20030669 Ver 2_401 Application_20110810

`* caste
ssocia es, inc.
August 9, 2011
NC DWQ, 401 /Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-19650
Attention: Amy Chapman
RE: Waterstone at Brier Creek
Parcels 0758-51-8484 & 0758-61-2090
Riparian Buffer Authorization
Raleigh, Wake County, NC
Dear Amy,
k_19
AUG 1 0 2011
DENR- WATER 4AM
SANDS AND STMftTER
On behalf of our client, Selona Partners, LLC, we are transmitting five (5) sets of the executed PCN
forms and attachments associated with their request for riparian buffer authorization. Selona Partners,
LLC is requesting permission to impact the riparian buffer on the subject property in five (5) locations.
Four (4) are for utility connections and the fifth is for construction of a cul-de-sac requiring buffer
mitigation.
Please find enclosed five (5) copies of the PCN forms and the following attachments:
Attachment No. 1:
Location Map
Impact Key Map
Impact B 1 exhibit
Impact B2 exhibit
Impact B3 exhibit
Impact B4 exhibit
Impact B5 exhibit
Attachment No. 2:
Executed filter strip, restored riparian buffer and level spreader
Operations & maintenance agreements for DA I, DA2 & DA3.
Attachment No. 3:
LS-VFS Filter Strip supplement for area 1, 2, & 3.

255 VILLAGE PARKWAY • SUITE 630 • MARIETTA, GEORGIA 30067
Planners • Engineers • Landscape Architects
770-955-2421 • (Fax) 770-955-2480 • email: [e-mail]
a
t
Amy Chapman
2 August 9, 2011
Attachment No. 4:
Engineering plans for Waterstone at Brier Creek Apartments
Attachment No. 5:
Additional information to item 3a.
Attachment No. 6:
Additional information for item 3e.
Attachment No 7:
Additional information for item 4d.
Attachment No 8:
Additional information for item 5b.
Attachment No. 9:
Continuation of chart in item C6 for buffer for buffer impacts B4 and B5.
Attachment No. 10:
Continuation of comments under item 6i.
Attachment No. 11:
Continuation of information for item D I a.
Attachment No. 12:
Continuation of information for item D 1 b.
Attachment No. 13:
Copies of buffer mitigation bank correspondence, check copy receipt for 1,712.78 sf of buffer
credit in response to item D6g
Attachment No. 14:
Stormwater Management Study prepared by J. Lancaster Associates, Inc. For Brier Creek
Apartment dated July 21, 2011.
Amy Chapman
3 August 9, 2011
To the best of our knowledge there are no wetland disturbance or C.O.E. NWPs required to construct
the development. As noted in the application, the only stream crossing was permitted previously,
DWQ 03-0669, Wake County.
Should you require additional information or have any questions, please contact me at
jlancastergilainc.com or call 770-955-2421.
Sincerely,
J. LAN ,7 ER ASSOCIATES, INC.
Joseph L. Lancaster, PE
attachments
JLL: mld
cc: Nathan Burdick/ City of Raleigh Public Works
William Hamrick/Davis Development (attachments)
03 - oLP LO q vD_
?, .._ R, r
DUD,
4. ffix +

Office Use Only:
Corps action ID no.
DWQ project no.
Form Version 1.3 Dec 10 2008
Pre-Construction Notification (PCN) Form
A. Applicant Information
1. Processing
1 a. Type(s) of approval sought from the
Corps: NA
? Section 404 Permit ? Section 10 Permit
1 b. Specify Nationwide Permit (NWP) number: N/A or General Permit (GP) number: N/A
1c. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps? IVA ? Yes ? No
1 d. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWQ (check all that apply):
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular ? Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
? 401 Water Quality Certification - Express ® Riparian Buffer Authorization
1 e. Is this notification solely for the record
because written approval is not required? For the record only for DWQ 401
Certification:
? Yes ® No For the record only for Corps Permit:

? Yes ® No
1f. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in-lieu fee program proposed for mitigation
of impacts? If so, attach the acceptance letter from mitigation bank or in-lieu
fee program. ® Yes ? No
1 g. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties. If yes, answer 1 h
below. ? Yes ® No
1h. Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)? ? Yes ® No
2. Project Information
2a. Name of project: Waterstone at Brier Creek Apartments
2b. County: Wake 0) 1 1 1 W

2c. Nearest municipality / town: Raleigh
2d. Subdivision name: NA AUG I o 2011
2e. NCDOT only, T.I.P. or state
project no: NA
DENa - WATER. WAL.1
3. Owner Information e
3a. Name(s) on Recorded Deed: Selona Partners, LLC
3b. Deed Book and Page No. Book: 014174 Page: 02597-02601
3c. Responsible Party (for LLC if
applicable): Fred Hazel
3d. Street address: 1050 Eagles Landing Parkway
3e. City, state, zip: Stockbridge, GA 30281
3f. Telephone no.: 770-474-4345
3g. Fax no.: 770-474-5213
3h. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 1 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
4a. Applicant is: ? Agent ? Other, specify: NA
4b. Name: NA
4c. Business name
(if applicable): NA
4d. Street address: NA
4e. City, state, zip: NA
4f. Telephone no.: NA
4g. Fax no.: NA
4h. Email address: NA
5. Agent/Consultant Information (if applicable)
5a. Name: Joe Lancaster (Consultant)
5b. Business name
(if applicable): J. Lancaster Associates, Inc.
5c. Street address: 255 Village Parkway # 630
5d. City, state, zip: Marietta, GA 30067
5e. Telephone no.: 770-955-2421
5f. Fax no.: 770-955-2480
5g. Email address: [e-mail]
Page 2 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
B. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Property Identification
1a. Property identification no. (tax PIN or parcel ID): 0758-51-8484 & 0758-61-2090
1 b. Site coordinates (in decimal degrees): Latitude: 35.8969 Longitude: - 78.8094
(DD.DDDDDD) (-DD.DDDDDD)
1c. Property size: (H, Lots 202 & 204) 20.723 acres
2. Surface Waters
2a. Name of nearest body of water (stream, river, etc.) to Briar Creek
proposed project:
2b. Water Quality Classification of nearest receiving water: C, NSW
2c. River basin: Neuse
3. Project Description
3a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this
application:
See Attachment # 5
3b. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
.18 ac.
3c. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams (intermittent and perennial) on the property:
1775.4 L.F.
3d. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:
Construct 232 apartment units with associated infrastructure and parking.
3e. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used:
See attachment # 6
4. Jurisdictional Determinations
4a. Have jurisdictional wetland or stream determinations by the
Corps or State been requested or obtained f this property / ® Yes El No El Unknown
project (including all prior phases) in the past.
Comments:
4b. If the Corps made the jurisdictional determination, what type
? Preliminary ®Final
of determination was made?
4c. If yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas? Agency/Consultant Company:
Name (if known): Other: S & EC
4d. If yes, list the dates of the Corps jurisdictional determinations or State determinations and attach documentation.
Attachment # 7 previous permit.
5. Project History
5a. Have permits or certifications been requested or obtained for ® Yes ? No ? Unknown
this project (including all prior phases) in the past?
5b. If yes, explain in detail according to "help file" instructions.
See attachment # 8.
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project? ? Yes ® No
6b. If yes, explain.
NA
Page 3 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
C. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
1 a. Which sections were completed below for your project (check all that apply):
? Wetlands ? Streams - tributaries ® Buffers
? Open Waters ? Pond Construction
2. Wetland Impacts /M
If there are wetland impacts proposed on the site, then complete this question for each wetland area impacted.
2a. 2b. 2c. 2d. 2e. 2f.
Wetland impact Type of jurisdiction
number - Type of impact Type of wetland Forested (Corps - 404, 10 Area of impact
Permanent (P) or (if known) DWQ - non-404, other) (acres)
Temporary T
W1 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W2 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W3 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W4 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W5 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
W6 ? P ? T ? Yes ? Corps
? No ? DWQ
2g. Total wetland impacts
2h. Comments: NA
3. Stream Impacts
If there are perennial or intermittent stream impacts (including temporary impacts) proposed on the site, then complete this
question for all stream sites impacted.
3a. 3b. 3c. 3d. 3e. 3f. 3g.
Stream impact Type of impact Stream name Perennial Type of jurisdiction Average Impact
number - (PER) or (Corps - 404, 10 stream length
Permanent (P) or intermittent DWQ - non-404, width (linear
Temporary (T) (I NT)? other) (feet) feet)
S1 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S2 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S3 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S4 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S5 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
S6 ? P ? T ? PER ? Corps
? INT ? DWQ
3h. Total stream and tributary impacts
3i. Comments: NA
Page 4 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
4. Open Water Impacts
If there are proposed impacts to lakes, ponds, estuaries, tributaries, sounds, the Atlantic Ocean, or any other open water of
the U.S. then individually list all open water impacts below.
4a.
Open water
impact number
- Permanent
(P) or
Temporary T 4b.
Name of waterbody
(if applicable) 4c.

Type of impact 4d.

Waterbody type 4e.

Area of impact (acres)
01 ?P?T
02 ?P?T
03 ?P?T
04 ?P?T
4f. Total open water impacts
4g. Comments: NA
5. Pond or Lake Construction
If and or lake construction proposed, then com lete the chart below.
5a.

Pond ID 5b.

Proposed use or purpose of 5c.
Wetland Impacts (acres) 5d.
Stream Impacts (feet) 5e.
Upland
(acres)
number pond
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
Filled
Excavated
Flooded
P1
P2
5f. Total
5g. Comments: NA
5h. Is a dam high hazard permit required?
? Yes ? No If yes, permit ID no:
5i. Expected pond surface area (acres): NA
5j. Size of pond watershed (acres): NA
5k. Method of construction: NA
Page 5 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWQ)
If project will impact a protected riparian buffer, then complete the chart below. If yes, then individually list all buffer impacts
below. If an impacts require mitigation, then you MUST fill out Section D of this form.
6a.
® Neuse ? Tar-Pamlico ? Other:
Project is in which protected basin? ? Catawba ? Randleman
6b. 6c. 6d. 6e. 6f. 6g.
Buffer impact
number - Reason for Buffer Zone 1 impact Zone 2 impact
Permanent (P) impact Stream name mitigation (square feet) (square feet)
or Temporary required?
T
B1 ? P ®T Sewer Tap UT Briar Creek ® Nos 323 675.57
B2 ®P ? T Cul-de-sac
Construction UT Briar Creek ® Nos 0 1141.85
B3 ? P ®T Sewer Tap UT Briar Creek ® Nos 0 399.74
t pz j T? (lp (1? 6h. Total buffer impacts 332.02 2630.54
6i. Comments: See attachment # 10
D. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
1a. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing project.
See attachment # 11.
1 b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques.
See attachment #12.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for ? Yes ® No
impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
2b. If yes, mitigation is required by (check all that apply): ? DWQ ? Corps
? Mitigation bank
2c. If yes, which mitigation option will be used for this project? ? Payment to in-lieu fee program
? Permittee Responsible Mitigation
3. Complete if Using a Mitigation Bank
3a. Name of Mitigation Bank:
3b. Credits Purchased (attach receipt and letter) Type Quantity
Page 6 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
3c. Comments:
4. Complete if Making a Payment to In-lieu Fee Program
4a. Approval letter from in-lieu fee program is attached. ? Yes
4b. Stream mitigation requested: linear feet
4c. If using stream mitigation, stream temperature: ? warm ? cool ?cold
4d. Buffer mitigation requested (DWQ only): square feet
4e. Riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4f. Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested: acres
4g. Coastal (tidal) wetland mitigation requested: acres
4h. Comments:
5. Complete if Using a Permittee Responsible Mitigation Plan
5a. If using a permittee responsible mitigation plan, provide a description of the proposed mitigation plan.
6. Buffer Mitigation (State Regulated Riparian Buffer Rules) - required by DWQ
6a. Will the project result in an impact within a protected riparian buffer that requires
buffer mitigation? ® Yes ? No
6b. If yes, then identify the square feet of impact to each zone of the riparian buffer that requires mitigation. Calculate the
amount of mitigation required.

Zone 6c.
Reason for impact 6d.
Total impact
(square feet)
Multiplier 6e.
Required mitigation
(square feet)
Zone 1 3 (2 for Catawba)
Zone 2 Road impact other than
crossing of streams 1141.85 1.5 1712.78
6f. Total buffer mitigation required: 1712.78
6g. If buffer mitigation is required, discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (e.g., payment to private mitigation bank,
permittee responsible riparian buffer restoration, payment into an approved in-lieu fee fund).
Private mitigation bank. See attachment # 13.
6h. Comments: Only impact B2 requires mitigation.
Page 7 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
E. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWQ)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified ® Yes ? No
within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
1 b. If yes, then is a diffuse flow plan included? If no, explain why.
® Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. What is the overall percent imperviousness of this project? 37%
2b. Does this project require a Stormwater Management Plan? ® Yes ? No
2c. If this project DOES NOT require a Stormwater Management Plan, explain why: NA
2d. If this project DOES require a Stormwater Management Plan, then provide a brief, na rrative description of the plan:
Three detention systems will be constructed which discharge into engineered level spreaders outside the riperian buffers.
® Certified Local Government
2e. Who will be responsible for the review of the Stormwater Management Plan? ? DWQ Stormwater Program
? DWQ 401 Unit
3. Certified Local Government Stormwater Review
3a. In which local government's jurisdiction is this project? City of Raleigh
® Phase II
3b. Which of the following locally-implemented stormwater management programs ® NSW
? USMP
apply (check all that apply): ? Water Supply Watershed
? Other:
3c. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been ? Yes ® No
attached?
4. DWQ Stormwater Program Review
? Coastal counties
? HQW
4a. Which of the following state-implemented stormwater management programs apply ? ORW
(check all that apply):
? Session Law 2006-246
? Other:
4b. Has the approved Stormwater Management Plan with proof of approval been
? Yes ® No
attached?
5. DWQ 401 Unit Stormwater Review
5a. Does the Stormwater Management Plan meet the appropriate requirements? ® Yes ? No
5b. Have all of the 401 Unit submittal requirements been met? ? Yes ® No
Page 8 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
F. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation (DWQ Requirement)
1a. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the ? Yes ® No
use of public (federal/state) land?
1 b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an
environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State ? Yes ? No
(North Carolina) Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
1c. If you answered "yes" to the above, has the document review been finalized by the
State Clearing House? (If so, attach a copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval
letter.) ? Yes ? No
Comments:
2. Violations (DWQ Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated
Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), DWQ Surface Water or Wetland Standards, ? Yes ® No
or Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B.0200)?
2b. Is this an after-the-fact permit application? ? Yes ® No
2c. If you answered "yes" to one or both of the above questions, provide an explanation of the violation(s): NA
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWQ Requirement)
3a. Will this project (based on past and reasonably anticipated future impacts) result in ? Yes ® No
additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?
3b. If you answered "yes" to the above, submit a qualitative or quantitative cumulative impact analysis in accordance with the
most recent DWQ policy. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
No additional development is proposed on the 20.723 ac site.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWQ Requirement)
4a. Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of wastewater generated from
the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater will be discharged into the City of Raleigh Public Sewer System which traverses the site.
Page 9 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or Yes
? ? No
habitat?
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act Yes
? ? No
impacts?
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted. E] Raleigh
? Asheville
5d. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical
Habitat?
NA
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as essential fish habitat? ? Yes ? No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Essential Fish Habitat?
NA
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal
governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation ? Yes ? No
status (e.g., National Historic Trust designation or properties significant in
North Carolina history and archaeology)?
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?
NA
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain? ? Yes ® No
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements: NA
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination? City approved revised FS 540 mapping by ECO
Engineering.
5e6 n(A. l CILLO 11CvLs (..(•?•

y ?
V
( ?vs? j? Zc9
?
t
d
? '
Appl
a<nt/Agen r
e Applicant/A ent
s Signature Date
(Agent's signature is valid only if n authorization letter from the applicant
i provided.)

Page 10 of 10
PCN Form - Version 1.3 December 10, 2008 Version
ATTACHMENT # 1:
• Location Map
• Impact Key Map
• Impact B I Exhibit
• Impact B2 Exhibit
• Impact B3 Exhibit
• Impact B4 Exhibit
• Impact B5 Exhibit
NOTE: location of impacts are shown on impact key map
VMIOIMJ HUM 1=W AD MD IA MIOD 7 'dM M K M M '49 • M T
LWM
YNDIMJ NiDN 1D?MY p AID 'AINI00 .I. 'AMOK Irol M va t = T
"MIWIMLVA
1?1?? 1
?..1
1(1
l '

U
M
0
M ?
?z 3
u
? M
M ?
00
00
M ?
?-,z3
u N
M
M OC
0 0
O O
00
?-, z

}

e w S ? /?

M
U
00
??00
00
n M 0
0
e 00
M
?-, z 3
H
u
? N
0000
00
0 0
v? ?
M ?
?z3
f

.I
4.

? v
k
CD
Q o
U
? W

O I?
O ¢
Qi o ?
M

ate' a
W
O

;?' ? .'m?h•,.,, i"?'SZ', ??.7k`i rM10M?J WYON 'M/NII JO AIp AINIOD ?M '??I?OI ¦OI NUJ 10i ? ii T
sLVUwa MW lvY? tr s L MVA
{
f
F
77
li M? l
0 f- : T
oU) WO
f wUN?QO0i Z
i-x QMQO 2 ( ..
UUZVOO
to - o¢aQ¢ v N
x r wwm? d Q
lL (n
V) LL. U)
mmo-zoo, Q ?l
? 04 Y
U)WW
'Cc LL.
?ZNN?m J _ ;r D / ?dvstiY
zz X r
s e tt O /
1 w /
Z 3NOZ m
M

d

z
o'

l X
f1 w
f
? ? l 1
f f
YM10M/J W1OM NUM O AID %LWW? 4d ? W N MOW 4M if O T ,
?! o, wou?nr?r o ?w LV ¦lois?utvw
JOV •
i ?
i
ra

0
LL.
L
vi
N? 0 J O
W
LI 0 z /

LLI zo?Q

•
+
z m

W D
?W ?
y
/ ? ? 3
? d a
.\ f f J N

x W
? Z
N VZ VZ
S
oQa a C)
in (n
Cs q, mm zm? W
' < € W,' g I H ?-N 0 1
2t Wl W vW)LaLLI
oI 0 nzpzp???t z
' N O? ZN1?1?a J Q
} r € N
S
Yz
0 !
U _..
v
LLI
z
s
N W s
W p N
© Na
33. w
r` N
LLJ c,4
1 LO a- LL, f . N
mcnao ?$
UO
1t 0. Wa
?aixn c"
11111, No
!Ogzm,. ?.
L*vm)li 1E]

d p ?•

?k -
{ I i i
O
LA: N
LL (n
w0;O)Qoi Z
zo R Poo) Z<
ml c)
I I I I w o
{ N a?a __.
w mma<w
I P 3 w ?P- _r
Ln OEn La N
O
m 010 O O
c'y aW00H= w ?
o?
LL.
0 0 (n _
P:
°;(In
Z w l
I I
w
cn I I N
? t( I I ?
I 1 O
LLI
- 73,
YN101N0 ANION 1NSMN O ND 7UMII MRS UNWOU NOI N? 1as it
1R T
1.L1,111ILiviff 7L?Y0 IIL?IM lr a101lIOlrA
I lie
tow
I 1 !0 11 ft j
1 m W" MD 7 us=.M • o T
all
M LOW
N
_ P
Z 3NOZ .?
tf
p In
QW ?-ip
f ' NCI ,u0NQN Z /
\ ` ZO / N? t l w zp?2 Q y
Q
t? t0? O m i I a I?
t t ti? z Elfww? no
?OOz
t! cnz<Z
w o m aim a 6
t F
Lc) LL. V) D)
! ( N N M -i
' N
!I z?I /
,
Y
o
.?
-ET
° Z t 77?
T•.,. P
i
N
ATTACHMENT # 2:
• Filter strip, restored riparian buffer and level speeder
• Operation and Maintenance agreements
• Drainage Area 1
• Drainage Area 2
• Drainage Area 3
1
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer and Level Spreader
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMW elements noted in the inspection will be
corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity
of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
Important maintenance procedures:
- Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
- Once a year, the filter strip will be reseeded to maintain a dense growth of
vegetation
- Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the vegetation.
- Two to three times a year, grass filter strips will be mowed and the clippings
harvested to promote the growth of thick vegetation with optimum pollutant
removal efficiency. Turf grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 5 inches and
may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic requirements
(NIPC,1993). Forested filter strips do not require this type of maintenance.
- Once a year, the soil will be aerated if necessary.
- Once a year, soil pH will be tested and lime will be added if necessary.
After the filter strip is established, it will be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours
after every storm event greater than 1.0 inch (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County).
Records of operation and maintenance will be kept in a known set location and will be
available upon request.
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 sputter device is Unclog the conveyance and dispose
(if applicable) clogged. of any sediment off-site.
The flow splitter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
repair
.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 3
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The Swale and the level The swale is clogged with Remove the sediment and dispose
lip sediment. of it off-site.
The level lip is cracked, Repair or replace lip.
settled, undercut, eroded or
otherwise damaged.
There is erosion around the Regrade the soil to create a berm
end of the level spreader that that is higher than the level lip, and
shows stormwater has then plant a ground cover and
bypassed it. water until it is established. Provide
lime and a one-time fertilizer
application.
Trees or shrubs have begun Remove them.
to grow on the swale or just
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 tic^S1CCatcd. Provide addiuoiial lrrigauon and
fertilizer as needed.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application.
Nuisance vegetation is Remove vegetation by hand if
choking out desirable species. possible. If pesticide is used, do not
allow it to get into the receiving
water.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality local Regional Office, or the
outlet. 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-1786.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 2 Of 3
ti
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:
BMP drainag
Print name:
Title:
Address: le

Phone: 710 ??7k? - A13445
Signature:
Date:
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, ? ?)CA. /? • /? a ?' + , a Notary Public for the State of
County of iffPar\ U , do hereby certify that
F"rrud 5. ze personally appeared before me this _
day of , o? / , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing filter strip, riparian buffer, and/or level spreader maintenance requirements
Witness my hand and official seal,
SEAL
My commission expires /A!;//Z'C / Z.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 3
` Permit Number:
(to be provided b DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:_
Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer and Level Spreader
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be
corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity
of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
Important maintenance procedures:
- Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
- Once a year, the filter strip willbe reseeded to maintain a dense growth of
vegetation
- Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the vegetation.
- Two to three times a year, grass filter strips will be mowed and the clippings
harvested to promote the growth of thick vegetation with optimum pollutant
removal efficiency. Turf grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 5 inches and
may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic requirements
(NIPC,1993). Forested filter strips do not require this type of maintenance.
- Once a year, the soil will be aerated if necessary.
- Once a year, soil pH will be tested and lime will be added if necessary.
After the filter strip is established, it will be inspected quarterly and within 24 hours
after every storm event greater than 1.0 inch (or 1.5 inches if in a Coastal County).
Records of operation and maintenance will be kept in a known set location and will be
available upon request.
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 any sediment off-site.
The flow sputter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
re air.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 3
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The swale and the level The swale is clogged with Remove the sediment and dispose
lip sediment. of it off-site.
The level lip is cracked, Repair or replace lip.
settled, undercut, eroded or
otherwise damaged.
There is erosion around the Regrade the soil to create a berm
end of the level spreader that that is higher than the level lip, and
shows stormwater has then plant a ground cover and
bypassed it. water until it is established. Pr6vide
lime and a one-time fertilizer
a lication.
Trees or shrubs have begun Remove them.
to grow on the swale or just
downslo e of the level lip.
The bypass charnel 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 app "' "'cable . 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 dosiccated. Provide additional irllg0. U011 Q1lG
fertilizer as needed.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application.
Nuisance vegetation is Remove vegetation by hand if
choking out desirable species. possible. If pesticide is used, do not
allow it to get into the receiving
water.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality local Regional Office, or the
outlet. 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-1786.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 2 of 3
7 ,
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: WArF_ j Q46 4' ?P,? Aae C,e?r'iylc7?7?
BMP drainage area number:
Print name: Se (0010. 44t P'' Je S, CbC,
Title([,'
Address:_A
Phone:
Signature:
Date:za
5.
Note: The legally respo4sible 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.
a Notary Public for the State of
?e o } , County of r , do hereby certify that
personally appeared before me this
day of Q ! , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing filter strip, riparian buffer, and/or level spreader maintenance requirements.
Witness my hand and official seal,
SEAL
My commission expires lL
Form SWU40I-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 3

Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number: S_
Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer and Level Spreader
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP elements noted in the inspection will be
corrected, repaired or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can affect the integrity
of structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
Important maintenance procedures:
- Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
- Once a year, the filter strip will be reseeded to maintain a dense growth of
vegetation
- Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
sediment load to the vegetation.
- Two to three times a year, grass filter strips will be mowed and the clippings
harvested to promote the growth of thick vegetation with optimum pollutant
removal efficiency. Turf grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 5 inches and
may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic requirements
(NI-PC,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 sputter device is Unclog the conveyance and dispose
(if applicable) clogged. of any sediment off-site.
The flow sputter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
repair.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 3
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The swale and the level The swale is clogged with Remove the sediment and dispose
lip sediment. of it off-site.
The level lip is cracked, Repair or replace lip.
settled, undercut, eroded or
otherwise damaged.
There is erosion around the Regrade the soil to create a berm
end of the level spreader that that is higher than the level lip, and
shows stormwater has then plant a ground cover and
bypassed it. water until it is established. Provide
lime and a one-time fertilizer
application.
Trees or shrubs have begun Remove them.
to grow on the swale or just
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.
i l ants are Q^SiCCuie-. P rvvide -diuvn$i hrigatior, and
fertilizer as needed.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application.
Nuisance vegetation is Remove vegetation by hand if
choking out desirable species. possible. If pesticide is used, do not
allow it to get into the receiving
water.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality local Regional Office, or the
outlet. 401 Oversight Unit at 919-733-1786.
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 2 of 3
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:
76 j?'1 eC-Oi? & ,I IEk
BMP drainage area number: 3
Print name:
LL&
Titl?/ nnej r sn•/' Fred s
Phone: '!
Signature:
Date:
Note: The legally responsible part 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, , a Notary Public for the State of .
County of /ko , do hereby certify that
U \J
s. lk4,Ze( personally appeared before me this `J
day of and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing filter strip, riparian buffer, and/or level spreader maintenance requirements
SEAL
My commission expires 0-341zo4a-
Form SWU401-Level Spreader, Filter Strip, Restored Riparian Buffer O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT # 3:
• DWQ Level Spreader - vegetated filter
• Strip (LS - VFS) Supplement
• Area 1 Engineered Filter Strip
• Area 2 Engineered Filter Strip
• Area 3 Engineered Filter Strip

AvrA pp YVA7F?
NCDENR
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERT IFICATION APPLICATION FORM
LEVEL SPREADER - VEGETATED FILTER STRIP (LS-VFS) SUPPLEMENT
This form must be completely filled out, printed, initialed, and submitted.
L PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name Waterstone at Brier Creek
Contact name Joe Lancaster
Phone number 770-955-2421
Date
Drainage area number 1
II. DESIGN INFORMATION
The purpose of the LS-VFS Buffer Rule: Diffuse Flow
Stormwater enters LS-VFS from A BMP
Type of VFS Engineered filter strip (graded & sodded, slope < 8%)
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from the Drainage Area
Drainage area fe Do not complete this section of the form.
Impervious surface area ftz Do not complete this section of the form.
Percent impervious % Do not complete this section of the form.
Rational C coefficient Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 1 in/hr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Time of concentration min Do not complete this section of the form.
Rainfall intensity, 10-yr storm in/hr Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 10-yr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Design storm
Maximum amount of flow directed to the LS-VFS cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Is a flow bypass system going to be used? (Y or N) Do not complete this section of the form.
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from a UP
Type of BMP Other: Explained below
Peak discharge from the BMP during the design storm 3.85 cfs
Peak discharge from the BMP during the 10-year storm 3.26 cfs
Maximum capacity of a 100-foot long LS-VFS 10 cfs
Peak flow directed to the LS-VFS 3.85 cfs
Is a flow bypass system going to be used? N (Y or
Explanation of any "Other" responses above Dry Detention
LS-VFS Design
Forebay surface area sq It
Depth of forebay at stormwater entry point in
Depth of forebay at stormwater exit point in
Feet of level lip needed per cfs 10 ft/cfs
Computed minimum length of the level lip needed 39 ft
Length of level lip provided 40 ft
Width of VFS 40 ft
Elevation at downslope base of level lip 336.00 fmsl
Elevation at the end of the VFS that is farthest from the LS 335.40 fmsl
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 1 of 3
A IFF I
Slope (from level lip to the end of the VFS)
Are any draws present in the VFS?
Is there a collector swale at the end of the VFS?
Bypass System Design (if applicable)
Is a bypass system provided?
Is there an engineered flow splitting device?
Dimensions of the channel (see diagram below):
W
y (flow depth for 10-year storm)
freeboard (during the 10-year storm)
Peak velocity in the channel during the 10-yr storm
Channel lining material
Does the bypass discharge through a wetland?
Does the channel enter the stream at an angle?
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
1.50
Pick one:
(Y or N) OK
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
fVsec
(Y or N)
(Y or N)

1 B
III. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
EDIT 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.
Requried Item:
1. Plans (1" - 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
- Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Forebay (if applicable),
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
2. Plan details (1" = 30' or larger) for the level spreader showing:
- Forebay (if applicable),
flow bypass system
-One foot to o fines between the level lip and top of bank,
roposed drainage easemen , a
Design at ultimate build-out.
Initials Page or plan sheet number and any notes:
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way)
C-23 (Off-stie drainage)
C-27 & C-28 (Delineated drainage basins)
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Proposed drainage
easement)
Forebay - NA
High flow bypass system - NA
One foot topo lines - NA (less than one foot fall)
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27JU12011 - Rev.9 page 2 of 3
3. Section view of the level spreader (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
- Underdrain system (if applicable),
Level lip,
Upslope channel, and
Downslope filter fabric.
4. Plan details of the flow splitting device and supporting calculations (if applicable).
5. A construction sequence that shows how the level spreader will be protected from
sediment until the entire drainage area is stabilized.
6. If a non-engineered VFS is being used, then provide a photograph of the VFS showing
that no draws are present.
7. The supporting calculations.
8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.
C-24, C-25 & C-26
NA
it
i
NA
See Attachment #2
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 3 of 3
l_?
A X 'V
T. W T. W. + - °
44.0 346.7
10' ACCE
T.W ASEMt,N T
T. W. 345.8
a
? r
RIP-RAP
336.1
a ?
,W \
C. c
CA
TO[
336.3
34 36:0
A-:_?:?. - T.W. +
..-_ .. \? :: -. wa 44.3
LEVEL -?
PR DER 1 ?.-_?.•.rd?. ? ?:au-?-- ??6 _ _ ?
10' ACCESS
EASEMENT
SM H
LIMIT OF
IN ifH:
1.
i
t
o??F WAT Fq?G

NCDENR >_ y
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERT IFICATION APPLICATION FORM
LEVEL SPREADER - VEGETATED FILTER STRIP (LS-VFS) SUPPLEMENT
This form must be completely filled out, printed, initialed, and submitted.
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name Waterstone at Brier Creek
Contact name Joe Lancaster
Phone number 770-955-2421
Date
Drainage area number 2
II. DESIGN INFORMATION
The purpose of the LS-VFS Buffer Rule: Diffuse Flow
Stormwater enters LS-VFS from A BMP
Type of VFS Engineered filter strip (graded & sodded, slope < 8%)
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from the Drainage Area
Drainage area fe Do not complete this section of the form.
Impervious surface area fe Do not complete this section of the form.
Percent impervious % Do not complete this section of the form.
Rational C coefficient Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 1 in/hr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Time of concentration min Do not complete this section of the form.
Rainfall intensity, 10-yr storm in/hr Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 10-yr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Design storm
Maximum amount of flow directed to the LS-VFS cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Is a flow bypass system going to be used? (Y or N) Do not complete this section of the form.
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from a BMP
Type of BMP Other: Explained below
Peak discharge from the BMP during the design storm 2.8 cfs
Peak discharge from the BMP during the 10-year storm 2.38 cfs
Maximum capacity of a 100-foot long LS-VFS 10 cfs
Peak flow directed to the LS-VFS 2.8 cfs
Is a flow bypass system going to be used? N (Y or N)
Explanation of any "Other" responses above Dry Detention
LS-VFS Design
Forebay surface area sq ft
Depth of forebay at stormwater entry point in
Depth of forebay at stormwater exit point in
Feet of level lip needed per cfs 10 ftlcfs
Computed minimum length of the level lip needed 28 ft
Length of level lip provided 30 ft
Width of VFS 30 ft
Elevation at downslope base of level lip 330.00 fmsl
Elevation at the end of the VFS that is farthest from the LS 329.50 fmsl
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 1 of 3
Slope (from level lip to the end of the VFS)
Are any draws present in the VFS?
Is there a collector Swale at the end of the VFS?
Bypass System Design (if applicable)
Is a bypass system provided?
Is there an engineered flow splitting device?
Dimensions of the channel (see diagram below):
M
W
y (flow depth for 10-year storm)
freeboard (during the 10-year storm)
Peak velocity in the channel during the 10-yr storm
Channel lining material
Does the bypass discharge through a wetland?
Does the channel enter the stream at an angle?
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
1.67 %
N (Y or N) OK
N (Y or N)
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
fVsec
Pick one:
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
NV

Jill. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
EDIT 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.
Requried Item:
1. Plans (1" - 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
- Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Forebay (if applicable),
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
2. Plan details (1" = 30' or larger) for the level spreader showing:
- Forebay (if applicable),
High flow bypass system,
One foot topo lines between the level lip and top of stream bank,
Proposed drainage easement, and
Design at ultimate build-out.
Initials Page or plan sheet number and any notes:
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way)
C-23 (Off-stie drainage)
C-27 i£ C-28 (Delineated drainage basins)
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Proposed drainage
easement)
Forebay - NA
I High flow bypass system - NA
One foot topo lines - NA (less than one foot fall)
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 2 of 3
3. Section view of the level spreader (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
- Underdrain system (if applicable),
Level lip,
Upslope channel, and
Downslope filter fabric.
4. Plan details of the flow splitting device and supporting calculations (if applicable).
5. A construction sequence that shows how the level spreader will be protected from
sediment until the entire drainage area is stabilized.
6. If a non-engineered VFS is being used, then provide a photograph of the VFS showing
that no draws are present.
7. The supporting calculations.
8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement.
C-24, C-25 & C-26
NA
NA
See Attachment #2
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27M2011 - Rev.9 page 3 of 3
LL
7
U
33.
\,---D E
330.5
\ \ 10
330.2 RIP- P 5
LEVEL 5
v + SPREADER 2 SEE
341.5
-350
N X X T. W
?- I
330.6
X X X`
?o o 10 ACCESS
TW
336.0 I EASEMENT
W.
nn
U?

? aQF ?"J A TF9?
NCDENR
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERTI FICATION APPLICATION FORM
LEVEL SPREADER - VEGETATED FILTER STRIP (LS-VFS) SUPPLEMENT
This form must be completely filled out, printed, initialed, and submitted.
(. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name Waterstone at Brier Creek
Contact name Joe Lancaster
Phone number 770-955-2421
Date
Drainage area number 3
II. DESIGN INFORMATION
The purpose of the LS-VFS Buffer Rule: Diffuse Flow
Stormwater enters LS-VFS from A BMP
Type of VFS Engineered filter strip (graded & sodded, slope < 8%)
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from the Drainage Area
Drainage area fe Do not complete this section of the form.
Impervious surface area fe Do not complete this section of the form.
Percent impervious % Do not complete this section of the form.
Rational C coefficient Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 1 in/hr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Time of concentration min Do not complete this section of the form.
Rainfall intensity, 10-yr storm in/hr Do not complete this section of the form.
Peak flow from the 10-yr storm cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Design storm
Maximum amount of flow directed to the LS-VFS cfs Do not complete this section of the form.
Is a flow bypass system going to be used? (Y or N) Do not complete this section of the form.
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
If Stormwater Enters the LS-VFS from a UP
Type of BMP
Peak discharge from the BMP during the design storm
Peak discharge from the BMP during the 10-year storm
Maximum capacity of a 100-foot long LS-VFS
Peak flow directed to the LS-VFS
Is a flow bypass system going to be used?
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
LS-VFS Design
Other: Explained below
3.52 cfs
2.93 cfs
10 cfs
2.93 cfs
N (Y or
Dry Detention
Forebay surface area sq ft
Depth of forebay at stormwater entry point in
Depth of forebay at stormwater exit point in
Feet of level lip needed per cfs 10 ftlcfs
Computed minimum length of the level lip needed 29 ft
Length of level lip provided 30 ft
Width of VFS 30 ft
Elevation at downslope base of level lip 330.00 fmsl
Elevation at the end of the VFS that is farthest from the LS 329.50 fmsl
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 1 of 3
Slope (from level lip to the end of the VFS)
Are any draws present in the VFS?
Is there a collector swale at the end of the VFS?
Bypass System Design (if applicable)
Is a bypass system provided?
Is there an engineered flow splitting device?
Dimensions of the channel (see diagram below):
M
W
y (flow depth for 10-year storm)
freeboard (during the 10-year storm)
Peak velocity in the channel during the 10-yr storm
Channel lining material
Does the bypass discharge through a wetland?
Does the channel enter the stream at an angle?
Explanation of any "Other" responses above
1.67 %
N (Y or N) OK
N (Y or N)
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
ft
ft
It
ft
ft
fVsec
Pick one:
(Y or N)
(Y or N)
j B ±
III. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
EDIT 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.
Requried Item:
1. Plans (1" - 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
- Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Forebay (if applicable),
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way (ROW), and
- Boundaries of drainage easement.
2. Plan details (1" = 30' or larger) for the level spreader showing:
- Forebay (if applicable),
High flow bypass system,
One foot topo lines between the level lip and top of stream bank,
Proposed drainage easement, and
Design at ultimate build-out.
Initials Page or plan sheet number and any notes:
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Maintenance access,
Proposed drainage easement and public right of way)
C-23 (Off-stie drainage)
C-27 & C-28 (Delineated drainage basins)
C-14 - C-17 (Design at ultimate build-out, Proposed drainage
easement)
Forebay - NA
High flow bypass system - NA
C-24, C-25 & C-26 (One foot topo lines)
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27Ju12011 - Rev.9 page 2 of 3
3. Section view of the level spreader (1" = 20' or larger) showing: C-24, C-25 & C-26
- Underdrain system (if applicable),
Level lip,
Upslope channel, and
Downslope filter fabric.
4. Plan details of the flow splitting device and supporting calculations (if applicable). I NA
5. A construction sequence that shows how the level spreader will be protected from
sediment until the entire drainage area is stabilized.
6. If a non-engineered VFS is being used, then provide a photograph of the VFS showing I NA
that no draws are present.
7. The supporting calculations.
8. A copy of the signed and notarized operation and maintenance (0&M) agreement. See Attachment #2
I
Form SW401 - LS-VFS - 27M2011 - Rev.9 page 3 of 3

17
340 - RIP-RAP
OREBAY
SCIDIDED
SWALE
-,"3400
'-
".
W -` W -"
40.8
339.3 T.W
339.0 340.8 C
T. 3 4?2 42.5
342.0
T. W
T. W. T. W0 T. W 344.0 w
347o
41
349.0 X 346.0
342.2 342.0
? X
o W ,,
350.0
N
o X ?
Cp X 80 DRAIN'
INV. 342.4
ATTACHMENT # 4:
• Project Engineering Plans
• Waterstone at Brier Creek Apartments
ATTACHMENT # 5:
• B3a The site is mostly undeveloped except for Public Sewers along the creek and a
driveway/creek installed under a previously permit.
ATTACHMENT # 6:
• 133e The project will consist of 9 apartment buildings, a clubhouse/leasing/pool
facility, associated parking, supportive utilities which will include three detention
ponds discharging on engineered level spreader devices. The buffers will be
protected from disturbance by sediment barberries/tree protection fencing. Heavy
Equipment will be utilized to move earth on site to establish finish grades.
ATTACHMENT # 7:
B4d Per the previous permit approved on this site, S&EC delineated the wetlands on
this property in 1997 and 198. Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE verified the wetland
boundaries on October 16, 1998 (Action ID # 199506078). S&EC also conducted
Neuse River Basin (NRB) buffer determinations on the property, which were
confirmed by Danny Smith of the NCDWQ in a 6/12/98 letter (NBR-RRO-020).
S&EC consulted with Andre Wade of the USACE on March 26, 2003.
ATTACHMENT # 8:
• 135b DWQ Project No. 03-0669 records of previous permit. See Impact # 5 of this
permit which was located on this site.
WAT?RpG
r
=1
Brier Creek Associates, LP
Attn: Barry James
3800 ARCO Corporate Drive
Charlotte, NC 28273
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
August 19, 2003
Subject Property: Brier Creek Parcel H West, Aviation Parkway, Raleigh, NC
S&EC, Inc. Project No. 97-3165.07
Brier Creek [03-04-02, 27-33-4, C NSW]
Alari W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
DWO Project No. 03-0669
Wake County
Page 1 of 2
APPROVAL of 401 Water Gluality Certification and AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATE per the Neuse River Buffer
Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233) with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Dear Mr. James:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to place fill within or
otherwise impact streams and protected riparian buffers as outlined in the "Impact Table" below for the purpose of
constructing an access road at the subject property, as described within your application dated June 5, 2003. After
reviewing your application, we have decided that the impacts are covered by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
General Water Quality Certification Number(s) 3402 and 3404 (GC3402 & GC3404). The Certification(s) allows you to
use Nationwide Permit(s) 14 and 39 when Issued by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This letter shall also
act as your approved Authorization Certificate for impacts to the protected riparian buffers per 15A NCAC 2B .0233. In
addition, you should obtain or otherwise comply with any other required federal, state or local permits before you go
ahead with your project Including (but not limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control and Non-discharge regulations.
Also, this approval will expire when the accompanying 404 permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General
Certification.
Impact Table:
Impact No. Stream Length
Im acted Feet Buffer Area Impacted
(Square Feet Impact Type General Certification
No.
1 128 12,632 Road 3402
2 148 11,761 Road 3402
3 112 10,454 Road 3402
4 195 17,424 Road 3404
5 98 10,454 Road 3402
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new application. If the property is sold, the new owner
must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and Is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions.
If total fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of wetland or 150 linear feet of stream, compensatory
mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid, you must follow the
conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions listed below.
Conditions:
1. Buffer Mitigation (WRP)
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, WETLANDS / 401 UNIT
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
Page 2 of 3
DWQ Project No. 03-0669
August 19, 2003
You are required to mitigate for impacts to the protected riparian buffers. The required area of mitigation to
compensate for impacts to the protected riparian buffers Is 44,432 square feet as required under this
Authorization Certificate and 15A NCAC 2B .0242. We understand that you wish to make a payment into the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund administered by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (WRP) to meet this
mitigation requirement. This has been determined by the DWQ to be a suitable method to meet the mitigation
requirement. In accordance with 15A NCAC 2B.0242(7), this contribution will satisfy our compensatory
mitigation requirements under 15A NCAC 2B .0233(9)(C). Until the WRP receives and clears your check
(made payable to: DENR -Wetlands Restoration Program Office), no impacts specified in this Authorization
Certificate shall occur. Mr. Ron Ferrell should be contacted at [phone] if you have any questions
concerning payment into the WRP. You have one month from the date of this approval to make this payment.
For accounting purposes, this Authorization Certificate authorizes payment Into the Riparian Buffer
Restoration Fund to compensate for 44.432 ft2 of required riparian buffer mitigation for Impacts to
17,424 ft2 (and 195 linear feet) of protected riparian buffers; 03-04-02 river and subbasln and 27-33-4
stream Index number."
2. Stream Mitigation (WRP)
You are required to mitigate for permanent impacts to the streams. The required length of stream mitigation to
compensate for impacts to the streams is 195 feet as required under GC3404 and 15A NCAC 02H .0506. We
understand that you wish to make a payment into the Wetland Restoration Fund administered by the NC Wetlands
Restoration Program (WRP) to meet this mitigation requirement. This has been determined by the DWQ to be a
suitable method to meet the mitigation requirement. In accordance with 15A NCAC 02H .0506, this contribution
will satisfy our compensatory mitigation requirements under this certification. Until the WRP receives and clears
your check (made payable to: DENR -Wetlands Restoration Program Office), no impacts specified in this
certification shall occur. Mr. Ron Ferrell should be contacted at [phone] If you have any questions
concerning payment into the WRP. You have one month from the date of this approval to make this payment.
For accounting purposes, this certification authorizes payment Into the Wetland Restoration Fund to
compensate for 195 feet of required stream mitigation for Impacts to 195 feet of perennial streams; 03-04-
02 river and subbasln and 27-33.4 stream Index number.
3. Dlff use Flow (Review)
An additional condition Is that all constructed stormwater conveyance outlets from the proposed roadways shall
be directed to flow in a diffuse manner at non-erosive velocities through the entire protected stream buffers
without re-concentrating. If this Is not possible it may be necessary to provide stormwater facilities that are
considered to remove nitrogen. Additionally, a stormwater management plan for this project shall be provided to
this Office before any of the impacts approved herein are conducted. The plan shall specify all stormwater
discharge points, plan details, and calculations to indicate that diffuse flow through the protected buffers or
nitrogen removal as described above will be achieved.
4. Written Stormwater Management Plan
An additional condition is that a general, written stormwater management plan shall be approved in writing by
this Office before the impacts specified in this Certification occur per Condition No. 4 in GC No. 3402. The final
stormwater management plan must include plans and specifications for stormwater management facilities that
are appropriate for surface waters classif led as NSW and designed to remove 85% TSS according to the most
recent version of the NC DENR Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual. These facilities must be
designed, and approved in writing by this Office before development begins on each lot, to treat the runoff from
the entire project, unless otherwise explicitly approved by the Division of Water Quality. Also, before any
permanent building is occupied on each lot, the facilities (as approved by this Office) shall be constructed and
operational, and the stormwater management plan (as approved by this Office) shall be Implemented. The
structural stormwater practices as approved by this Office as well as drainage patterns must be maintained in
perpetuity. No changes to the structural stormwater practices shall be made without written authorization from
the Division of Water Quality. The plan should be coordinated with the City of Raleigh's nitrogen removal
stormwater requirements to ensure the above condition is incorporated into the City's requirements.
The above condition shall apply unless it is demonstrated in writing to the satisfaction of this Office that the
impervious area of the entire, built-out project shall be less than 30% and that there are no areas of
concentrated impervious area over 30% within the project such as, but not limited to, commercial areas, multi-
family, clubhouses, maintenance areas, etc. A State Stormwater Permit (15 A NCAC 2H .1000) can be
considered to meet this condition.
Page 3of3
DWQ Project No. 03-0669
August 19, 2003
Please contact Mr. Todd St. John at [phone] if you have any questions or require additional information
regarding this condition.
5. Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer Rules, and
any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached certificate of completion to the
401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-
1650.
6. Deed Notifications
Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all properties and lots with retained jurisdictional
wetlands, waters and protective buffers in order to assure compliance for future wetland, water and buffer
impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place prior to impacting any wetlands, waters and/or buffers
approved for impact under this Certification Approval and Authorization Certificate. You can obtain a copy of a
sample deed notification from our web site or by contacting the DWQ.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result in criminal and/or
civil penalties. This Certification shall become null and void unless the above conditions are made conditions of the
Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or
CAMA permit.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Certification (associated with the approved wetland or stream impacts),
you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for
a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office
of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 27611-7447. This certification and its conditions are final
and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
Any disputes over determinations regarding this Authorization Certificate (associated with the approved buffer impacts)
shall be referred In writing to the Director for a decision. The Director's decision is subject to review as provided in
Articles 3 and 4 of G.S. 1508.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act and the
Neuse riparian buffer protection rule as described within 15A NCAC 26.0233. If you have any questions, please
telephone John Dorney at 919-733-9646 or Bob Zarzecki at 919-733-9726.
Sincerely,
Ian W. Klimek, P.E.,
NC DWQ, Director
Attachments: Certificate of Completion
GC 3402 & 3404
Cc: Kevin Martin, S&EC, Inc., 11010 Raven Ridge Road, Raleigh, NC 27614
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
bz
DWQ # 03-0669
Date: August 19, 2003
OF WArFR Michael F. Easley, Governor
OCR pG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
? 7 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
_ r
-4 Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
.? Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION & AUTHORIZATION CERTIFICATE
SUMMARY OF PERMITTED IMPACTS AND MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500 and 2B .0233, Brier Creek Associates, LP has permission as outlined below
and within the General Water Quality Certification (WQC) Number 3404 & 3402 w/ additional conditions for the purpose(s)
of constructing the proposed road. All activities associated with these authorized impacts must be conducted with the
conditions listed in the attached certification transmittal letter. THIS CERTIFICATION AND AUTHORIZATION
CERTIFICATE ARE NOT VALID WITHOUT THE ATTACHMENTS.
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION REQUIREMENT WETLAND RESTORATION PROGRAM (WRP)
DWQ Project No.: 03-0669
Date: August 19, 2003
LOCATION: Raleigh
COUNTY: Wake
BASIN/SUBBASIN: 03-04-02 (river/subbasin); 27-33-4 (stream index no.)
As required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and 2B .0233 and the conditions of WQC No. 3404 & 3402 w/ additional conditions,
you are required to compensate for the above impacts through the restoration, creation, enhancement or preservation of
wetlands, surface waters and/or buffers as outlined below prior to conducting any activities that impact or degrade the
waters of the state.
[Note: Acreage requirements proposed to be mitigated through the WRP must be rounded up to one-quarter acre
increments according to 15A NCAC 2R .0503(b).]
0 acres of Class WL wetlands
0 acres of riparian wetland
0 acres of non-riparian wetland
195 feet of stream channel
44,432 square feet of stream buffers
One of the options you have available to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements is through the payment of a fee
to the Wetlands Restoration Fund per 15A NCAC 2R .0503 and to the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund per 15A NCAC
213.0233. If you choose this option, please sign this form and mail it to the WRP at the address listed below. An invoice
for the appropriate amount of payment will be sent to you upon receipt of this form. PLEASE NOTE, THE ABOVE
IMPACTS ARE NOT AUTHORIZED UNTIL YOU HAVE RECEIVED NOTIFICATION THAT YOUR PAYMENT HAS BEEN
PROCESSED BY THE WRP.
Signature
WETLANDS RESTORATION PROGRAM (WRP)
NC DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
[phone]
Date
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
MEIUIORA'NDUM
TO: John Dorney Regional Contact: Steve Mitchell
Non-Discharge Branch WQ Supervisor:
Date:
SUBJECT: WETLAND STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Facility Name Brier Creek Parcel H - West County Wake
Project Number 03 0669 County2
Recvd From APP Region Raleigh
Received Date 6/5103 Recvd By Region
Project Type road to access property
Certificates Stream Stream Impacts (ft.)
Permit Wetland Wetland Wetland Stream Class Acres Feet
Type Type Impact Score Index Prim. Supp. Basin Req. Req. ME
14 Stream O Y O N - 27-33-4 F -c N5W 30,402. F- 68I. 195.00-[--
10
39 Y N.
30,402
F - r- F--
$uffers WY _0N F--F-F-F-30,402. 1.44 F- ?- F-
Mitigation Wetland
MitigationType Type Acres Feet
Stream WRP Stream I 195.00
Btiffer WRP uffers 1.02
Is Wetland Rating Sheet Attached? 0 Y 0 N Did you request more info? 0 Y 0 N
Have Project Changes/Conditions Been Discussed With Applicant? 0 Y 0 N
Is Mitigation required? 0 Y O N Recommendation: # issue 0 Issue/fond O Deny
Provided by Region: Latitude (ddmmss) Longitude (ddmmss)
Comments:
July 24. 2003
Danny did buffer call for project NBR-020 and RRO does not have a file copy to check on the
delineation. Should be OK but we should check with him to make sure, See Todd's comments on
Stormwater control. RRO is OK w/ACOE I/P calls,
cc: Regional Office Page Number 1
Central Office
imap://todd.st.john%40dwq.denr.ncmail.net@nplex l .ncifiail.net: i 43/f...

Subject: Brier Creek Parcel H West
From: "Jennifer Burdette" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:01:08 -0400 j
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "Mike Munn" <[e-mail]>, "Barry James" <bjamePeYom>, "Furman"
<Furman @ johnrmcadams.com>
Todd
As requested, listed below is the City of Raleigh contact that Jeff Furman
and Mike Munn of The John R. McAdams Company have been dealing with
regarding the city's stormwater requirements for the project.
I think it is a great idea to tie DWQ stormwater compliance in some way with
individual site plan approvals by the City of Raleigh. This will allow
stormwater management plan design to occur along with site plan development
on the individual lots, which may not occur on some lots for possibly years
ter the roa constructed.
Ben Brown
lRalei, of Raleigh
W. Hargett Street
ghNC 27602
) 890-3767
Please ow if there is anything else you need to process the
application.
- Jennifer
Jennifer Burdette
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
[phone]
This electronic communication, including all attachments, is intended only
for the named addressee (s) and may contain confidential information. This
electronic communication may not have passed through our standard
review/quality control process. Design data and recommendations included
herein are provided as a matter of convenience and should not be used for
final design. Rely only on final, hardcopy materials bearing the
consultant's original signature and seal. If you are not the named
addressee (s), any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is prohibited. If you have received this electronic
communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete
the original communication from your system. Thank you.
CB'1'Ytf
44,
6_0ft dg'J7 V14 S lo (4J41#4at (10W AWI)r'W
?'? r,M Sao aS 4/4A, J&W.4t444JLn //
6
1 of 1
02
,/I?,. //' L 1 it C ©?? /24/03 11:08 AM

The following conditions can be used in any situation where diffuse flow is required through protected
buffers. The first condition can be used for projects that have adequately addressed this issue as part
of the application process. The second can be used when the issue is not well addressed.
$$) Diffuse Flow (No Review)
An additional condition is that all constructed stormwater conveyance outlets shall be directed
as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities through the protected stream buffers such that it will not
re-concentrate before discharging into a stream as identified within 15A NCAC 213.02 (5).
If this is not possible it may be necessary to provide stormwater facilities that are considered to
remove nitrogen. This may require additional approval from this Office.
$$) Diffuse Flow (Review) t"? i°?" g
An additional condition is that all constructed stormwater conveyance outlet shall be directed
to flow in a diffuse manner at non-erosive velocities through the entire protected stream buffers
without re-concentrating. If this is not possible it may be necessary to provide stormwater
facilities that are considered to remove nitrogen. Additionally, a stormwater management plan
for this project shall be provided to this Office before any of the impacts approved herein are
conducted. The plan shall specify all stormwater discharge points, plan details, and calculations
to indicate that diffuse flow through the protected buffers or nitrogen removal as described
above will be achieved.
The following are typical conditions added to all approvals unless it does not make sense to add it:
$$) Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable
Buffer Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return the attached
certificate of completion to the 401/Wetlands Unit, North Carolina Division of Water Quality,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650.
$$) Deed Notifications
Deed notifications or similar mechanisms shall be placed on all retained jurisdictional wetlands,
waters and protective buffers in order to assure compliance for future wetland, water and buffer
impact. These mechanisms shall be put in place prior to impacting any wetlands, waters and/or
buffers approved for impact under this Certification Approval and Authorization Certificate. A
sample deed notification can be downloaded from the 401/Wetlands Unit web site at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands.
$$) Temporary Fills
All temporary fill and culverts shall be removed and the impacted area returned to the original
grade, including each stream's original cross sectional dimensions, planform pattern, and
longitudinal bed and bed profile after construction is complete or within 6 months of the
establishment of the crossing, which ever is sooner, and the various sites shall be stabilized
with natural woody vegetation (except for the maintenance areas of permanent utility crossings)
and restored to prevent erosion; If the crossings are not completely removed and restored as
described above within the specified time above, additional written approval from this Office
must be obtained to modify this condition.
The following are conditions to place specific requirements in areas with protected buffers:

Waters (acres)
Buffers (square feet)
The following condition is recommended when a stormwater management plan is required. This
typically applies to projects that are over 30% impervious or have concentrated areas of development
within a project that are over 30% impervious. It is recommended that the need for a stormwater
management plan be established prior to issuing any approvals. The applicant should also demonstrate
that there is adequate space allotted for the proposed BMP and that an the BMP appropriate to the
stream classification is used (i.e. wetlands, pond with forested filter strip, or bioretention in sensitive
watersheds per the GC's).
tten Stormwater Management Plan
$additional condition is that a lip* written stormwater management plan (including a signed` 4%
and notarized Operation and Maintenance Agreement) shall be approved in writing by this
Office beforp the impacts specified in this Certification occur per Condition No in GC No. Q
?f p7i . The ?rmwater management plan must include plans and specifications for stormwater '2t
management facilities that are appropriate for surface waters classified as R5kl and designed °
to remove 85% TSS according to the most recent version of the NLE NR Stormwater Best
Management Practices Manual. These facilities must be designed eat the runoff from
entire project, unless otherwise explei I d by the Division of Water Quality. Also, before F
any permanent building is occupied +}eet-sale, the facilities (as approved by this Office)
shall be constructed and operational, and the stormwater management plan (as approved by
this Office) shall be implemented. The structural stormwater practices as approved by this Office
as well as drainage patterns must be maintained in perpetuity. No changes to the structural
stormwater practices shall be made without written authorization from the Division of Water
Quality.
A
show ?oor?;?, wig, 1 C%?y •?' ?l?r9k'j
3?0r"'a?x1c?, rC?rcir?ti'w"? oiv EHS?cv? IC ?L?n?eEl
( ptio'hal ara 4M.
AdmNOW it,
The above condition shall apply unless it is demonstrated in writing to the satisfaction of this
Office that the impervious area of the entire, built-out project shall be less than 30% and that
there are no areas of concentrated impervious area over 30% within the project such as, but not
limited to, commercial areas, multi-family, clubhouses, maintenance areas, etc.
Th
h
ll b
ere s
a
e no direct discharges to streams from fairways, tee areas, or greens.
A State Stormwater Permit (15 A NCAC 2H .1000) can be considered to meet this condition.
Note: The sentence that discusses the 85% TSS removal design standard can be eliminated or
modified to reflect a plan not designed to meet 85% TSS removal, etc. "
$$) Written Stormwater Management Plan (No Further Approval Needed)

The final, written stormwater management plans (including a signed and notarized Operation ?o
and Maintenance Agreement) dated , must be implemented and the stormwater
management facilities shall be constructed and operational before any permanent building is ??.
occupied at the subject site. The structural stormwater practices as approved by this Office as
well as drainage patterns must be maintained in perpetuity. No changes to the structural
stormwater practices shall be made without written authorization from the Division of Water
Quality.
mai I box:///CI/Documents%20and%20Settings/bob_zarzecki/Applicat...
Subject: Re: Brier Creek Parcel H West. DWQ# 03-0669 Wake County.
From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:33:07 -0400
To: Kevin Martin <[e-mail]>
Kevin:
So, I guess that means that we have until 4:41 pm today to sign the letter (kidding). I don't know what
happened. The latest information was dated June 20, 2003, but it's stamped received June 23, 2003.
Therefore, I assume that Cyndi was using the June 23, 2003 date when calculating the 60 day clock.
Regardless, John reviewed the file last night and I plan to write the authorization today per his
guidance. I'll fax you a copy.
- Bob
Kevin Martin wrote:
The courier picked up here on Friday 6/20 and according to them B. Strickland at your office signed for
it at 4:41 pm that day,so the 60th day is 8/19 by my calculations. No big deal either way just wanted you
to know the clients position since they are freaked out is that we should get something by 8/19. So if you
get to it send me an email or a fax otherwise I will assume it is either OK or you decided to let it go
statutory. Thanks for checking and let me know if you have questions once it is reviewed. Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Zarzecki (mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 3:19 PM
To: Kevin Martin
Cc: Todd St. John; john.dorney
Subject: Re: Brier Creek Parcel H West. DWQ# 03-0669 Wake County.
Kevin:
We have it as received on 8/24/03 and the file lists 8/23/03 as the 60th day. The project
is currently in John's box for review. Hopefully we can it resolved tomorrow (8/19/03).
- Bob
Kevin Martin wrote:
Thanks, Todd. Bob could you verify that my 60 day calculation is
correct and
that 8/19 is the 60th day. The engineer has now told me he had a
discussion
with you folks and was told that everything was ok and would be signed
an
out by the 23rd. Is that correct? Sorry for the confusion. Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: Todd St. John [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 7:42 AM
To: Kevin Martin
Cc: Bob Zarzecki; john.dorney
Subject: Re: Brier Creek Parcel H West. DWQ# 03-0669 Wake County.
Je ne sais pas...
It's on Bob's "board o' buffer things to do"... i asked him and he told
me that Dorney was looking at it but couldn't remember why...
I of 3 8/19/2003 9:33 AM
mai I box:///CI/Documents%20and%20Setti ngs/bob_zarzecki/Applicat...
It would be my recommendation that you make your follow up requests to
Bob instead of John...
Kevin Martin wrote:
Todd, can you please check on the status of your review of the
diffuse flow
and stormwater calculations for this project? They were submitted on
6/20/03
in response to your 6/11/03 letter. The client is freaking out
because he
just discovered that Jennifer Burdette no longer works here and
believes we
have dropped the ball because of that. In reality, everything was
submitted
and we are just awaiting you response. Please verify that you have
the info
and your schedule for review. I assume since we responded on 6/20/03
the 60
day review expires on 8/19/03 so if you have already sent a response
we do
not have it, please email or fax it if not please advise on schedule.
Thanks
Kevin
Kevin Martin
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
919-846-5900
This electronic communication, including all attachments, is intended
only
for the named addressee (s) and may contain confidential information.
This
electronic communication may not have passed through our standard
review/quality control process. Design data and recommendations
included
herein are provided as a matter of convenience and should not be used
for
final design. Rely only on final, hardcopy materials bearing the
consultant's original signature and seal. If you are not the named
addressee (s), any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this
communication is prohibited. If you have received this electronic
communication in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and
delete
the original communication from your system. Thank you.
2 of 3 8/19/2003 9:33 AM
0? VY„ I1 ~q?G
> -.4
Cl) r
o -F
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Brier Creek Associates, LP
Attn: Barry James
3800 ARCO Corporate Drive
Charlotte, NC 28273
Dear Mr. James:
iwn;natn r. ?aoiey, ? Vu Vliiur
Wam G. Ross Jr., Secretary
D nvironment and Natural Resources
AI+?P. ., Director Division of Water Quality
June 11, 2003
DWQ # 03-0669
Wake County
Project Name: Brier Creek Parcel H West
On June 5, 2003 the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) was notified by receipt of your
application regarding your plan to fill waters for the purpose of constructing an access road in Wake
County. Approval from DWQ is required to disturb these areas. Please provide 7 copies of the
following information and refer to the DWQ # listed above in your reply. Please show these on maps of
suitable scale (for instance 1" = 100 feet) so we can begin to determine your projects' compliance with
15A NCAC 2H.0500.
1. Please provide detail for the stormwater management practices for the eventual development.
Why cannot stormwater management be provided (or reserved) for the entire site up-front?
2. Please indicate the diffuse flow provision measures on the site plan.
3. What criteria were used to determine perennial vs. intermittent streams?
Please telephone John Dorsey at 919-733-9646 if you have any questions or would require
copies of our rules or procedural materials. This project will remain on hold as incomplete in
accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0505(c). The processing time for this application will begin when
this information is received. If we do not hear from you by writing or by fax at [phone] within
three (3) weeks we will assume you no longer want to pursue the project and will consider it
withdrawn.
on Program
JRD/bs
cc: Raleigh DWQ Regional Office
Raleigh Corps of Engineers
Central Files
File Copy
Jennifer Burdette, S&EC
N. C. Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
[phone] (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), (http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands
s'?? r.
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road • Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
wTIUM C
0 P Y
The proposed project will impact 195 linear feet of important stream channel, 486 linear
feet of unimportant stream channel, and riparian buffers. Therefore, a check in amount of
$475 to cover the processing fee for the 401 Water Quality Certification approval is
enclosed.
VVETIA.NPS / -ir1 rgOUP
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Ste. 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
June 5, 2003
JUN
(-:ti,,?r,„1G. J
ITYl' ECTION
NCDENR - DWQ
Parkview Building
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attn: Ms. Andrea Wade Attn: Mr. John Dorney
RE: Nationwide Permit 14 & 39, 401 Water Quality Certification,
& Neuse River Buffer Compliance Request
Brier Creek - Parcel H West
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
S&EC Project #: 97-3165.07
Dear Ms. Wade and Mr. Dorney:
On behalf of Brier Creek Associates, L.P., we request authorization from the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) to use Nationwide Permit (NWP) 14 for the proposed project to cover
permanent impacts to a perennial stream channel and to use NWP 39 to cover permanent impacts
to four intermittent stream channels. We also request written concurrence from the NC Division
of Water Quality (NCDWQ) that the project complies with the associated 401 Water Quality
Certification and Neuse River Basin (NRB) Buffer Rules. A Pre-construction Notification
Application (PCN) including an agent authorization form is attached.
As indicated in the application, the project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the
Interstate 540 and Aviation Parkway intersection. It is bounded to the northeast by Globe Road
(SR 1644), 1-540 to the south, and Aviation Parkway to the west. Attached is an excerpt from
the Southeast Durham, NC USGS topographic quadrangle showing the location of the site
(Figure 1).
Charlotte Office: Greensboro Office: HickoU Office:
236 LePhillip Court, Suite C 3817-F Lawndale Drive 622 Coon Mountain Lane
Concord, NC 28025 Greensboro, NC 27455 Taylorsville, NC 28681
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone] Phone [phone]
I-V. 0041 7?0_9406 Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
June 5, 2003
S&EC Project #: 97-3165.07
Page 2 of 4
The project consists of the construction of the proposed Loop Road and an individual access
across Brier Creek and its tributaries to provide access to all areas of the property. The attached
PCN form and its attachments detail the impacts, justification, and mitigation requirements of the
project.
.f If you have any questions while reviewing this application, please do not hesitate to call Jennifer
Burdette at [phone].
Sincerely,
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
VJJenni r A. Burdette
Environmental Scientist
Attachments:
Pre-construction (PCN) notification form
USGS Location Map (Figure 1)
Impact Map Exhibits (4 sheets)
Attachment I - Latitude & Longitude Table
JRM Justification Letter (6/4/03)
NCWRP Preliminary Mitigation Acceptance
Agent Authorization Form
Check for WQC Processing Fee (NCDWQ Only)
c: Barry James - AAC Real Estate Services
Jeff Furman - The John R. McAdams Company
Office Use Only: Form Version May 2002
USACE Action ID No. DWQ No.
(if any particular item is not applicable to this project, please enter "Not Applicable" or "N/A".)
1. Processing
1. Check all of the approval(s) requested for this project:
® Section 404 Permit ® Riparian or Watershed Buffer Rules 41GI
? Section 10 Permit ? Isolated Wetland Permit from DWQ
® 401 Water Quality Certification
2. Nationwide, Regional or General Permit Number(s) Requested: 14 & 39
3. If this notification is solely a courtesy copy because written approval for the 401 Certification
is not required, check here: ?
4. If payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is proposed for
mitigation of impacts (verify availability with NCWRP prior to submittal of PCN), complete
section VIII and check here:
5. If your project is located in any of North Carolina's twenty coastal counties (listed on page
4), and the project is within a North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Area of
Environmental Concern (see the top of page 2 for further details), check here: ?
II. Applicant Information
1. Owner/Applicant Information
Name: Brier Creek Associates LP
Mailing Address: 3800 ARCO Corporate Drive
Charlotte North Carolina 28273
Contact: BaM James
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: [e-mail]
2. Agent/Consultant Information (A signed and dated copy of the Agent Authorization letter
must be attached if the Agent has signatory authority for the owner/applicant.)
Name: Jennifer A. Burdette
Company Affiliation: Soil & Environmental Consultants PA
Mailing Address: 11010 Raven Ridge Road
Raleigh NC 27614
Telephone Number: [phone] Fax Number: [phone]
E-mail Address: jurdette e SandEC com
Page 5 of 14
III. Project Information
Attach a vicinity map clearly showing the location of the property with respect to local
landmarks such as towns, rivers, and roads. Also provide a detailed site plan showing property
boundaries and development plans in relation to surrounding properties. Both the vicinity map
and site plan must include a scale and north arrow. The specific footprints of all buildings,
impervious surfaces, or other facilities must be included. If possible, the maps and plans should
include the appropriate USGS Topographic Quad Map and NRCS Soil Survey with the property
boundaries outlined. Plan drawings, or other maps may be included at the applicant's discretion,
so long as the property is clearly defined. For administrative and distribution purposes, the
USACE requires information to be submitted on sheets no larger than 11 by 17-inch format;
however, DWQ may accept paperwork of any size. DWQ prefers full-size construction
drawings rather than a sequential sheet version of the full-size plans. If full-size plans are
reduced to a small scale such that the final version is illegible, the applicant will be informed that
the project has been placed on hold until decipherable maps are provided.
1. Name of project: Brier Creek Parcel H West
2. T.I.P. Project Number or State Project Number (NCDOT Only): NA
3. Property Identification Number (Tax PIN): 0758927623 (portion) & 0758719121
4. Location
County: Wake Nearest Town: Raleigh
Subdivision name (include phase/lot number): NA
Directions to site (include road numbers, landmarks, etc.): The project site is located in the
northeast quadrant of the Interstate 540 and Aviation Parkway intersection It is bounded to
the northeast by Globe Road (SR 1644) I-540 to the south, and Aviation Parkway to the
west. Attached is an excerpt from the Southeast Durham, NC USGS topographic quadrangle
showinst the location of the site (Figure 1).
5. Site coordinates, if available (UTM or Lat/Long): See Attachment I
(Note - If project is linear, such as a road or utility line, attach a sheet that separately lists the
coordinates for each crossing of a distinct waterbody.)
6. Property size (acres): 81.18
7. Nearest body of water (stream/river/sound/ocean/lake): Brier Creek
8. River Basin: Neuse
(Note - this must be one of North Carolina's seventeen designated major river basins. The
River Basin map is available at http://h2o.enr.state,nc.us/admin/map .)
9. Describe the existing conditions on the site and general land use in the vicinity of the project
at the time of this application:. The site is largely undeveloped except for sanitary sewer
and powerline easements and a small office located in the southeast corner of the site The
Page 6 of 14
area in the vicinity of the project is mixed use, which includes residential subdivisions, a golf
course and retail centers.
10. Describe the overall project in detail, including the type of equipment to be used: The
proposed project involves dividing, the property into separate parcels and constructing a loop
road off of Globe Road. Heavy equipment typical of road construction will be used to
complete the proposed project.
11. Explain the purpose of the proposed work: The purpose of the project is to provide road
access to land separated from Globe Road by Brier Creek and its tributaries.
IV. Prior Project History
If jurisdictional determinations and/or permits have been requested and/or obtained for this
project (including all prior phases of the same subdivision) in the past, please explain. Include
the USACE Action ID Number, DWQ Project Number, application date, and date permits and
certifications were issued or withdrawn. Provide photocopies of previously issued permits,
certifications or other useful information. Describe previously approved wetland, stream and
buffer impacts, along with associated mitigation (where applicable). If this is a NCDOT project,
list and describe permits issued for prior segments of the same T.I.P. project, along with
construction schedules.
S&EC delineated the wetlands on this property in 1997 and 1998. Eric Alsmeyer of the USACE
verified the wetland boundaries on October 16. 1998 (Action ID # 199506078). S&EC also
conducted Neuse River Basin (NM) buffer determinations on the property, which were
confirmed by Danny Smith of the NCDWQ in a 6/12/98 letter MR-11110-20). S&EC consulted
with Andrea Wade of the USACE on March 26, 2003. After reviewing the project plans, Ms.
Wade determined that the project would be processed as a single and complete project separate
from the remaining Brier Creek property due its independent utility. Ms. Wade also conducted
importance calls on the stream channels. The crossing identified as Impact #1 is the only stream
channel that Ms. Wade found to be important.
V. Future Project Plans
Are any future permit requests anticipated for this project? If so, describe the anticipated work,
and provide justification for the exclusion of this work from the current application.
Additional permit requests are not anticipated for this project.
VI. Proposed Impacts to Waters of the United States/Waters of the State
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
wetlands, open water, and stream channels associated with the project. The applicant must also
provide justification for these impacts in Section VII below. All proposed impacts, permanent
and temporary, must be listed herein, and must be clearly identifiable on an accompanying site
Page 7 of 14
plan. All wetlands and waters, and all streams (intermittent and perennial) must be shown on a
delineation map, whether or not impacts are proposed to these systems. Wetland and stream
evaluation and delineation forms should be included as appropriate. Photographs may be
included at the applicant's discretion. If this proposed impact is strictly for wetland or stream
mitigation, list and describe the impact in Section VIII below. If additional space is needed for
listing or description, please attach a separate sheet.
1. Provide a written description of the proposed impacts: Impacts 1 throw 5 are
proposed. Impact #1 involves stream channel impact associated with widening the existing
Globe Road. Impacts 2 through 4 are stream crossings associated with the loop road. Impact
45 is a road crossing of a tributary to Brier Creek.
2. Individually list wetland impacts below:
Wetland Impact
Site Number
indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres) Located within
100-year Floodplain**
(es/no) Distance to
Nearest Stream
(linear feet
Type of Wetland***
NA

• List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: mechanized clearing, grading, fill,
excavation, flooding, ditching/drainage, etc. For dams, separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding.
** 100-Year floodplains are identified through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps
(FIRM), or FEMA-approved local floodplain maps. Maps are available through the FEMA Map Service Center at 1-800-358-9616, or
online at hqp://www.fema.gov.
*** List a wetland type that best describes wetland to be impacted (e.g., freshwater/saltwater marsh, forested wetland, beaver pond,
Carolina Bay, bog, etc.) Indicate if wetland is isolated (determination of isolation to be made by USACE only).
List the total acreage (estimated) of all existing wetlands on the property: 0.17
Total area of wetland impact proposed: 0
3. Individually list all intermittent and perennial stream impacts below:
Stream Impact Length of Average Width Perennial or
Site Number Type of Impact* Impact Stream Name** of Stream Intermittent?
indicate on ma (linear feet) Before Impact leasespecify)
permanent
I culvert & rip rap 128 UT to Brier Creek 4 Intermittent
unimportant
channel
permanent
2 culvert & rip rap
unimportant 148 Brier Creek 4 Intermittent
channel
permanent
3 culvert & rip rap
unimportant 112 UT to Brier Creek 7 Intermittent
channel
Page 8 of 14
permanent
4 culvert & rip rap 195 Brier Creek 18 Perennial
important
channel
permanent
5 culvert & rip rap 98 UT to Brier Creek 10 Intermittent
unimportant
channel
* List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: culverts and associated rip-nap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loWgain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening, etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
** Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800-358-9616, or online at
www.usas.eov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., www.topozone.coin.
www.MMuest.com, etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 195 imp + 486 unimp=681
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
(indicate on ma
Type of Impact* Area of
Impact
(acres)
(if Name applicable) Wat) Type of Waterbody
(lake, pond, estuary, sound,
bay, ocean, etc.)
NA

+ List each impact separately and identify temporary impacts. Impacts include, but are not limited to: till, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): NA
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): NA
Size of watershed draining to pond: NA Expected pond surface area: NA
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
Page 9 of 14
were minimized once the desired site plan was developed. If applicable, discuss construction
techniques to be followed during construction to reduce impacts.
Construction of the proposed loop road is necessary in order to provide access to high ground
located across Brier Creek from Globe Road. It is important to note that access could not be
provided from I-540 because it is a controlled access highway. In addition, Aviation Parkway
and Brier Creek Parkway could also not be used to access the property due to the property's
location near existing intersections that would not allow the minimum separation between
intersections. The City of Raleigh requires the applicant to upgrade Globe Road as part of this
project. Please refer to the attached letter written b the applicant's engineer, John R. McAdams
Company for more information regarding the necessity of this widening, and the other proposed
road crossings.
VIII. Mitigation
DWQ - In accordance with 15A NCAC 2H .0500, mitigation may be required by the NC
Division of Water Quality for projects involving greater than or equal to one acre of impacts to
freshwater wetlands or greater than or equal to 150 linear feet of total impacts to perennial
streams.
USACE - In accordance with the Final Notice of Issuance and Modification of Nationwide
Permits, published in the Federal Register on March 9, 2000, mitigation will be required when
necessary to ensure that adverse effects to the aquatic environment are minimal. Factors
including size and type of proposed impact and function and relative value of the impacted
aquatic resource will be considered in determining acceptability of appropriate and practicable
mitigation as proposed. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate and practicable include,
but are not limited to: reducing the size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland
and/or upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as streams; and replacing losses of
aquatic resource functions and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving similar
functions and values, preferable in the same watershed.
If mitigation is required for this project, a copy of the mitigation plan must be attached in order
for USACE or DWQ to consider the application complete for processing. Any application
lacking a required mitigation plan or NCWRP concurrence shall be placed on hold as
incomplete. An applicant may also choose to review the current guidelines for stream restoration
in DWQ's Draft Technical Guide for Stream Work in North Carolina, available at
http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/strmgide.htmi.
1. Provide a brief description of the proposed mitigation plan. The description should provide
as much information as possible, including, but not limited to: site location (attach directions
and/or map, if offsite), affected stream and river basin, type and amount (acreage/linear feet)
of mitigation proposed (restoration, enhancement, creation, or preservation), a plan view,
preservation mechanism (e.g., deed restrictions, conservation easement, etc.), and a
description of the current site conditions and proposed method of construction. Please attach
a separate sheet if more space is needed.
The applicant has avoided impacts to jurisdictional wetlands minimized impacts to stream
channels to the maximum extent practicable and will maintain the riparian buffers on the
Page 10 of 14
property as required by the NRB Riparian Buffer Rule. However, Impact #4 (195 L.F.)
exceeds 150 linear feet of important stream channel impact. Therefore, stream channel
mitigation is required by the USACE. Andrea Wade of the USACE agreed that a 1:1
mitigation ratio would satisfy this requirement This proposed compensatory mitigation will
also serve to meet the requirements for mitigation by the NCDWQ. The remaining stream
channel impacts #1 #2 #3 and #5) are to unimportant channels and each crossing does not
exceed 150 linear feet, therefore S&EC believes mitigation should not be required by
NCDWQ for these crossings It is very important to note that each crossing has been
designed in accordance with the Wilmington District's Regional Conditions for linear
transportation projects and NCDWQ's WQC #3375 that require maintaining the existing
bank-full channel and allowing low flow passage of water and aquatic life.
Because the buffer impacts for Impacts 1 Z 3 and 5 are perpendicular road crossings
impacting _less than 1/3 acre of riparian buffer and 150 linear feet of stream channel, S&EC
believes buffer mitigation should not be required for these impacts However, riparian buffer
mitigation is required for Impact #4 because it exceeds 150 linear feet of stream channel and
1 /3 acre of riparian buffer.
2. Mitigation may also be made by payment into the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration
Program (NCWRP). Please note it is the applicant's responsibility to contact the NCWRP at
[phone] to determine availability and to request written approval of mitigation prior
to submittal of a PCN. For additional information regarding the application process for the
NCWRP, check the NCWRP website at http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wrp/index.htm. If use of
the NCWRP is proposed, please check the appropriate box on page three and provide the
following information:
Amount of stream mitigation requested (linear feet): 195
Amount of buffer mitigation requested (square feet): 44,432
Amount of Riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
Amount of Non-riparian wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
Amount of Coastal wetland mitigation requested (acres): NA
IX. Environmental Documentation (required by DWQ)
Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state) funds or the use of public
(federal/state) land?
Yes ? No
If yes, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the
requirements of the National or North Carolina Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?
Note: If you are not sure whether a NEPA/SEPA document is required, call the SEPA
coordinator at [phone] to review current thresholds for environmental documentation.
Yes ? No ?
Page I I of 14
If yes, has the document review been finalized by the State Clearinghouse? If so, please attach a
copy of the NEPA or SEPA final approval letter.
Yes ? No ?
X.
Proposed Impacts on Riparian and Watershed Buffers (required by DWQ)
It is the applicant's (or agent's) responsibility to determine, delineate and map all impacts to
required state and local buffers associated with the project. The applicant must also provide
justification for these impacts in Section VII above. All proposed impacts must be listed herein,
and must be clearly identifiable on the accompanying site plan. All buffers must be shown on a
map, whether or not impacts are proposed to the buffers. Correspondence from the DWQ
Regional Office may be included as appropriate. Photographs may also be included at the
applicant's discretion.
Will the project impact protected riparian buffers identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233
(Meuse), 15A NCAC 2B .0259 (Tar-Pamlico), 15A NCAC 213 .0250 (Randleman Rules and
Water Supply Buffer Requirements), or other (please identify )?
Yes ® No ? If you answered "yes", provide the following information:
Identify the square feet and acreage of impact to each zone of the riparian buffers. If buffer
mitigation is required calculate the required amount of mitigation by applying the buffer
multipliers.
Zone* ( ulinpact are feet Multiplier MiequaUo
Impact #1
1 8,276 3 NA
2 4,356 1.5 NA
Subtotal 12,632 NA
Impact #2
1 7,841 3 NA
2 3,920 1.5 NA
Subtotal 11,761 NA
Impact #3
1 6,534 3 NA
2 3,920 1.5 NA
Subtotal 10,454 NA
Impact #4
1 12,197 3 36,591
2 5,227 1.5 7,841
Subtotal 17,424 44,432
Page 12 of 14
Impact #5
1 6,098 3 NA
2 4,356 1.5 NA
Subtotal 10,454 NA
Total 62,725 44,432
' Zone I extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone I.
It is important to note that fill material left in place after the relocation of Globe Road will al
be removed from the floo plain and the riparian buffer. The stream channel will not be impacted
in this process Please refer to the attached Impact Maps for the location of this fill removal.
The area within the riparian buffer is currently vegetated with grasses. Diffuse flow will be
maintained and the riparian area will be restored, therefore, this activity is exempt from the
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules.
If buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0242 or .0260.
The applicant proposed payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund, which has been
preliminarily accepted by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). See the attached
letter from NCWRP Please note NCWRP granted the applicant more mitigation than requested
in the permit because the applicant further minimized impacts after requesting preliminary
acceptance of the proposed compensatory mitigation.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Most of the DroDerty is currently undevelo4ed forestland. The proposed lots shown on the
attached Impact Maps will be sold and developed by other individuals. Due to the mixed use
zoning of the property, we anticipate that impervious area on the property will exceed 30% upon
completion of development Individual lot developers will be required to comply with the City
of Raleigh Nitrogen Control Rules thereby protecting surface waters and wetlands downstream
from the property.
XII. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated on the site will be discharged to the existing municipal sanitary sewer
lines present on the property and shown on the attached Impact Maps
Page 13 of 14
XIII. Violations (required by DWQ)
Is this site in violation of DWQ Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H.0500) or any Buffer Rules?
Yes ? No
Is this an after-the-fact permit application?
Yes ? No
XIV. Other Circumstances (Optional):
It is the applicant's responsibility to submit the application sufficiently in advance of desired
construction dates to allow processing time for these permits. However, an applicant may
choose to list constraints associated with construction or sequencing that may impose limits on
work schedules (e.g., draw-down schedules for lakes, dates associated with Endangered and
Threatened Species, accessibility problems, or other issues outside of the applicant's control).
It is important to note that submission of this permit application has been delayed in an effort to
ensure the design of each crossing complied with conditions and requirements for maintaining
the existing bank-full channel and allowing low flow passage of water and aquatic life. Because
the project team would like to construct the road crossings during the summer to reduce impacts
to water quality and the City of Raleigh requires NCDWO's 401 Water Quality Certification
approval prior to their Design Approval, anythin the he agency can do to expedite the review
process would be appreciated Please call Jennifer Burdette at [phone] if any additional
information is required for the review process.
a- 616103
Signature f Ddte
only if an authorization letter from the applicant is provided.)
Page 14 of 14
( 600 ?/ _i!? f\ -
?-
1` ?
1" q ? Apo
\ _ _ (O
W 0 ?

_ e so

?f
1
? ?l_I ?
-r
?1-i
: --
1
3

\1-_ ?? ?? 111 p s- /-? ?? j? `:? r•

SOUTHEAST DURHAM, NC
1993
NIMA 52551V NE-SERIES V842
Scale:
1" 2 2000'
Mpr.: JAB 512103
Figure 1
Location Map
Brier Creek Parcel H West
Raleigh, Wake Co., NC
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Rd.- Raleigh, NC 27614
[phone] • [phone]
Web Page: www.SandEC.com
® ""w" "0' AAC-02020
AAC0202XAWC BRIER CREEK - PARCEL "H-WEST" ®COMPANY, IIN.McADAMS THE JOHN R
+? wa 1"-300' U"A .T KEY M" INGV= sM+nnm/V0XMM
CA M. 04-14-03 R?MaH. NORTH CAROUMA F.o?iU 148 PAM
08 UP (NO) 551-5000
oow-m (Its) CO-'?t-i0 ,u?
loop-wwI m won mi wa vmno iYo umoN'HDzwm
DR lad zlownu
'uavarro? „ZSa& H„ Z3O2lVd - 31aaHO 23MHg ema'xzozoow
l X o(? ! Oho V I
f I /` E9
\
\ 1 / pip VI 0 0
/ ? ? ? p Il?o U \ 1
(L x
Z :0
W -
\ I tlh ? 3 a ,. j
8
2 N
?-
_ OAP
" "°
z pt"\ -? V
6
ZS 3 i
sc-
1 \ \ \
r? r
oooo-rss Ierel ar.,a
soo+-eoua as soon xoe o•a (1tlJyHI'/ION [,'J?}(??7H?.I}??IO['N?'H?'JVI1Itl'?,?2i f0-bt-b0
ON 'xu?a 70NY0LL FL1N98CiH £# CNV Z# ?Jovc1m •040.1
Stl0A7A805/6tl7NNYid/Stl91N10N9 '71vJ5
OHI ',kNVdN[OO 1isam-R, 120a V d - That, ua1Qu OMO•XZozoovv 7M,NTTY
SNIVQV0NI'2IPIHOf sHL® OZOZO-ovv ON?arova
°Q W4
. II ?-
W +O
II 11 C II -?
f? J I m - -°
w /
-4N
IT3 fr) PAC
xr?
1
401,
\/ \ W u
w
D:
/ v V 3 / / I \_/ m 4
?-
?. W .o
? Z
a
z N ?
W
\ W
.r C4 I ?\ m
\ w v '\Q cj
1 W .4 6 ? \ • ? • • / P tp
( \\
II I? II I I I le,
oowlse (ne)
"09-20"2 m 2001 IN •0•a
ON 7M/i MOM 1:7Y?7Q?
vNnom KWON vola MI
£0-ti l-to qua
m
CWA7AMWrA MNR1 SvsmnA

,DM • (}
.7# ILWY " s{A.vdy{i
•??•? ?rn•?y
19
ANvdwo3®
swvmox •a ux a dSa& H,s -I3DH 'd - M ? HO UMUS ama"XZOZOow
or mu
ono- , ar A»
0
V t w -r -
um
88 /
Z(yK0
N f
V, 0. I I I /?? I / / Vl
77
O
I ?_, ,? /moo
I I N ?A V
00
\ _ "1--`111. \?::.??? •?..a. .: ?:•:
1 ` \ \ ? . C4
Brier Creek Parcel H West
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
ATTACHMENT I
Impact #1 35° 53' 58" N
78° 48' 29" W
Impact #2 35° 54' 03" N
78° 48' 32" W
Impact #3 35° 54' 00" N
78° 48' 34" W
Impact #4 35° 53' 47" N
78° 48' 32" W
Impact #5 35° 53' 46" N
78° 48' 35"W
Since 7979
THE JOHN R McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
June 2, 2003
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
RE: Brier Creek Parcel µH-West' Stream Impacts
AAC-02020
Dear Mr. Dorney:
This letter is the engineer explanation for the following three impacts located on
the attached Impact Key Map; Impact #1; Impact #2, and impact #4.
Impact #1 is due to widening Globe Road as required by the city of Raleigh
during the Subdivision appproval process. Globe Road has been designated as a
minor thoroughfare by Raleigh and therefore will go from existing 37' road with
ditches to the minor thoroughfare standard of 60' back of curb to back of curb
with an 80' right of way. The present, undersized 18" culvert will be replaced
with two 54"x88" concrete arch culverts or the equivalent box culvert.
Impact#2 and Impact #4 are crossings on the Loop Road that has been designed to
the Commercial Collector standard as set by City of Raleigh During the
subdivision approval process the City of Raleigh required a flood study to
analyze each crossing for creeks that drain more than 100 acres. Both Impact #2
and #4 consist of box culverts, required to pass the 100-year storm with a
maximum of 1' of water overtopping the road.
As a result of the flood study, the culverts required to pass the design flood are 2
11'x4' box culverts for Impact #2 and 2 9'x9' culverts for Impact #4. In both
crossings, one culvert has been centered on the channel and the other culvert has
been raised to maintain the original channel.
In summary, all crossings have been designed to minimize the impact to the
stream channels and associated buffers. If you have any further questions or
comments, please feel free to give me a call at [phone].
Sincerely,
THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
4L
JF/maf
CIVIL ENGINEERING • LAND PLANNING • SURVEYING
PO Box 14005 • Research TriarVla Park, NC 27709 • [phone] • tax [phone]
www.)ohnancadams.com
North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
May 30, 2003
ern
NCDENR
Jennifer Burdette
Soil Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road JUN - 3 2003!!
Raleigh, NC 27614 i
Subject: Project: Brier Creek Parcel H West
County: Wake
The purpose of this letter is to notify you that the North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP) is
willing to accept payment for stream and buffer impacts associated with the subject project. Please note that the
decision by the NCWRP to accept the mitigation requirements of this project does not assure that this payment
will be approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the N.C. Division of Water Quality Wetlands/401
Unit. It is the responsibility of the applicant to contact these agencies to determine if payment to the NCWRP for
impacts associated with this project is appropriate.
This acceptance is valid for six months from the date of this letter. If we have not received a copy of the issued
404 Permit/401 Certification within this time frame, this acceptance will expire.
Based on the information supplied by you in a letter dated May 29, 2003, the stream and buffer restoration that is
necessary to satisfy the compensatory mitigation requirements for this project is summarized in the following
table. The maximum amount of mitigation that the NCWRP will accept for this project is also indicated in this
table.
Stream
(linear feet) Wetlands Riparian
(acres) Wetlands Non-
Riparian (acres) Buffer
(Sq. Ft.)
Impact 195 _ 73,835
Mitigation Max 390 73,835
The NCWRP will provide mitigation with an approved combination of stream and buffer restoration,
enhancement or preservation. The stream and buffer mitigation will be provided as specified in the 401 Water
Quality Certification and/or Section 404 Permit for impacts associated with the subject project in Cataloging Unit
03020201 of the Neuse River Basin. The mitigation will be performed in accordance with the Memorandum of
Understanding between the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers dated November 4, 1998.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact Carol Shaw at [phone].
SiZy,46
?
R
onald E. Ferrell,
Program Manager
cc: Cyndi Karoly, Wetlands/401 Unit
Andrea Wade, USACOE-Raleigh
Steve Mitchell, Raleigh DENR Regional Office
Wetlands Restoration Program 1619 Mail Service Center
[phone]
Raleigh, NC 27699-1619
Fax: [phone]
X001 14:08 919 755 2200 AAC REAL ESTATE SERVICES #4650 P.001/001
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
rj 11010 Raven Ridgc Rood - ttMSh, North Cnrohna 27614 . Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
F•; i?' WWW.Senac.com
` AGENT AU'T'HORIZATION FORM
AM NaAs To Be Filled In B,y The Curcettt L amdaw,p?r
F ne: Wa Q=k- Associates, L X'
?14.dr.ess: c/o AAC Real Estate Services,- 3800 ARCO Corporate Dr., Ste.200
Charlotte, NC 28273 [phone]
-?.e ?cription Brier Creels Parcel /SdcF?C Pro jet: No, 9"10
;^'is r ' •_,baient of the Army
Corps of Engineers, Wilali pon District
't am zkgton, NC 2802
Amanda [ones
."J .`_irr.ds Related Consult Ag and Perm tang
nm It may Concern:
owner, hereby designate and authorize Soil & Environmaatal Cormdtants, Inc. to
in A?y behalf as my agent in the processing of perumAt applications, to funvtsh upon request
supplef wntal Worumoon in support of applications, etc. from this day forward, The 151b day of
-: - :on supersedes any previous correspondence concerning the Agent for ft project
authorizations, for liability and professional courtesy. reasons, is valid only for
-?T-q rtent of dols to enter the property when accompanied by S&EC staff. You should call S&EC
ge a site meeting ptdor to visiting the site.
BL,'= QMA AoociatU, L.P. L_Paul Herndon V.P.
F r? Pioperty Owrt&6 Name
Property Owner's Signature
.A John Domey c: Ms. JeTmiier A- Burdette
?' -FV^F - IDWQ Soil & Environnuntal Consultants, Inc
-7;3btree Boulevard
\t%-- 27(AX b14nk *6*F4 auth Form.doc
'_:.--.+-n---rinn •wwuwi r? in n??www???w ?rw.?+.??u
(3reenrborv of =: Ilisksmr braces
_ :$20•I pmepedty Church Road 36)7-E Iawndale Ihlve. 910$o3Wtr Road
;.T.S?-7197 Orcensbaro. NC 27455 Taylorville, NC 28681
_i-ocp5 Ph9tw; [phone] Paom [phone]
5820
;Z0_9t06 Fax: [phone] Fes: (929)635
C
Triage Check List
Date: Project Name:
nwQ#: 03
0
County: W, 4L
To: ? ARO Mike Parker ? WaRO Tom Steffens
? FRO Ken Averitte ? WiRO Noelle Lutheran
? MRO Alan Johnson ? WSRO Cyn ' Karoly (Central Office)
O Steve Mitchell` ?.?(W4 C.
From: Telephone : (919) ??39'd 8y
The file attached is being forwarded to your for your evaluation.
Please call if you need assistance.
? Stream length impacted
? Stream determination
? Wetland determination and distance to blue-line surface waters on USFW topo maps
? Minimization/avoidance issues
? Buffer Rules (Meuse, Tar-Pamlico, Catawba, Randleman)
? Pond fill
? Mitigation Ratios
? Ditching
? Are the stream and or wetland mitigation sites available and viable?
? Check drawings for accuracy
? Is the application consistent with pre-application meetings?
? Cumulative impact concern
.? Curl ? c? S? So`?
Comments:
v
Less
ea s
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
11010 Raven Ridge Road - Raleigh, North Carolina 27614 - Phone: [phone] - Fax: [phone]
www.SandEC.com
F/I CUP
June 20, 2003 ,r
US Army Corps of Engineers
Raleigh Regulatory Field Office
6508 Falls of the Neuse Road, Ste. 120
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615
NCDENR - DWQ
Parkview Building
2321 Crabtree Boulevard
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Attn: Ms. Andrea Wade
Attn: Mr. John Dorney
RE: NWP 14 & 39,401 WQC, & NRB Compliance Request Addendum
Brier Creek - Parcel H West
Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina
S&EC Project #: 97-3165.07
DWQ Project #: 03-0669
Dear Ms. Wade and Mr. Dorney:
On behalf of Brier Creek Associates, L.P., Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA (S&EC)
submits the enclosed additional information and revision to Impact #5 of the original permit
application dated June 5, 2003 for the subject project. The NC Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ) requested the additional information in a letter dated June 11, 2003.
The results of a flood study required for Impact #5 necessitated raising the height of this
crossing, which in turn increased the amount of impact required for construction of the crossing.
Please refer to the letter provided by Jeff Furman of The John R. McAdams Company explaining
the necessity of these changes. It is important to note that the engineer also re-designed the
alignment to cross the stream channel at a more perpendicular angle to minimize these impacts to
the stream channel and riparian buffer. We have enclosed revised pages 9 and 13 of the PCN to
reflect the change in impact quantities for this crossing. The revised crossing now impacts 120
linear feet of stream channel and 0.29 acre of riparian buffer. Because Impact #5 is still less than
150 linear feet of stream channel and 1 /3 acre of riparian buffer and is an intermittent stream
channel, S&EC believes riparian buffer mitigation should not be required by NCDWQ or the US
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
NCDWQ requested three items of additional information in their aforementioned letter. The
items and their associated responses are provided in an itemized list below.
Charlotte Office: Greensboro Office: Hickory Office:
PMB 291, 3020-1 Prosperity Church Road 3817-E Lawndale Drive 910 Boston Road
Charlotte, NC 28269-7197 Greensboro, NC 27455 Taylorsville, NC 28681
Phone: [phone] Phone: [phone] Phone [phone]
Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
•
June 20, 2003
S&EC Project #: 97-3165.07
Page 2 of 3
1. Please provide detail for the stormwater management practices for the eventual
development. Why cannot stormwater management be provided (or reserved) for the
entire site up-front?
The subdivision plan for this 81-acre site creates 14 lots. Currently, these lots will be
sold individually and developed by different entities. The stormwater management for
the entire site cannot be provided at this time because the development details of each lot
are unknown; however, any development on the site will comply with applicable
stormwater management regulations. The City of Raleigh has stated in the subdivision
approval that the lots are subject to Part 10 Chapter 9 of Raleigh City Code. Part 10
Chapter 9 is the Neuse River Nutrient Sensitive Stormwater Regulations that will require
nitrogen reduction and control of the 2-year storm. Deed notifications will be provided
for each individual lot indicating that the development must comply with the City of
Raleigh's Neuse River Nutrient Sensitive Stormwater Regulations and condition #8 of
NCDWQ's Water Quality Certification #3364.
2. Please indicate the diffuse flow provision measures on the site plan.
An overall plan showing the storm drainage infrastructure for the roads is enclosed.
Calculations and details are also enclosed that show that the level spreaders have been
properly sized for the 10-year storm and discharge velocities, which are less than 2 ft/s.
3. What criteria were used to determine perennial vs. intermittent streams?
The intermittent vs. perennial stream determinations were based on an evaluation
conducted by Andrea Wade of the USACE. Ms. Wade did not find any EPT taxa of
macro invertebrates indiciative of a perennial stream associated with Impacts 1, 2, 3, & 5.
Please contact me if NCDWQ would like to conduct a field visit to make a separate
determination.
If you have any questions about the additional information or revision provided, please do not
hesitate to call Jennifer Burdette at [phone].
Sincerely,
Soil & Environmental Consultants, PA
Jennif A. Burdette
Environmental Scientist
r
June 20, 2003
S&EC Project #: 97-3165.07
Page 3 of 3
Attachments:
Pre-construction (PCN) notification form (pages 9 & 13)
Impact Map Exhibit (Sheet 4 of 4)
JRM Impact #5 Justification Letter (6/20/03)
Stormwater Management Plan (NCDWQ copy only)
Stormwater Outlet Calculations & Details - 5 pgs (NCDWQ copy only)
c: Barry James - AAC Real Estate Services
Jeff Furman - The John R. McAdams Company
permanent
4 culvert & rip rap

important 195 Brier Creek 18 Perennial
channel
permanent
5 culvert & rip rap

unimportant 120 Ur to Brier Creek 8 Intermittent
channel
" t %O} pa/.? i oM a -1.
. ., y
••.i.o.. -i,wwcl anu luc"niry ccmpor-y impacts. unpacts inciu0e, but arc not limited to: culverts and associated rip-nap,
dams (separately list impacts due to both structure and flooding), relocation (include linear feet before and after, and net loss/gain),
stabilization activities (cement wall, rip-rap, crib wall, gabions, etc.), excavation, ditching/straightening. etc. If stream relocation is
proposed, plans and profiles showing the linear footprint for both the original and relocated streams must be included.
Stream names can be found on USGS topographic maps. If a stream has no name, list as UT (unnamed tributary) to the nearest
downstream named stream Into which it flows. USGS maps are available through the USGS at 1-800.358-9616, or online at
www.usas.gov. Several internet sites also allow direct download and printing of USGS maps (e.g., one.com
www.mamuest.c= etc.).
Cumulative impacts (linear distance in feet) to all streams on site: 195 imp + 486 unimp=681
4. Individually list all open water impacts (including lakes, ponds, estuaries, sounds, Atlantic
Ocean and any other water of the U.S.) below:
Open Water Impact
Site Number
Type of Impact' Area of
Impact Name of Waterbody Type of Waterbody
(lake
pond
estuary
sound

indicate on ma
acres (if applicable) ,
,
,
,
bay, ocean, etc.
NA

••••,.... ,bulkh .d wclluty tcmpurary lmpaci& impacts induce, but are not limited to: fill, excavation, dredging,
flooding, drainage, bulkheads, , etc.
5. Pond Creation
If construction of a pond is proposed, associated wetland and stream impacts should be
included above in the wetland and stream impact sections. Also, the proposed pond should
be described here and illustrated on any maps included with this application.
Pond to be created in (check all that apply): ? uplands ? stream ? wetlands
Describe the method of construction (e.g., dam/embankment, excavation, installation of
draw-down valve or spillway, etc.): NA
Proposed use or purpose of pond (e.g., livestock watering, irrigation, aesthetic, trout pond,
local stormwater requirement, etc.): NA
Size of watershed draining to pond: NA Expected pond surface area: NA
VII. Impact Justification (Avoidance and Minimization)
Specifically describe measures taken to avoid the proposed impacts. It may be useful to provide
information related to site constraints such as topography, building ordinances, accessibility, and
financial viability of the project. The applicant may attach drawings of alternative, lower-impact
site layouts, and explain why these design options were not feasible. Also discuss how impacts
Page 9 of 14
Impact #S
1 8,712 3 NA
2 3,920 1.5 NA
Subtotal 12,632 NA
Total 64,903 44,432
' Zone 1 extends out 30 feet perpendicular from near bank of channel; Zone 2 extends an
additional 20 feet from the edge of Zone 1.
It is important to note that fill material left in place after the relocation of Globe Road will also
be removed from the floodplain and the rWArian buffer The stream channgl will not be imoacted
in this process. Please refer to the attached Impact s for the location of this fill removal
The area within the riparian buffer is currently vegetated with grasses Diffuse flow will be
maintained and the riparian area will be restored: therefore this activity is exempt from the
Neuse River Riparian Buffer Rules,
if buffer mitigation is required, please discuss what type of mitigation is proposed (i.e., Donation
of Property, Conservation Easement, Riparian Buffer Restoration / Enhancement, Preservation or
Payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund). Please attach all appropriate information as
identified within 15A NCAC 2B.0242 or.0260.
The gpplieant propgsed_payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund which has been
preliminarily acc tg ed by the NC Wetlands Restoration Progml (NCWRP) See the attached
letter from NCWRP Please note NCWMgranted the applicant more mitigation than requested
in the permit because the applicant further minimized impacts after regpesting prgliminarv
accgptance of the proposed compensatory mitigation.
XI. Stormwater (required by DWQ)
Describe impervious acreage (both existing and proposed) versus total acreage on the site.
Discuss stormwater controls proposed in order to protect surface waters and wetlands
downstream from the property.
Most of the MMM is currently undeveloped forestland. the proposed lots shown on the
attached Impact s will be sold and developgd by other individuals. Due to the mixed use
zoning of the prop, we anticipate that impervious area on the property will exceed 30% Mn
completion of develomnt. Individual lot developers will be reguied to comely with the City
of Raleigh Nitrogen Control Rules thereby protecting surface waters and wetlands downstream
from the prrgR=.
XH. Sewage Disposal (required by DWQ)
Clearly detail the ultimate treatment methods and disposition (non-discharge or discharge) of
wastewater generated from the proposed project, or available capacity of the subject facility.
Wastewater generated on the site will be discharged to the existing, municipal sanitary sewer
lines present on the proper y and shown on the attached Impact Maps.
Page 13 of 14
EVIX (V+MnOUVO HMO X'H0l?'MI tpK aJ.7 # cm V .1.SaM-H,, TRDH V d 122HO H21dig oMO'xzozoovv Of 3HL ozozo-ovv oN u.roe,
4
p Zdw? \ / 1. .>-? ? ? /
a _ ?'c I
zm?o°
1-W WN _- ?y
In
_ i
7,
Ul CO
Na
\ ? Woo
C" Ir
a \ I I ? w
\. ? y I ? I? I I >nw
` A
dd
00
w a
w
I \ \ oa Ify:;:
?
QQD.,OW a .I:•:
Since ]979
THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
June 19, 2003
Mr. John Dorney
North Carolina Division of Environmental and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
4401 Reedy Creek Road
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
RE: Brier Creek Parcel "H-West" Stream Impacts
AAC-02020
Dear Mr. Dorney:
This letter is the engineer's explanation for Impact #5.
Impact #5 is the driveway to access the Southwest parcel. Since it is the only
access, the driveway is 36' wide. The crossing has been horizontally aligned
to be perpendicular to the creek. The road height has been set by the culvert
height and minimum crossing for utilities. The culvert sizing is based upon
the Flood Study that is required by the City of Raleigh since the area drains
more than 100 acres. The culverts needed to pass the 100 year flood with a
maximum of 1 foot overtopping the road are 2 13'x5' aluminum box culverts.
As with the other impacts, this crossing has been designed to minimize the
impact to the stream channels and assodiated buffers. If you have any further
questions or comments, please feel free to give me a call at [phone].
Sincerely,
THE JOHN R. M ADAMS COMPANY, INC.
4dJF an 1-4
Research Triangle Park, NC Development t Group
Post office Box 14005
Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27709 JF/maf
2905 Meridian Parkway
Durham, North Carolina 27713
8*733.5646
919-361.5000
919.361.2269 Fax
Chartolle, NC
5311 Seventy-Seven Center Drive,
Suite 66
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
800.733.5646
704.521.0600 Comprehensive Land Development Design Services
704.527.2003 Fax I We help our clients succeed.

THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
P.O. Box 14005
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
[phone] Fax[phone]
J R McA JOB NO. AAC!-oZ6us-DATE ?Qd 177-03 BY 3 y CHECKED BY
CLIENT U1&Z C RF-E?K W !/ir ?. L!" PROJECT PAP'O'&
SUBJECT LEVEL SMA690. ?14dC_y jfrf
LRuft SOMAJEa $41
Q,o (FES A = 3. 90 CPS
UISF 0eoAV_2aTED 0810. [3Q&4T70-1' Tb 0CW9 h,V1_ 144444 :
oo Cw I?M_yZ Q'o= 3.ts cps
C"/", 3.6 [FaEF o&"EaPhut )
13 L-= to F-r.
L,
_64_105 Z/3 _ Q Z-5-Z2-2- Fr
3.oxio pr

4= vA
PAGE I^ OF
V:: l.? ; 3.9o CPS I. SI F"T S
THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
P.O. Box 14005
Research Triangle Park. North Carolina 27709
[phone] Fax[phone]
/ PAGE
J R McA JOB NO. AAG'oZo?? DATE 40 - 1 d3 8Y CHECKED BY _
CLIENT BQJRIL WAK Aiso-44rm, L P PROJECT AftPL H-Wsf
SUBJECT _LP-&*L Sf1ICFi 40A, VECd[JTJSS
L2y8[- Si 11.46 11 * Z :
4,o LMS 3? .:5.88 CrS
Lkw 89vrtcaurgh cvaiR eoumo4 zy L)JRTi ?c_ h_
H ?lz 4,u= S.88 cfs
Cw - 3.0 L Am ow FJ4? I- -A /0 pr
Cwt
ds sS.Rd c.FS ? _ 6.3?7yZ Fr
.OX/0 Fr
%S9 FGow _4 4 4r/M4 Tn DSTLE ",wff VXDC $TV
o-- LIA
L/ -:: Q _ S 89 CF; Lt. 7s Pr/s
A 6a337PrVvAi?
2 OF

THE JOHN R. McADAMS COMPANY, INC.
P.O. Box 14005
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
[phone] Fax [phone]
J R MCA JOB NO. A? 02-02-e DATE &,(-17-a3 BY ZZO CHECKED BY
CLIENT SQIER "VW 4AS0CJ#WCi LP PROJECT PASSEL #-Wi
SUBJECT
G.F.vEI. s PA SA4 FA ?3 :
G1,e [FES 5? = 7-S.oy CFS
WE RRe+?AteES7EA WAIR Ec, wt-lorv 7b DA701.+ft. #- N644
Q . cw?N z p,o--2a.vq cr:?
Cam, =3.a ??e6 ou,-r,?u.?
N = ao ?3 l- 35 Fr.
,,L
N= 28,oy cps Zl3^ D.
3? x 35Fr
k-SE Flow QQ,%know To AE7XX~vA vEca,TY I.
Ct=vA
V =?.-- - z 8 .ay cF5 - . R3 F7?
? Ca?Frl(35Fr>
PAGE OF
(N.T.s. k-- A
- /?Transition
-? ??\? -,W?to 0 grade
Vegetated
diversion - f }??"-•`'? ice- ?i
I r ? •?.w ? ?v.
????"?" ???• ^,A- Stabilized
w.. N'• .,?, ?/ slope
Stable ?I ri,• f ».... ,?.. / \ M...
undisturbed
outlet' Owl
hV'm?K' N w4w4-
X-P~9
IRA "94%
6"
77e
of NueAOO0.
M1N I rAtm
EA' ITaA.4W_e V46WrA
M tN?
hs 1 p
e„ *,e9 /
4V MI?J .
cRos5 ?,??„oN cN.r. s)
6LOM MAXv-1 x1
?5'?Gcrt?tx-riot., SPr?t?tcA-tlot?S
i. AIVOC 1LA.55 MAWM46, , -1 .D P'r WIDE 500OLP -15XIt5NV 6" OVZ54c 'Ti'1=.
L-r-V5A- W? AND 15E T*XZtr=D 6" 1 >=P AT `MC LOW W-• eDCjM .
A. f?N%l . - rtwr -TIK:-:' STme veR L-tTY 1'5 I -£v v-t_ -TACDOC?146Vr rt'S 1 ?N LtT}} .
5. ecw711KVc-1- E l /Et. ?jYR?ArDE2 ON t?tv?S"YI? D So??- ?PIa1 ON
f'1 t--L-. •)
6ON5TZLy-1" A TRA?StTtoc{ teGTtoN f-00M -nW-- 'i>tVER.S?DN -M
TKO 5t-\ o1-HL..Y -ro -r'w- wtPV.VA Amfl cP 'Tim
.!5.' S1'v"levtaTE?( At'Tr-t-- 6oww "cl-w" ) AwroPKI A't"ELY .6v--P Am>
Mth.LN -nTAV- tT1RE T TV2>3t=? AR-eA OF -t11E S Ea ? .
6f-=e- VOtA s-rA-r t vE V11.. a W ,

C':'
"ff
`'
7.16
VQ# _Q?A - V.IP 1t2 '1 Triage On-Hold Letter 1.u 3rarr L.oncnu yu« _ ?,? --
plan Detail Incomplete
? Please provide a location map for the project.
? Please show all stream impacts including all fill slopes, dissipators, and bank stabilization on the site plan.
? Please show all wetland impacts Including fill slopes on the site plan.
? Please Indicate all buffer impacts on the site plan,
a Please indicate proposed lot layout as overlays on the site plan.
? 'Please indicate the location of the protected buffers as overlays on the site plan.
? Please locate all Isolated or non-isolated wetlands, streams and other waters of the State as overlays on the site plan.
? Please provide cross section details showing the provisions for aquatic life passage.
? Please locate any planned sewer lines on the site plan.
? Please provide the location of any proposed stormwater management practices as required by QC

Please provide detail for the stormwater management practices ' ,, ?,
"4A a
?
? Please specify the percent of project Imperviousness area based on the estimated built-out conditions. ,
6717r
te
?n,o
? Please Indicate all stonnwater outfalle on the site plan. r
-- ''
(A
Please Indicate the diffuse flow provision measures on the site plan. /'N,
)4r
`

?

Please Indicate whether or not the proposed Impacts already been conducted. z
`'
? < ? 7? v
Avoidance and/or Mlydmlzation Not Provided
d Ths. a on the plane does not appear to be necessary. Please eliminate the or provide additional information as to r
Ills necessaryfor this project.
? This Office bellevAs that the labeled on the plans as - can be moved or reconfigured to avoid the Impacts to the Please
revise the plans to avoid the Impacta,
:S/° O4
-mo I a

This Office be8eves that the `talsWWon the plane w can be moved or reconfigured to minimize the Impacts to the Please
revise the plans to minimlze the impacts.
? The stonnwater discharges at the location on the plans labeled will not provide diffuse flow through the buffer because . Please
revise the plans and provide calculations b show that diffuse flow will be achieved through the entif buffer. If It Is not poselble to achieve diffuse
flow through the entire buffer then. it may be necessary to provide stormwater management practices that remove nutrients before the stormwater
can be discharged through the buffer.
Other
? The applicatlon fee was insufficient because over 150 feet of stream and/or over 1 acre of wetland impact was requested. Please provide $
This additional fee must be received before your application can be reviewed.
? Please complete Sectlon(s) on the application.
.D Please provide a signed copy of the application.
? Please provide copies of the application, copies of the site plans and other supporting Information.
Mitigation
O of compensatory mitigation Is requfred for this project. Please provide a compensatory mitigation plan. The plan must conform .
to the requirements in 16A NCAC 2H .0500 and must be appropriate to the type of Impacts proposed
? Please Indicate which 404 Permit t__he•• USACE would use to authorize this project. ,\f
. ? ?we-l s 1 TC A1M5 l
•
m
O? 1V
Q Q
??
NN
Q x
P ?
Z
??
T r '
t.
E 3:
m o C
c
.G m
' ' cry
m t]
m m
.0mg
m I-
0
m
'a
a
E-g >
"
=cO
o -
V 'N o of
A 6
°7
° °
¢
y ,
v - o
C > -0 CD a

N CO
10 CD V
cu
?- m ? 6O
C E c
E
m t;
. co
V V
•_
m
CD a: C (D
m? O 3:E .?

E E c CO
o
UO a` °1 o
m
O
m
cb
m
L
a
m
U
a
as
L
i
m
L
0
_ g
m
x
c o
"rv
??

25 L
*0

m
CD a)
N
U CC c

J

cl? M
p
? N
C OC

J w ? ?

? a
Oct

0
}
11
-1
ID
m
CD
V
m
4t
r u
_D
D
r-q
Ln
ru
m
d
r?
n.j
ru
r-
m
m
U
?LO
E
Z
m
U ?
L
a
w
co
0
N
Q
CL
a
ci
a
U
O
C
CD
V
N
0
E
Q
U
T
0
C\j
Q)
Q
C
E
L
U.
w
_ N O
LL C?
co z
p. E
? 0 ch
i CL D
w
W
LO
J
O
IL
cn
w
U)
a
w
z
D
•
x
18
C
CL
N
? = o
w ?
?/? N
c ? ?-.?
V 1
•V?
G) 4.. cc cG
E O U 7
C?
?.?.??
co
M
`U
>
?
• w
CL
L.:
CD
C
•

r
?r1
rwr
aw
spo
a
• • -x(ntal NYId-10i W NOISOUB ONV OMMO o N a
soot-Hotta as soonlao9 'o'a s yp>flpay'J NINGN VoIr N o S 0
?X aY.a a1sYYlaa xaYrssFY <?ol:.ar,am a?aaX .1?1>,.a o ? }I;332I7 2i?2Ig :: - o U <
ans/¢aaxwrw/saaaxloYa moa a.o, ,oto? c • .
d'1 'S3IV13OSS6'?M33aJ a31ae - Z QNV i SaS1dHd
•113 `1CNVd1V0? o e ? ? y??-H'I??2idd ? ? ? a i a t
SKVUVDYVH MHOr 3HZ 'I' SN01S '" "'X"°
s
_e r C
a ----------- I 7R ESSIPAY - _
7-; _
1 - 1 tYdIYfAEttT? 1 mouc w)
°_
d? '.\ "?lj ? =lam 1yj _ l a; h \ ?? \ 5 \ '
f€ g ;_ ?g
--
ti
V", d
If-
Ig
?Pn ??? ?__ >L\ ? :5 ?P '. /?.!? / ?/?-// ?/??nlll ?1 (/ ?;'1?(a ?y?T,at? fir' /I..'-- ??
- m --- ry -- f ( F < ?r\ I<`,
gg'
y k ° E ><-? \ y?e `1\ \ Sg ,??` I j?yr; 'l`II111??_w \ y _..
6?f??,j:
z ?Q)lil I
Ank
!
y G? Sg? d Q ?i a G9 g ¢9 § m.\\ _ I, I 1 -? I w _ __
a ??gg' ? b€ X €a 4i a ER k§v- ? --- - - •-?-; . r rJ ?? \\I?` ? - -
Y?8?. S $RRp 5e 44" apx eRa` rgrp:@- pox ,? _ A ' ; / l
111 J p .I' _'-
Rb 4Yi 3°y ??Y ?? BF
K n 1 p ?°.a g
4
S d y" ?? ?be? F Y .k? iV yF XBYY
Y'
i C g 9 \I /
k
X 19 F "sg k e § ?t 11 ` l? rr I "- ??
fig" 5€q a 911 A 51
?' a 33?@2 ?- ppN \lil i i !} 'X I ff Y e"
sQ 0 € e 9 k? 49 e g Xa° gg € 4 ? g5 yq p
81 b E -I I a ;1?d4i j ?3€ Q ,?R3
R s a b axgX s ?'g dYX X F?g_
3 r 4} b F 4 F3 XaX gRnS p, ap.p° Y FS j^ 5$ ? ° \ 9p °R/ ( 1 c / =
6 Y"Yyby? SX 3X P?° pSe'5 33 Ye p[pg !Y SyySd 't< -
x? ??Y y$8F 1?2 cb :?g ya? Ya?? Of p??
? zi ''?? Y ?o FSf x ?yi kX' F ?q s S LLF _. o' R LI '`., "? 1
? ?4 ?y'E= 9 y4a ?a 4yk $e a xY ? 2 ee d?rR kr ? _ _ r / / / ? _
?a ?9?`s E a Sad XY3 h six h An
9? $' $? . iex? ,?XSi F &? Y'! x43 XSF \ i C ?' ?V A\ 9
GF$' $' e@ €bY M g i X-. S @X°g 4° pa 4X5 8E 3.a' ( -r--l 11 '
ns ? 3yY %, w S; ka ? Y 8p F ??i4 4a? 4Y C. gsn?4tii II ? J r f 1} ."?
Yr 6 155 e? ?e ! .4s ?Y j }3 Y? 8 ygx ? ?? S?? n ?? 'T? .? ,
!y Ygg •? 6.R? S?yyCy ?d k F ?? E!?Y Y 3p?? _ ,s?D. f?•
m ?? E4 !€ 33? Ff d ? F?t%X b' ? k3 ?
q C Y b q E"Y E .r 4
p4`33 4Y .Fe k Yy 3? year g3 q 4X' Et 11:1511 1 1
Y€ 4Y g. to i e 1g 'r xg e=gp3'7 U¢ 6 a 4 I r. 1,1 1 1
° k? gg4 Ap$dtlr SS f7 4 5 Q k i! j3 g^t . dz5 °T Y„ 8Yn' C ![g¦ J$ "J CC5 y
! X356 a4 4?9 ? 3. ?. 5 Y YdYY. S iS Y9b§E i12 14H I S. Et 01 ? 5d G q f I" ?/ UY/Y-J17911d H1Q/p1'y.i ;i +. / \\ ? '?? -..
a ° - - yaysS... ,: z G c .[V.A3,NVd X33N? g??'U ?
ATTACHMENT # 9:
6b 6c 6d 6e 6f 6g
Buffer Impact Reason Stream Buffer mitigation Zone 1 Zone 2
Number Name Requirement impact SF impact SF
Permanent (P)
Temporary (T)
B4 (T) Required UT Briar NO 9.02 289.47
sewer Creek
construction
B5 (T) Sewer Tap UT Briar NO 0 123.91
Creek
ATTACHMENT # 10:
• C6i Impact B2 requires mitigation since it falls under the category of "Road Impacts
other than crossings of streams and other surface water subject to this rule".
All other impacts relate to utilities and are required due to the fact that the
existing sewer system was installed within the riparian buffer.
ATTACHMENT # 11:
• Dla A cul-de-sac was used to meet access requirements thus avoiding an additional
stream crossing. The existing drive and stream crossing was utilized to avoid
additional impacts. This drive was previously permitted and installed as Impact
45, DWQ Project No. 03-0669. Remaining impacts are for sewer utility
connections at or in existing easements which are mostly along the buffer edges
(Zone 2) and connect as close to ninety degrees as possible.
ATTACHMENT # 12:
• DIb As part of initial erosion control BMP's, the permanent run-off control and level
spreaders (engineered) are being constructed thus reducing run-off into the
Riparian Buffer System. The sewer connecting buildings 500, 600 and 700 will
be bore and jacked across most of the buffer and unnamed tributary to Brier Creek
- see Impact B I Exhibit. Tree protection and sediment fences will be installed to
protect the buffers during construction.
ATTACHMENT # 13:
• D6g Private Buffer Mitigation Bank Buffer Reservation from Wildlands Engineering
dated August 4, 2011.
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Invoice
Date Invoice #
7-27-11 7271102
Bill To
Selona Partners, LLC
Mr. William Hamrick
1050 Eagles Landing Pkwy, Suite 300
Stockbridge, GA 30281
Payable To
Wildlands Southeast Holdings I LLC
5605 Chapel Hill Road
Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27607
Project Name Terms Bank Name
Waterstone at Briar Creek Reserved - Price Little River Farm
Apartments Valid for 15 Days Nutrient Mitigation Bank
Neuse HUC 03020201
Line
Item Description Quantity Unit Price Amount
01 Riparian Buffer Credits 1,712.78 sq. ft. $.80 $1,370.22
Sales Tax
N/A
Thank you for your business. If you have any
questions regarding this invoice please call
Robert Bugg at 919-851-9986 ex. 100 or Total $1,370.22
rbu wildlandsinc.com
Wildlands Southeast Holdings 1, LLC 5605 Chapel hill Road, Suite 122 - Raleigh, NC 27607
0053:
0802-,T 080-1 Buffed, Credits
26" , 137
0 22 r
, ', 370, 2

f
1

++
p 11
is Y ..

080211w?:' 00
53 check totals:
1,370.22 1,370.22
11100 5 3 3a"I ':0 5 3 &008 501:6 & 600008 & Ell'
WIIDLANDS
ENGINEERING
August 4, 2011
Mr. Nathan Burdick
City of Raleigh Public Works
P.O. Box 590
Raleigh, NC 27602
Re: Transfer Certificate for the Waterstone at Briar Creek Apartments Project.
Dear Mr. Burdick:
This letter is to inform you that Carolina Multifamily Construction, Inc. has purchased 1,712.78 sq. ft. of
Riparian Buffer Credits from the Wildlands Little River Mitigation Site. The Little River Site is part of the
Wildlands Neuse River Riparian Buffer & Nutrient Umbrella Mitigation Bank, DWQ Project # 09-0866V2, (the
"Wildlands Bank"). These credits were purchased and transferred on August 4, 2011 to offset impacts related
to the project known as Waterstone at Briar Creek Apartments Project in Wake County, North Carolina.
Projects eligible for utilization of credits from the Wildlands Bank are those requiring authorization under the
requirements of 15ANCAC 213.0233 (Meuse Buffer Rule), 15ANCAC 211B.0234(Wastewater Discharge
Requirements), 15ANCAC 213.0235 (Basinwide Stormwater Requirements), and 15ANCAC02B.0242
(Mitigation Program for Protection and Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffer); 15ANCAC2H.0506(h) (NC
Stream, Wetland and Buffer Mitigation), and 15ANCAC213.0240 (Nutrient Offset Payments) under such
authority as established in SL2007-438 and any amendments thereto provided such use has met all applicable
requirements and is authorized by the appropriate authority and any others as deemed appropriate by NCDWQ.
The Wildlands Bank is on the NC Division of Water Quality list of approved mitigation banks
(http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document library/get file?uuid=35b693d4-5ab9-4405-9906-
8b8569b68bcd&groupld=38364).
If you have any questions regarding the purchase of these credits, please contact me at 919-851-9986 ex. 100 or
rbul??-Y(J-;wi ldlandsenu.com.
Sincerely,

Robert W. Bugg
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Cc: Ms. Katie Merritt, NCDWQ (with updated credit ledger), via Electronic Mail
Wildlands Southea.sl II01dings 1, LLC • 5005 Chapd Kill Road, Suitt 122 - Raleigh, NC ^760
WMI)LANDS
ENGINEERING
August 4, 2011
Mr. William Hamrick
Selona Partners, LLC
1050 Eagles Landing Pkwy, Suite 300
Stockbridge, GA 30281
Re: Confirmation and Transfer of Riparian Buffer credits for the Waterstone at
Briar Creek Apartments Project in Wake County, NC
Dear Mr. Hamrick:
Wildlands Southeast Holdings I, LLC is in receipt of full payment of $1,370.22 for 1,712.78 sq.
ft. of riparian buffer credits for the above-referenced Project located in Wake County, North
Carolina.
This credit transfer letter certifies your credit purchase of 1,712.78 sq. ft. or riparian buffer
credits from the Wildlands Neuse River Riparian Buffer & Nutrient Umbrella Mitigation Bank -
Little River Farm Mitigation Site.
A credit transfer certificate will also be issued to Nathan Burdick at the City of Raleigh Public
Works and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality; a copy is enclosed for your records.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your mitigation requirements. Please contact
me at 919-851-9986 ex. 100 or rbu gnwildlandseng.com if you have any questions or need any
additional information.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Bugg
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Cc: Mr. Joe Lancaster (via Electronic Mail)
Wildh nos Southeast Holdim-,s 1, LLC - 5603 Chapel Hill Road, Suitt 122 • Raleigh. NC 27607
ATTACHMENT # 14:
0 Stormwater Management Study
ncaster
sim. 255 VILLAGE PARKWAY • SUITE 630 • MARIETTA, GEORGIA 30067
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STUDY
FOR
WATERSTONE AT BRIER CREEK APARTMENTS
(f.k.a. Brier Creek III)
PARCEL H, LOT 204 & PARCEL H, LOT 202
LOCATION;
LOTS 202 AND 204
CEDAR FORK TOWNSHIP
WAKE COUNTY
CITY OF RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
OWNER/DEVELOPER;
SELONA PARTNERS, L.L.C.
1050 EAGLES LANDING PARKWAY
SUITE 300
STOCKBRIDGE, GEORGIA 30281
(770) 474 -4345
PREPARED BY;
J. LANCASTER ASSOCIATES, INC.
255 VILLAGE PARKWAY
SUITE 630
MARIETTA, GEORGIA 30067
?tr??i?f#top r
.?` FARO
Fp fly??EE?PS,;
Job No. 10-032
• July 21, 2011
Planners • Engineers • Landscape Architects
770-955-2421 • (Fax) 770-955-2480 • email: [e-mail]

• NARRATIVE;
Selona Partners, LLC proposed to construct 232 apartment units on 20.723 acres south of
Sellona Street and west of Brier Creek. The project is bordered on the south and west by
1-540. The site is divided by a small creek. Brier Creek and the unnamed creek have
Neuse River Riparian Buffers.
EXISTING CONDITIONS;
As mentioned above, the site is bounded on the east by Brier Creek and bisected by an
unnamed creek with Neuse River Riparian Buffers on each. The site is mostly wooded
and falls steeply down to the creeks. The floodplains for both creeks have been
established and represented on the survey to Eco Engineering dated October 11, 2010,
per revised FS 540.
Based on the side hill slope and site conditions, an existing "C" factor of .25 was
established for the existing condition. Another apartment community, the Jamison at
Brier Creek, is being constructed north of the site. A small landscaped area, 0.09 acres,
"C" _ .4 and a larger area of 5.26 acres with proposed detention / water quality drain
south into the subject property. Information on the detention / water quality facility is
unavailable at this time so a "C" factor of .25 with a Tc of 5 min. was assumed. The 5.26
acre off-site drainage passes south via a ditch, emptying into the unnamed tributary.
A small area of the expressway right-of-way (0.31 acres) drains onto the site. A small
• area of the site in the SHOD-2 Protected Yard (0.51 acres) mostly drains south into the
expressway. All of the remaining site drains directly into the floodplain of the two
creeks.
SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT;
A short public street with a cul-de-sac will be constructed from Sellona Street to near the
western leg of the Neuse River Riparian Buffer. Two (2) driveways will connect from
the cul-de-sac to the northern and southern building clusters. The existing private drive
south of the cul-de-sac crosses the creek over an existing 6 foot x 12 foot box culvert.
Three (3) detention systems will be constructed in order to prevent increased run-off into
the creek drainage system. Each system will release water using level spreaders. These
will be simple detention systems since a nitrogen loading buy-down is proposed. The
proposed nitrogen load is less than 10 lbs. / acre / year.
The 5.26 acre drainage area tributary from the northern boundary will be piped through
the site and discharge on residual grade at the edge of the Riparian Buffer into the
existing ditch.
METHODOLOGY;
Hydroflow Hydrograph by Intersolv will be utilized to create run-off hydrographs using
the rational method. Rainfall intensity is based on the published intensity duration chart
found in the City of Raleigh Stormwater Management Design Manual dated January
2002. The Study Point for all run-off will be the existing creek floodplain system. Off-
site creek drainage was not added to the on-site and adjacent site hill run-off. Time of
concentration for Pre-Developed and Post-Developed conditions is based on TR55 and
presented in chart format on the drainage maps.
The 2 through 100 year run-off for the pre and post development conditions were
calculated. The post-developed run-off was routed through the detention systems using
Hydroflow Hyudrographs. The appropriate hydrographs were summed using the
Hydroflow software for appropriate pre-developed and post-developed run-off
comparisons.
DETENTION SYSTEMS;
Pond 1
4.676 acres of on-site run-off (C = .75) will be directed to a walled detention
southeast of Building 200. The resulting reduced run-off will exit the pond into a
40 foot wide level spreader (Q10 = 3.26 c.f.s) (0.82 c.f.s. / 10 foot width). The 2
to 100 year storm frequency return run-off will be retained by the 8,900 c.f.
walled structure. Details of the pond are included in the "Facility Details" section
of this report.
Pond 2
3.751 acres of on-site run-off (C=.74) will be directed to a walled detention east
• of Building 500. The resulting reduced run-off will exit the pond into a 30 foot
wide level spreader (Q10 = 2.38 c.f.s.) (0.79 c.f.s. / 10 foot width). The 2 to 100
year storm frequency return run-ff will be retained by the 7,000 c.f. walled
structure.
Pond 3
2.615 acres of on-site run-off, C=.70, and 0.31 acres of off-site run-off (C = .25)
will be directed to a walled detention between Buildings 900 and 1000. The
resulting reduced run-off will be combined with run-off from Building #900 roof
drainage and be released into a 40 foot wide level spreader (Q10 = 2.93 c.f.s.)
(0.73 c.f.s. / 10 foot width). The 2 to 100 uear frequency return run-off will be
retained in the 4,437 c.f. walled structure.
ON-SITE BYPASS;
The buffer areas and some on-site developed areas will bypass directly into the
floodplain. This area is 9.201 acres with a "C" of .34. The total run-off was calculated
by adding all pond discharges to the off-site and on-site bypass flows.
0
RUN-OFF SUMMATION;
The following is a comparison of total run-off to the road plans using the site and
immediate side hill drainage basins:
•
Frequency of Return Pre-Developed c.f.s. Post-Developed c.f.s.
1. 2 year 37.52 31.04
2. 5 year 42.85 35.08
3. 10 year 47.04 38.24
4. 25 year 53.37 42.98
As seen from the above analysis the development of the site will not result in an increase
in run-off for the 2 year through 25 year frequency return storms.
NITROGEN LOADING AND COMPUTATION OF OFFSET FEES;
A detailed existing and proposed nitrogen loading calculation is enclosed. The existing
nitrogen loading was found to be 20,056 lb. / year. The proposed loading was found to
be 178,648 lb. / year. Taking into account the allowable export of 74,603 lb. / year, the
remaining export of 104.045 lb. / year will require an offset fee of $88,490.27. See
attached detailed calculations.
FLOOD FRINGE REDUCTION/DISTURBANCE;
The site contains existing floodways for Brier Creek and an unnamed tributary of Brier
Creek. The total floodplain area is 239,851 s.f. and the floodway area is 89.315 s.f. The
flood fringe is 150,536 s.f. and the impacted flood fringe area is 46,086 s.f. The percent
of flood fringe reduction will beo 30.6% which is allowable by the City of Raleigh
regulations (less than 50%). See enclosed Flood Fringe Disturbance Exhibit.
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF WATER QUALITY;
A DCN has been filed with NCDWQ for five (5) Zone 2 minor impacts as follows:
1. Installation of a sewer bore and jack and tie into an existing manhole.
2. Construction of a cul-de-sac near the existing unnamed tributary of Brier Creek
driveway crossing.
3. Installation of sewer taps at an existing sanitary manhole.
4. Rip-rap of an existing ditch over an existing 8" sanitary sewer.
5. Sewer tap for project compactor.
0
•
•
OPERATIONS AND
MAINTENANCE MANUAL
U
Initial Operation OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL
•
Upon completion of construction and establishment of permanent vegetation the owner or
their representative should verify that the detention and level spreader systems are clean
and constructed in accordance with the approved engineering plans. If any impediments
are found they should be corrected by the contractor within 30 days of the initial
inspection. The process should be repeated once the contractor has notified the owner
that the deficiencies have been corrected.
A project maintenance log should be created and kept by the maintenance staff. All
inspection results and corrective measures taken should be documented.
DETENTION PONDS No. 1, 2 & 3:
The owner should inspect all detention structures every three (3) months or after major
storm events. Ponds should be inspected for:
1. Erosion beyond protected discharges.
2. Sediment, lawn debris or any accumulated debris of any kinds.
3. Orifice blockages or potential material inside the pond that could cause any
blockage or hydraulic impairment.
4. Structural stability of retaining walls and protective fences or screens.
Should any structural impairments be found, the owner shall hire a qualified contractor to
• make appropriate repairs within 30 days of the owners inspection. Deficiencies requiring
routing maintenance such as removing debris should be performed by the owner within
60 days of the inspection.
It is anticipated that minor maintenance should be scheduled at least once yearly. This
work would consist of adjusting or adding rip-rap (Class I) at spot erosion locations,
removing trash and re-seeding vegetation areas.
FILTER STRIP/LEVEL SPREADER No. 1 2 & 3:
Keep a maintenance record on these 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 immedailtey. These deficiencies can affect the integrity of
structures, safety of the public, and the removal efficiency of the BMP.
Maintenance Procedures:
• Immediately after the filter strip is established, any newly planted vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
• Once a year, the filter strip will be reseeded to maintain a dense growth of
vegetation.
• Stable groundcover will be maintained in the drainage area to reduce the
. sediment load to the vegetation.
• Two to three times a year, grass filter strips will be mowed and the clippings
• harvested to promote the growth of thick vegetation with optimum pollutant
removal efficiency. Turf grass should not be cut shorter than 3 to 5 inches and
may be allowed to grow as tall as 12 inches depending on aesthetic
requirements (NIPC, 1993). Forested filter strips do not require this type of
maintenance.
• Once a year, the soil will be aerated of 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 then 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. SEE THE FOLLOWING PAGE.
•
0
•
•
L_J
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 sputter device is Unclog the conveyance and dispose
(if applicable) clogged. of anysediment off-site.
The flow sputter device is Make any necessary repairs or
damaged. replace if damage is too large for
repair_
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 e 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 ro er 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. Provide additional irrigation and
fertilizer as needed.
Plants are dead, diseased or Determine the source of the
dying. problem: soils, hydrology, disease,
etc. Remedy the problem and
replace plants. Provide a one-time
fertilizer application.
Nuisance vegetation is Remove vegetation by hand if
choking out desirable species. possible. If pesticide is used, do not
allow it to get into the receiving
water.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality local Regional Office, or the
outlet. 401 Oversi ht 1 nit at 919-733-1786.
• ESTIMATED MAINTENANCE COST:
Yearly maintenance cost for each of the three detention/level spreader systems is
estimated to be $ 1,500.00 for a total yearly cost of $ 4,500.00.
U

•
•
0
0
J Of
?oQ
?,' 0
Q
<z LO
?p P
Lij
? Z o
0
LEI 0
O
cr-I ~ ~ . II
CD cn
Lp= w
SEL J
Q
U U
NpI1 bI O
? b
.J
7. s?uul
WVNnOHV0 HUSON 'H0131VN .40 A-110 ALNnOO 3NVM 'dIHSNM01 >180.4 8V033 '*OZ DZOZJ?
Em.] CO . b3,? ,' "'""•',K"ry,'a;;?',,,a n.R a";,° ?
8 IIi0di08II 3W1aVdV )133UO U31US IV 3NO1Sa{?y P I S1N ?qy .y &
Him
d8IS88II8(?8 sres scr occ 9
////rrrr)))) IBiOC M6nwJ b6PMMooK ??? ^ o A n ^ ^
d 6o V
- 00
Yn snu»od uualoS l?o3 OSGI o d
NV'1d naanv

W y
m p a a
ea
JJQ
Q
I
Z
N R
a „ o o d E
F

Z
f - (I1 g
`o o a`
o° a
o w s
? Z
O ?
Q $ „
pZWQ v a o _ -

I"pQLL rv oe?? a
?
mirmu o
Z0U. W
G
a
d ^ a
aooae
o
Vp a £
a _
J<}p
m
odcio6
J FZ
a=OQ o IIIIIIII

m
n
?aoo?ao
.

? I I I I I I? I $
A ? ?
? 1 1 1 1 1 1 I a'
?a ` _
L ?

A p a

£5
a s
3 5 5 x
.§ s q
.O K R C C K C U K

w
an
I...
41 0 0
;?r?u N?1? c??ulins ,u? ?n'u.l m0 AM. ?3
Q palsaodami
aaa?ssausC J0
mn
0
U

v, a
I
e
m O h r? ^
G C`Hf` q,p•?$ e Z n O 0?9

:
W
Gi
i
A tl r
A tl A i.,
p tl A
A A e .?.. O
Pn
a tl

A p; H
:
kk
:
0o A A tl A U
a A a
0o A x
O U W
{0 C7 U p„
a
? ?

O
U

O ! 4 zW b

0
0 W k W

Os x
O? WQ 0n $
a? (
? q
a

???noH
O? F
a xxx?
a?mF` 3a F:
7

a 6
VNr)OW0 HLNON 'HO131YU.3 0 A.LrJ 'AINnOo 3HYM 'dIHSNM01 >180d 8YO33 ';OZ .p ZOZ 'l'l
S1N3W1»VdV )133x0 U31US 1V 3NO1SH31VM
L
Q
cl)
StCf-1L1-OL( y??' x w ? o` ? ?,A? ? ?j q ,y q? I ? N
OOCA NO Ror q6 Pn --16-3 O In _ O p s ri
:In d 6 upu>7 uI6a3 OSOI o U
O T '9nu»od ouo;ag NVId Q3d013AM-1SOd
b
?a
nJ LLLLLLO
c
aw
W>v0000
oz.1,4t00?
a
`?qq zVOLLNW.? t
%'p
7

- - -
:

?.
?r

-

r?

W
WmZ0 O
LLOO
O?WOONN00
LL it 4W??NprON
SILO;00000
/i
tl
I
OOOLL
j ma LLO
00
OD Oh
' ANC, 0 ,
, pOhlO ¦
LL??Nq?N
' 100000
5
F 0
4 $ ? • n asR
$q e
N 1,1 N v F O N e u C rv £ EvE El ?'
m & o` ? o` a o` ? 8 m? a a s a -
$ $ 0 0 o N o n '! a 8'? g n a° o ?--_
X a R N _ o n g$ a$
a o o a a a v° n n
N
a n' rv ° ° ? ? d
L ? as °ry $ -
a
V 5 d e ° m d e d? ? e{ fj N .- d N o N ? d ? ? ,,: o N
m o° a m o ° s s ry g n
° ° rv rv ,. ? ? N d n ? ° d o ? d N
a I I I I I i l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I III
d
a. n $ d o o F o dd° ee$tt N _ w? Ti s e g „
w cD o a
_ 1 1 1 1 1 I? I I I I I I I III I I I I ICI I
°r£ I l i t l l I 11- I I I? I I „dm I?
•? rc rc a rc¢ rc u rc rc rc rc ¢" 8 ° ._v o 2
a: rc u¢ a"• ¢ rc u u
0 >, AS
t
t' // F C
J IN
1 / 00 XF, LL i 00
t i tt" ,/OJ O J Fn,: 41 M1a
: 0 H O 00
Rt So
13 ?
,it
0 A

4d

f!] O
?-a

O o N
-? W
a
Q+
Aw
A An 00
M M M

c v
O?

L16 O
,
w O
n
;, w
x
O W A
JIG
NN
I
>
0 4
'm NO?Of C/]
(L O
J0000 U a
O4 > 0° °
Q a Q <"A d ?h
. WW?
4 ?U a
D
O
00
rn
N
r-
M
r'r1
V)

J N tln N
W y
C1 p
JJ
Iz
y .0
ox11 z
0
g
002
.D=W,(
V
C1a?V
0 () 0
Atzz
<ZQ<
). i we
0<it LLLLLLV
Clio
M 11 V. ziddnN
cw;on 0N0 00
OOOLLOVOOI?LL
LL00¢V?00
fW
10 p W O*Op*
Ab,yNJbh.--w.
MMLL
00
G m
0) lOV a to
M
ppdd00
I
mr
......, -.,.. 11 i
..._ .,
t 3 gm 0 3 10 0 0 0 0
0
1
0
-0
1 0 OO
Ol9LLLL
0 LLLL
0
a 0000 ; MOLL
G
0
Wtl0 00 N
1* 094 'NbOOhp 0.0000 LL
LLNOOCO?p '010 00
dd00
LL ?Nq"N 00000 NaD0,N
1
0000n ;;0050
-
• •

U
C
a
c>
C$
0
At l uullA u3
n .?
6
i I - d8?840II4( T80
VNnOHY3 NINON 'H013-IVN 30 AID 'A1NnO3 3NVM 'dIHSNM01 N210d 8V033 '*Oz V Z0Z 'l7
S1N31V1dVdV )133x0 U31US 1V 3NO1SH31VPA
stcti-?v-ott
OON .(oal%/od 6uplc, ?oleo3 OSOI
3n 'snu,/od °uopg 3ONVaanl3in 1181HX3
lHX .
1
Q???n?€o?a ern N
I ,
W I w
l l z ?- 1 a
a
/1 / Q OC 3 / p z°
0 LL
a
caa
/ m o
- y• z; F? =O O ?-
0 0 r 1 1 ao
?W 0 W-a ? as
:3 a LL LL
017.
? `? l ? 11 ? ;y?•-? ;- : • - ?? ?"? ? o,., - ?=w ? i `? ?s ` N ¢
F O
?/ // ` 1111' •'?.%• ?:'•` J
LL.
/? , /'- - r IIII .t •:1?r''. .t' ..1... /?? ,., / ?% .' / ''<?I!?-'.1?0- -a
N LL.
- // • / . _-
I p
_ • 1 1 7
? _ r 1y1 ,R _?-
_ _ `?/__ ? 11 1 ? /'I 111 \ 71 / --__-_' - ?_ '-__-
V
\11??• ' - `. - 1 1 ?\g. ?\ \\?I3111 .\?• \ P/i / < P???. ? CJCfiI_- 3
?_/? 1 ?\` s \11'1 1 1 1 I 1 1 -? ('?y?^' ' 12
V \ w
. , Z _ ' ' 1 1 11 1 ? I •`. '.1J1YI. / ' I 111 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 , (? lsl -
a , ' 1 11 ? \ YO TA11 pM ? 11 II 1 ' _ 1 ? 0 c'_?F
iy 1 111 ??P ;?; ;,.. .. '.' `/ ,r- . _ .,1 •? ? /
?o Ib 1 111 •;1??;. ?:?::• ',a.,¢ ^t.• (^-ol/ ?•
tl 11 '1 111 ?; J ; : ; :::: ... '' 1 : • r 11 ; / YOj°+?; - ?)x) 0
W Id ? 1 1 6 ?'' `• i ' I f ? / ' ??
?.
I
Win
M0
?. a
/W O 11 , 1 1 1 _ _ ???; c?•.,`• 'r 1 /?'" X1111 ?..1 LYY /: r ?
Y. LL/ I I I i 1111-1 ` ' ; ;/:?? r i .S •,' ?• /_ / ll:;/ 2I.
/ I 1 I' 1111 1 ^':''•' :•//•. 1 I ??1 1 ? / 1'
11 l
/ VVYY
1
` ?
/ •
i 1

1 1; :I. y•: •.
1

,.-.-- F
'? 1 1?-
I 111 ? .
'n???•::;:
'

1 11? ,/I ?:

Ig

' ?
N OT T0' W 264.1 2' z }

wa o
}O O
00
O Lb L.
?'. 1•.' , ' I li 1,10 OJ
.'?, 1 1 I I 1 /?
1 I (4) /
1 i .pl 1 1 ' 1 ' ?' ??
•::j•. ? 11 r I I
• •/f ' a lJ r ' ?3
(Q qq I
w •, f/ ? ti 1 I 1 , 1 1 ? /L
i /Y?h ?/V 11
• ?I I /
1`"7 / ??? IL IL IL 4.
NfA fq C•1m
I ?
Xa h? CO
U
O W W ?
a '? r= z (D O Q
ZU ° O LO
Z LL Z z w
R w Z a O ° O
Q
L.m 0 a i W O
O O
O O OOo
F m Oda. } i o LL w `?- W -iLJ
(/) 0 U 3 LL LL LL o ?.I
-?O J0 ooooo
LL <
O
W LLLL
I?L
o
nc oo aW x
J
U W
aaa
av
¢ m O W w
It
a?-aa
0
• •
3 d3 ""?'?, «`:.r. n.. •" •? YNIlp21YO HLNON 'FMJI3lYi1 j0 ALYJ
-AiNf10J 3NYM 'dIHSWOI N210j 2N030 '10Z IP ZOZ 'l'l
6 J Va OAw u>u v
?• l,, "°^,?°.'°; ,?, ?•? ` "? S1N3W1HVdV H33HO x31118 1V
g? a ? l poluaodnoul 3NO1S!l31V/M Q -1 I Rip b : 18?SSaIIB(? 8ro
qa ry re N
IZDC /q6 LL y 5? .1m
°n4 d 6NM4?'j 15" Mi Yc ^ ^ '? O cl 1 S ^ N
,,,,..,?'"?? ,J ?? R
X71 *v. J'Cd owls 1181HX3 V3MV 3JVNIVH(3 13'1N) o VU
d n
/
Qh U!C Cr.Gp '? "?
V Ile
.
I
moo ' - '.'?'• p ? ? ' °,:?' lr^?il.:'?,; ! 1,,, ' `??' ? ?-P. I ?,-"?: '-f
1L1 i ,?.? f
LL Se s 9Si I / t 1 Z? `
ZR
1? 1
L EdF 88 ;,III ?,, ? 1t 11 1 ?.t?r•10 ! // - -
S c+ I i t -
u7 -- I i 1 ? Iq
I
r
•• I
q I I -_
o s d o?Q Ai 1 ? ? I z ? :Sn
"3--oodc C?c?j
-,I-I ` It' 11 , t 11 11 '! 11 .::, ?Zh 1' I \ I IT 7? S
tY
F_ r r)
c '? - , I ? 1 1 '• I .. I ? Q J. y411 u v ? ? N ? ? ? ? 1
1-FE i -I I I _, ? I I- ?SB. , i ,! !, II' ?a,/• r I.t+?I d71 :
?+ I _t{ 1 1 ! .. 1 l I ! 1 r Hill I
' E
2
N
CE)
F- x ;- 6'B: ?cE. m°J ? ' 1 ? I , ' 1 ' I _ ?r I \\ I'9 yy ?1 ? i '-?3[ I ? ? /
Q ? ¢ ? I ? ? i i " i I^ ^ I I ? I 5.,?` I ! , t, I ? ? ! G - ?Yr ?I• ?I? 1 ? i 8 I I
?'f 99??, grr E
U FFE ^^?e$1=edde? ?dh"R°Y.d? / ? w? ®! ' ?I i `'1 , E Rl) ?•' 'Is j..:
m ° ° o6oo Cecooo !?. ^'_p, 1 ' 7 jC `
Q ? i mm mmm mmmmm m^mmmmm / I I, I ? ,•?. \ :Ia¢l
J ?NV?iN Wv{? ViN VI NiilWyvf NVi u(vni I I / ?'?` ?' ''?,I ?YI /.
9 Y
0/
`fff
a53S3?53S3S3S?sSi??SiS3?ooSiSi? -?? ? ? ' LY 71 ? , ?>;?'+ /- ?? -yyj' r?)
° m ° ° 1- I I ' ?tp I r I \I
~ I r ri 1 I{?+ 6 4 \ `?' ` 1 T? tlt I n I G f ,L,i
F3nffis?R I '"" ? `;;I I R ?9? I
.. °° m o 0 o mom Y--- ?? l ^.r? t! t . a .y ? t ?I, I o f e
omm° ?` N, M , 11
°O add ddo dSo dd Cd !? #/IM
??
AI I
I? p` T I
Q r / 'J Rh ' ' , I 5y' 1
ITIT
I ? ' ?r , I I 1 I I ?'I
',`. ' \ egg ?l•? i. '?
t! t I`
,? ? ? ? )? I. ...?'.r: r7 ?$ ICI I y,N`,. •.
- I 1 ' ?- .ft t 3 I I $ry'-
'- I '•0 ' 1 f Inzt{
11 1 O --1--?? II I r 1 ! t' ?? 1 I Ye :5 i 1'.
t
?I .t_ tY 111 ? ?Cn
?? 9at ^ It t
Ake
f 1
a _ -- - :P3
- L KJ • '
o I t L t:
I 1!
•? u pct ,?, Li _, - a \\ `_ - -' 1
Mllmic In
_- _..._ ._._
slrA 3AILJ110Nd,
• - I
1
/
_ --_ I I r
I ,
'11153 d 'a;'s .01 -
I r Y
111 m
LL
dN., ^t!r
0 0 •
file
siuo„nsuuQ ,ww olus+Q Air r u]
g s w @ Poluodaoatu
s8014I00SS
b , .101880II8(?]'80
VNIIOar3H1aON •H0131da !0 A ',UNho0 3NyM 'dIHSWOI NaOd aVO30 'hoZ zoZ 'l•l _Lrj S1N3W1HVdV )133NO 831118 1V 3NO1SHR.LVA11.
c
m _ Co
0 N
sfff-"[f-Ott S ,? o o` j 1
letof v6gMr-is '?+ ^
000 dw g6>pod.oao slr,pw-, suo?os g6o3 OSQI
n V
Oll - o
,.J.,q d o 1181HX3 V3?11/ q?MNlN).?In a ?1.n
- -- -- ? I I I I I °I I ?,
? ? y,? ? \ `(i 1 O? N?Jj'7 `NVIA? i!; d'N 11YJ)?+??17ry / `_? ? _" ?..y?._.y_.?h'?? ?YJ ? .? •.
(?? ?? s? ? -3303 : ?1 ?' ,? ? ?.?r¢'._".`? _" iC'•? ??` * I
- iJ J /?? ? % ?,' , 1, i ? Y ? .2 '-?''T •. __ -mc-' i n 1 'un 1 --
r I `, , ? I r Lr,
// J , i:s ,I Bso .
'fir j,?' // i ; ?,i / t ` + ? l?r??' / / ?r t•-- -? 1'---- ' -?----1
----340--t---•- cSi
I;z
--------- ---
_77
i $
' ?•: / ` - _ ' _ - 1 ! - - - -! - _ -
rk?
Ir•... ?J???S": O/A II ?2?t1 i / f \ ? ,Di.- ' , `I , ?' _ - _ _ _ _ _ - ' ' ? -
'"v qua "•, ?!!a,? ' 1
.crerav ss°r''erid "?'-? _ / ?? ,' , / V ? , ? /? .• r••. f - .?1?'C „ ? •ir l
G- .7 #t --- t'' gib 1 1350
7': / \\ 1 ' . ?} 1 1
_- ? '--,r?ra..?•I.
? I
dwJ` ""TWl1 ?107?rJ1,lM ' '' ?/' ? l1 ? ' I g? 1 ? % 1
-- ? , ? t ' O?? `?L `, ?v, ?; , ? , - ? Af Al % % !
, "per ssow:. , ? ? 1. ?•L 1 ? `\ _;.v.?, ( ?•-?'.??..?-?? j / /!
r.; t --,nn+?- r-' ((
Ile,
t1s co-v` t A I V +f A! +
l ' / }} r , . , jai
to I,
93, ?'
1 ,
- t 1
I •?
1 _
kill
' J
7 -7
I
0 --
• MISCELLANEOUS CALCULATIONS
0
0
•
NITROGEN LOADING &
COMPUTATION OF OFFSET FEES
SITE AREA:
PARCEL H LOT 204
PARCEL H LOT 202
TOTAL:
EXISTING NITROGEN LOADING:
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA
UNDISTURBED AREA
20.353 X.6 LB/YR
0.370 X 21.2 LB/YR
TOTAL:
PROPOSED NITROGEN LOADING:
NRB & TPA
LANDSCAPED AREA
IMPERVIOUS AREA
6.965 AC.
13.758 AC.
20.723 AC.
0.37 AC
20.353
12.212 LB/YR
= 7.844 LB/YR
= 20.056 LB/YR
= 7.696 AC.
= 5.338 AC.
= 7.689 AC.
• 7.696 X 1.2 LB/YR
5.338 X 1.2 LB/YR
7.689 X 21.2 LB/YR
TOTAL:
9.235
6.406
= 163.007
= 178.648 LB/YR
178.0-48/20.71-.3=8.621 LB[YRi /AC
< 10.0 LB/YR/AC
OFFSET FEE COMPUTATION
ALLOWABLE NITROGEN EXPORT
20.723 X 3.6 LB/YR = 74.603 LB/YR
YEARLY REQUIRED OFFSET LOADING
178.648 - 74.603 = 104.045 LB
ESTIMATED OFFSET FEE
104.045 LB X $ 28.35/LB/YR X 30 YR
$ 88,490.27
(REVISED PER FINAL PLAN)
E
•
•
Post-Developed C-Factor Calculations
Direct Bypass to FloodPlane
C = (A1)(C1)+(A2)(C2)...+(An)(Cn)
(A1 + A2...+ An)
Total Acres= 9.2010
Where A = area (ac) C = 0.3437
C = C - Factor
Input Data
1.8350 0.4000 Pervious'
0.8380 0.9500 Im ervious
6.5280 0.2500 undisturbed
I?
U
•
•
Post-Developed C-Factor Calculations
On Site to Pond 1
C = (A1)(C1)+(A2)(C2)...+(An)(Cn)
(Al + A2...+ An)
Total Acres= 4.6760
Where A = area (ac) C = 0.7450
C = C - Factor
Input Data
_A C Desc.
1.5710 0.4000 Pervious'
2.9700 0.9500 Impervious
0.1350 0.2500 'undisturbed
9
•
•
Post-Developed C-Factor Calculations
On Site to Pond 2
C = (A1)(C1)+(A2)(C2)...+(An)(Cn)
(Al + A2...+ An)
Total Acres= 3.7510
Where A = area (ac) C = 0.7420
C = C - Factor
Input Data
_A C Desc.
1.1920 0.4000 Pervious
2.3810 0.9500 Impervious
0.1780 0.2500 undisturbed
•
E
Post-Developed C-Factor Calculations
On Site to Pond 3
C = (A1)(C1)+(A2)(C2)...+(An)(Cn)
(Al + A2...+ An)
•
Total Acres= 2.6150
Where A= area (ac) C = 0.6975
C = C -Factor
Input Data
A_ C Desc.
0.6000 0.4000 Pervious
1.5430 0.9500 Impervious
0.4720 0.2500 undisturbed
0
4( /t
Hyclrograph Re ur Period Recap
d. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph

o. type Hyd(s) description
(origin) 1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr
1 Rational ---- 5.05 ------- ------ ------ ------- ----- ------ ---- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational ---- 0.01 ---- --- ----- ----- ---- ------ -,--- IB Off Site
3 Rational --- 0.03 ------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ------- -- IC Off Site
4 Rational ------- 0.04 ------- - --- ------ ----- ----- --- ---- ID Off Site
5 Rational ------- 1.32 ----- ------- ----- ----- ----- ------ --- IE Off Site
6 Rational --- 0.08 ------ ------- ______ _______ IIIB Off Site
7 Combine 1, 2, 3, 4, , 66.52 ------- ------ ----- ----- ---- ---- ---- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational ----- 0.13 ------- ------- ------- ----- ------ ------- ---- IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational -- 0.02 ---- ------ ----- ------- ------- --- ----- IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational ------- 3.51 ----- ---- ----- _____ -__ __?_ _?_ On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 3, 4, 11 3.57 ------- ------ ------- --- _______ ----- - Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 12 0.83 ------ ------ Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational -- 2.78 ------- --- - ---- __-_ __^ -___ On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 15 0.92 ----- ------- - - ---- ------ ----- ---- Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational -- 1.83 On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 6, 18 1.91 ------ ----- --- ---- ----- --- ---- Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 19 0.77 ------ ---- ------ ---- ---- ------ --- Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational --- 0.10 Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 20,22 0.81 ------ ---- ------ _______ ---- __ Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational ------ 3.13 ------- ______ Post Dev Site Bypass to Fllood plain
26 Rational ----- 0.11 ------ ------ __---- _______ IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 2, 5, 1.32 ------- ------- ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 10, 13, 16 20,426$ ------ ______ ______ On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 28,29 6.01 ------- ------ _______ ___- Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain

Proj. file: 10-032finalonein.gpw I Friday, Jul 22 2011, 12:16 PM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
L
0
FACILITY DETAILS
0
•
n'
•
SECTION X-X
SCALE: LT - Nr
15„ END CONTAINMENT WALL
LEVEL CONCRETE
CONTROL LIP BEYOND
3000 PSI CONCRETE RESIDUAL GRADE
T
SECTION Y -Y
SCALE; 1/2' = P-0"
•
•
X
SODDED SWALE
LEVEL CONCRETE
CONTROL LIP
SODDED SWALE
CONTAINMENT END WALL
3' RIP-RAP/GRAVEL STRIP
2.0%
X
2.0%
FLOW
UNIFORMLY GRADED
2.0%
2.0%
5.0' 3.0' 30.0'
PT AN
SCALE r - MY
LEVEL CONCRETE
CONTROL LIP 2.0%
RIP-RAP/GRAVEL STRIP
SECTION
SCALE r - 10'
w
c?
a
U
N
0
U
0
z
a
J
W
W
N
E
vu Jo Air)
VNIIOiJV3 HIlION 'HO13 1,LNf10D 3NVM 'dIHSNM01 NL103 8VO30 '*OZ A ZOZ 'l'l
S1N3W1aVdV )133UO U31US 1V 3NO1Sa31VAV1
$ a 8 Pe?QrodaooaI
°?0??3' N
?80] BLOC"" « rt S6 i o i
'.w ?? ?I, o-3 OSOI L a-NC d o " U
?'d g ! `^,.:.,.M OOC? Rwyod 6NV?'7 I6
¦ X71 'siou»od ouolag S'iiV13(l 4NC d
)!d
b
¦
I
W J?
a ?
I ?
GGl y
J P,? /, 1y. ? C1 ? N
3 \ Q N
°? l a V)
gg 3
i + i
o d
J

1 U' ?
bo $
J C.1

¦ V
?a
U
r (36avH?;la vaLol) v?rid »s
= a ? LLa
X 4 W
O:
g m
ro
a 8 '9a
Q R-
J

x Q
O al 1?
i
a

os
E2
CIO
------------
i I
1
a
m
J I i
` ? I I
..O 3 i I
T? v
h g ? ?
i
I
4
9 a
v ?
DR
h O'0
I ---
Iv II
vao ;?
FY
u1)
Zip)
OQa
uxa
n
0 jo
=n
Jn
a;
N
Z
Q
J b
I'1 N
Z ery
w
C) a
Q U
C?
?? gd d i d ?? g g$ ? g
W I` ¦

W
Oz s
a
0 0 •
IT
{ J Iww ?+Q ?~w M u3
?uaodaoaIIi
Il ? r Jf S '884410088
a aalsvoill 00

0'Of

VNf1021Y0 H1210N 'H0131V2J d0 ALYJ A1Nf100 3NVM 'dIHSWOI >180! 21V030 'YOZ ZOL '1'l
S1N3W1liVdV A?13Ii0 a31lI8 1V 3 MY033 1V/GA o
?32 N.
s>c YV Otc ??_ s ? QW-
IeZOC a° .e?,yl,,,is Z ONOd
SIIV13O UNOd d
e
Z.
Q
J o
n N
Z w
Y
Q N
V/
J
w
w
J
x
Oy
IL J
NQ
UW
D
F- ?
WW
wW
IQ
yw
wx
wa
NN

AfO?
U
1

A a?
a'
C7
4 ^
'S
00;3II4? 1
E 331
_ .
\_
`
:
\__
\
\
t a

C)
V?g

yy ¢¢ I
1N3YV3
~
z
SV3?33D ft3lVa •p p .
'^
21?:ijn NVIaVdla ZA18 3sn3N / _ -

--330, / z

`
b6 Q
a
4
II
?
I /
? Z w
/ a
33 ul

at?

z
N
z
a
? § $ ? h a a a $!„??
? ? s 8
I1 I
z Fig 6! i i
IN
?al
Ojn
z.n
a?
N
0 0
.7M VNIl08V0 H1iJ0 N 'H013lYMU d0 ALYJ A1N1100 3NVM 'dIH5NM01 Ni10d NY030 '40Z V ZOZ T
,?'?? ??? slYMtlncw? ??Rtl pnap
????? ? {?,?? ?¢g - a ?? a3's4aa34iaaooasus I? ?? po
as;sBaas00
LED I d
,.,,.....
S1N3W11iVdV )133H3 831HS 1V 3NO-LSH3.LV
?C
x -'s E aNOd 2 Os01
Lf""I-U 3 I
d ouoloS SlIV134 aNOd
I?IVA? --- '\r?' -".6.6="m"-- ?./
ojo
v llzj?ols.c
10311 e
UZI
? „? W W ' ?€ 14 `? g
J L-
/ Q O IL J
N
f --- N 'ta
1'r ov ? ? \ _ ?, s ODI I Q N
m w g
.0'OCp w G
W 3
Wx
Ja, W IL
. CC
u} N N o I
C11
9 -
[G \
O ?r
Q " ?? ? o c0 A II'
o a
Q vii s ^? v
I
I
55f/ A
'?J J ?..
Ir \
r
\Z?
11- ? Jlrr Ism` ' •y'?• ? "' ,
w o - I
10
<1
1u \ r --? I at
M'
ti X_ I 19
I. I r I T- ,'' ; i
/ I
I ,?, r

• HYDROGRAPHS AT ROUTING
CALCULATIONS
0
0
Hydrograph Return Period Recap
yd.
o Hydrograph
t
e Inflow
H
d(s) Peak Outflow (cis) HYdro9raPh
. yp y description
(origin) 1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr
1 Rational ----- ------- 29.08 ----- 33.22 36.47 41.37 45.24 49.08 Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational ---- ------- 0.06 ------- 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.09 IB Off Site
3 Rational ------ ------ 0.16 --- 0.18 0.19 0.22 0.24 0.26 IC Off Site
4 Rational ---- ------ 0.21 ---- 0.24 0.26 0.29 0.32 0.35 ID Off Site
5 Rational ---- ------ 7.57 ------- 8.64 9.49 10.77 11.77 12.77 IE Off Site
6 Rational ------- ------- 0.45 ------ 0.51 0.56 0.63 0.69 0.75 IIIB Off Site
7 Combine 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6---- 37.52 ------- 42.85 47.04 53.37 58.36 63.31 Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational ------- ------- 0.73 ------- 0.84 0.92 1.04 1.14 1.24 IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational ---- ------- 0.12 ------- 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.19 0.21 IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational ---- ----- 20.18 ------ 23.05 25.31 28.71 31.40 34.06 On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 3, 4, 11 ------ 20.55 ------ 23.47 25.76 29.23 31.96 34.68 Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 12 ------ 2.86 --- 3.09 3.26 3.50 3.68 3.85 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational ---- ------ 15.98 ----- 18.25 20.03 22.72 24.85 26.96 On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 15 ----- 1.89 ----- 2.00 2.08 2.20 2.29 2.37 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational --- ------ 10.54 ------ 12.03 13.21 14.99 16.39 17.78 On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 6, 18 ----- 10.98 ------ 12.54 13.77 15.62 17.08 18.53 Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 19 ------ 2.34 ----- 2.53 2.67 2.87 3.02 3.16 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational ----- ------ 0.55 ------ 0.62 0.69 0.78 0.85 0.92 Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 20,22 ------ 2.54 ------- 2.76 2.93 3.16 3.35 3.52 Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational ------ ----- 18.00 ------ 20.56 22.58 25.61 28.01 30.39 Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational ---- ------ 0.61 ------ 0.70 0.77 0.87 0.96 1.04 IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 2, 5, ------- 7.62 ------- 8.71 9.56 10.85 11.86 12.87 Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 10, 13, 16 2a,-.26,- 23.42 ------ 26.37 28.68 32.13 34.84 37.52 On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 28,29 ------ 31.04 ------- 35.08 38.24 42.98 46.70 50.38 Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Proj. file: 10-032final.gpw Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Return Period Recap
yd. Hydrograph Inflow
H
d Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph
o. type
(origin) y
(s)
1-Yr
2-Yr
3-Yr
5-Yr
10-Yr
25-Yr
50-Yr
100-Yr description
I 32
33 Rational
Combine -----
16,32 -------
I ------ 0.55
2.12 ---
------- 0.62
2.27 0.69
2.38 0.78
2.55 0.85
2.68 ( 0.92
2.80 Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Proj. file: 10-032final.gpw Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Inteliso
Hydrograph Summary Report
yd.
o. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 Rational 29.08 1 5 8,725 ---- ----- ---- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.06 1 5 17 ---- --- ---- IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.16 1 5 47 ---- ----- ---- IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.21 1 5 62 ---- ------ ------ ID Off Site
5 Rational 7.57 1 5 2,271 ---- ------ ------ IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.45 1 5 134 ---- ------ ----- 1116 Off Site
7 Combine 37.52 1 5 11,255 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6 ------ ---- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 0.73 1 5 220 --- ------ --- IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.12 1 5 37 ---- ------ ------ IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 20.18 1 5 6,055 ---- ----- ------ On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 20.55 1 5 6,164 3, 4, 11 ----- Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 2.86 1 9 6,156 12 337.95 5,189 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 15.98 1 5 4,793 ---- --- ------ On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 1.89 1 9 4,790 15 332.69 4,044 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 10.54 1 5 3,161 --- ----- ----- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 10.98 1 5 3,294 6, 18 ------ ----- Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 2.34 1 9 3,291 19 344.28 2,487 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.55 1 5 164 -- ------ ---- Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 2.54 1 7 3,455 20,22 ------ ----- Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 18.00 1 5 5,401 ---- ------ ----- Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 0.61 1 5 184 --- ------ ------ IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 7.62 1 5 2,287 2, 5, ------ ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 23.42 1 5 19,675 10, 13, 16, 0, 25;---- ------ On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 31.04 1 5 21,963 28,29 ------ ------ Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 2 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Summary Report
yd.
o. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cult) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cult) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.55 1 5 164 ---- ------ ------ Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.12 1 6 4,954 16, 32 ----- ----- Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 2 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
d
N
1
y
.
o.
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 20.213 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 29.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph volume = 8,725 cult
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Yr
30.00
025.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 V
0.0
• Hyd No. 1
0.1
?I
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5
5.00
- V 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
IB Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.06 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 17 cult
Q (cfs)
0.10
• 0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0 00
L
• 0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 2
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.16 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 47 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Yr
0.0
•
Hyd No. 3
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
7
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 4
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
•
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 4
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 2 Yr
0.1
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.21 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 62 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
8
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
E Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 7.57 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 2,271 cult
Q (cfs)
8.00
•
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 V
0.0
• Hyd No. 5
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 2 Yr
0.1
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
-N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
9
Hydrograph Plot
*Hyd.No.-6
1116 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.45 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 134 cuft
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
11113 Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 2 Yr
0.0
Hyd No. 6
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
10
Hydrograph Plot
11
• Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 37.52 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 11,255 cuft
Q (cfs)
40.00
•
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
• 0.0
Hyd No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 7 -- 2 Yr
Hyd No. 1
Hyd No. 4
0.1
Hyd No. 2
.-_1-1-1 Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 6
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
40 Hyd. No. 8
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.510 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.73 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 220 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
i
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hyd. No. 8 -- 2 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
12
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 8 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.12 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 37 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hyd. No. 10 -- 2 Yr
0.0
•
Hyd No. 10
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
13
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 20.18 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 6,055 cuft
Q (cfs)
21.00
018.00-
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 1
Hyd. No. 11 -- 2 Yr
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
14
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 20.55 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 6,164 cult
Q (cfs)
21.00
• 18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
Total Post Dev to Pondl
Hyd. No. 12 -- 2 Yr

0.0
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.1 0.2
Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
15
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used.
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.86 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 337.95 ft
Max. Storage = 5,189 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 6,156 cult
Pond 1 Routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 13 -- 2 Yr Q (cfs)
21.00
018.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
16
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12 Time
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Pond No. 1 - POND1
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 (cult) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2,107
1.90 338.00 3,237 3,237 5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8,581
3.90 341.00 3,237 3,237 11,818
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect -- - -
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tai lwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
4.00
Stage / Discharge
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 7.00 14.00 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
0 00
17
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 15
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
IN Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 15.98 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 4,793 cuft
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 15 -- 2 Yr
18.00
• 15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00 v
• 0.0
Hyd No. 15

0.1
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
' 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
18
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Storage Indication method used
Q (cfs)
18.00
0
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
Q (cfs)
18.00
19
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00 -,1 , I I I I i I 0.00
• 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15
Pond 2 Routing
Hyd. No. 16 -- 2 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 1.89 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 332.69 ft
Max. Storage = 4,044 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 4,790 cult
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
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)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No
•
Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crest El. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Type = Rect -- - --
Multi-Stage = No No No No
ExfIitration = 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)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
20
0.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
Total Q
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
IDF Curve
Rational
2 yrs
2.615 ac
5.755 in/hr
Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 10.54 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 3,161 cult
Q (cfs)
12.00
• 10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 18 -- 2 Yr
Q (cfs)
12.00

0.0
• Hyd No. 18
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.1
N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
21
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to P ond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Hydrograph Volume = 3,294 cuft
Q (cfs)
12.00
010.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 19
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 10.98 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 2 Yr
Hyd No. 6
0.1
Hyd No. 18
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
- N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
22
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.34 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 344.28 ft
Max. Storage = 2,487 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
4n nA
Pond 3 Routing
Hyd. No. 20 -- 2 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 3,291 cult
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
•
Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19 Time (hrs)
23
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage /Storage Table
Stays (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (saft) Incr. Storage (cult) TotaI storage (cuft)
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- -- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0 .000 in/hr (Contour) Tail water Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
•
0.00
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
4.00 8.00
Total Q
' ' 0.00
12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
24
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.55 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 164 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
• 0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hyd. No. 22 -- 2 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 22
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
25
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
•
Hyd. No. 23
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.54 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,455 cult
Q (cfs)
3.00

2.00
1.00
0 00
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hyd. No. 23 -- 2 Yr
0.0 0.2
• Hyd No. 23
0.3 0.5
- Hyd No. 20
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
26
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No. 25
Post Dev Site By
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
OF Curve
pass to Hood plain
= Rational
= 2 yrs
= 9.201 ac
= 5.755 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 18.00 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 5,401 cult
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 25 -- 2 Yr
21.00
018.00-
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00

Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
27
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 25 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.61 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 184 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00 l-`
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hyd. No. 26 -- 2 Yr
0.0
•
Hyd No. 26
0.1
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
28
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 2s
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 7.62 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 2,287 cuft
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 28 -- 2 Yr
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00 11
0.0
• Hyd No. 28
Hyd No. 2
0.1
Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
-1 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
29
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 23.42 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 19,675 cult
Q (cfs
24.00
020.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hyd. No. 29 -- 2 Yr
0.00
0.0
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
n nn
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 v --
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 16 Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 25
30
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No. 30
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 31.04 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 21,963 cuft
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 30 -- 2 Yr
35.00
030.00-
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 . " ' 1 1 0.00
•
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time (hrs)
31
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No.-,3,2-
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 5.755 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.55 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 164 cult
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 32 -- 2 Yr
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.0
•
Hyd No. 32
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
32
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.12 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 4,954 cuft
Q (cfs)
3.00
•
2.00
1.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 P Y I I I I I I 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
•
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hyd. No. 33 -- 2 Yr
33
Hydrograph Summary report
34
yd.
o. ograph
pe
igin)
F Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cult) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 Rational 33.22 1 5 9,965 ---- ---- ----- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.06 1 5 19 ---- IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.18 1 5 53 ---- ------ ------ IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.24 1 5 71 --- ---- ---- ID Off Site
5 Rational 8.64 1 5 2,593 ---- ---- ----- IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.51 1 5 153 ---- ------ ---- HIS Off Site
7 Combine 42.85 1 5 12,854 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6 ------ ----- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 0.84 1 5 251 ---- ------ ------ IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.14 1 5 42 -- ------ ---- IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 23.05 1 5 6,916 ---- ------ ----- On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 23.47 1 5 7,040 3, 4, 11 ------ --- Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 3.09 1 9 7,032 12 338.19 5,972 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 18.25 1 5 5,474 -- ------ ---- On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 2.00 1 9 5,471 15 332.95 4,672 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 12.03 1 5 3,610 ---- ----- ---- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 12.54 1 5 3,763 6, 18 ------ ------ Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 2.53 1 9 3,759 19 344.60 2,883 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.62 1 5 187 --- ------ ----- Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 2.76 1 7 3,947 20,22 ----- ------ Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 20.56 1 5 6,169 ---- ---- ----- Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 0.70 1 5 211 ---- ----- ------ IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 8.71 1 5 2,612 2, 5, ------ ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 26.37 1 5 22,473 10, 13, 16, 0, 25;-- -- On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 35.08 1 5 25,086 28,29 ------ ----- Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 5 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Summary Report
35
d.
o. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(tuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cult) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.62 1 5 187 --- --- ------ Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.27 1 6 5,659 16,32 ---- ------ Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
•
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 5 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 20.213 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 33.22 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 9,965 cuft
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 5 Yr
35.00
030.00-
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 " i N 0 00
0 0.0
Hyd No. 1
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
36
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
d
N
2
y
.
o.
B Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.06 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 19 cult
Q (cfs)
0.10
• 0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 5 Yr
0.0
•
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.1 0.2
Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
37
Hydrograph Mot
• Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.18 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 53 cuft
Q (cfs)
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
38
•
0.0 0.1 0.2
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
N
4
d
y
.
o.
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.24 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 71 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
39
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
IE Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
40
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 8.64 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 2,593 cuft
Q (cfs)
4 n nn
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 5 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 5
0.1
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
1 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
d
N
6
y
.
o.
1116 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.51 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 153 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
1116 Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 5 Yr
0.0
• _.._
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 6
41
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 42.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 12,854 cuft
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 5 Yr
50.00
•
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
.??
0.00
, 'L 0.00
0 0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 1 Hyd No. 2 Hyd No. 3
--- Hyd No. 4 1.1-1- Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 6
42
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No. 8
IV Pre Dev Site t,
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
OF Curve
Expressway
= Rational
= 5 yrs
= 0.510 ac
= 6.573 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.84 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 251 cuft
.IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 8 -- 5 Yr
1.00
is 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
43
0.0 0.1 0.2
•
Hyd No. 8 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.14 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 42 cuft
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 10 -- 5 Yr
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
44
• 0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs-- Hyd No. 10
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 23.05 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 6,916 cuft
Q (cfs)
24.00
• 20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 1
Hyd. No. 11 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00

0.0
• Hyd No. 11
0.1
12.00
8.00
4.00
N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
45
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Q (cfs)
/1 A n^
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 23.47 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 7,040 cuft
Total Post Dev to Pondl
Hyd. No. 12 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00

• 0.0
Hyd No. 12
Hyd No. 3
0.1
Hyd No. 4
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
46
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
Pond 1 Routing
Hyd. No. 13 -- 5 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 3.09 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 338.19 ft
Max. Storage = 5,972 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 7,032 cult
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00 " i i I I I I 1 0.00
0 - 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12

47
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
• Pond No. 1 - POND1
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour a reas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2,107
1.90 338.00 3,237 3,237 5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8,581
3.90 341.00 3,237 3,237 11,818
Culvert / Orifice Structure s Weir Structures
[A] IBl [C] [D] [A) [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect -- --- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multistage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
r:
Note: Culvert/Crifce outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 ' ' ' ' 1 1 1 1 I 0.00
0.00 7.00 14.00 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
Stage / Discharge
48
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 15
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 18.25 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 5,474 cuft
Q (cfs)
21.00
018.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hyd. No. 15 -- 5 Yr

Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
i °.° 0.1
Hyd No. 15
V 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
49
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Storage Indication method used.
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.00 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 332.95 ft
Max. Storage = 4,672 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 5,471 cuft
Pond 2 Routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 16 -- 5 Yr Q (cfs)
21.00 21.00
018.00- 18.00
15.00 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
• 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15
50
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
•
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)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] ID] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- - --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tai lwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
0.00 _L_
0.00
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
4.00 8.00
Total Q
0.00
12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
51
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 2.615 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 12.03 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 3,610 cuft
Q (cfs)
14.00
• 12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 18 -- 5 Yr
0.0
•
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 18
52
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Q (cfs)
14.00
1012.00-
10.00 8.00
6.00
4.00
f_
2.00
0 00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 12.54 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,763 cuft
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 5 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 19
Hyd No. 6
0.1
Hyd No. 18
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
53
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.53 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 344.60 ft
Max. Storage = 2,883 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
A A An
Pond 3 Routing
Hyd. No. 20 -- 5 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 3,759 cult
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
•
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19 Time (hrs)
54
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
is Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Eleva?' /
tags { ?cn tftj Contour
area (sgft)
i...nn .r. Storage (cuft) u
r T ctat o{ storage aga / ?cu 10
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No
Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D]
Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Type = Rect -- - ---
Multistage = No No No No
ExfiItration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
•
Stage (ft)
5.00

-

-----
5.00
4
00 ------
. 4.00
3
00
. 3.00
2
00
. 2.00
• 1
00 _
.
I 1.00
0.00
n nn
0.00
Note: CulverUOrifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage / Discharge Stage (ft)
4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
Total Q
55
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Leve
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
OF Curve
I Spreader
= Rational
= 5 yrs
= 0.100 ac
= 6.573 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.62 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 187 cuft
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 22 -- 5 Yr
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20 7Z
0.10-
0.00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
56
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 23
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.76 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,947 cult
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 23 -- 5 Yr
3.00
• f"\
2.00
1.00
0.00 1-
• 0.0 0.2
Hyd No. 23
0.3 0.5
- Hyd No. 20
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
57
Hydrograph Plot
,H,d,allow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 25
Post Dev Site Bypa ss to Hood plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 9.201 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 20.56 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 6,169 cult
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 25 -- 5 Yr
21.00
•18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00

0.00 1
• 0.0
_I
3.00
Hyd No. 25
0.1
N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
58
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.70 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 211 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hyd. No. 26 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
59
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 26 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
28
• H
d
N
y
.
o.
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
so
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 8.71 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 2,612 cuft
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 28 -- 5 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 28
0.1
Hyd No. 2 Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
. Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 26.37 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 22,473 cuft
Q (cfs;
28.00
024.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hyd. No. 29 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00

,
0.00
• 0.0
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13
-- Hyd No. 20 - Hyd No. 25
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
n nn
1.0 1.2 1.3 v vv
Hyd No. 16 Time (hrs)
61
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
N
30
H
d
o.
y
.
Total Post Dev Run off to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
Q (cfs)
40.00
•
30.00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 35.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 25,086 cuft
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 30 -- 5 Yr
?IIII III
I iii I I I I
20.00
10.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
62
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 32
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 6.573 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.62 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 187 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hyd. No. 32 -- 5 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
0.0
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 32
63
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 5 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.27 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 5,659 cult
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 33 -- 5 Yr
3.00
•
2.00
1.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
64
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time
65
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 Rational 36.47 1 5 10,941 -- ------ ------ Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.07 1 5 21 ---- ---- ------ IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.19 1 5 58 ---- -- - ------ IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.26 1 5 78 ---- --- - -- -- ID Off Site
5 Rational 9.49 1 5 2,847 --- ------ ------ IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.56 1 5 168 --- ------ ----- IIIB Off Site
7 Combine 47.04 1 5 14,113 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 ----- ------ Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 0.92 1 5 276 ---- ------ ------ IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.15 1 5 46 ---- ------ --- - IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 25.31 1 5 7,593 -- ---- ------ On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 25.76 1 5 7,729 3, 4, 11 ----- ------ Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 3.26 1 9 7,721 12 338.39 6,590 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 20.03 1 5 6,010 --- ------ ---- On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 2.08 1 9 6,007 15 333.14 5,169 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 13.21 1 5 3,963 ---- ------ ----- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 13.77 1 5 4,131 6, 18 --- -- Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 2.67 1 9 4,128 19 344.86 3,197 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.69 1 5 206 ---- ---- ------ Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 2.93 1 7 4,333 20,22 ------ ----- Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 22.58 1 5 6,773 ---- ----- ----- Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 0.77 1 5 231 -- --- ---- IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 9.56 1 5 2,868 2, 5, ---- ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 28.68 1 5 24,675 10, 13, 16, 0, 25 ---- ------ On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 38.24 1 5 27,543 28,29 ------ ------ Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
ss
Hydrograph Summary Report
yd.
o. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.69 1 5 206 ---- ---- -- Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.38 1 6 6,213 16,32 ----- ----- Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 1
Predev On Site I
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
IDF Curve
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 36.47 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 10,941 cult
Q (cfs)
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
o Flood Plain
= Rational
= 10 yrs
= 20.213 ac
= 7.217 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Yr

Q (cfs)
40.00
30.00

20.00
10.00
0 00
67
0.0 0.1 0.2
40 Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
I B Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.07 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 21 cult
Q (cfs)
A 4n
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2
is Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
6s
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.19 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 58 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
69
0.0 0.1 0.2
40 Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 4
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IN Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.26 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 78 cult
Q (cfs)
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
70
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 4
Hydrograph Plot
71
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
IE Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 9.49 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 2,847 cuft
Q (cfs)
10.00
•
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00

0
0.0 .00
0.1 0.2
•
Hyd No. 5 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 6
11113 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.56 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 168 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IIIB Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 10 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 6
0.1
0.2
Time (hrs)
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
72
HydrograPh Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
10 Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Q (cfs)
50.00
•
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 7
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 47.04 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 14,113 tuft
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 7 -- 10 Yr
0.1
Hyd No. 1 Hyd No. 2 Hyd No. 3
Hyd No. 4 - Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 6
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
IN- 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
73
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 8
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.510 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.92 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 276 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hyd. No. 8 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
74
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 8 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 0.15 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 46 cuft
Q (cfs)
r% CA
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hyd. No. 10 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
75
0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 10
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area ' = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 25.31 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 7,593 cuft
Q (cfs)
28.00
024.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 1
Hyd. No. 11 -- 10 Yr

0.0
• Hyd No. 11
0.1
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
1 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
76
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 25.76 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 7,729 cult
Q (cfs)
28.00
024.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
Total Post Dev to Pondl
Hyd. No. 12 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
28.00
0.0 0.1
• Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 3
Hyd No. 4
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
77
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
28.00
024.00
Pond 1 Routing
Hyd. No. 13 -- 10 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 3.26 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 338.39 ft
Max. Storage = 6,590 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 7,721 cuft
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00 11 ' I I I I I 1 I 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
• Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12 Time (hrs)
78
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Pond No. 1 - POND1
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area me thod used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (cult)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2
107
1.90 338.00 3,237 3,237 ,
5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8
581
3.90 341.00 3,237 3,237 ,
11,818
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - --- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Crif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfjltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00 -
• 1.00 -
0.00 -
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00

O.vu /.UV 14.UU 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.000.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
79
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Inlelisolve
Hyd. No. 15
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 20.03 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph volume = 6,010 cult
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 15 -- 10 Yr
21.00
018.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00 V
0.0
• .0 Hyd No. 15
0.1
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
80
Hydrograph Plot
. Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
21.00
018.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
Pond 2 Routing
Hyd. No. 16 -- 10 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 333.14 ft
Max. Storage = 5,169 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 6,007 cuft
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
81
• 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7
Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15 Time (hrs)
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
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)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Culvert/ Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] ID] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect -- -- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
OHL Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multistage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tail water Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
Stage (ft)

1.00 I
i
0.00
0.00
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
4.UU 25.Uu
Total Q
12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00 0.00
Discharge (cfs)
s2
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
0
Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 2.615 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 13.21 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 3,963 cuft
Q (cfs)
14.00
012.00-
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 18 -- 10 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 18
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
83
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 16 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Q (cfs)
14.00
012.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 19
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 13.77 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 4,131 cuft
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 10 Yr
0.1
Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 18
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
84
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
Storage Indication method used
Pond 3 Routing
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 20 -- 10 Yr
14.00
012.00-
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
e
a.?M1
0.00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Peak discharge = 2.67 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 344.86 ft
Max. Storage = 3,197 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 4,128 cult
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5
• Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
Time (hrs)
85
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:22 AM
Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
Pond Data
•
Pond storage is based on k nown contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (cult)
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - -- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
• Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft) Stage / Discharge Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
ss
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.69 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 206 tuft
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 22 -- 10 Yr
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20 --
0.10
0.00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
87
0.0 0.1 0.2
0 Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot

Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
d
N
23
y
.
o.
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.93 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 4,333 cult
Q (cfs)
3.00
•
2.00
1.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 Z v I I 1 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
0 Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hyd. No. 23 -- 10 Yr
88
Hydrograph Plot
• Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
H
d
N
25
y
.
o.
Post Dev Site Bypa ss to Fllood plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 9.201 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 22.58 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 6,773 cuft
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 25 -- 10 Yr
24.00
20.00 _-Z
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00

0.0
• Hyd No. 25
0.1
12.00
8.00
4.00
4 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
89
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 7.217 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.77 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 231 cuft
Q (cfs)
A AA
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hyd. No. 26 -- 10 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0
0.0 .00
0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 26
90
Hydrograph Plot
Hydralow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 28
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
91
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 9.56 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 2,868 cuft
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 28 -- 10 Yr
10.00
•
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.0 0.1
• Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 2 Hyd No. 5
If _ i _ i
Q (cfs)
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 28.68 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 24,675 cult
Q (cfs;
30.00
• 25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hyd. No. 29 -- 10 Yr

(

t
2
f

t
F
j
0.00 _., . _ _.._. -.__ :...M .,. . , ...._
0.0
•
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
n nn
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 v vv
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 16 Time (hrs)
-- Hyd No. 20 1-1- Hyd No. 25
92
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
40 Hyd. No. 30
Total Post Dev Run off to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 38.24 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 27,543 cult
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 30 -- 10 Yr
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
93
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time
Hydrograph Plot
10 Hyd. No. 32
Bldg 600 to level
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
OF Curve
Spreader
= Rational
= 10 yrs
= 0.100 ac
= 7.217 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.69 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 206 cuft
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 32 -- 10 Yr
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
94
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.38 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 6,213 cult
Q (cfs)
3.00
•
2.00
1.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 r r 1 1 I 1 l 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7
•
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hyd. No. 33 -- 10 Yr
95
96
Hydrograph Summary Report
d. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 Rational 41.37 1 5 12,411 ---- ---- ----- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.08 1 5 24 - --- ----- IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.22 1 5 66 ---- ------ ----- IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.29 1 5 88 ---- ------ --- ID Off Site
5 Rational 10.77 1 5 3,230 ---- ---- ----- IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.63 1 5 190 ---- ----- -- IIIB Off Site
7 Combine 53.37 1 5 16,010 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6 ------ -- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 1.04 1 5 313 ---- ------ ------ IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.17 1 5 52 ---- ---- ----- IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 28.71 1 5 8,614 ---- ------ ---- On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 29.23 1 5 8,768 3, 4, 11 ----- ----- Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 3.50 1 9 8,760 12 338.67 7,527 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 22.72 1 5 6,817 -- ----- ------ On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Reservoir 2.20 1 10 6,815 15 333.45 5,926 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 14.99 1 5 4,496 --- ----- ---- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 15.62 1 5 4,686 6, 18 ------ ----- Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 2.87 1 9 4,683 19 345.25 3,676 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.78 1 5 233 -- ----- ---- Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 3.16 1 7 4,916 20,22 ------ ----- Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 25.61 1 5 7,683 ---- ------ ----- Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 0.87 1 5 262 ---- ------ ---- IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 10.85 1 5 3,254 2, 5, ---- ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 32.13 1 5 27,994 10, 13, 16, 0, 25 ---- ----- On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 42.98 1 5 31,247 28,29 ------ ----- Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
0
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 25 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
97
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.78 1 5 233 ---- --- --- Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.55 1 6 7,048 16,32 ---- --- Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2

10-032final.gpw Return Period: 25 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 20.213 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 41.37 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 12,411 cuft
Q (cfs)
50.00
•
40.00
30.00
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 1 -- 25 Yr
20.00
10.00
0.00 'L
0.0
•
Hyd No. 1
0.1
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
y 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
98
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
I B Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 24 cult
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
•
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0 00
99
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.22 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 66 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
. 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 25 Yr
0.0
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 3
100
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 4
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.29 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 88 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
• 0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
101
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
IE Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IN Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 10.77 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 3,230 cult
Q (cfs)
12.00
010.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 25 Yr

U.0
Hyd No. 5
0.1
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
- ' 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
102
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 6
1116 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.63 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 190 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
• 0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IIIB Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
103
0.0 0.1 .
• 0.2
Hyd No. 6 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Q (cfs)
60.00
050.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00 11
0.0
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 53.37 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 16,010 cuft
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 7 -- 25 Yr
0.1
Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 1 Hyd No. 2
a Hyd No. 4 - Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 6
104
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 8
IV Pre Dev Site t
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
OF Curve
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 1.04 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 313 cuft
Q (cfs)
2.00
•
1.00
0.00 V
0.0
Expressway
= Rational
= 25 yrs
= 0.510 ac
= 8.187 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hyd. No. 8 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
2.00
Hyd No. 8
1.00
0.1
?11 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
105
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.17 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 52 cult
Q (cfs)
n cn
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hyd. No. 10 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
106
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 10 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
. Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 28.71 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 8,614 cuft
Q (cfs)
30.00
025.00
20.00
On Site to Pond 1
Hyd. No. 11 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 V
0.0
• Hyd No. 11
0.1
N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
107
Hydrograph Plot

Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 29.23 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 8,768 cult
Q (cfs) Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hyd. No. 12 -- 25 Yr
30.00
025.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 v
0.0
Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 3
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.1 0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 4 Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
108
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
30.00
1025.00-
25.00
Pond
Pond 1 Routing
Hyd. No. 13 -- 25 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.50 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 338.67 ft
Max. Storage = 7,527 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 8,760 cult
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00

Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
109
U.u u.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
0 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12 Time (hrs)
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 1 - POND1
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour a reas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2,107
1.90 338.00 3,237 3,237 5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8,581
3.90 341.00 3,237 3,237 11,818
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exnitration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
•
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
1.00
•
0.00
Stage / Discharge
2.00
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
0.00 7.00 14.00 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.00
Total 0 Discharge (cfs)
110
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 15
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 22.72 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 6,817 cuft
Q (cfs)
24.00
020.00-
16.00
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hyd. No. 15 -- 25 Yr
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 15
0.1
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
-11 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
111
Hydrograph Plot
10 Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
24.00
020.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00 -
Pond 2 Routing
Hyd. No. 16 -- 25 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.20 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 333.45 ft
Max. Storage = 5,926 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 6,815 cult
Q (cfs)
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00 " ' I I I I I I I 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
• Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15 Time (hrs)
112
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
• 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)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures
[A] IBl [C] ID]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No
•
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
0.00
Weir Structures
[A] [B] ICI [D]
Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crest El. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weir Type = Rect - --- ---
Multi-Stage = No No No No
ExfiItration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage I Discharge Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
113
0.00 14.UU d.UU 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
Hydrograph Plot
40 Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
IDF Curve
Rational
25 yrs
2.615 ac
8.187 in/hr
Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 14.99 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 4,496 cuft
On Site to Pond 3
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 18 -- 25 Yr
15.00
0
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
114
0.0 0.1 0.2
40 Hyd No. 18 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot

Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 15.62 cfs
Time interval = i min
Hydrograph Volume = 4,686 cult
Q (cfs)
e nn
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00

0.0
Hyd No. 19
Hyd No. 6
0.1
Hyd No. 18
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
115
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
0 Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
116
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.87 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 345.25 ft
Max. Storage = 3,676 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Hydrograph Volume = 4,683 cuft
Pond 3 Routing
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 20 -- 25 Yr
18.00
• 15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
• Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19 Time (hrs)
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
•
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area me thod used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - -- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orlf. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tai lwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
is Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft) Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
117
G.uu 4.uu d.UU 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
18 Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.78 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 233 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hyd. No. 22 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
0.0
0.1 0.2
Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
118
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 23
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
119
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.16 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 4,916 cuft
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
. Hyd. No. 23 -- 25 Yr
III I?'?
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 22 Time
Hydrograph Plat
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
41 Hyd. No. 25
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 9.201 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 25.61 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 7,683 cuft
Q (cfs)
no nn
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Hyd. No. 25 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
00
0.1 0.2
is Hyd No. 25 Time (hrs)
120
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.87 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 262 cuft
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 26 -- 25 Yr
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
121
0.0 0.1 0.2
.
Hyd No. 26 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 28
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 10.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,254 cult
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 28 -- 25 Yr
12.00
010.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
1 14, , _ ®
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 2
0.1
Hyd No. 5
-? 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
122
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 32.13 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 27,994 cuft
Q (cfs;
35.00
• 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.0 _
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13
Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 25
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
n nn
1.2 1.3 1.5 V vv
Time (hrs)
- Hyd No. 16
123
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 30
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 42.98 cfs
T ime interval = i min
Hydrograph Volume = 31,247 cuft
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 30 -- 25 Yr
50.00
i
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
124
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
• Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 32
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 8.187 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.78 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 233 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00 -Z
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hyd. No. 32 -- 25 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
125
0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 32
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 25 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.55 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 7,048 cult
•
•
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 r y I I I I I 1
0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hyd. No. 33 -- 25 Yr
126
127
Hydrograph Summary Report
yd.
o_ Hydrograph

type
(origin) Peak

now
(cfs) Time

interval
(min) Time to

peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow

hyd(s) Maximum

elevation
(ft) Maximum

storage
(cult) Hydrograph

description
1 Rational 45.24 1 5 13,573 ---- ---- ---- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.09 1 5 26 -- --- ----- IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.24 1 5 73 ---- --- ------ IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.32 1 5 97 --- ----- ------ ID Off Site
5 Rational 11.77 1 5 3,532 ---- ----- ----- IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.69 1 5 208 --- ------ ----- 1116 Off Site
7 Combine 58.36 1 5 17,509 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6 ------ ----- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 1.14 1 5 342 ---- ------ ------ IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.19 1 5 57 - ----- -- IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 31.40 1 5 9,420 - ----- -- On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 31.96 1 5 9,589 3, 4, 11 ----- --- Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 3.68 1 9 9,581 12 338.90 8,271 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 24.85 1 5 7,456 -- ------ ---- On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
6 Reservoir 2.29 1 10 7,453 15 333.69 6,530 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 16.39 1 5 4,917 -- ---- ---- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 17.08 1 5 5,125 6, 18 ------ ------ Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 3.02 1 9 5,121 19 345.56 4,057 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.85 1 5 255 ---- ---- ----- Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 3.35 1 7 5,377 20,22 ---- ----- Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 28.01 1 5 8,403 ---- ---- ----- Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 0.96 1 5 287 ---- ------ -- IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 11.86 1 5 3,558 2, 5, ------ ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 34.84 1 5 30,615 10, 13, 16, 0, 25;---- ------ On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 46.70 1 5 34,174 28,29 ------ ---- Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 50 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Summary Report
128
Hyd.
o. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cult) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.85 1 5 255 --- ------ ------ Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.68 1 6 7,708 16,32 --- ------ Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 50 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot 129
- nyu. IVu. 1
Predev On Site 1
Hydrograph type
Storm frequency
Drainage area
Intensity
IDF Curve
o Flood Plain
= Rational
50 yrs
= 20.213 ac
= 8.953 in/hr
= Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 45.24 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 13,573 cult
Q (cfs)
50.00
• 40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 1 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
0.0 0.1 .
0.2
• Hyd No. 1 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
IB Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.09 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 26 cult
Q (cfs)
r%
0.0
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 50 Yr
Hyd No. 2
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
130
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.24 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 73 cuft
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 50 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 3
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
131
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 4
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.32 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 97 cult
Q (cfs)
n C^
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0
00
0.0 0.1 0.2 .
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 4
132
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 5
IE Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 11.77 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 3,532 cuft
Q (cfs)
12.00
• 10.00
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 50 Yr
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00

0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 5

0.1
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
" - 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
133
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 6
1116 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.69 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 208 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
•
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
IIIB Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
134
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 6 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 58.36 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 17,509 cult
Q (cfs)
60.00
1050.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 7
0.1
Hyd No. 1 Hyd No. 2
- Hyd No. 4-? Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 6
135
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 7 -- 50 Yr
Hydrograph Plot 136
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Infelisolve
• Hyd. No. 8
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.510 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 1.14 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 342 cult
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 8 -- 50 Yr
2.00
•
1.00
0.00 Z
0.0
• Hyd No. 8
0.1
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
-N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
40 Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.19 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 57 cult
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 10 -- 50 Yr
0.50
0.45
•
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
137
0.0 0.1 0.2
•
Hyd No. 10 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
40 Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 31.40 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 9,420 cuft
Q (cfs)
OC Ark
On Site to Pond 1
Hyd. No. 11 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
v.vu " 0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
138
139
Hydrograph Plot
Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Q (cfs)
35.00
• 30.00
25.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
f) 1111 11 \1 -
0.0
•
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 31.96 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 9,589 cuft
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hyd. No. 12 -- 50 Yr
0.1
Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
0 .00
0.2
Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used
Q (cfs)
35.00
101, 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 U I I 1 1 1 I ' 1 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12 Time (hrs)
Pond 1 Routing
Hyd. No. 13 -- 50 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.68 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 338.90 ft
Max. Storage = 8,271 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 9,581 cuft
140
Pond Report 141
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 1 - POND1
•
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour a reas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (soft) Incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2,107
1.90 338.00 3,237 3,237 5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8,581
3.90 341.00 3,237 3,237 11,818
Culvert / Orifice Structure s Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - -- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multistage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multistage = n/a No No No Exi'iitration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
•
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
Stage / Discharge
2.00
1.00
•
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 -t ' ' ' 1 1 1 I I 1 1 0 00
0.00 7.00 14.00 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00 70.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
Hydrograph Plot
40 Hyd. No. 15
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 24.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 7,456 cult
Q (cfs)
28.00
• 24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hyd. No. 15 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0 00
0.0
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 15
142
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
i Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.29 cfs
ime interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 333.69 ft
Max. Storage = 6,530 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Hydrograph Volume = 7,453 cult
Pond 2 Routing
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 16 -- 50 Yr Q (cfs)
28.00
• 24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0 00
143
0.u 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
. Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15 Time (hrs)
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour a reas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (tuft)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- -- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multistage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailw ater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
•
Stage (ft) Stage / Discharge Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
0.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
Total Q
144
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 2.615 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 16.39 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 4,917 cuft
Q (cfs)
18.00
• 15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
On Site to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 18 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00

12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 18
0.1
- N 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
145
Hydrograph Plot 146
4D Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Q (cfs)
A n nn
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 17.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 5,125 cult
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 50 Yr

Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
0.0 0.1 0.2
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 19 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 18 Time
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
Pond 3 Routing
Hyd. No. 20 -- 50 Yr
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
18.00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.02 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 345.56 ft
Max. Storage = 4,057 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 5,121 cuft
•15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
147
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
• Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19 Time (hrs)
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour a reas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect -- --- --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multistage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No EAItration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
•
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
• 1.00
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 --1-
0.00
4.00 8.00
Total Q
0.00
12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
148
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 255 cult
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
•
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00 -?/
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hyd. No. 22 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
149
0.0 0.1 .
0.2
• Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
40 Hyd. No. 23
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
150
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.35 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 5,377 cuft
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 23 -- 50 Yr
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
-19 ---- Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
. Hyd. No. 25
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50' yrs
Drainage area = 9.201 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 28.01 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 8,403 cuft
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 25 -- 50 Yr
30.00
025.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 " I
0.0
• Hyd No. 25
0.1
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
151
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
IN Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.96 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
T c by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 287 cult
Q (cfs) IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hyd. No. 26 -- 50 Yr
1.00
0.90
•
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
152
0.0 0.1
0.2
• Hyd No. 26 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
• Hyd. No. 28
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
Q (cfs)
12.00
010.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 11.86 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,558 cult
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 28 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00

U.?
• ----- Hyd No. 28
Hyd No. 2
0.1
Hyd No. 5
6.00
4.00
2.00
--" 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
153
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 34.84 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 30,615 cult
Q (cfs)
']G nn
• 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.0
• T
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hyd. No. 29 -- 50 Yr
0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13
°-a----- Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 25
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
A nn
1.2 1.3 1.5 v vv
- Hyd No. 16 Time (hrs)
154
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 30
Total Post Dev Run off to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
155
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 46.70 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 34,174 cult
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 30 -- 50 Yr
50.00
• 40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
• Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 32
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 8.953 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 255 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
• 0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hyd. No. 32 -- 50 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 32
156
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 66 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.68 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 7,708 cuft
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 33 -- 50 Yr
3.00
U
2.00
1.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
157
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time
158
Hydrograph Summary Report
d. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cult) Hydrograph
description
1 Rational 49.08 1 5 14,725 -- ------ ----- Predev On Site To Flood Plain
2 Rational 0.09 1 5 28 --- ------ ---- IB Off Site
3 Rational 0.26 1 5 79 ---- ----- ------ IC Off Site
4 Rational 0.35 1 5 105 ---- ----- ---- ID Off Site
5 Rational 12.77 1 5 3,832 --- --- ------ IE Off Site
6 Rational 0.75 1 5 226 --- --- ------ 1116 Off Site
7 Combine 63.31 1 5 18,994 1, 2, 3, 4, , 6 ------ ----- Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
8 Rational 1.24 1 5 372 --- ---- ------ IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
10 Rational 0.21 1 5 62 ---- ----- ----- IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
11 Rational 34.06 1 5 10,219 ---- ------ ----- On Site to Pond 1
12 Combine 34.68 1 5 10,403 3, 4, 11 ------ ---- Total Post Dev to Pond1
13 Reservoir 3.85 1 9 10,394 12 339.13 9,010 Pond 1 Routing
15 Rational 26.96 1 5 8,088 --- --- --- On Site Post Dev to Pond 2

10 Reservoir 2.37 1 10 8,086 15 333.93 7,129 Pond 2 Routing
18 Rational 17.78 1 5 5,334 --- --- ---- On Site to Pond 3
19 Combine 18.53 1 5 5,560 6, 18 ---- ---- Total Post Dev to Pond 3
20 Reservoir 3.16 1 9 5,556 19 345.87 4,437 Pond 3 Routing
22 Rational 0.92 1 5 277 -- ------ -- Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
23 Combine 3.52 1 7 5,833 20,22 ---- ------ Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
25 Rational 30.39 1 5 9,116 -- ------ ------ Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
26 Rational 1.04 1 5 311 -- ----- ------ IV Post Dev to Expressway
28 Combine 12.87 1 5 3,860 2, 5, ---- ------ Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
29 Combine 37.52 1 5 33,214 10, 13, 16, 0, 25 ---- --- On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
30 Combine 50.38 1 5 37,074 28,29 ---- ----- Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 100 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
159
Hydrograph Summary Report
d. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Volume

(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Maximum
storage
(cult) Hydrograph
description
32 Rational 0.92 1 5 277 1 ---- ------ --- Bldg 600 to level Spreader
33 Combine 2.80 1 6 8,363 16,32 ---- ------ Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
10-032final.gpw Return Period: 100 Year Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 1
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 20.213 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 49.08 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 14,725 cult
Q (cfs)
50.00
•
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
Predev On Site To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Yr
0.00 -v
0.0
Hyd No. 1

0.1
Q (cfs)
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
-1' 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
160
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 2
IB Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.039 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.09 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 28 cult
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
IB Off Site
Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0 00
161
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 2 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 3
IC Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.108 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.26 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 79 cult
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
a
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
IC Off Site
Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Yr
0.0
• Hyd No. 3
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0.1 0.2
Time (hrs)
162
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 4
ID Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.090 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.35 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 105 cuft
Q (cfs)
A
ID Off Site
Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Yr
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
163
U.U 0.1 .
0.2
• Hyd No. 4 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 5
IE Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 5.260 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
IE Off Site
Hyd. No. 5 -- 100 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 3,832 cuft
Q (cfs)
14.00
• 12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00

Peak discharge = 12.77 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1

0.u
• Hyd No. 5
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
0.1 0.2 .
Time (hrs)
164
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 6
1116 Off Site
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.310 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IN Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.75 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 226 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
•
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
I11B Off Site
Hyd. No. 6 -- 100 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
165
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 6 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 7
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.0
Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 1
- Hyd No. 4
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 63.31 cfs
Time interval = i min
Hydrograph Volume = 18,994 cult
0.1
Hyd No. 2
-- -- Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
70.00
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 3 Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 6
166
Total Predev Runoff To Flood Plain
Hyd. No. 7 -- 100 Yr
Hydrograph Plot
167
- nyu. ltlV. O
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.510 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 1.24 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 372 cult
IV Pre Dev Site to Expressway
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 8 -- 100 Yr
2.00
•
1.00
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
0.00 -?" N 0.00
0.0 0.1 0.2
•
Hyd No. 8 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 10
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.053 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.21 cfs
Time inierval = i min
Runoff coeff. = 0.4
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 62 cuft
IF On Site Bypass to Flood Plan Ditch
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 10 -- 100 Yr
0.50
0.45
• 0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
Q (cfs)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0 00
168
0.0 0.1 0.2
• Hyd No. 10 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 11
On Site to Pond 1
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 4.676 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 34.06 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.75
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 10,219 cult
On Site to Pond 1
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 11 -- 100 Yr
35.00
• 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 -'V
0.0
• Hyd No. 11
0.1
o.oe
0.2
Time (hrs)
169
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 12
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4, 11
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 34.68 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 10,403 tuft
Total Post Dev to Pond1
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 12 -- 100 Yr
35.00
• 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.0
0.1
Hyd No. 12 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.2
Hyd No. 11 Time (hrs)
170
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 13
Pond 1 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 12
Reservoir name = POND1
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs
35.00
0 30.00
•
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00 U ` I I I I 1 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0 2.2
Time (hrs)
Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 12
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.85 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 339.13 ft
Max. Storage = 9,010 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 10,394 cuft
171
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 1 - POND1
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cult)
0.00 336.10 10 0 0
0.50 336.60 3,237 812 812
0.90 337.00 3,237 1,295 2
107
1.90 338.00 3,237 ,
3,237 5,344
2.90 339.00 3,237 3,237 8
581
3.90 341.00 3,237 ,
3,237 11,818
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 9.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 339.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 336.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Cirif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00
M I' - 0.00 0.00
U t1-Stage - n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
•
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
1.00
•
0.00
G
Stage / Discharge
2.00
Stage (ft)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
172
.VU r.uv 14.uu 21.00 28.00 35.00 42.00 49.00 56.00 63.00' 70.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. IS
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 3.751 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 26.96 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.74
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 8,088 cult
Q (cfs)
28.00
• 24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
On Site Post Dev to Pond 2
Hyd. No. 15 -- 100 Yr
4.00
0.00 ?
0.0
Hyd No. 15
0.1
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
-y 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
173
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 16
Pond 2 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 15
Reservoir name = POND 2
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
28.00
Pond 2 Routing
Hyd. No. 16 -- 100 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.37 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 333.93 ft
Max. Storage = 7,129 cuft
Hydrograph Volume = 8,086 cuft
• 24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
Q (cfs)
28.00
24.00
20.00
16.00
12.00
8.00
4.00
0.00 L., ` ' ' i i I I L 1 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 2.0
• Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 15 Time (hrs)
174
Pond Deport
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Pond No. 2 - POND 2
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area me thod used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 330.24 10 0 0
0.76 331.00 1,200 460 460
1.76 332.00 2,500 1,850 2,310
2.76 333.00 2,500 2,500 4,810
3.76 334.00 2,500 2,500 7,310
4.76 335.00 2,500 2,500 9,810
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 7.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest EI. (ft) = 334.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 330.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multistage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0 .000 in/hr (Contour) Tai lwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
•
Stage (ft) Stage / Discharge Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
is 1.00
0.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
175
0.00 4.00 8.00 12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00' 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00
Discharge (cfs)
Total Q
Hydrograph Plot 176
Hyd. No. 18
On Site to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 2.615 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
IDF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Hydrograph Volume = 5,334 cuft
Q (cfs)
18.00
015.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 17.78 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.7
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
On Site to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 18 --100 Yr
0.00 "
0.0
• Hyd No. 18

0.1
Q (cfs)
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
-''- 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 19
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 6, 18
Q (cfs)
21.00
• 18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.0
•
Total Post Dev to Pond 3
Hyd. No. 19 -- 100 Yr
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 18.53 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 5,560 cult
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
177
0.1
Hyd No. 19 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 18
HydrograPh Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 20
Pond 3 Routing
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyd. No. = 19
Reservoir name = Pond 3
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.16 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Max. Elevation = 345.87 ft
Max. Storage = 4,437 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
7-1 nn
Pond 3 Routing
Hyd. No. 20 -- 100 Yr
Hydrograph Volume = 5,556 cult

0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5
• Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 19
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3
Time (hrs)
178
Pond Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Pond No. 3 - Pond 3
• Pond Data
Pond storage is based on k nown contour areas. Average end area method used.
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cuft) Total storage (cuff)
0.00 342.00 10 0 0
0.50 342.50 1,225 309 309
1.00 343.00 1,225 613 921
2.00 344.00 1,225 1,225 2,146
3.00 345.00 1,225 1,225 3,371
4.00 346.00 1,225 1,225 4,596
5.00 347.00 1,225 1,225 5,821
Culvert / Orifice Structure s Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 346.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00
Invert El. (ft) = 342.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N-Value = .013 .000 .000 .000
Orif. Coeff. = 0.60 0.00 0.00 0.00
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No Exfiltration = 0.000 in/hr (Contour) Tailwater Elev. = 0.00 ft
•
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control.
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Stage / Discharge
Stage (ft)
5.00
4.00
0.00
4.UU 8.00
Total Q
3.00
2.00
1.00
12.00 16.00 20.00 24.00 28.00 32.00 36.00 40.00 0.00
Discharge (cfs)
179
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 22
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.92 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 277 cuft
Q (cfs)
4 nn
Bldg 900 to Level Spreader
Hyd. No. 22 -- 100 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
0.0 0.1 0.2 .
• Hyd No. 22 Time (hrs)
180
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 23
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 20, 22
181
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 3.52 cfs
T ime interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 5,833 cult
Total Runoff to Level Spreader 3
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 23 -- 100 Yr
4.00
•
3.00
2.00

1.00
0.00
?D V
Q (cfs)
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 23 Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 22 Time
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 25
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 9.201 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 30.39 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.34
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 9,116 cuft
Post Dev Site Bypass to Hood plain
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 25 -- 100 Yr
35.00
• 30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.0
• Hyd No. 25

0.1
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
- V 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
182
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
Hyd. No. 26
IV Post Dev to Exp ressway
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.427 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 1.04 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.25
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 311 cult
Q (cfs)
2.0
r1
u
•
1.00
IV Post Dev to Expressway
Hyd. No. 26 -- 100 Yr
0.00 -jZ
0.0
Hyd No. 26
0.1
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
I' 0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
183
Hydrograph Plot
40 Hyd. No. 28
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 2, 5
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 12.87 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 3,860 cuft
Off Site Post Def to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 28 -- 100 Yr
14.00
• 12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.0
0.1
Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 2 Hyd No. 5
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.2
Time (hrs)
184
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
IS Hyd. No. 29
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 10, 13, 16, 20, 25
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 37.52 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 33,214 cult
On site Post Dev to Flood Plane
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 29 --100 Yr Q (cfs)
40
00
. 40.00
•
30
00
.
d? 30.00
20
00
.
I
t 20.00
10.00
II

d

10.00
i
0.00 .. .? ...... _... ......_._? . m _..w. -,..._n , . ?.__ _ ..... _ 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
Hyd No. 29 Hyd No. 10 Hyd No. 13 Hyd No. 16 Time (hrs)
-- - Hyd No. 20 Hyd No. 25
185
Hydrograph Plot 186
4D Hyd. No. 30
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 28, 29
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 50.38 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 37,074 tuft
Total Post Dev Runoff to Flood Plain
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 30 -- 100 Yr
60.00
050.00-
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
Q (cfs)
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0 00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5
• (hrs)
Hyd No. 30 Hyd No. 28 Hyd No. 29 Time
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 32
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hydrograph type = Rational
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Drainage area = 0.100 ac
Intensity = 9.713 in/hr
OF Curve = Raleigh-new.IDF
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 0.92 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Runoff coeff. = 0.95
Tc by User = 5.00 min
Asc/Rec limb fact = 1/1
Hydrograph Volume = 277 cuft
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Bldg 600 to level Spreader
Hyd. No. 32 -- 100 Yr
Q (cfs)
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0 00
187
0.0 0.1 0.2
is Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Hydrograph Plot
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve
• Hyd. No. 33
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Inflow hyds. = 16, 32
Friday, Jul 22 2011, 10:23 AM
Peak discharge = 2.80 cfs
Time interval = 1 min
Hydrograph Volume = 8,363 tuft
•
•
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 / i I I I I I I-'`"..i.`-? 0.00
0.0 0.2 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.8
Hyd No. 33 Hyd No. 16 Hyd No. 32 Time (hrs)
Total Post Dev to Level Spreader 2
Hyd. No. 33 -- 100 Yr
188