SW5130501_HISTORICAL FILE_20130507

'k - ...
STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW�
DOC TYPE
❑CURRENT PERMIT
❑ APPROVED PLANS
IQP HISTORICAL FILE
l
DOC DATE
,I ofol
YYYYMMDD

Report of Subsurface Investigation and
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Siler City Kingdom Ball
Siler City, North Carolina
prepared for
N.C. Regional Building Committee 94
TerraTech Engineers, Inc. (C-1356)
4905 Professional Court
Raleigh, North Caroling 27609
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
TFRPATECH
E N G I N E E R S- I N C
C,eotechnlcaL Lngineering
environmental CnnsuLting
Construction tjateriaLn Tenting
M M - 7 2013

September 20, 2011
N.C. Regional Building Committee #4
4509 Lawrence Daniel Drive
Matthews, North Carolina 28104
"acek tcco.com
ATTENTION: Mr. Jon Jacek
Report of Subsurface Investigation
and Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Siler City Kingdom Hall
Siler City, North Carolina
Our Project Number 121-11-65510
Gentlemen:
TFRPATECH
E N G I N E E R S • I N C
(�eotechnical Lngineering
G nvironmental Con5ulting
Construction Materials Testing
TerraTech Engineers, Inc, has completed the authorized subsurface investigation and engineering
evaluation for the planned construction of the Kingdom Hall in Siler City, North Carolina. The
enclosed report describes our investigative procedures and presents the results of our testing and
evaluation along with design and construction recommendations for this project.
We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project, and look forward to providing the
recommended construction testing services. If you have any questions concerning this report, please
contact us.
Sincerely,
Te Tech Engineers, Inc. (C- 56)
Glen A. Malpass, P.E. Erwin T. Williams III, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engin r Principal Geotechnical Engineer
GAM/sk
4905 Professional Court - Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 • [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Page 1
SCOPE OF SERVICES
TFRP4TECH
E N G I N E E R$• I N C
[eLItechnicalC-nyineenng
Lnoronmental Cansulling
Construction Materials Testing
The scope of this subsurface investigation was outlined in our proposal #4910-N dated June 16, 2011.
The primary objectives of this investigation were to evaluate the subsurface conditions within the area
of proposed construction and to make recommendations regarding foundation design. More
specifically, this investigation included the following objectives:
(1) To evaluate the existing subsurface soil and ground water conditions within the area of
proposed development.
(2) To recommend foundation types which can safely and economically support the proposed
construction.
(3) To evaluate the allowable bearing pressure of the foundation subsoils encountered within
the proposed building area for support of shallow foundations.
(4) To make recommendations concerning site preparation and site grading, including a
discussion of the excavation characteristics of the encountered materials.
(5) To make design recommendations for concrete slabs -on -grade.
(6) To make recommendations concerning control of ground water during construction and
on a permanent basis, if necessary.
(7) To make recommendations for material types and thicknesses for the planned pavement
systems in the driveways and parking areas.
(8) To make recommendations for achieving high density structural fill capable of
satisfactorily supporting the proposed construction.
(9) To make pertinent recommendations concerning quality control measures during
construction.

Page 2
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES
Field Investigation
TORPATECH
E N G I N E E R S - I N C
C,eateehnlcal Lnglneer ng
Cnvironmental Consulting
Can5trucben Yaferial5 Testing
The subsurface investigation consisted of five soil test borings advanced to a depth 15 feet below the
existing ground surface elevation. The approximate test boring locations are shown on Figure 1 in the
Appendix.
The test borings were located in the field by representatives of TerraTech Engineers, Inc. by measuring
distances and angles from existing site reference points. In general, the locations of the test borings
should be considered approximate. Ground surface elevations were not known at the time of this report.
Standard penetration testing, as provided for in ASTM D-1586, was performed at selected intervals in
the soil test borings. The standard penetration resistance, in conjunction with soil classifications,
provides some indication of a soil's engineering characteristics.
Detailed descriptions of the soils encountered in the test borings are provided in the Test Boring
Records included in the Appendix. Ground water conditions, penetration resistances, and other
pertinent information are also included. Please note that the stratification lines on the Test Boring
Records are approximate boundaries between soil types. The in -situ transitions are likely to be more
gradual.
Laboratory Investigation
The laboratory investigation consisted of a physical examination and classification of all samples
obtained from the drilling operation. Classification of the soil samples was performed in general
accordance with ASTM D-2488 (Visual -Manual Procedure for Description of Soils). Soil
classifications include the use of the Unified Soil Classification System described in ASTM D-2487
(Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes). The soil classifications also include our evaluation
of the geologic origin of the soils. Evaluations of geologic origin are based on our experience and
interpretation and may be subject to some degree of error.

Page 3
GENERAL SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDMONS
Site Location and Description
TFRP4TECH
ENGINEERS• INC
(�eotechnical Lngineering
Lmironmental Consulting
Construction AAateriaLs Testing
The site is located northeast of the intersection of Eden Hills Drive and Old U.S_ Highway 421 North in
Siler City, North Carolina. At the time of our investigation, the site was clear of trees and the ground
surface was generally covered with heavy underbrush and grass. Site topography generally slopes
downward to the south. Maximum relief across the site is approximately 30 feet.
Reeional Geolo�v
The subject site is located in the Piedmont Physiographic Province of North Carolina. Based on a
review of geologic maps, it appears that the site is located within a geologic unit known as the Carolina
Slate Belt. The site is generally underlain by massive metamorphic rocks consisting of biotite gneiss
and schist, with some mica schist.
Soils in this area have been formed by the in -place weathering of the underlying rock, which accounts
for their classification as "residual" soils. Residual soils near the ground surface, which have
experienced advanced weathering, frequently consist of clayey silt (ML) or silty clay (CL). The
thickness of this surficial clayey zone may range up to roughly 6 feet. (For various reasons, such as
erosion or local variation of mineralization, the upper clayey zone is not always present.)
With increased depth, the soil becomes less weathered, coarser grained, and the structural character of
the, underlying parent rock becomes more evident. These residual soils are typically classified as sandy
micaceous silt (ML) or silty micaceous sand (SM). With a further increase in depth, the soils eventually
become quite hard and take on an increasing resemblance to the underlying parent rock. When these
materials have a standard penetration resistance of 100 blows per foot or greater, they are referred to as
partially weathered rock. The transition from soil to partially weathered rock is usually a gradual one,
and may occur at a wide range of depths. Lenses or layers of partially weathered rock are not unusual in
the soil profile.
Partially weathered rock represents the zone of transition between the soil and the indurated
metamorphic rocks from which the soils are derived. The subsurface profile is, in fact, a history of the
weathering process which the crystalline rock has undergone. The degree of weathering is most
advanced at the ground surface, where fine grained soil may be present. The weathering process is in its
early stages immediately above the surface of relatively sound rock, where partially weathered rock may
be found.
The thickness of the zone of partially weathered rock and the depth to the rock surface have both been
found to vary considerably over relatively short distances. The depth to the rock surface may frequently
range from the ground surface to 60 feet or more. The thickness of partially weathered rock, which
overlies the rock surface, may vary from only a few inches to as much as 40 feet or more.
Stream valleys in the Piedmont often contain alluvial (water deposited) soils, depending on ground
surface topography, stream flow characteristics, and other factors. By nature, alluvial soils can be
highly variable depending upon the energy regime at the time of deposition. Coarse materials such as
sand or gravel are deposited in higher energy environments, while fine grained materials such as silt and

Page 4
TFRPATECH
E N G I N E E R S - I N C
Geotechnical Engineer ng
Lavironmentat Consulting
Construction MateHats Testing
clay are deposited in low energy environments. Alluvial soils may also contain significant amounts of
organic materials, and are frequently in a loose, saturated condition. In many cases, fine grained alluvial
soils will be highly compressible and have relatively low shear strength.
General Subsurface Conditions
From the ground surface, each of the test boring locations encountered topsoil. The thickness of the
topsoil ranged from approximately 4 to 8 inches. The thickness of topsoil can be quite variable and
could be significantly different at other locations on the site. The reported thickness of the topsoil
should not, therefore, be used for detailed quantity estimates.
Beneath the topsoil, residual materials were encountered in each test boring location. The residual soils
generally consisted of sandy silts. Standard penetration resistances in the residual soils generally ranged
from 14 to 52 blows per foot.
Partially weathered rock was encountered in all of our test borings at depths ranging from
approximately 3 to 8 feet below the existing ground surface. Partially weathered rock denotes residual
material with a standard penetration resistance of 100 blows per foot or greater.
Auger refusal was encountered in test borings B-3 and B4 at depths ranging from 11 to 12 feet below
the existing ground surface. Auger refusal is the depth at which the boring cannot be further advanced
using conventional soil drilling techniques. The material causing auger refusal may consist of a
boulder, a lens or layer of rock, the upper surface of relatively massive rock, or other hard material.
Ground water was not encountered in our test borings at the time of our investigation. It should be
noted that ground water levels will fluctuate depending on seasonal variations of precipitation and other
factors, and may occur at higher elevations at some time in the future.
For more detailed descriptions of subsurface soil and ground water conditions, please refer to the Test
Boring Records included in the Appendix.

Page 5
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION
URPATECH
E N G I N E E R S- I N C
GeotechnicaL engineering
LrvirannentaL CansuLting
Construction MateriaL5 Testing
Our understanding of the proposed construction is based on our conversations and e-mail
correspondence with Mr. Jon Jacek and our testing services performed on similar Kingdom Hall
buildings throughout central North Carolina. The building will most likely be a 1-story wood framed
structure supported on shallow foundations and having a concrete slab -on -grade floor system. Site
grading plans are not known at the time of this report. However, we estimate that site grading plans will
include mass excavation and structural fill placement of about 8 to 10 feet. Structural loading
conditions are currently unknown. However, based upon the type of construction, we anticipate
maximum column loads of 30 kips and maximum wall loads of 3 kips per linear foot. If actual loading
conditions are greater than these reported maximums, please contact us and we will review our
recommendations for applicability to the actual loading conditions.
We have estimated that traffic volumes for the parking and driveway areas will not exceed
500 automobiles per day and 4 dumpster or delivery trucks per week. If actual traffic volumes are
greater, please notify us and we will review our recommendations for applicability to the higher traffic
volumes.

Page 6
EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
TFRP.4TECH
ENGINEE R S• INC
(;&AechnicaL 6_ngiveering
Environmental COn5P(tiny
Contraction MateriaLs Testing
The following recommendations are based on the information available on the proposed structure, the
data obtained from our soil test borings, and our experience with soils and subsurface conditions similar
to those encountered at this site. Because the test borings represent a very small statistical sampling of
subsurface conditions, it is possible that conditions may be encountered during construction that are
substantially different from those indicated by the test borings. In these instances, adjustments to the
design and construction may be necessary depending on actual conditions.
General Site Development Considerations
Partially weathered rock and/or rock were encountered in the majority of our test borings. Mass
excavation, as well as the excavation of foundation and utility trenches, will likely require ripping or
blasting over a large portion of the site. A more detailed discussion of these items is provided in the
following sections of this report.
General Site>fregaration
All topsoil, roots, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the proposed construction
area. Site clearing, grubbing, and stripping should be performed only during dry weather conditions.
Operation of heavy equipment on the site during wet conditions could result in excessive mixing of
topsoil and organic debris with clean underlying soils.
Based on our experience with similar soil conditions, some softening of the near surface and exposed
soils should be expected during times of wet weather. The depth of soft soils caused by wet weather can
be highly variable, and can be dependent on the slope of the ground surface, the presence of on -site or
off -site sources of surface water, and other factors. Therefore, we recommend that site preparation
operations be performed during times of dry weather. While wet weather can occur at any time during
the year, the summer and early. fall are times when drier weather is generally prevalent. Scheduling site
grading during this time frame would reduce the probability of softening of the near surface soils from
inclement weather conditions.
We recommend that areas to receive structural fill be proofrolled prior to placement of structural fill.
Areas of proposed excavation should be proofrolled after rough finished subgrade is achieved.
Proofrolling should be performed using a loaded dump truck weighing at least 15 tons. Proofrolling
should be accomplished by performing at least 3 passes in each of two perpendicular directions within
entire construction areas, and 10 feet beyond. Any unsuitable materials that may be present, and any
low consistency soils that are encountered which cannot be adequately densified in place, should be
removed and replaced with well compacted fill material placed in accordance with the Structural Fill
section of this report. Proofrolling should be observed by our representative to determine if remedial
measures are necessary.
Proofrolling should facilitate the identification of soft surficial soils, but should not be expected to
reveal soft conditions more than 2 feet below the ground surface at the time of proofrolling. Footing
examinations will be required to evaluate the presence of deeper soft soils, which could adversely affect
foundation support. Footing examinations will be discussed later in this report.

Page 7
UPPATECH
E N G I N E E A S- I N C
C;eatechnical Engineering
EnvironmentaL Consulting
Construction MateriaLs Testing
Based on our experience on similar sites, there may also be buried foundations, burn pits or trash pits
located on the property. On sites located near developed areas this is not an unusual occurrence.
Additionally, aerial photographs reviewed online indicate that a road may have previously been present
on the site. Soft, wet soils are often present in the road -side ditches. All too frequently such buried
material occurs in isolated areas which are not detected by the soil test borings. Any buried waste,
construction debris, trash organics, or soft soils which are found during the construction operation
should be thoroughly excavated, and the waste material should be removed from the site prior to
placement of fill soils
Excavation Characteristics
For the purpose of discussing excavation characteristics, the subsurface materials encountered in our
borings fall into one of three broad categories: (1) residual soils, (2) partially weathered rock, and (3)
rock.
The residual soils at the project site should generally be excavatable with conventional soil excavation
equipment; such as scrapers, loaders, etc. However, residual soils having penetration resistances
ranging from 50 to 100 blows per foot may prove to be difficult to excavate using scrapers. These very
hard soils may require the use of heavy bulldozers, loaders, or track -mounted backhoes to effectively
achieve excavation. It is possible that very hard soils may require ripping in some instances.
Although materials identified as partially weathered rock may in some cases be excavatable with
conventional soil excavation equipment, we believe that it is wise to assume that partially weathered
rock.will require ripping to efficiently achieve excavation. The thickness and the continuity of partially
weathered rock should be expected to vary widely, even over a relatively short distance. Additionally, it
would not be unusual to find lenses of partially weathered rock within more weathered residual soils.
Ripping can probably best be achieved with a single -tooth ripper mounted on a large tractor such as a
Caterpillar D-8 or larger. In small area excavations, excavation of partially weathered rock may require
the use of heavy track -mounted backhoes or pneumatic jackhammers.
It should be noted that test borings B-1, B-3 and B-4 encountered zones of partially weathered rock
which allowed little or no penetration of our sampling equipment. These zones are indicated on the test
boring records by penetration resistances of 50 blows for zero inches, '/z inch, and 1 inch. It is likely
that these zones of partially weathered rock cannot be efficiently pre -loosened by ripping. In such
instances, blasting will be necessary.
Rock was encountered in test borings B-3 and B-4 at depths ranging from approximately I 1 to 12 feet
below the existing ground surface. Rock, as used in this report, is defined as auger refusal of our
conventional soil drilling equipment. We believe it would be prudent to assume that blasting will be
required for excavations below the depth at which rock was encountered in the area of these boring
locations, and in other areas below the boring termination depths.
We recommend that the project specifications include a clear definition of excavation types to prevent
field discussions regarding excavation of hard materials. We have enclosed our standard Rock
Excavation Specifications for your use. We recommend that these be incorporated into the project
earthwork specifications.

Page 8
TFRP4TECH
E N G 1 N E E R S- I N C
Ceatechnicat 6nyineering
Lnvironmentat Comutting
Construction Materials Testing
It is important to note that the depth to rock or partially weathered rock may vary quite rapidly over
relatively short distances. It would not be unusual for rock or partially weathered rock to occur at
higher elevations between or around the soil test borings. Additionally, it is important to realize that
ground water levels will fluctuate and could occur at significantly higher elevations at some time in the
future.
Earth Slopes
Temporary construction slopes should be designed in strict compliance with the most recent OSHA
regulations. The test borings indicate that most soils at the site are Type B as defined in the OSHA
regulations. The Type B soils will require that temporary construction slopes be no steeper than
1 horizontal to I vertical for excavation depths of up to 20 feet. A competent person as defined by
OSHA guidelines should be present to determine the type of material exposed during trench
excavations. Temporary construction slopes should be closely observed for signs of mass movement:
tension cracks near the crest, bulging at the toe of the slope, etc. If potential stability problems are
observed, the geotechnical engineer should be immediately contacted. The responsibility for excavation
safety and stability of construction slopes should lie solely with the contractor.
We recommend that permanent cut or fill slopes be no steeper than 2.5 (H) to 1.0 (V) to maintain long
term stability and to provide ease of maintenance. Slopes constructed steeper than 2.5 (H) to 1.0 (V)
could be highly susceptible to erosion, will be difficult to maintain, and could experience large scale
slope failure in some instances. The crest or toe of cut or fill slopes should be no closer than 15 feet to
any building foundation. The crest or toe should be no closer than 5 feet to the edge of any pavements.
Foundation DesiLwn
After the above described site preparation and site grading are complete, it is our opinion that the
proposed structure may be supported on conventional shallow foundations. Based on the test boring
results, and our past experience, we recommend that the shallow foundations be designed using an
allowable soil bearing pressure of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). This value assumes that soils
similar to those encountered at the site will be utilized as structural fill materials, and that fill materials
and floor subgrade soils will be compacted in accordance with the Structural Fill section of this report.
We recommend a minimum width of 18 inches for continuous wall footings and 24 inches for isolated
column footings to prevent localized shear failure. Footings should bear at a minimum depth of
18 inches below the prevailing exterior ground surface elevation to avoid potential problems due to frost
heave.
Detailed footing examinations should be performed in each footing excavation prior to placement of
reinforcing steel. These examinations should be performed by our representative to confirm that the
design allowable soil bearing pressure is available. The footing examinations should be performed
using a combination of visual observation, hand rod probing, and dynamic cone penetrometer testing.
Dynamic cone penetrometer testing, as described in ASTM STP-399, should be performed in each
column footing location and at no greater than 15 foot intervals in continuous wall footings.
Some of the foundations for this project may bear on new structural fill materials. For this reason, we
must emphasize the importance of quality control during the placement of structural fill. Performance
of building foundations which are supported by structural fill material will depend largely on achieving

TFRP4TECH
f N G 1 N F E R 5- I N C
C,eatechnical C_ngincering
Page 9 LnvironmentA Con:wLting
Corstruction Materials Testing
the recommended level of compaction on fill materials. Compacted soil densities less than the
recommended percentage of the standard Proctor maximum dry density could result in excessive
foundation settlement.
Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the foundation bearing surface, if they are
exposed for extended periods of time. If the foundation bearing surface becomes softened due to
exposure, the soft soils should be removed prior to placement of concrete.
Concrete Slabs -On -Grade
Based on our test boring results, and the anticipated site grading operations, we recommend that a
design modulus of subgrade reaction (k) value of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) be used for concrete
slabs -on -grade. This recommended value assumes that the subgrade soils and fill soils will be
compacted to a minimum of 98 percent of their standard Proctor (ASTM D-698) maximum dry density
in the upper 12 inches_
Construction activities and exposure to the environment often cause deterioration of the prepared slab -
on -grade subgrade. Therefore, we recommend that the subgrade soils be evaluated by our representative
immediately prior to floor slab construction. This evaluation may include a combination of visual
observations, proofrolling observations, and field density tests to verify that the subgrade has been
properly prepared. If soft areas are encountered, we will provide recommendations for remedial
measures.
'eIn order to provide a stable base for construction activity, and to protect the prepared slab subgrade soils
17. from inclement weather and construction traffic, we recommend that all slab -on -grade construction be
I— underlaiiv by a minimum 4 inch thickness of aggregate base course (ABC) stone meeting the NCDOT
Specification.
Flexible Pavement Desien
Based on the above described site preparation recommendations, we anticipate that the pavement area
subgrade soils will generally consist of sandy silts. These materials may reasonably have a California
Bearing Ratio (CBR) ranging from approximately 3 to 8, if compacted to at least 100% of the standard
Proctor maximum dry density.
For purposes of pavement design, we have used a California Bearing Ratio of 6 for the pavement
subgrade soils and the loading condition described previously in this report. Based on the AASHTO
-design method, a. 20 year design life, and our past experience, we suggest the following design
pavement section:
Driveways: 2 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course
8 inches Aggregate Base Course
Parking Areas: 2 inches Asphaltic Concrete Surface Course
6 inches Aggregate Base Course
The asphaltic concrete surface course should be a type SF9.5A bituminous concrete mixture in
accordance with Section 645 of the NCDOT Standard Specifications (2006). Aggregate base course

Page 10
TFRP4TECH
E N G I N E E Ps. INC
�,eotechnicaL Lngineering
6nvironmentaL Consulting
Construction NiateHats Testing
stone should be in accordance with Section 520 of the NCDOT Standard Specifications. Proper
subgrade compaction, adherence to the NCDOT specifications, and compliance with project plans and
specifications are critical to the performance of the constructed pavement.
Based on our past experience, we recommend that a Portland cement concrete pavement be used in
dumpster areas, and in other areas where heavy trucks are turning while traveling at slow speeds. We
suggest the use of a 6 inch thick section of Portland cement concrete having a 28 day design
compressive strength of 4,500 psi above a 4 inch thick section of compacted ABC stone. The concrete
pavement may be designed as a "plain concrete pavement" with no reinforcing steel, or reinforcing steel
may be used at joints. Construction joints and other design details should be in accordance with
guidelines provided by the Portland Cement Association and the American Concrete Institute.
Suitabilitv of Excavated Materials for Reuse as Structural Fill
Based on the results of our soil classifications, the residual soils at the site appear to be suitable for reuse
as structural fill material. Routine adjustment of moisture content will be necessary to allow
compaction in accordance with project specifications. Partially weathered rock will be suitable for use
as structural fill, if it can be adequately broken down into pieces smaller than 3 inches in any dimension.
Based on our experience, the majority of the partially weathered rock encountered at this site will break
down to a size adequate for use as structural fill. Blasted rock should be considered unsuitable for use
as structural fill.
Structural Fill
In order to achieve high density structural fill, the following recommendations are offered:
(1) Materials selected for use as structural fill should be free of vegetable matter, waste construction
debris, and other deleterious materials. The material should not contain rocks having a diameter
over 3 inches. It is our opinion that the following soils represented by their USCS group symbols
will typically be suitable for use as structural fill and are usually found in abundance in the
Piedmont Region: (SM), (SC), (ML), and (CL). The following soil types are not recommended
as fill on this site since they could create a perched water condition: (SW), (SP), (SP-SM), and
(SP-SC). The following soil types are considered unsuitable: (MH), (CH), (OL), (ON), and (Pt).
(2) Laboratory Proctor compaction tests and classification tests should be performed on
representative samples obtained from the proposed borrow material to provide data necessary to
determine acceptability and for quality control. The moisture content of suitable borrow soils
should generally not be more than 4 percentage points above or more than 4 percentage points
below optimum at the time of compaction. Tighter moisture limits may be necessary with certain
soils.
(3) Suitable fill material should be placed in thin lifts (lift thickness depends on type of compaction
equipment, but in general, lifts of 8 inches loose measurement are recommended). The soil
should be compacted by mechanical means such as steel drum rollers or sheepsfoot rollers.
Proofrolling with rubber tired, heavily loaded vehicles may be desirable at approximately every
third lift to bind the lifts together and to seal the surface of the compacted area thus reducing
potential for absorption of surface water following a rain. This sealing operation is particularly
important at the end of the work day and at the end of the week.

Page i I
TFRP4TECH
E N G I N E E R S- I N C
<eatechnicaL C_noineering
C_nviranmental Censlflno
Conshruc{ian Makerdah Teatinq
Within small excavations such as behind retaining walls or in footing excavations, we
recommend the use of "wacker packers" or diesel sled tamps to achieve the specified compaction.
Loose lift thicknesses of 4 to 6 inches are recommended in small area fills.
(4) We recommend that structural fill be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the standard Proctor
maximum dry density (ASTM Specification D-698). The upper 12 inches in building pad areas
should be compacted to at least 98 percent of the same standard. Additionally, the in -place
maximum dry density of structural fill should be no less than 90 pcf. Pavement area fill should
be placed in accordance with the NCDOT Standard Specifications.
(5) An experienced soil engineering technician should take adequate density tests throughout the fill
placement operation to verify that the specified compaction is achieved. It is particularly
important that this be accomplished during the initial stages of the compaction operation to enable
adjustments to the compaction operation, if necessary.

Page 12
ADDITIONAL SERVICES RECOMMENDED
TFRPaTECH
E N G I N E E R S- INC
CeotechnicaL engineering
LnVironmental Can>olting
Construction Materials 1 e56ng
Additional foundation engineering, testing, and consulting services recommended for this project are
summarized below:
(1) Proofrollina Observation: Proofrolling should be observed by a representative of the
Geotechnical Engineer to determine if remedial measures are necessary in certain instances.
(2) Quality Control of Fill Placement and Compaction: We recommend that an experienced
engineering technician witness all required filling operations and take sufficient in -place density
tests to verify that the specified degree of compaction has been achieved. Soil engineering
judgments will be involved and should be made by our project geotechnical engineer with
information provided by our engineering technician,
(3) Footing and Slab Evaluation : Footing and -slab areas for this project should be evaluated by our
representative. The purpose of these evaluations will be to verify that the design soil bearing
pressure is available and that subgrade areas are properly prepared.
(4) Pavement Components Testing and Inspection: Pavement components should be tested and
inspected during and following construction to verify compliance with project plans and
specifications.
The attached Appendix completes this report.
Sincerely,
Engineers, Inc. (�-1356)
Glen A. Malpass, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical E
GAMIsk
6111
BAR `'".
�'E'st �id'�.'li�'•;
: 4Z
30M z
.r +
�HGINE.��•' Gjy �•`
A •
Erwi T. Williams
Principal Geotechnical Engineer

TERRATECH
E NGINEERS • I N C
APPENDIX

TERRATECH
£ N G i K E E R S- V N C
Rock Excavation Specifications
Excavation Classifications: The classifications of excavation below will be made when rock
excavation is encountered in work. Do not perform such work until material to be excavated has been
cross -sectioned and classified by the Geotechnical Engineer. Such excavation will be paid on basis of
contract conditions relative to changes in work.
1. Earth excavation includes removal and disposal of pavements and other obstructions visible on
surface; underground structures and utilities indicated to be demolished and removed; along with
earth and other materials encountered that are not classified as rock excavation or unauthorized
excavation.
2. Mass rock excavation consists of the removal and disposal of a formation that cannot be excavated
with a Caterpillar D-8 bulldozer or equivalent, mounted with a single tooth ripper. Trenches in
excess of 10 feet in width and pits in excess of 30 feet high in either length or width are classified
as mass rock excavation.
3. In trench excavations for footings and utilities, trench rock excavation shall be the removal and
disposal of a formation that cannot be excavated with a Caterpillar 322 track mounted excavator or
equivalent, equipped with'/< cubic yard bucket equipped with rock teeth.
4. The owner's testing agency or architect shall be the final judge as to what is to be classified as rock
excavation. The contractor shall provide the specified equipment at the site to confirm_ rock
excavation.
5. Intermittent ripping or drilling and blasting to increase production and not necessary to permit
excavation will be classified as earth excavation.
6. Rock payment lines are as follows:
A. Two feet outside of concrete work for which forms are required, except footings.
B. One foot outside perimeter of footings.
C. In pipe trenches, 6 inches below invert elevation of pipe and two feet wider than inside
diameter of pipe, but not less than 3 feet minimum trench width.
D. For drainage structures, 18 inches outside ofstructure dimension, and 6 inches below
bottom of structure.
E. Neat outside dimensions of concrete work where no forms are required.
F. Under slabs -on -grade, 6 inches below bottom of concrete slab.
G. Under pavements, 6 inches below planned subgrade elevation.
7. Field verification of rock quantities shall be performed by the owner's testing agency or a
registered land surveyor.
8. Remove all excavated material classified as rock from the site.
9. Unauthorized excavation consists of removal of materials beyond indicated subgrade elevations or
dimensions without specific direction of the architect. Unauthorized excavation, as well as
remedial work associated with unauthorized excavation, shall be at Contractor's expense.

�Vlil
2.
ui
I =

Symbols and Nomenclature
I Undisturbed Sample (UD)
Standard penetration resistance (ASTM D-1586)
iow, Number of blows (100) to drive the spoon a number of inches (2)
w-O-H, R Weight of Hammer, Weight of Rods
Ax, ex, NX Core barrel sizes for rock cores
65%
ROD
Z
Z
A
C
Gs
z
P
18
Percentage of rock core recovered
Rock quality designation - % of core 4 or more inches long
Water table at least 24 hours after drilling
Water table one hour or less after drilling
Loss of drilling water
Atterberg Limits test performed
Consolidation test performed
Grain size test performed
Triaxial shear test performed
Proctor compaction test performed
Natural moisture content (percent)
Penetration Resistance Results
Sands
Silts and
Clays
Number of Blows, N
0-4
5-10
l 1-20
21-30
31-50
over 50
Number of Blows, N
0-1
24
5-8
9-15
16-30
31-50
over 50
Drilling Procedures
Relative Density
very loose
loose
firm
very firm
dense
very dense
Approx. Consistency
very soft
soil
firm
stiff
very stiff
hard
very hard
TERRATECH
ENGINE E K 5- INC
Soil sampling and standard penetration testing performed in accordance with ASTM D-1586. The
standard penetration resistance is the number of blows of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a
2 inch O.D., 1.4 inch I.D. split spoon sampler one foot. Core drilling performed in accordance with
ASTM D-2113. Undisturbed sampling performed in accordance with ASTM D-1587.

TEST BORING RECORD
TERRATECH
ENGINEERS • 1 NC
Depth
Description
Elev.
Water
Level
Blow
Counts
Standard Penetration Test
blows/ft
40 60 80
-20
Topsoil (Approximately 6 inches)
-0.5
1
2
7-10-13
•
3
Very stiff fine sandy silt (ML) (RESIDUUM)
4-
5—
12-9-8
•
6
--
—
7
50
3"
8
9
10
Partially weathered rock sampled as brown and
tan fine sandy silt (ML)
50
S.
1l
12
13
14
15
-15
50
W
BORING TERMINATED
16
17
18
19
20
Water Level 24 hr.: Boring Backfilled Upon Completion TerraTech Engineers, Inc. Boring Number. B-1
Water Level I hr.: Not Encountered 4905 Professional Court project plumber. 121-11.65510
Raleigh, NC 27609
Date Drilled: 9/13111
Sheet: 1 of I

TEST BORING RECORD
TERRATECH
ENGINEE R$' INC
Depth
Description
Elev.
Water
Level
Blow
Counts
Standard Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 60 80
- _40
-Topsoil tApproNimateIX 4 inches
1
2
Stiff to very stiff tan fine sandy silt (ML)
6-6-9
•
3
(RESIDUUM)
5
6-8-13
10
6-
Partially weathered rock sampled as brown and
7
tan fine sandy silt (ML)
50
8
-8
5.,
9
L0
Very hard tan fine sandy silt (ML)
8-15-37
11
12
12
13
Partially weathered rock sampled as brown fine
sandy silt (ML)
14
1S
BORING TERMINATED
-15
50
2"
16
17
18
I
19
20
Water Level 24 hr.: Boring Backf fled Upon Completion TerraTeeh Engineers, Inc. Boring Number. B-2
Water Love! 1 hr.: Not Encountered 4905 Professional Court Project Number. 121-11-65510
Raleigh, NC 27609
Date Drilled: 9113111
Sheet: 1 of 1

TEST BORING RECORD
TERRATECH
E N G I N E E R S • I N C
Depth
Description
Elev.
Water
Level
Blow
Counts
Standard Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60 80
Topsoil (Approximately b inches)
-0.5
1
10-11-14
•
3
4
Very stiff to hard tan and brown fine sandy silt
- -
(ML) (RESIDUUM)
5
10-12-12
•
6
--
7
8-11-20
•
8
-8
9
10
Partially Feathered rock sampled as grey fine
sandy silt (ML)
S0
1+
—_
11
12
-12
AUGER REFUSAL
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Water Level 24 hr.: Boring Backfilled Upon Completion TerraTeeh Engineers, Inc. Boring Number: B-1
Water Level i hr.: Not Encountered 4905 Professional Court project Number: 121-11-65510
Raleigh, NC 27609
Date Drilled: 9/13111
Sheet: 1 of t

TEST BORING RECORD
TERRATECH
E N G I N E f R 5• INC
Depth
Description
Elev.
Water
Level
Blow
Counts
Standard Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60 80
'topsoil (Approximately 6 inches)
_0.5
1
Very stiff tan fine sandy silt (ML) (RESIDUUM)
2
9-8-10
•
3
-3
4
5
50
2"
6
—
Partially weathered rock sampled as tan and
gray fine sandy silt (ML)
50
2"
8
—
9
10
25
0"
11
-11
AUGER REFUSAL
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Wattr Level 24 hr.: Boring Backfilled Upon Completion TermTech Engineers, Inc. Boring Number. B4
Water Level l hr.- Not Encountered 4905 Professional Court Project Number: 121-11-65510
Raleigh, NC 27609
Date Drilled: 9/13111
Sheet: 1 of I.

TEST BORING RECORD
TERRATECH
E N G I N -f E A S- t N C
Depth
Description
Elev.
Water
Level
Blow
Counts
Standard Penetration Test
blows/ft
20 40 60 80
Topsoil (Approximately 8 inches)
-0.7
1
2
Stiff tan fine sandy silt (ML) (RESIDUUM)
{--
—
6-5-9
•
3
-3
4-
5-
Ward to very hard tan and gray fine sandy silt
12-14-27
11
(ML)
6
_.
7
8
-8
18-22-29
•
9
10
50
2"
_--
11
Partially weathered rock sampled as gray fine
sandy silt (Mu
12
13
14
15
-15
50
3"
BORING TERMINATED
16
--
17
18
19
20
Water Ltvel 24 hr.: Boring Backfilled Upon Completion TerraTech Englneers, InC. Boring Number. B-5
Water Ltvel i hr..- Not E mtrrnered 4905 Professional Court Project Number. 121-11-65510
1i81eighr NC 27609
Date Drilled: 9/13111
Sheet: t of 1

Wet Pond Calculations
Confirm Permitting Authority
Latitude: 35.7525
Long: 79.4929
General Requirements
• Sizing shall take into account all runoff at ultimate buildout, including off -site drainage
• Vegetated slopes shall be no steeper than 3:1.
• BMP shall be located in a recorded drainage easement with access to a public ROW.
• Basin discharge shall be evenly distributed across a minimum 30 feet long vegetative filter strip
unless it is designed to remove 90% TSS. (A 50-ft filter is required in some locations.)
• The design storage shall be above the permanent pool.
• Discharge rate of the treatment volume shall completely draw down between 2 and 5 days.
• The average depth of the permanent pool shall be a minimum of 3 feet. The average depth shall
be calculated as described in Figure 10-2b.
• Permanent pool surface area shall be determined using Tables 10-1, 10-2, 10-3, and 10-4.
• The flow within the pond shall not short circuit the pond.
• BMP shall be designed with a forebay.
• BMP shall not be located to produce adverse impacts on water levels in adjacent wetlands.
• A minimum 10-foot wide vegetated shelf shall be installed around the perimeter. The inside
edge of the shelf shall be 6" below the permanent pool elevation; the outside edge of the shelf
shall be 6" above the permanent pool elevation.
• The forebay volume should be about 20% of the total permanent pool volume, leaving about
80% of the design volume in the main pool.
• Freeboard shall be a minimum of 1 foot above the maximum stage of the basin.
SHWT: The permanent pool elevation shall be within 6 inches (plus or minus) of the SHWT elevation.
e-mailed design engineer advising him that the soils report indicated that the SHWT was not
determined. While the soil report indicated they were clay with poor infiltration rates, good engineering
practice calls for the proposed permanent pool elevation to be at approximately the same elevation as
the SHWT, i.e., six inches above or below the SHWT. Determining infiltration rates and SHWT is not an
exact science. If the permanent pool elevation cannot be maintained, then DWQ looks to the design
professional to apply the appropriate method for their specific site to ensure the proposed design will
not adversely affect wetlands, surface waters, buffers and that the water level is maintained at the
design permanent pool elevation. Should you need to line the basin or convert it to an infiltration
system, the modifications can be addressed when the BMP is certified.
MAY - 7 2013

Water Quality Treatment Volume
Volume = 3630 * Rd * Rv * Ac
Where Rd = Design Storm = 1 inch
I = Impervious Portion / Drainage Area = 33,647 / 43754 % = 76.9 % = 0.7690
Rv = 0.05 + 0.9 * I = 0.05 + 0.9 * 0.7690 = 0.73055
Volume = 3630 * 1.0 * 0.7355 * 1.0 Acres = 2,651 cf
Q: Discharge Rate (cfs) for 2 to 5 days
Q = CdA [2 g Ho] ^ 0.5
For a 1 inch diameter orifice
r = 0.5 inches/12 inches/ft = 0.04 ft
A = 3.14 rz = 3.14 (0.04) 2 = 0.005 sf
Cd = 0.6
g = 32.2
Ho = (Temporary Pool Elevation -Permanent Pool Elevation) / 3 = (867-866)/3 = 0.333
Q = 0.6 (0.005) [(64.4) (0.333)] ^ 0.5 = 0.014 cfs'
Note: Q must be between Discharge Rate for 2 days and 5 days
Discharge Rate (2-5 days) = Water Quality Treatment Volume/(seconds/day)/(number of days)
Q-Discharge Rate (2 days) = 2651 cf / (86,200 seconds per day) / 2 = 0.015 cfs'
Q-Discharge Rate (5 days) = 2651 cf / (86,200 seconds per day) / 5 = 0.006 cfs
Note: 0.015 cfs > 0.014 cfs > 0.006 cfs
Surface Area (SA)
SA = DA/100 * Ratio
Average Depth:3.0
BUA1 = 76.9 %
DA = Drainage Area = 43754 sf
Ratio= 4.0 to 4.5 (from Table 10-1, 10-2, 10-3 or 10-4 is based on BUA, average depth, TSS and removal )
SA = DA/100 * Ratio = 43754 /100 * 4.25 = 1857 sf
' Rough approximation that does not consider head

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
v
STEWART
TO
FROM
NCDENR - DWQ
Adam Pike, PE
NCDENR
Civil Project Engineer
512 North Salisbury St
[phone] x (205)
Raleigh, NC 27601
DATE SENT VIA
4/30/13 Hand Delivery
PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME
C12031 Kingdom Hall - Siler City
COPIES DATE DESCRIPTION
2
4 25 13
Plan Set
1
4 25 13
Stormwater SIA
1
4 25 13
Check O&M Agreement, Deed
For approval
For review & comment
Returned for corrections
For your use
Approved as submitted
Returned after review
As requested
Approved as noted
Resubmit copies for approval
COMMENTS
Please find included the necessary documents for state stormwater submittal for
Kingdom ball - Siler City. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Thanks
Adam Pike
7 2413
SIGNED
Adam Pike, PE - Civil Project Engineer
[APR 2013
- YATEi4 OUALI
�!!'affands e z,-- . N
COPIED TO
file
STRONGER BY DESIGN
421 FAYETTEVILLE ST. RALEIGH, NC T 919.380.8750
SUITE 400 27601 F 919.380.8752

r
i 1247
0945
BOOK 124 r PAGE 945
Prepared by W. Ben Atwater, Jr., Attorney
P. O. Box 629, Siler City, NC 27344
Mail to: Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses Siler City Congregation
3670 Alston Bridge Road, Siler City, NC 27344
NORTH CAROLINA }
}
CHATHAM COUNTY )
No title search performed
FILED
CHATHAM COUNTY
REBA G. THOMAS
REGISTER OF DEEDS
FILED Mar 30, 2006
AT 12:27:00 pm
BOOK 01247
START PAGE 0945
END PAGE 0946
INSTRUMENT # 04079
WARRANTY DEED
Chatham county o3-30-2ow
NORTH CAROLINA
Real Estate
Excise Tax $60.00
1Q910. 440 d
THIS DEED, made and entered into this 7th day of March, 2006, by and between
FRANKLIN-WOOD PROPERTIES, LLC, of Chatham County, North Carolina, Grantor,
AND
LYLE WESTBROOK, LEROY CHEEK and CHARLES WESTBROOK, the duly elected
Board of Trustees of KINGDOM HALL OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES, SILER CITY
CONGREGATION, and their successors in office, of 3670 Alston Bridge Road, Siler City, NC
27344, Grantee,
WITNESETH:
THAT the Grantor, for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is
hereby acknowledged, have and by these presents do grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the
Grantee in fee simple, all that certain lot or parcel of land situated in Matthews Township, Chatham
County, North Carolina, and more particularly described as follows:
Being all of Lot 01, containing 1.81 acres more or less, as shown on a Plat entitled "Survey for
Jerry B. Wood, III", dated April 10, 1966, prepared by rufus L_ Johnson, RLS, and recorded in
Plat Slide 96-138, Chatham County Registry, to which plat reference is hereby madae for a more
accurate description.
For chain of title see Deed Book 690, Page 285, Chatham County, North Carolina.
(1) The above described property is subject to any restrictive or protective covenants of
record,
(2) The above described property is subject to any recorded or unrecorded rights -of -way in
favor of the North Carolina Department of Transportation and Town of Siler City and any other
easements of record.
(3) The above described property is subject to any easements which might now exist in
favor of any Public Utility Company.
(4) The above described property is subject to a Water and Sewer Easement in favor of the
Town of Siler City. ,
ti .

'w
T247
0946 BOOK124i PAGE 946
(5) The above described property is subject to any zoning ordinances of the county or the
Town of Siler City.
(5) Grantors and Grantee shall pro -rate the 2006 Chatham County ad valorem taxes.
(6) The above described property is subject to any matters which a recent and accurate
survey might disclose.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and
appurtenances thereto belonging to the Grantee in fee simple.
AND the Grantor covenants with the Grantee, that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee
simple, and has the right to convey the same in fee simple, that title is marketable and free and clear
of all encumbrances, and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful claims of
all persons whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has duly executed the foregoing instrument, as of
the day and year first above written.
FRANKLIN-WOOD PROPMUIES. LLC,
Y
NORTH CAROLINA, CHATHAM COUNTY:
WOOD,111f Member -Manager
Member -Manager
I, a notary public of said county and state, do hereby certify that Jerry B. Wood, III and Betty F.
Wood, member managers of Franklin -Wood Properties, LLC, a limited liability company, and by
authority duly given and as an act of the entity, have signed the foregoing instrument in its name
and on its behalf as its act and deed.
WITNESS my hand and notarial seal this the - 12 day of March, 2006.
ZTAAY PUBLIC 1 j ,0Q(A 0, 1 k erJA.)
My commission expires: r
O v
Iq /aa a Z
Z7 = /QJ� GO
2