SW6220203_Design Calculations_20220505

Storm Wafer & Erosion Control
Design Colculotions
May 5, 2022
Dollar General Store
NC-211
Raeford, NC
Hoke County
Prepared for:
Rhetson Companies, Inc.
2075 Juniper Lake Road
West End, NC 27376
[phone]
Prepared by:
Bowman North Carolina, Ltd.
4006 Barrett Drive, Suite 104
Raleigh, NC 27609
[phone]
FIRM# F-1445
Bowman

TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW
FIGURES
SOILS SURVEY & SOIL INFORMATION
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
FEMA FIRM MAP
HUG
SURFACE WATER CLASSIFICATIONS
NOAA POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
WATER QUANTITY/QUALITY
DESIGN SUPPLEMENT
DRAINAGE AREA MAPS
CN VALUES
PRE -DEVELOPMENT HYDROGRAPHS
POST -DEVELOPMENT HYDROGRAPHS
TIME VS. VOLUME (STORAGE)
TIME VS. ELEVATION (STAGE)
ELEVATION -VOLUME-FLOW SUMMARY
POND OUTLET/STRUCTURE SUMMARY
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
GRASS CHANNEL
EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS
RIP -RAP APRON
SKIMMER BASIN
ANTI -FLOTATION CALCULATIONS
TEMPORARY DIVERSION DITCH

OVERVIEW
Background
This report contains the
storm water management and erosion control
calculations for the
proposed Dollar General
retail site. The project site is located at
the
southeast corner of
the intersection of NC-211 and Fulford McMillan Rd, Raeford in
Hoke
County and is
undeveloped wooded and open space area, The proposed project
site
consists of 2.84
acres and approximately
2.90 acres will be disturbed as part of
this
project for the
construction of the site
improvements,
The development of the site will result in an impervious area of 42,924sf (0.99ac -
34,69% impervious),
The proposed Dollar General parcel is not located within a FEMA designated flood zone as
shown on FEMA FIRM Panel 3710940400J with an effective date of October 17, 2006.
There are no existing stream or wetland features on the proposed property.
There is a proposed storm water management facility (infiltration basin) on site. The SCM
outlined in this report has been designed for post —development peak attenuation and
water quality. The SCM is designed to capture a drainage area of 2.16 ac with an
impervious area of 1.34 ac, The site grading and storm drainage systems are designed
to convey stormwater runoff from the impervious areas of the site to the infiltration
basin. The site is not located within a coastal county, therefore the design storm for
water quality is a 1.0" storm event.
Erosion Control
Erosion control measures have been designed in accordance with NCDEQ erosion control
standards and regulations to minimize sediment laden runoff from exiting the site. Silt
fence will be installed along the low sides of the site prior to construction. The
construction entrance will be installed prior to construction commencing. A skimmer
basin will be used to treat stormwater runoff prior to leaving the site. Accumulated
sediment within the project site will need to be removed and the pond constructed to
final design conditions prior to final acceptance of the project.
Soils
The County Soils Survey indicates that Candor sand soils are present on the site.
Attached in the Figures section is the geotechnical engineering report which includes site

specific information regarding the site investigation and soil profile. Soil Boring B-12 at
the proposed infiltration basin shows that a SHWT was not observed within loft of the
existing ground surface and the infiltration rate recorded was 11.3 inches per hour.
Site Stabilization
After final grading is completed, permanent vegetation shall be applied in acccrdance
with the seeding requirements and landscape plan for this site.

FIGURES

Hydrologic Soil Group —Hoke County, North Carolina
35` 0' 2T N
3Y 0' 18' N
Map Scale: 1:1,450 rf printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. m
N Meters
l 0 20 40 80 120
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Map projection: Web Mercator Comercoordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
UrSDDAA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/20/2021
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 4
35' Cr 27 N
35° 0' 18' N

0
Z
'W
V
W
J
IL
Q
N - N
OM 0-AD,O
C U N 4)
[6 O O
U m o E
O
C U m
a M —
o. f6 m
Co E c
N E O N Zi
N 0) a)O
.L. O C
a) to
'Q 3
N u d O C
U m L a)w E m (D
> w o o ID
c >
N 0 L
O N
C T C �
N O 0
m
`Q co
C N
o �
(n CDjn E O)
E c
O U C N � N
E 2
[6 N N C f6
W E °
p L
N
Cl)
D
•-O]
N 10
D_
Q
V
Z
U O
(o
O
O C
E
co
E
a)0
0 E
Nw'O
•-.
m
o
N
c E
=
U
O
cO r
-0 •5
Cj
Lo -0 O
O N
U)
n
N C7
c to
N L
ma a) -0 ti
Z
Q
@ 04
Uo
U
3
0
V E y a
0 Q)>
E
U W
c0 (0 O Q)
❑
L N
L
to (6 N
U
U
N
CL L
p N 0
(n
❑
0 C
[0
U
O_
O Q
O
N
O O
`0 o
N
3
(n
IO
m
.- N (o
O E
L a�
>+ - U
L
2 OO
o
N
O
ccoo a E
T
O
(n
2 �'°.� m
o-0
o c
v
n
aEi mD E a
(6
L
a)
(n N N N
.o n 16
"
-0 0
U O
N
(n m O 00 N (0
@
— Z
N m
0
y
a��i
-0 o ro
a
Q O
=
L
m
Z E
L N C
y a o
N N
c
m
N
rn
0 N 0
(0
(0
a1
E
O .� T
C N
c
O- N a
m
N U f0 (0 7
U
Q❑
w �°
0 �0 Co
o
TE
j
�U a�
Y 3
u
E
COa
L C E
O O
E m
O O 0) N
0
O>
Z Q
7 0
a co
�
C
N O
U
N
_N N
O > N O
(o O tyA U
L
.O 7
.O
Z0 O
L O L
4 E
u) > U
2 a-6 Q N
� O
U) U)
U) -
❑ (N
E
H U .- u)
N
m
>
6
0
C
N
6
C
0
U
U)
(6
t
L
0-
-0
c
m
m
N
m
N
o
N
`0
O
O
L
E
m
is
o
�°
d
(o
N
U U
O Z
cn o C
D
t
7
0 ©
e 0
m O
" a
C
O
F
m
o
g
0
0
0
N
O
W
C
O
C
O
O
rn
U)
m
13
g o
d
d
CL
o 0
a `m
0
U
0
o
a
a O 0
m U
IL a
a m
Q
y
m¢
C
m
U
O
Z
p) Q m
C
U O Z
0 Q m
C
®.®®
It
■/ `i
7/
a
ElO
y.
y 4 i
4
N
Q
N

Hydrologic Soil Group —Hoke County, North Carolina
Hydrologic Soil Group
Map unit symbol
AuA
CaB
Map unit name
Autryville loamy sand, 0 A
to 2 percent slopes
Candor sand, 1 to 8 A
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest
Description
Rating Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
0.2 4.7%
4.9 95.3%
5.1 1 100.0%
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive
precipitation from long -duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively
drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water
transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well
drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.
These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of
water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay
layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious
material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in
their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/20/2021
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4

Hydrologic Soil Group —Hoke County, North Carolina
Component Percent Cutoff., None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Higher
LISDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 12/20/2021
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4

Uq
Lf)
Lf7
Q
M
Ln

en m
LWi
m x
f>0 9
H Y P E
N N
v >
c
m W
o 0
O Q
W
O�
LL p N
a N p x
N
U U
9 LL
C m
N O
ei ° v N N
2
O
VIm w
mQ O T
m m«
O
: p N z O
C O S N LL
y
m
ULL
.3
o Q m A
a
N u ti 3
N
L vpi
Nei N N
i N> d
3 3 ae
C; -0 `m
U. = a -j a
Wow
oa
W
OJ Q
Qa
W N
a
Q O
a�
w Q
Ir O
w p
t/l 2
U-
O
m
v
°o
In
c N c°
o o N E v
'n
O
c
2 a N.
N-0
N
O
o
N
c
o o
0
C m
f> o m
m
m
'�
Emp��
W
�LL-0....m
-o
LL N
E
r LL
3 w ii > >
m Z
a
y a �`
N n �n
m n E ai
i E c
m 2
Y
N
°
N y N N O
C W v m
d
N c li
N '� U
> Y
Q
O y`
C.
v U a
m y W
v v O c E
v v O y
d N E v c
° m U>
C O
J
v
C
U Y
O 2 m -O C
in °
m V1 Q
O 0
m
v
On
° a
C v LL
N
>> d N m v
E E
E E 0
N�
o>
o
- o
c
y o o
'�° LL o `-'
F= m E
m° to0.
;°
- .m
a
n
d N
v
16 m$
w •3
°> > o
d
v
o a m aT'i m
w
>
o m m °°'E L
m v
O
E
TA°
a�v
ci
°aEog�
a
Q W
Q
L N
U J
O m
U 3 U OO J
o
O T
U d 2
n_u O
O z
c
O
N
r
_
W n
c-'iam ��
i
E
-a' Mo '- N
N
t�- N N
LL
�I
m m o
Z
' -
m e 3
Nnpv
=�om�
�m -a�N
1
nm Nv
rcz o m
m0a �v n
Q
Qw
ww
W
ovmm
U p E m
m>�cLLa
L ._ z O
Epmcmn
"O V N v
W
2 d'
2 2
-
TU
m
NE
�O •
NE
Q
U
O
umO
EW
nOVmi
nC
ac
yz
W
wL
L N
EV d
!nil
b11 2 T10
Q
LOmO
L
L
L N c
O
N
O O
u- O
10
N
O
O
Lq
O
O
O
O
O
O
LO
N

x
01
9
a
0
Ln
o
r�
a
E
3
o
m
Q
m
00
v
a
E
di
E
Z
a
-8
V
Eu
0
E
ra
Z
Ep
$
V
a
E
'50
b
°
a
E
$
'o
ho
a
p

0
2
2
�
k
%
5
d
§
2
f
SE
2
'
t
€
f
■
\
/
ƒ /
\ }
2
j
/
�
/■
Q
k
k
k ©
6
§
\
\
/
/,.. 2
F
k
k\
k/
k}
G
tA
j!E
s�
� I
j P-
I
«
ƒ
e
+
9
/
F

1/6/22, 1:37 PM Precipitation Frequency Data Server
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3
. Location name: Raeford, North Carolina, USA*
Latitude: 35.0071, Longitude:-79.3065*
Elevation: 379.6 ft**
` source: ESRI Maps + R
" source: USGS
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
G.M. Bonnin, D. Martin, B. Lin, T. Parzybok, M.Yekta, and D. Riley
NOAA, National Weather Service, Silver Spring, Maryland
PF tabular i PF graphical I Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 906/6 confidence intervals (in inches)1
Average
recurrence interval (years)
1
2
5
10
25
50
100
200
500
1000
5-min
t0.398.0 S82)
(0.470-0 569]
(0.54 -0 663)
(0-604--Q 732
(0-671-0 815
(0.7.742 09-0 874)
(0.76.797 3--0 932)
0.80 -0 986
0.850-61005J
(0.886-1.11
t1830]
10-min
0.636-0.769
(0.7528-0 91G
0-H-- 661.08
0.967--16.17
1.07
(1.15--21739)
1.21 1548]
(1.2741358j
{1.34-51267
(1.40-51974)
15-min
0,794-0.9c2
(0.94-14.14).
(1,11-21?34)
(1.221548)
(1-3651065]
(1. 5-61176)
0-53 1-IF187
(1.61-81097)
11-69-2.10y
1.759.19)
1.
30-min
251)
1.0921032
1.3141358}
[1.5873
1.77 2515)
{2.01 2?44]
:91
[2$ 2Z6)
2,356287
(2.50 3007)
(2. 903.34)(2.8q
77
60-min
?45}
(1.3641964)
(i.6481a98)
[2.02 2
[2,31 2479.
{2.67 3 25)
t2.96 386[T]
(3.23 3o9il)
(3:51 4 31 }
(3,85 4 79)
(d- 4 5,17
2-hr
1.74
(1.58-1.94]
2.11 .
(1.91-245)
2.65
(2.39-2.95)
3.06
(2-76-3.4 1)
--1-62-71
(3.25-4.03)
4.06
1 (3.63-4.51)
F 4.51
1 (4.00-5.00)
F 4.96
1 (4.37-5.50)
5.58
1(4.87-6.18)
6.06
(5.25-6.73)
3-hr
1.84
1.67- .06
2.02 2350
2,55 3?14
2.96 3a66
3.51-4.37)
(3.96-4.95)
1 (4.415954).
(4.67-5.17)
(5.51 7606)
(fi.01,0177
6-hr 2.19
(1.99 2.44J
2.66
(2.42--2.95)
3.36
(3,04-3,72)
3.92 4, c0
(3.5d 4-34] (4.22-5,19)
[4,76-�,84]
6.02 0 6.73
(5-32-G-62) {5.89-7-39
7.73
(6.686.49)
8.55
[7.30-9.39
2.59
3.131
3.98
4.67 5.64
6.45
7.30 8.22
12-hr
1
9.531
10.6
(2.34-2.88]
IL(2.84-3-49
(3,59-4.42)
(4.20-5.18} 5.03-6.24)
(5.71-7.12}
(6.41-8.05) (7,14-9.[t5)
(8.15-1 0.5}
(8.96-11.7)
3.05
3.69
4.67
F 6.51
7.37
8.25 9.17
10.4
24-hr
11.4
(2,83-3.30)
(3.42-4,00
4.32-5.05]
(5-02-5.89 (5.99-7.04
5.76-7.96}
7.55-&92) 8,36-9,9p
9.46-11.3)
10.3-12.4)
3.54
4.27
5.37
6.23 7.42
8.37
9.35 10.4
11.8
12.9
2-day
(3.30-3.81)
(3-98A.60) J1
(4.99-5.78)
L(5.78-6.71] (6.8g-7.98]
(7.71-9.00
8.59-10.1) (9.48-11.2]
(10.7-1 2.7
(11.7-13.9)
3.76
4.53
5.65
6.54 7.77
8.75
9.76 10.8
12.2
13.4
3-da y
(3.51-4.03] J1
(4.23A.86
(5.27-6,08)
1 (6,09-7.01) 1 (7.20-8.32)
1 (8.08-9.37)
(8.99-10.5) 1 (9.91-11.6)
1 {11.2-13.1}
(12.1-14.4)
4-day
3.72 4 25
[4. 87811
5. 5 6434
6: 0--2 31 ] 11 U.554,66)6.
5 9.73
(9,39 D.B)
1116-13:6
(1216-14.8
4.61
F 6.76
7.75 9.11F
10.2
11.3 12.5
14.0
F7-day]F
15.3
(4.314.93)
(6.32-7.23)
1 (-9.46-10.9
10.5-12.1 11.5-13.3J
(12.9-15.0)
(14.D-1&4)
5.28
6.30
7.61
8.63 10.0
11.1
12.2 13.3
14.8
16.0
Q10-da
(4.98-5.62)
(5.93-6.70J
[7.1fi-8:06]
(8.11-9.t7) (9.39-10,6)
(10.4-11,8]
(11.4 13 0]1 (12.4-14.2)
(13.7-15 81
(14.8-17.1)
20-day
7
6.7.1 53
(7.95 8192
9 43.00.6
1p.6 1? .9] 12123.7
13.3- 5.1
1415-16.5] (15 7-1 91
(1713-ti4.9
(18 6021.4
8.83
10.4
12.2
13.5 15.3
16.7
18.0 19.4
21.2
22.6
30-day
(8,35.9.34)
9.85-11.t}}
(T1.5-12.9].
(12.8-14.3] (14.4-16.2]
(15.7-17.6)
(16 9-19 1) (18.2-20.5)
r
(19.8-22.a}
n
(21.0-24.0)
11.2
13.1
15.1
16.6 18.5
20.0
21.4 22.8
24.7
45-day
26.1
(10.6-11,8) jj
112.4-13.8]
14.3-15.9 .
1 (15.7-17.5) 17.5-19-5
(18.8-21A)
1 (20.2-22.6) (21.5-24.2.)
(23.1-26.2)
(24.4-27.7)
19.5 21.6
23.2
24.7 26.3
28.2
29.7
60-day=[(�F--17-8
16.9-18.7
18.5-20.5 20.5-22.7
f21.9-24.4]
{23.4-2G.iJ (24 7-27.7]
[26.5.29.8)
(27.B-31.4
Precipitation frequency (PF)
estimates in
this table are
based on frequency analysis of
partial duration
series (PDS)
Numbers in parenthesis are
PF estimates
at lower and upper
bounds of the 90 % confidence
interval. The
probability that precplatipn
frequency estimates
(for
a given duration and average
recurrence interval)
will be
greater than the upper bound
(or less than the
lower bound) is 5%. Esllrnates
at upper bounds
are
not checked against probable
maximum precipitation
(PMP)
estimates and may be higher
than currently
valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas
14 document for
more information.
pack to Tap
PF graphical
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.0070&lon=-79.3065&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 1/4

Irerracon
de"o R e p o—r t-
Engineering Report
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC
Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
October 25, 2021
Terracon Project No. 70215215
Prepared for:
Rhetson Companies Inc.
West End, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Raleigh, North Carolina

October 25, 2021
Rhetson Companies Inc.
2075 Juniper Lake Road
West End, North Carolina 27376
Attn: Mr. Alan Cagel
P: [phone]
E: [e-mail]
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC
Aberdeen Road and Fulford McMillan Road
Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 70215215
Dear Mr. Cagel:
Irerracon
We have completed Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This
study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Proposal No. DG2100105/P70215215
dated August 30, 2021. This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides
geotechnical recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of
foundations and floor slabs for the proposed store.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Seth A. Bowman
Staff Engineer
Geotechnical Services
,`��•SNl GARQ4��if��
. •Essig y`
•a SEAL
03D
�Q*
Andrew A. Nash, PE
Department Manager
Registered NC 031022
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2401 Brentwood Rd, Suite 107 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
P [phone] F [phone] terracon.com North Carolina Registered F-0869

REPORT TOPICS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1
SITE CONDITIONS.........................................................................................................1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................2
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION...................................................................... 2
GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW....................................................................................... 3
EARTHWORK................................................................................................................. 4
SHALLOWFOUNDATIONS........................................................................................... 8
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS........................................................................................ 9
LIQUEFACTION............................................................................................................. 9
FLOORSLABS............................................................................................................... 9
PAVEMENTS................................................................................................................
10
GENERALCOMMENTS...............................................................................................
12
FIGURES..... :................................................................................................................
14
Note: This report was originally delivered in a web -based format. Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced
section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperlinks which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the
GeoReport logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at
client.terracon. com .
ATTACHMENTS
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS
EXPLORATION RESULTS
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Note: Refer to each individual Attachment for a listing of contents
Responsive ■ Resourceful Reliable

Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerracon
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC to Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
October 25, 2021 ■ Terracon Project No. 70215215 GevReport
REPORT SUMMARY
Topic Overview Statement
rL
Project A new, approximate 10,720-square foot single -story Dollar General Store with paved
Description heavy-duty drives and parking areas is proposed. A stormwater management area
is proposed between the driveway and building.
Geotechnical
Characterization
and Overview
Earthwork
The borings encountered very loose to medium dense sand in the upper 5 to 8 feet
underlain by denser sand and very stiff clay. Groundwater is anticipated at a depth
of 8 feet below the existing ground surface.
After stripping and priorto placing fill, the exposed subgrade soils in the Iuilding and
pavement footprints should be compacted/densified in place using a medium weight
static roller.
Shallow Allowable bearing pressure = 2,000 ps#
Foundations Expected settlements: < 1-inch total, <'/2-inch differential
With subgrade prepared as noted in Earthwork.
Concrete:
■ 5 inches Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) in Light Duty areas
Pavements a 7 inches PCC in Medium, Duty areas and those exhibiting heavy traffic
Asphalt:
■ 3 inches Asphaltic Concrete (AC) over 6 inches granular base in Light Duty
areas
■ 4 inches AC over 8 inches granular base in Medium Duty areas
General This section contains important information about the limitations of this geotechnical
Comments I engineering report.
1. If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics above can be used to access the appropriate section
of the report by simply clicking on the topic itself.
2. This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design
purposes.
Responsive Resourceful Reliable

Geotechnicar Engineering Report
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC
Aberdeen Road and Fulford McMillan Road
Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 70215215
October 25, 2021
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering
services performed for the proposed store to be located off Aberdeen Road and Fulford McMillan
Road, in Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina. The purpose of these services is to provide
information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:
Subsurface soil conditions
■ Groundwater conditions
■ Site preparation and earthwork
■ Excavation considerations
■ Foundation design and construction
• Floor slab design and construction
10 Seismic site classification per IBC
Pavement design and construction
The geotechnical engineering Scope of Services for this project included the advancement of 12
soil borings to depths of 10 feet to 20 feet below existing site grades.
Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration
Plans sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil samples
obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs and as separate
graphs in the Exploration Results section.
SITE CONDITIONS
The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the
field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.
Item ' Description - _ _ .�_ �._ '_ ►
The project is located at 4451 Currituck Highway in Raeford, Hoke County,
Location North Carolina
See Site Location and Exploration Plans
Site Coordinates Approximately 36.3583°N, 75.9611 °W
Existing
An existing house.
Improvements
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 1

Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC ■ Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
October 25, 2021 v Terracon Project No. 70215215
Item
1 rerracan
GeoReport
Description
Current Ground
Cover Grassed area around the existing house and sparse trees.
Existing Topography
Geology
Relatively level
The subject site is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. The
Coastal Plain soils consist mainly of marine sediments that were deposited
during successive periods of fluctuating sea level and moving shoreline. The
soils include sands, silts, and clays with irregular deposits of shells, which are
typical of those lain down in a shallow sloping sea bottom. Recent alluvial
sands, silts, and clays are typically present near rivers and creeks.
According to USGS Mineral Resources On -Line Spatial Data based on the
1998 digital equivalent of the 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina updated
in 1998, the site is mapped within Surficial Deposits, Undivided (Quaternary).
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed during
project planning. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated, and our
final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:
Item
A new, approximate 10,720-square foot single -story Dollar General Store
Proposed Structure
with paved heavy-duty drives and parking areas is proposed. A stormwater
management area is proposed between the driveway and building.
It is assumed that the building will be a steel frame construction supported
Building Construction
on a monolithic shallow foundation and concrete slab -on -grade. Metal
panes and a brick veneer are anticipated for exterior walls.
Finished Floor Elevation
Unknown, no grading plan was provided. We have assumed the finished
floor elevation to be up to 2 feet above existing grades.
Columns: 20 to 50 kips (assumed)
Maximum Loads
Walls: Up to 3 kips/linear foot (assumed)
Floor Slab: 100 psf (assumed)
Grading
Up to 2 feet of cut and fill (assumed).
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION
We have developed a general characterization of the subsurface conditions based upon our
review of the subsurface exploration, laboratory data, geologic setting and our understanding of
the project. This characterization, termed GeoModel, forms the basis of our geotechnical
calculations and evaluation of site preparation and foundation options. Conditions encountered at
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 2

Geotechnical Engineering Report lrerracvn
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC ■ Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
October 25, 2021 R Terracon Project No. 70215215 Geol4eport
each exploration point are indicated on the individual logs. Laboratory tests for moisture content,
Atterberg limits, and grain size were conducted on selected soil samples. The individual logs and
test results can be found in the Exploration Results section. The GeoModel can be found in the
Figures section of this report.
As part of our analyses, we identified the following model layers within the subsurface profile. For
a more detailed view of the model layer depths at each boring location, refer to the GeoModel.
Model Layer _ layer Name �_ _ _Gener l escription
1 Looser Sand Very loose to medium dense sand
2 Denser Sand Medium dense to dense sand
3 Clay Very stiff to hard clay
Groundwater
Groundwater was measured between 8 and 12 feet in the borings during our field exploration. Mud
rotary drilling techniques that were for drilling can obscure the groundwater readings due to the
drilling fluid used. Based on measured water depths after drilling and moisture condition of the
soil samples, groundwater is anticipated at a depth of 8 feet below the existing ground surface.
The groundwater level can change due to seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff,
lower permeability of the soil, and other factors not evident at the time the borings were performed.
The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the
design and construction plans for the project.
Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) and Infiltration
SHWT determination and infiltration testing was requested in the proposed stormwater pond. The
depth to the seasonal high water table (SHWT) at the requested locations will be determined by
examining the chroma value of the existing soils. The determination and testing will be completed
and provided at a later date.
GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW
The borings encountered very loose to medium dense sand in the upper 5 to 8 feet underlain by
denser sand and very stiff clay. After stripping topsoil, the proposed building and parking lot
footprints should be densified in place using a medium weight vibratory roller. The purpose of the
rolling is to densify the loose, near surface soils and potentially improve floor slab and foundation
support.
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 3

November 4, 2021
Rhetson Companies Inc.
2075 Juniper Lake Road
West End, North Carolina 27376
Attn: Mr. Alan Cagel
P: [phone]
E: [e-mail]
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Addendum 1
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC
Aberdeen Road and Fulford McMillan Road
Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
Terracon Project No. 70215215
Dear Mr. Cagel:
Irerracon
We have completed Geotechnical Engineering services for the above referenced project. This
study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Proposal No. DG2100105/P70215215
dated August 30, 2021. This report addendum of our Geotechnical Report dated October 25, 2021
presents the results of the Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT) and infiltration testing in the
proposed stormwater pond.
STORMWATER DESIGN
Subsurface information at the site was obtained during our field explorations on October 11, 2021.
The depth to the seasonal high water table (SHWT) at the requested locations was determined
by examining the chroma value of the existing soils. The infiltration rate was determined utilizing
a soil permeameter. The SHWT at the locations requested was not observed within 10 feet below
the existing ground surface and the infiltration rate recorded at the site was 11.3 inches per hour.
See attached Soil Evaluation for Stormwater Design report for SHWT information.
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2401 Brentwood Rd, Suite 107 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
P [phone] F [phone] terracon.com North Carolina Registered F-0869

Geotechnical Engineering Report Addendum 1 Irerracon
Proposed Dollar General — Raeford, NC a Raeford, Hoke County, North Carolina
November4, 2021 s Terracon Project No. 70215215 Ge�Report
CLOSURE
We. appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
conceming this report or if we may be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Seth A. Bowman
Staff Engineer
Geotechnical Services
Attachments: Soil Evaluation for Stormwater Design
�-i
Andrew A. Nash, PE
Department Manager
Registered NC 031022
Responsive Resourceful Reliable 2

4
V ti
A
oak
RD41 .01
-%
-.-I- . --. —.� .- I 'A —
f " .. :� 9, �
e N-10.' .7 lao
o 1pq
, .. .. * 's I
4
M,
A
jo w 0 jjjjjillll�
0A 111111's 610 2.1
b
P64%1;i
000
a
4FAO 40 W, sigIA 0 PO 60 IN
09610- 1 imo gWr
4% 1p it
Ap
c9, 2021 lwricrosPofrCorporation 19; 2021, —romTcm Z Va-4cej imaging

w
0
z
0
J
Q
0
w
BORING LOG NO. B-12
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Proposed Dollar General - Raeford
CLIENT: Rhetson Companies Inc
West End, NC
SITE: Aberdeen Rd and Fulford McMillan Rd
Raeford, NC
w
cD
LOCATION See Explon Plan)
Z
wo
Lu
a
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
w
o
v
Latitude: 35.0063- Longitude:-79.3062'
LL
_
Q
w
� J
o
w z
z
LL
w
a
w
of w w
a
w
Z
LL-PL-PI
U
m
ip
<
LLa
DEPTH
a
y'
0.4 TOPSOIL, 5 inches
SILTY SAND ISM), light brown, very loose
1-1-2
N=3
1-2-1
N=3
5
5.5
CLAYEY SAND (SC), brown and red, medium dense to dense
3-7-17
N=24
2
12-15-17
N=32
'
10.0
1
Boring Terminated at 10 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In, -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type' Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exi loration and Testing Procedures for a
Notes:
2 1/4" HSA
description of field and laboralory procedures used
and additional data (If any).
See Supporting Information for explanation of
symbols and abbreviations.
Abandonment Method:
Boring backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
Irerracon
Boring Started: 10-11-2021
Boring Completed: 10-11-2021
No free water observed
Drill Rig: D50
Driller: JT
2401 Brentwood Rd Ste 107
Raleigh, NC
Project No.: 70215215
ffi Cave in depth

tz
o c
d
'O a �o� o'o I %, l�soor�morn
0 J Y-0 T" CV M N O M
N
{O
C)0 co t•- In V- M In
co o 0 0 o- o
V-
�
O N st M N
IT
m
� G
00 _
il-
tLL a L I;,-I�
L_
C
to
_ C,N O o w
_ N O O O Y C O O C-)
coOr
U.
r
:a II
v
r
O N
c N ao m N ti ti t`
� R � L� O O P �� 0 0 0 .00000
LL Q U A r 0 0 +� O r r r r
p 0 M o o 6 > E o 0 0 0 0 0
00
s-
Y C N mLL
m
c
E w a
C U ,�� m a c
O a me-
t G
= rn cU E m Qxa Ep
a
ZG m ._ E _0
C O Cf = c 0
p a
C Cco
m m C Q] y U 2 0 0 0 O O
O
O
CD
C C N co �
1'rz
IR
�
U- H (n m m e. N- V- V.: e-
t+
e-
p
a _ I., co ill
O
O .. to
_
°" o E� a cO p�a�O�Otocv
V `� Lp N
E
p
d � r a `� o coo
N
C II E,c Z7
E U E m s c to 19 op C) N coO
M
C
Q
ems- to m U t'a
V V E
E3 a Z I v N
o'o
c*'i
c
ON
w�+ �"
oiod
LL' N
O
10
G S[
=
01
r N U N
a -
II C C O�
O Z�_ m IO O O P tt N
It
ti
W
7
"U
O = Q .c O O rn o y 'v L c tF e} e! c'Y CV r=
O
Qj
it
Q
W
(qLo aD E E_m v�E CV) ��MMM
r
E
m v Q E z M M M
M
M
Q
(O c C ❑ E
to ~ = W j O p 0 0 0 0
O
O
♦+
a N� M "p U 72 O O O O
O
O
v
= ` No M n
•�
m R N N N N �' m y
❑
•pd Q N N N N
N
N
=
u�i
ID ll
a> Q [) li :T m m c_ w
�0 mU
c
0
c.Swr`.o
U
a
N
v❑-t M N �+ X 3
�••,U°°' °m�om
ti000U.5
~CC
NcC
rn
0
GL_ LL L_ LL p
a.or�
UU o�
0
'=
O O LD.❑ mm m ca N
D=
oc
O N L N Q
co
v+
.i
w; M
G 5 m ,5a
to
>-
U
L. O Q c N p
0
IM Ua2FF-c o
Q�
W
w
c
Z
hi E a E ma E
! G O N X f0 O co �
o
a
¢
qt
LmGcncmm =w.� .- �'� P3
(h
01,1A
r

WATER QUALITY/QUANTITY

SUPPLEMENT-EZ COVER PAGE
L FORMS LOADED
PROJECT INFORMATION
1 Project Name Dollar General - Raeford Hoke County)
2 Project Area (ac) 2.84
3 Coastal Wetland Area (ac �^
4 Surface Water Area (ac
5 Is this project High or Low Densi ? High
6 Does this project use an off -site SCM? No
OMPLIANCE WITH 02H .1003(4
7 1 Width of vegetated setbacks provided (feet)
8 lWill the vegetated setback remain vegetated? NIA
9 If BUA is proposed in the setback, does it meet NCAC 02H.1003(4)(c-d)? No
10 Is streambank stabilization proposed on this project? No
NUMBER AND TYPE OF SCMs:
11
Infiltration System _
Bioretention Cell
1
12
0
0
0
13
Wet Pond
14
Stormwater Wetland
15
Permeable Pavement
0
16
Sand Filter
0
17
18
Rainwater Harvesting (RWH)
0
0
Green Roof
19
Level Spreader -Filter Strip (LS-FS)
0
20
Disconnected Impervious Surface (DIS)
0
21
Treatment Swale
0
22
Dry Pond
_ 0
0
23
StormFilter
24
Silva Cell
0
25
�Filterra
Bayfilter
0
26
0
FORMS LOADED
27
INameand Title:
Matt Lowder PE
28
_
Or anization:
Bowman North Carolina Ltd.
29
Street address:
4006 Barrett Dr Suite 104
30
Ci , State Zip:
Phone number(s): _ _
Email:
Raleigh, NC 27609
31
919-553-6570
32
mlowder(a)bowman.com
Certification Statement:
I certify, under penalty of law that this Supplement-FZ form and all supporting information were prepared under my direction or supervision: that the
information provided in the form is, to the best of my knovdedge and belief, true, accurate, and complete-, and that the engineering plans, specifications,
operation and maintenance agreements and other supporting information are consistent with the information provided here.
k SEAL � -
r
r u Cf�
f till
W'vw.�
Signature k Designer
Date
5/512Z

DRAINAGE AREAS
1
Is this a hi h density project?
Yes
2
If so number of drainage areas/SCMs
1
3
Does this project have low density areas?
No
4
If so number of IrnN dens draina a-azeas
D
5
Is all/part of this project subject to previous rule
versions?
No
FORMS LOADED
DRAINAGE AREA INFORMATION
Entire Site
1
4
-fype of SCM
Infiltration Basin
5
Total drainage area (sq ft
142297
93972
6
Onsite drainage area (sq ft)
123745
75420
18552
7
Offsite drainage area R
18552
8
Total BUA in project (sq ft
58416 sf
56211 sf
9
New BUA on subdivided lots (subject to permitting)
(sq ft
10_permitting)
New BUA not on subdivided lots (subject to
is
11
Offsite BUA (sq 11)
15492 sf
15492 sf
12
Breakdown of new BUA not on subdivided lots:
Parkin (sq ft)
29892 sf
29892 sf
Side 31k (sq ft
2392 sf
2187 sf
Roof (sq ft
10640 sf
10640 sf
Road" s ft
Future (so ft
Other, please specify in the comment box below
(sq ft)
13
New infiltrating permeable pavement on subdivided
lots (sq ft
14
New infiltrating permeable pavement not on
subdivided lots (sq ft
15permitting)
Existing BUA that will remain (not subject to
(sq It
16
Existing BUA that is already permitted (sq ft)
17
Existing BUA that will be removed (s A)
18
Percent BUA
35%
62%
19
Design storm (inchesL
1.0 in
20
Desi n volume of SCM cu ft
4763 d
21
Caleulation method for design volume
Simple Method
ADDrTtONAI.IN ATiON
22
Please use this space to provide any additional information about the
drainage areas :

INFILTRATION SYSTEM
1
0raln® a area number
1
2
Minimum required treatment volume cu ft)
4 63
GENERAL
MDC FROM 02H .1050
3
Is the SCM sized to treat the SW from all surfaces at build -out?
Yes
4
Is the SCM located away from contaminated soils?
Yes
5
What are the side slopes of the SCM (H:V or enter "Vertical' for
trenches)?
3:1
6
Does the SCM have retaining walls, gabion walls or other engineered
side slopes?
No
7
Are the inlets, outlets, and receiving stream protected from erosion
10 ear storm)?
Yes
8
Is there an overflow or bypass for inflow volume in excess of the
design volume?
as
9
What is the method for clewatering the SCM for maintenance?
Pump (preferred)
10
If applicable, will the SCM be cleaned out after construction?
Yes
11
Does the maintenance access comply with General MDC 8 ?
Yes
12
Does the drainage easement comply with General MDC 9 ?
Yes
13
If the SCM is on a single family lot, does (will?) the plat comply with
General MDC (10)?
NIA
14
Is there an O&M Agreement that complies with General MDC (11)?
Yes
15
Is there an O&M Plan that complies with General MDC 12 ?
Yes
16
Does the SCM follow the devices ecific MDC?
Yes
17
lWas the SCM desiR221by an NC Aoerlsedprofessional?
Yes
WRIar"n SYSTEMzggggg2iftam
18 fIroposed slope of the subgrade surface (%) 0%
19 Are terraces or bafflesprovided? No
20 [Type of pretreatment: Forebay
Soils Data
21
Was the soil investigated in the footprint and at the elevation of the
infiltrations stem?
Yes
22
SHWTelevation (fmso
369.90
23
Depth to SHWT per soils re ort in
121.20
24
Ground elevation at oring in soils report fmsl
380.00
25
Is a detailed hydrogeologic study attached if the separation is
between 1 and 2 feet?
N/A
26
Soil infiltration rate in/hr
5,00
27
Factor of safety (FS) (2 is recommended):
2.00
I Elevations
f 29
1 Bottom elevation fmsl
374.8 ft
30
1 Storage elevation (fmsl
377. ft
31
lBygass elevation fnlsi
380.2 ft
For Basins Only
32 Bottom surface area ffZ 1590 ft
33 1 Storage elevation surface area (ft?) 3385. ft
For Tlenhes Only
34
4 ft
35
Width ft
36
Perforated pipe diameter, if a plicable (inches)
37
Number of laterals
38
Total length of perWated i in
39
Stone type, if applicable
40
Stone porosity
41
Is stone free of fines?
42
Is the the stone wrapped in geotextile fabric?
43
_
Has at least one inspection port beenprovided?
volume of SCM (cu ft) j 4763 cf
46 Please use this space to provide any additional information abot
infiltration system(s):
1e geotechnical report performed on our site recorded a infiltration rate of 11 3
ches per hour. For our design, we Grose to use a more conservate rate of 5 0
ches per hour, fine 26
Infiltration 3 2:02 PM 5/5/2022

vim tlNIdaX ND ldv [,Toci yyy.
�e�0 rc'�`i.ar 731�����Z�Q
NVId 30VNMa I ONIOUID ff �h "• { a g � $ � @@@� s �
All,
Alb ' ;1 sae
Ei��
g .-1 a rfag gillsir
` 6 i` r�EiiAi��� ! 1 q• � r � �r
{'ars saa49�oil
its
■
fit
♦ i � � � { r p
oil
M.
pi � 'P
, �� �� g �- •� j° 9 y°y I We Eg , 3 : ! ' �'' I •, � 4 ` ! �� g` g ' pp � � � � ��� ! i� f �E� ot
�Q� ��iy slsEr 9�s4�6r4 S r s siilrsl:yly rass
1
I �
.r!Milli Iy
'Ills i 1 J"Ia
I
dif
I _
fx
1
e
% ]
�+yR.
C ° ---
""`�"a+�+a unR•
�y

13MOSM aVTWIOa 11 z ! !
Ueulmos
NVId 30VNrvUa S WUVk!'J
fill
t xt .'�r � � 1����g • � ggg� ����i � � � �i� '� Btltl
q ¢ ps
Him
- ! Ylipip 93qq y� i o J€aY:
+ + E 6� �e� i�3ii0 y9 Y
it
if 11
its
j& 3 rg filly
! � r " 9N Ill� � � 17Q A !� !
qq Eg¢g �N�¢ BA 4R��AA3 yA 76 gA
�7s�6As4 s e y s s"�gAs9�yiy sus A a.a
id
i � �•� i r�i J t r
e gg e
a _ Q�AFAlA if 6y� is a�
-� �M
Nm
it
I I
I
� 1
+
AW*-aMNNWAI 2m"

N
[mmk_m T] Tod $
ueujmog r :a•xr 'rY2Iv_d V'JH1tlON Otl033tltl yy ,*
3NHD2IV'i'IOQ
NV'Id 30VNna I ONIC 0
v
j • � 3 isr! � Q y� 3g � ! � � _ �� � %r � a
[ �', • f1• 9 � °�Q�I • r !� i�l4i 1 � Y �1 � i ��r � � �� � E • ' c`g °� �1
4lilt,
r y
�•, _ � ° g $ l�F� 1� g �� 11 �� Y p � r 1% - ,
11
fififi if I Ii a
III
� 44 jj 1
f 3
5
1
,
,
,
,
t
,
,
,
L
I
e
[
[
. IgI
r
_
9 e r s 9 9 r _
, 9
1 � S
A'4FAlIf4L 7f41:Y 4��g
1
I
1

Bowman North Carolina, Ltd.
Curve Number Calculation (CN)
Pre -Developed Conditions (Overall Site)
Drainage Area (acres, 2.59
Existing Soil Groups:
Soil Grouv Map Symbol Soil Description Acres Percent of DA
A CaB Candor sand 2.59 100%
Exist_inq Land Uses:
Land Use Description Existing Soil G►oy Acres Curve # Weighted CN
Open Space - Good A 2.36 50 45,E
Wooded - Thin A 0.23 55 4.9
Cumulative Curve # = 50.4

Bowman North Carolina, Ltd.
Curve Number Calculation (CN)
Post -Developed Conditions (Infiltration Basin)
Drainage Area (acres,Z 2.16
Existing Soil Groups:
Soil Grouo Map Symbol Soil Description Acres Percent of DA
A CaB Candor sand 2.16 100%
Promised Land Uses.'
Land Use Description Existing Soil Group Acres Curve # weighted CN
Open Space - Good A 0.76 50 17.6
Impervious Area - Building/Pavement A 1.34 98 60.8
Wooded - Thin A 0.06 55 1.5
Cumulative Curve # = 79.9

Bowman North Carolina, Ltd.
Curve Number Calculation (CN)
Post -Developed Bypass Conditions (Infiltration Basin)
Drainage Area (acres): 0.43
Existing Soil Groups:
Soil Grotto Map Symbol Soil Description Acres Percent of DA
A WaB Wagram loamy sand 1.02 237%
Proposed Land Uses.
Land Use Description Existing Soil Groin Acres Curve # W6ghted CIV
Open Space - Good A 0.25 50 29.1
Impervious Area - Building/Paveme A 0.01 98 2.3
Wooded - Thin A 0.17 55 21.7
Cumulative Curve # = 53.1

Infiltration Basin Design
Site Information
Sub Area Location:
Drainage To Infiltration Basin #1
Drainage Area (DA) =
2.16 Acres 93972 sf
Impervious Area (IA) =
1.34 Acres 58211 sf
Percent Impervious I =
61.95 %
Required Water Quality Volume
Design Storm = 1 inch
Determine Rv Value = 0.05 + .009 (1) = 0.61 in/in
Water Quality Volume = 0.109 ac-ft
Water Quality Volume = 4,763 cf
Water Quality Volume = 0.608 inches of runoff
NDAA 1-year. 24-hour event = 3.05 inches
Minimum Surface Area
SA =
(12`FS*DV)/(K-T)
Factor of Safety (FS) =
2
Design Volume (DV) =
4763.3 cf
Hydraulic Conductivity of Soil =
5.00 in/hr
Max Dewatering Time =
72 hours
SA =
317.6 sf
Drawdown Time
T =
FS ` (DV-12)/(K*SA)
Factor of Safety (FS) =
2
Design Volume (DV) =
4763.3 cf
Hydraulic Conductivity of Soil =
5.00 in/hr
Surface Area Provided =
1590 sf
Drawdown Time =
14.4 hours

w
O
U
p
U
U w
U
O
cD
c0
T
r7
CT)4
ILO
r j
p
06
N
T
r7
LCS
cD
W
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
(n
S
W
W
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
U
Q
Q
�-
�
O)
LO
a)
cD
Q
rn
cD
O
O
O
O
T
O
O
LL
(�
(n
w
(�
cn
cn
(n
(�
\/ J
cD
00
r-)
00
p
O�
CN
N
00
CD
Q
_
00
N
W
rY
Cn
�
W
w
cn
m
z
w
�
L
Q
Q
w
w
>
r�
w
Q:f
N
T
Q
w
( 1
(n
::D
f
w
I I
O
Q
U
>
I
(n
w
LL-
Q
of
w
Z
w
a-
z
O
z
w
J
w
m
�
u
cn
o
v�
o
w
>
Q
3
w
Q
wF--
w
z
cn
Q
w
o
a_
o
Z
O
m
Qolf
m
cn
F-
CD
X
w
U
z
Of
a-

i
I �
�
I fl r
!I !
I
I II
I II I
I II !
I I! I I
I I r I I
„ ! !
/I II Do I f
II
�
II
�1
---- - - - - - -
of<
Q w J o N 1
� a
cn o = d
QOf
w z d
Of o
1
1
1
J Z �
L LIJ cc)
aw
LL) Ui
�ww
W
j
w
w
w
O Z
Q
V)
��
a
a
U g
w
w0
w
z u
nx
W
v �
rl
V
O

CW7
Q
O LL
N V
0
M
^
M^
Ln
W
CSW
H
N
�
C"
�
�
N
O
w`�-
J
�
W LLIM CD
O
ah
n
t00
LLJU
M
N
oMD
r4
u^9
O
— N
W
QOf
Q
O
M
08
pp
ILA
9
L—r,
^
N
M
to
to
Op
C
H
U
CO
L
tL
z
OR
O
O
O
O
O
O
P�
�
W
r�
n
n
n
r-
a$
M
8
M
V J
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
CT
CD
CD
CD
cV
M7
�
ll7
LA
H
N
p
W
d
O
JW
LLI W
L.LLNLLOLLNL
p Z
U U U U
N �
to
N OO 00 q*
O O
O- O n
dU
OCOcV
W
O
J
pLNa Z
L�L LNL LL LOL
UUUU
O M O
O O
CO
p
W p
O p
J CL
WW
fn Cn N N fn
�
WCx7
p
UUUUU
NN �
W W W
~a
(n
0000`a
CO
CO
QM at
U
Q
�
O O O O
O C C C
a
Z
cc 00 c0 �
p
O
-O)P7M
N O r
W
a
-
O
CD
J
WL
Ni N
p
p U
LNL LNi LNL
U U U LL-U U
J
O U
Z_
Cf) coo'
N C10 q* _ N
ocCo�°OO
Z
t
m CVnr)
O� COIN
Z
o
LLJ
U)
o
�p Z
LLI ZQ
LNLLNLLN
UUUU
rC
Op
O
W ��O
I
d
ON000
W
W
O�
v4U-)
COCVco
W
U
O 7-
Cl co
P d
w
_N
M
Q O
�N I
LLJ O
N�
O O
�~
Q
LLJ
Z
�= .-"Lri
a-=¢
2
z 5
z
cn
¢away
�
ZZz�`'
M
z¢
a::-CCI�
w
w
cc
LLJ
M
NW
W6N
WZ w w
wV
�O
W0
oNU
o
U
QLLI
m
c) Ln
aC9ZU
m Z
�
W W WO LLI
C, O_ p
WOO
C� Z W
ck:: U)(/)�
O Q
O
LLI
Z�jO
N�LQ�II
W W W LLI
> W KR�
O=
OZ�N¢
O= LLL.O
w O m
WLa��ail
O r r rOO
=fn(n2d
a MCnOH
OUF
-:-C14

ilk
2
I
wpp
B
32
• ���
5��
_fit
d310 Al < • LIS

Pond Report s
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk0 Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 ! 2022
Pond No. 1 - BMP Pond
Pond Data
Contours -User-defined contour areas.
Average end area method
used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 374.80 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft)
Contour area (sgft)
Incr. Storage (cuft)
Total storage (cuft)
0.00 374.80
1,590
0
0
0.20 375.00
1,745
334
334
1.20 376.00
2,535
2,140
2,474
2.20 377.00
3,385
2,960
5,434
3.20 378.00
4,290
3,838
9,271
4.20 379.00
5,250
4,770
14,041
5.20 380.00
6,270
5,760
19,801
5.90 380.70
7,015
4,650
24,451
Culvert / Orifice Structures
Weir Structures
[A]
[B]
[C]
[PrfRsr]
[A]
[B]
[C]
[D]
Rise (in)
Inactive
Inactive
Inactive
Inactive
Crest Len (ft)
= 10.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Span (in)
= 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Crest El. (ft)
= 380.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
No. Barrels
= 0
0
1
0
Weir Coeff.
= 2.60
3.33
3.33
3.33
Invert El. (ft)
= 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Weir Type
= Broad
-
Length (ft)
= 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Multi -Stage
= No
No
No
No
Slope (%)
= 0.00
0.00
0.00
n/a
N-Value
= .013
.013
.013
n/a
Orifice Coeff.
= 0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
Exfil.(in/hr)
= 5.000 (by
Contour)
Stage (ft)
6.00
5.00
4.00
moil]
2.00
91
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s)
Stage / Discharge
Elev (ft)
380.80
379.80
378.80
377.80
376.80
375.80
0.00 r ' ' ' I 'I i' 374.80
0.00 100 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 11.00
Total Q Discharge (cfs)

Hydrograph Summary Rep o r�ydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cult)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
SCS Runoff
0.041
2
754
1,007
--
--
--
SCM Pre -Developed
2
SCS Runoff
4.698
2
718
9,418
---
-----
SCM Post -Developed
3
Reservoir
0.000
2
684
0
2
376.53
4,034
Post Through SCM
4
SCS Runoff
0.020
2
730
262
- --
—
-----
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
6
SCS Runoff
0.062
2
154
602
1.0 Post -Developed to SCM
7
Reservoir
0.000
2
216
0
6
374.85
779
1.OinPost Through SCM
Infiltration.gpw
Return Period: 1 Year
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022

2
Hydrograph
Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 31DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 1
SCM Pre -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Peak discharge
= 0.041 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 754 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,007 cuft
Drainage area
= 2.590 ac
Curve number
= 50.4
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Tc method
= User
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 18.90 min
Total precip.
- 3.05 in
Distribution
= Type II
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Shape factor
= 484
SCM Pre -Developed
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 1 -- 1 Year
0.10 - 0.10
0.09 — 0.09
I
I
0.08 - 0.08
0.07 - 0.07
0.06 - - 0.06
0.05 0.05
0.04 I 0.04
� r
0.03 0.03
0.02 - - 0.02
i
0.01 - ` 0.01
I
I
0.00 7L- 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 1 Time (min)

Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D@ by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 2
SCM Post -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Peak discharge
= 4.698 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 718 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 9,418 cuft
Drainage area
= 2.160 ac
Curve number
= 79.9
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Tc method
= User
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 5.00 min
Total precip.
= 3.05 in
Distribution
= Type II
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Shape factor
= 484
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
WO
1.00
SCM Post -Developed
Hyd. No. 2 -- 1 Year
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 2 Time (min)

4
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutodeskO Civil 3D@ by Autodesk, Inc v2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Through SCM
Hydrograph type = Reservoir
Storm frequency = 1 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - SCM Post -Developed
Reservoir name = BMP Pond
Storage Indication method used Exfiltration extracted from Outflow.
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
M
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Max. Elevation
Max. Storage
Post Through SCM
Hyd. No. 3 -- 1 Year
120 240 360 480 600
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 0.000 cfs
= 684 min
= 0 cuft
= 376.53 ft
= 4,034 cuft
Q (cfs)
5.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440
[� Total storage used = 4,034 cuft Time (min)

Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 4
SCM Post -Developed
Bypass
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 0.430 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 3.05 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Q (cfs
0.10 - 0.10
0.09 — 0.09
0.08 - 0.08
0.07 — 0.07
0.06 0.06
0.05 0.05
0.04 - — - 0.04
0.03 0.03
0.02 ; 0.02
0.01 - 0.01
0.00 --� - i- 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 4 Time (min)
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Peak discharge
= 0.020 cfs
Time to peak
= 730 min
Hyd. volume
= 262 cuft
Curve number
= 53.1
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 10.00 min
Distribution
= Type II
Shape factor
= 484
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
Hyd. No. 4 -- 1 Year

7
Hydrograph
Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 6
1.0 Post -Developed
to SCM
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Peak discharge
= 0.062 cfs
Storm frequency
= 1 yrs
Time to peak
= 154 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 602 cuft
Drainage area
= 2.160 ac
Curve number
= 79.9
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Tc method
= User
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 5.00 min
Total precip.
= 1.00 in
Distribution
= SCS 6-Hr
Storm duration
= 6.00 hrs
Shape factor
= 484
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 Post -Developed to SCM
Hyd. No. 6 -- 1 Year
60 120 180 240 300 360
- Hyd No. 6
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
420
Time (min)

Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 7
1.0inPost Through SCM
Hydrograph type =
Reservoir
Peak discharge
Storm frequency =
1 yrs
Time to peak
Time interval =
2 min
Hyd. volume
Inflow hyd. No. =
6 - 1.0 Post -Developed to SCVhx. Elevation
Reservoir name =
BMP Pond
Max. Storage
Storage Indication method used. EAltration extracted from Outflow.
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
8
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 0.000 cfs
= 216 min
= 0 cult
= 374.85 ft
= 78 cuft
Q (cfs)
0.10
0.09
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.00
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Hyd No. 7 Hyd No. 6 ® Total storage used = 78 cult Time (min)
1.0inPost Through SCM
Hyd. No. 7 -- 1 Year

10
Hydrograph Summary Repo rlydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cuft)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
---
Hydrograph
Description
SCM Pre -Developed
1
SCS Runoff
0.242
2
732
2,406
------
-
2
SCS Runoff
6.484
2
716
13,092
-------
---
—
SCM Post -Developed
3
Reservoir
0.000
2
672
0
2
377.15
6,002
Post Through SCM
4
SCS Runoff
0.106
2
724
553
---
--
------
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
6
SCS Runoff
0.000
2
n/a
0
------
-
--
1.0 Post -Developed to SCM
7
Reservoir
0.000
2
n/a
0
6
374.80
0.000
1.0inPost Through SCM
Infiltration.gpw
Return Period: 2 Year
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022

11
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutodeskO Civil 31DO by Autodesk, Inc v2022
Hyd. No. 1
SCM Pre -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 2.590 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 3.69 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Peak discharge
= 0.242 cfs
Time to peak
= 732 min
Hyd. volume
= 2,406 cuft
Curve number
= 50.4
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 18.90 min
Distribution
= Type II
Shape factor
= 484
SCM Pre -Developed
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Year Q (cfs)
0.50 0.50
0.45 ---- 0.45
0.40 - 0.40
I
0.35 - — I — 0.35
0.30 0.30
0.25 0.25
0.20 - f 0.20
0.15 . 0.15
I
0.10 - I 0.10
0.05 k - - 0.05
0.00 - - — - - 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 1 Time (min)

12
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 2
SCM Post -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 2.160 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 3.69 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
N. Me
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 6.484 cfs
= 716 min
= 13,092 tuft
= 79.9
= Oft
= 5.00 min
= Type II
= 484
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Curve number
Hydraulic length
Time of conc. (Tc)
Distribution
Shape factor
SCM Post -Developed
Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Year
Q (cfs)
7.00
. M
5.00
HOES
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 , I 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 2 Time (min)

Hydrograph
Report
13
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Through SCM
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.000 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 672 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 0 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - SCM Post -Developed
Max. Elevation
= 377.15 ft
Reservoir name
= BMP Pond
Max. Storage
= 6,002 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Exfiltration extracted from Outflow
. oR
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Post Through SCM
Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Year
Q (cfs)
7.00
. ��
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440
Time (min)
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 Total storage used = 6,002 cult

14
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 4
SCM Post -Developed
Bypass
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Peak discharge
= 0.106 cfs
Storm frequency
= 2 yrs
Time to peak
= 724 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 553 cuft
Drainage area
= 0.430 ac
Curve number
= 53.1
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Hydraulic length
= Oft
Tc method
= User
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 10.00 min
Total precip.
= 3.69 in
Distribution
= Type II
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Shape factor
- 484
Q (cfs)
0.50 ` 0.50
f
0.45 1 I 0.45
k
0.40 - 4 I 0.40
j
0.35 0.35
0.30 ; 0.30
0.25 i - 0.25
I
0.20 — 0.20
i
I
0.15 i — 0.15
0.10 — 0.10
4
0.05 0.05
0.00 -- 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 4
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
Hyd. No. 4 -- 2 Year

17
Hydrograph Summary Repo Oydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutodeskO Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd.
No.
Hydrograph
type
(origin)
Peak
flow
(cfs)
Time
interval
(min)
Time to
Peak
(min)
Hyd.
volume
(cuft)
Inflow
hyd(s)
Maximum
elevation
(ft)
Total
strge used
(cuft)
Hydrograph
Description
1
SCS Runoff
2.032
2
726
8,553
- -
---
SCM Pre -Developed
2
SCS Runoff
11.81
2
716
24,105
--
-
-
SCM Post -Developed
3
Reservoir
0.000
2
570
0
2
378.63
12,254
Post Through SCM
4
SCS Runoff
0.580
2
722
1,745
--
------
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
6
SCS Runoff
0.000
2
n/a
0
-
-
--
1.0 Post -Developed to SCM
7
Reservoir
0.000
2
n/a
0
6
374.80
0 000
1.0inPost Through SCM
Infiltration.gpw
Return Period: 10 Year
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022

18
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for AutodeskO Civil 3DO by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 1
SCM Pre -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 2.590 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 5.45 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
we
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Curve number
Hydraulic length
Time of conc. (Tc)
Distribution
Shape factor
SCM Pre -Developed
Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year
120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960
Hyd No. 1
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 2.032 cfs
726 min
= 8,553 cuft
= 50.4
= Oft
= 18.90 min
= Type II
= 484
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)

19
Hydrograph report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 31D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 2
SCM Post -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 2.160 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 5.45 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
10.00
OR
4.00
2.00
we
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Peak discharge
= 11.81 cfs
Time to peak
= 716 min
Hyd. volume
= 24,105 cuft
Curve number
= 79.9
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 5.00 min
Distribution
= Type II
Shape factor
= 484
SCM Post -Developed
Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year
120 240 360 480 600 720
Hyd No. 2
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
OR
. IX
4.00
0 1l
0.00
840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440
Time (min)

20
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Through SCM
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 0.000 cfs
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time to peak
= 570 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 0 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - SCM Post -Developed
Max. Elevation
= 378.63 ft
Reservoir name
= BMP Pond
Max. Storage
= 12,254 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Exfiltration extracted from Outflow.
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0 60 120
Hyd No. 3
Post Through SCM
Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
12.00
10.00
1M
N. We
4.00
2.00
0.00
180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600
Time (min)
Hyd No. 2 Total storage used = 12,254 cult

21
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc v2022
Hyd. No. 4
SCM Post -Developed
Bypass
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 10 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 0.430 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 5.45 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Q (cfs
1.00 .i -- 1.00
0.90 — — -I - - - - 0.90
0.80
0.70 - - — - - 0.70
0.60 - - 0.60
I
0.50 1 — 0.50
I
0.40 — 0.40
0.30 - I 0.30
0.20 — - 0.20
0.10 0.10
E ,
1
0.00 • - Ll 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 4
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Peak discharge
= 0.580 cfs
Time to peak
= 722 min
Hyd. volume
= 1,745 cuft
Curve number
= 53.1
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 10.00 min
Distribution
= Type II
Shape factor
= 484
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year

24
Hydrograph Summary Re po gydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Hyd. Inflow Maximum Total Hydrograph
No. type flow interval Peak volume hyd(s) elevation strge used Description
(origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) I (ft) (cuft)
1
SCS Runoff
6.873
2
726
23,010
--
-
- —
SCM Pre -Developed
2
SCS Runoff
20.52
2
716
42,986
—
------
- --
SCM Post -Developed
3
Reservoir
1.086
2
744
2,664
2
380.32
21,912
Post Through SCM
4
SCS Runoff
1.658
2
722
4,418
---
--
-
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
6
SCS Runoff
0.000
2
n/a
0
--
-----
------
1.0 Post -Developed to SCM
7
Reservoir
0.000
2
n/a
0
6
374.80
0.000
1.0inPost Through SCM
Infiltration.gpw I Return Period: 100 Year I Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022

25
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 1
SCM Pre -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 2.590 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 8.25 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Q (cfs)
7.00
M
5.00
4.00
300
2.00
1.00
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Curve number
Hydraulic length
Time of conc. (Tc)
Distribution
Shape factor
SCM Pre -Developed
Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 6.873 cfs
= 726 min
= 23,010 cult
= 50.4
= Oft
= 18.90 min
= Type II
= 484
Q (cfs)
7.00
AMC
5.00
4.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 '1 L I
' ' "— 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 1 Time (min)

26
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 2
SCM Post -Developed
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Peak discharge
= 20.52 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 716 min
Time interval
= 2 min
Hyd. volume
= 42,986 cuft
Drainage area
= 2.160 ac
Curve number
= 79.9
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Hydraulic length
= 0 ft
Tc method
= User
Time of conc. (Tc)
= 5.00 min
Total precip.
= 8.25 in
Distribution
= Type II
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Shape factor
= 484
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
• 11
NOW
MIQ
SCM Post -Developed
Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
• el
. ��
3.00
0.00 - - 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320
Hyd No. 2 Time (min)

27
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022 Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
Hyd. No. 3
Post Through SCM
Hydrograph type
= Reservoir
Peak discharge
= 1.086 cfs
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time to peak
= 744 min
Time interval
= 2 rain
Hyd. volume
= 2,664 cuft
Inflow hyd. No.
= 2 - SCM Post -Developed
Max. Elevation
= 380.32 ft
Reservoir name
= BMP Pond
Max. Storage
= 21,912 cuft
Storage Indication method used. Exfiltration extracted from Outflow
Post Through SCM
Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Year
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0.00
0 120 240 360
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
M
we]
3.00
0.00
480 600 720 840 960
Time (min)
Total storage used = 21,912 cult

28
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® by Autodesk, Inc. v2022
Hyd. No. 4
SCM Post -Developed
Bypass
Hydrograph type
= SCS Runoff
Storm frequency
= 100 yrs
Time interval
= 2 min
Drainage area
= 0.430 ac
Basin Slope
= 0.0 %
Tc method
= User
Total precip.
= 8.25 in
Storm duration
= 24 hrs
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
we
Peak discharge
Time to peak
Hyd. volume
Curve number
Hydraulic length
Time of conc. (Tc)
Distribution
Shape factor
SCM Post -Developed Bypass
Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Year
120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960
Hyd No. 4
Wednesday, 02 / 9 / 2022
= 1.658 cfs
= 722 min
= 4,418 cult
= 53.1
= Oft
= 10.00 min
= Type II
= 484
Q (cfs)
2.00
1.00
0.00
1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)

W{
;
k/
|
k /k7
�»
§
Ut
!
|
■
|
k
�®
§
{
�
|
z!
2
|/
■
}
k}
!
� |
k
k
�!
■
k
«■!Ct
(|
�
ov
ƒ
Z7!
o
�
|

Bowman North Carolina, Ltd.
Dollar General - Raeford, NC - Grass Channel "C" calculations
Rational Runoff Coefficient "C"
Grass Channel # 1
Drainage Area (acres
2.61
Pran�sed l a ses:
Lind
Use Desolation
Acres
%Site
Runoff "C
C.
Roofs
000
0%
0.95
0.00
Asphalt/Concrete Pavement
036
14%
0.95
0.13
Lawn
2.25
86%
0.3
0.26
0.00
0%
0.2
0.00
_Wooded
Total Area-
2.61
Cumuialive "CC"
0.39
1
no=
7.98
Qio=
8.12

NORTH
AMERICAN
GREEN
CHANNEL ANALYSIS
> > > Grass Channel #1
Name
Grass Channel #1
Discharge
8.12
Channel Slope
0.0076
Channel Bottom Width
1
Left Side Slope
2
Right Side Slope
2
Low Flow Liner
Retardence Class
C 6-12 in
Vegetation Type
None
Vegetation Density
Good 65-79%
Soil Type
Sandy Loam (GM)
DS75
North American Green
5401' St. Wendel-Cynthiana Rd.
Poseyville, Indiana 47633
Tel. [phone]
>Fax [phone]
www.nagreen.com
ECMDS v7.0
Normal Remarks Permissible calculated Safety Staple
Phase Reach Discharge Velocity Depth Mannings N Shear Stress Shear Stress Factor Pattern
DS75 Straight 8.12 cfs 2.5 ft/s 1.05 ft 0.036
Unvegetated
Underlying Straight 8.12 cfs 2.5 ft/s 1.05 ft 0.036
Substrate
1.6lbs/ft2 0.5lbs/ft2 3.22 STABLE D
1.51lbs/ft2 0.27lbs/ft2 5.6 STABLE D

EROSION CONTROL CALCULATIONS

EROSION CONTROL CALCS (RIP -RAP CALCULATIONS)
Project Information
Project Name:
Project #:
Designed by:
Revised by:
Checked by:
Rip -Rap Apron#1
' All units are in feet
" Dissipator pad designed for full flow of pipe
Dollar General
BM
Date
2/2/2022
Date
Date
Pipe Diameter
d=
15
Pipe Slope
s=
0.5 %
Manning's number
n=
0.013
Flow
Q=
2 cfs
Velocity
V =
2.00 ft/s
Dissipator Dimensions "
Zone =
Stone Filling Class =
Entry Width ( 3 X Do ) _
Length ( 6 X Do ) =
Width (La + Do) _
Min. Thickness =
Min. Stone Diameter=
i
38
2
B
3.8 ft
7.5 ft
8.8 ft
22 inches
6 inches
8.8
RIP -RAP 2/9/2022 Page 1 of 4

Rio -Rao Aaron#3
Pipe Diameter
d=
15 in
Pipe Slope
s=
0.91 %
Manning's number
n=
0.013
Flow
Q= 4
2 cfs
Velocity
V =
2.00 ft/s
Dissipator Dimensions *
Zone = 4
2
Stone Filling Class =
B
Entry Width ( 3 X AO ) =
3.8 ft
Length (6 X AO) =
7.5 ft
Width (La + AO) =
8.8 ft
Min. Thickness =
22 inches
Min. Stone Diameter=
6 inches
* All units are in feet
** Dissipator pad designed for full flow of pipe
I
8.8
RIP -RAP 2/9/2022 Page 3 of 4

EROSION CONTROL CALCS (SKIMMER BASINS)
Project Information
Project Name: Dollar General -Raeford
Project #: 058-011
Designed by: BRM Date: _
Revised by: Date:
Checked by: Date:
Skimmer Basin #1
Drainage Area
25-year Runoff (Q25)
Surface Area Required
Total, AT=
4.53 Ac
Disturbed, Ao=
4.53 Ac
C =
0.50
T. =
5.00 min
125 =
8.90 in/hr
025 =
20.2 cfs
SA = 325sf x 025
SA =
6,552 sf
Volume Required
VR = 1800 cf/Ac x AD
VR =
8,154 cf
Sediment Trap Dimensions
L =
120 ft (spillway Length)
W =
55 ft (Spillway Width)
D =
2.0 ft (Depth of Storage)
Side Slopes =
2 :1
Lw=
128 ft
Lb„=
112 ft W., 1Ni_,
Wbp=
63 ft 1. _
Wb,r=
47 ft
UW Ratio=
2.2 :1 (must be 2:1 to 6:1)
Elevations
DBSCl/ohOn
Elevation
Top of Bens
380.00 (allow 1fl freeboard above spillway Bow height)
Emergency Spillway
378.50
Sediment Storage
378.00
Cleanout Mark
377.00 (half of storage height)
Bottom
376.00
Provided
SAP=
6,600 sf > 6,552
VP=
11,864.0 cf > 8,154
Emergency Spillway - 10 Year Storm
125 =
8.90 in/hr
025 =
20.16 cfs
h =
0.5 ft
Cw =
3
Lw=
10 ft

EROSION CONTROL CALCS (SKIMMER BASINS)
Project Information
Project Name:
Project #:
Designed by:
Revised by:
Checked by:
Anti -Flotation Device
4' x 4' Outlet Structure
Area:
Top of Basin Elev.:
Bottom of Basin Elev.:
Volume: 32.0 cf
Weight: 1997 Ibs
1.20
WT Req'd of Anti -Flotation Device: 2,396 Ibs
Volume of Concrete Req'd: 16.0 cf
Dollar General
RG
16.0 sf
378.0
376.0
Date: 2/9/2022
Date:
Date:
(Water Displaced - Top c
(Unit WT of Concrete = 1
Volume Provided: 69.5 cf (4'x4' riser x 2.0' = 32cf,

)f Pond to Bottom of Pond)
150 pcf)
5'x5' footing x 1.5'=37.5cf)

Calculate Skimmer Size
Basin Volume in Cubic Feet 11,864 Cu.Ft Skimmer Size 2.5 Inch
Days to Drain* 3 Days Orifice Radius 1.0 Inch[es]
Orifice Diameter 2.0 Inch[es]
•in NC assume 3 days to drain
Estimate Volume of Basin Length width
Top of water surface in feet 120 55 Feet VOLUME 1IS 4, Cu. Ft.
Bottom dimensions in feet 112 47 Feet
Depth in feet 2 Feet

1/28/22, 2:16 PM
ECMDS 7.0
NORTH
AMERICAN
GREEN
CHANNEL ANALYSIS
> > > Temporary Ditch #1
Name
Temporary Ditch #1
Discharge
7.6
Channel Slope
0.005
Channel Bottom Width
1
Left Side Slope
2
Right Side Slope
2
Low Flow Liner
Retardence Class
C 6-12 in
Vegetation Type
None
Vegetation Density
None
Soil Type
Silt Loam (SM)
DS75
Phase I Reach
DS75 Straight
Unvegetated
Underlying Straight
Substrate
North American Green
5401 St. Wendel-Cynthiana Rd.
Poseyville, Indiana 47633
Tel. [phone]
> Fax [phone]
www.nagreen.com
ECMDS v7.0
'
Normal
Permissible
Calculated l
Safety
Staple
Discharge Velocity
Depth
Mann ings N
Shear Stress
Shear Stress 1111
Factor
Remarks
J Pattern
7.6 cfs 2.03 ft/s
1.14 ft
0.037 1.6 Ibs/ft2
0.36 Ibs/ft2
4.5
STABLE D
7.6 cfs 2.03 ft/s
1.14 ft
0.037 1.17 Ibs/ft2
0.19 Ibs/ft2
6.13
STABLE D
https:Hecmds.com/project/139235/chan nel-analysis/207593/show 1 /1