
D
Z }
1-
0: a9
0) m
? U '13
0 Q. F_
M CD
0.3 TOPSOIL

FINE SAND, with clay, brown, medium SP 1 SS 9
:. 3 dense, moist

FINE CLAYEY SAND
yellowish brown
,
and reddish brown, medium dense to SC 2 SS 19 12.1 P200=24%
5
0
dense, moist .
SC 3 SS 29

SC 4 SS 48
10.0
(with gray clay seams below 13 feet)

15 SC 5 SS 42
BORING TERMINATED 15'0
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 BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL s rerracon
RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB #. 71067778
I'.
i
l
J;
rl
i
Il
I1I
11
(l
c
U?
u
C
e
f -
u
0
I i
i 1
o
u
a
u
i
Li
i o
S
u
U
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
SAMPLE S TESTS

0

DESCRIPTION J

M
2

>

1
;
.9

W
Z
U >- Of W ?
> 1
1L
zvs F-:
o!w Z ZZ
Q
X d
W U
cq n
D W
} O
w - 0
a_j F-- Z
aO >-
W v OU W
z?
C7 D z cn co 0 D a Z) co
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
8

FINE SAND
with clay
reddish brown
,
,
,
medium dense to dense, moist

10
0 SP 4 SS 39
VA- .
.•

15
SP
5
SS
25
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 10-20-06
WL BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WL $
- I rerracon
RIG CME 550
FOREMAN RJ
WL MSB JOB # 71067778
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
0
0

DESCRIPTION 0

M c

> C
'
°w
y

W
W
> -

zv
z
ituU

z
LL
z
?;
W
co m w
} o
? uJ o w
C
. a z t
- (n c) 0 a D co
0.3 TOPSOIL

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

SC 2 SS 23
FINE CLAYEY SAND, reddish brown,
dense, moist SC 3 SS 35

M 110 SC 4 SS 31
BORING TERMINATED 10.0
i
I
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary fines
between soil and rock types: in-situ, the transition may be gradual.
WA TER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, ft BORING STARTED
10-20-06
WL _
t BORING COMPLETED 10-20-06
WE
erracon RIG CME 550 FOREMAN RJ
WL
MSI3 JOB # 7/067778
i
C7.`
i
1'•
it
I- 1
i?
J.
I
1
11
?l
1
i
1
1

1
1
n
1
V
i.
?i
GENERAL NOTES
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon -1 318" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger
ST. Thin-Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: 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
BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary
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
penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value".
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling N/E: 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 PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL
Descriptive Term(s) of other Percent of
constituents Dry Weiaht
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 DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS
Standard Penetration
or N vale (SS)
Slows/Ft.
0-3
4-9
10-29
30 - 49
50+
Relative Densjty
Very Loose
Loose
Medium Dense
Dense
Very Dense
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Major 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+
Irerracon
j
F1

I
V;
11'
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name°
Coarse Grained Salt Gravels Clean Gravels Cu 2:4 and 1 5 Cc 5 3` 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'A•"
than 12% fines' Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel'-"
Sands Clean Sands Cu >- 6 and 1 5 Cc 5 3? SW Well-graded sand'
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes Less than 5% fines'
Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc > 3E
SP
Poorly graded sand'
No. 4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand"J
More than 12% fines' Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand"
Fine-Grained Soils Slits and Clays Inorganic PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line' CL Lean day's"
50% or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50
PI < 4 or plots below 'A" fine'
ML
Silt""
No. 200 sieve
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic clay'«'"
-0.75 OL
Liquid limit - not dried Organic s116 "4'
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above "A" line CH Fat day'-'-"
Liquid limit 50 or more
PI Tots below 'K line MH Elastic Silt'
organic Liquid limit - oven dried Organic day"""s`
< 0.75 OH
Liquid limit - not dried Organic siltxL"
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
a If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles
or boulders, or both" to group name.
cGravels 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 day.
'Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded
sand with sift, SW-SC well-graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with sift, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
ECu = D6dDj0 Cc= (D3o) 2
Dro x Den
P if soil contains ? 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
t i

LI
t
1
i
? I
?i
f
r:
f
i
t f
r'If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC-GM, or SC-SM
60
5o
Q
W 40
Q
z
30
(3
Q 20
o_
10
7
4
0
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
"If fines are organic, add `with organic fines'to group name.
1 If soil contains 215% gravel, add '/with gravel" to group name.
J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty day.
KIf soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or'with
gravel," whichever is predominant.
`If soil contains 2 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 2:4 and plots on or above "A" line-
oPI <4 or plots below "A" line.
P Pt plots on or above "A" line.
oPI plots below "A" line.
For classification of fine-grained
soils and fine-grained fraction
of coarse-grained soils
I(
Equation of "A" - line
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.
17 aJ , i " p I i
then PI=0
73 (LL-20)
.
Equation of "U" - line
Vertical at LL=1
6 to PIA7,
o?
th
PI
0
en
=
.9 (LL-6)
QV
of
{
?

MHo r OH

Form 111-6l99
11VI