20211406 Ver 2_Modification Request_20220606

Staff Review Form
NORTH CAROLINA
Envlronm¢ntcl Qvofiry
Updated September 4, 2020
Staff Review
Does this application have all the attachments needed to accept it into the review process?*
Yes No
ID# *
20211406
Version* 2
Is this project a public transportation project?*
Yes
• No
Reviewer List: * Sue Homewood:eads\slhomewood
Select Reviewing Office: *
Winston-Salem Regional Office - [phone]
Does this project require a request for payment to be sent?*
Yes
No
How much is owed?* $240.00
$570.00

Project Submittal Form
Please note: fields marked with a red asterisk * below are required. You will not be able to submit the form until all
mandatory questions are answered.
Project Type: *
For the Record Only (Courtesy Copy)
New Project
Modification/New Project with Existing ID
More Information Response
Other Agency Comments
Pre -Application Submittal
Re-Issuance\Renewal Request
Stream or Buffer Appeal
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
5/31/2021
Project Contact Information
Name:
Chris Tinklenberg
Who is submitting the information?
Email Address: [e-mail]
Project Information
Existing ID #:
20211406
20170001 (no dashes)
Project Name: Troutman Logistics Center
Is this a public transportation project?
Yes
No
Existing Version:
1
Is the project located within a NC DCM Area of Environmental Concern (AEC)?
Yes No Unknown
County (ies)
Iredell
Please upload all files that need to be submited.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
20220606_Troutman Logistics
Center_IP_(NCDWR-20211406)_(SAW-2021- 32.55MB
00535)_Optimized.pdf
Only pdf or kmz files are accepted.
Describe the attachments or
comments:
This IP was administratively denied pending submittal of the stormwater management plan. Attached is the
resubmittal including stormwater information.

Sign and Submit
By checking the box and signing box below, I certify that:
• I, the project proponent, hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the
best of my knowledge and belief.
• I, the project proponent, hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401
certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I agree that submission of this online form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General
Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a
written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the online form.
Signature:
Submittal Date: Is filled in automatically.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
33 CFR 325. The proponent agency is CECW-CO-R.
FormApproved-
OMB No. 0710-0003
Expires: 02-28-2022
The public reporting burden for this collection of information, OMB Control Number
for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining
information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction
at [e-mail]. Respondents
0710-0003, is estimated to average 11 hours per response, including the time
the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of
suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services,
should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall
does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT
be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it
RETURN YOUR APPLICATION TO THE ABOVE EMAIL.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10,
Section 103, 33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs
will be used in evaluating the application for a permit.
local government agencies, and the public and
is voluntary, however, if information is not provided
reproducible copies which show the location and
and be submitted to the District Engineer having
System of Record Notice (SORN). The information
and may be accessed at the following website:
33 USC 403; Clean Water Act, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act,
of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form
Routine Uses: This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal, state, and
may be made available as part of a public notice as required by Federal law. Submission of requested information
the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued. One set of original drawings or good
character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application (see sample drawings and/or instructions)
jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been completed (SORN #A1145b)
http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNslndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570115/a1145b-ce.aspx
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO.
2. FIELD OFFICE CODE
3. DATE RECEIVED
4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANTS NAME
First - Matt Middle - Last - Prince
Company - NC Development Acquisition, LLC
E-mail Address [e-mail]
8. AUTHORIZED AGENTS NAME AND TITLE (agent is not required)
First - Chris Middle - Last - Tinklenberg
Company - Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc.
E-mail Address [e-mail]
6. APPLICANTS ADDRESS:
Address- 1776 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 100
City - Atlanta State - GA Zip - 30309 Country -USA
9. AGENTS ADDRESS:
Address- 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
City - Charlotte State - NC Zip - 28202 Country -USA
7. APPLICANTS PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
770-4361791
10. AGENTS PHONE NOs. w/AREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
704-409-1802
STATEMENT OF
11. I hereby authorize, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. to act in my behalf as
AUTHORIZATION
my agent in the processing of this application
2021-12-09
and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this permit application.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
NAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE (see instructions)
Troutman Logistics Center
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable)
I-L Creek
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Address NW corner of I-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road
City - Troutman State- NC Zip- 28166
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude: oN 35.689908 Longitude: oW-80.861081
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN (see instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID Multiple Municipality
Section - Township - Range -
ENG FORM 4345, FEB 2019
PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE.
Page 1 of 3

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Statesville, head south on I-77 for approximately 6.5-miles then take Exit 42 for US-21/State Hwy 115, towards Troutman. Turn left
onto US-21 N/ State Hwy 115 N. Continue for 0.6-miles and turn right onto Ostwalt Amity Road, continue for another 0.6-miles and turn left
onto Perry Road. Continue for 0.3-miles and the Site is on the left.
18. Nature of Activity (Description of project, include all features)
See attached.
19. Project Purpose (Describe the reason or purpose of the project, see instructions)
See attached.
USE BLOCKS 20-23 IF DREDGED ANDIOR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s) for Discharge
The proposed project includes the construction of two (2) distribution center warehouses, as well as associated access roads, parking, utilities,
and stounwater management facilities. Due to the size of the warehouse buildings, the location and layout of these facilities were limited to
areas within the property where larger development clusters could be created. Areas were chosen that maximize the use of uplands
and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent practicable.
21. Type(s) of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards:
Type Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards
Structural Fill/Earthen Material - 300,000 cy
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled (see instructions)
Acres
or
Linear Feet 2,467 (Streams - includes 246 indirect loss of waters)
23. Description of Avoidance, Minimization, and Compensation (see instructions)
See attached.
ENG FORM 4345, FEB 2019
Page 2 of 3

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? n Yes No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
25. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can be entered here, please attach a supplemental list).
a. Address- 121 Ostwalt Amity Road
City - Troutman State - NC Zip - 28166
b. Address- 103 Ostwalt Amity Road
City - Troutman State - NC Zip - 28166
c. Address- 168 Levo Drive
City - Troutman State - NC Zip - 28166
d. Address -
City - State - Zip -
e. Address -
City - State - Zip -
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State, or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL' IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building, and flood plain permits
27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that this information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the
applicant.
06/03/2022 _-- 06/03/2022
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345, FEB 2019
Page 3 of 3

Troutman Logistics Center
SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION
SEPTEMBER 2021
(Revised December 2021)
(Revised June 2022)
Applicant: NC Development Acquisition, LLC,
a North Carolina limited liability company
Agent: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Engineer: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Kimley»>Horn

i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 BACKGROUND 1
3.0 PROJECT PURPOSE & NEED 2
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2
5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 3
6.1 No Action Alternative 4
6.2 Off -Site Alternatives 4
6.2.1 Applicant's Preferred Site 5
6.2.2 Off -Site Alternative 1 5
6.2.3 Off -Site Alternative 2 6
6.2.4 Off -Site Alternative 3 6
6.2.5 Off -Site Alternative 4 7
6.2.6 Off -Site Alternative 5 7
6.3 On -Site Configurations 8
6.3.1 On -Site Configuration 1 8
6.3.2 On -Site Configuration 2 8
6.3.3 On -Site Configuration 3 (Applicant's Preferred) 8
6.4 Alternatives Not Practicable or Reasonable 8
6.5 Review of Practicable Alternatives 10
6.5.1 Proposed Action or Applicant's Preferred Alternative/On-Site Configuration 3 10
6.5.2 Alternative Site #2 11
6.5.3 On -Site Configuration #1 12
6.5.4 On -Site Configuration #2 12
6.6 Summary of Alternatives Analysis 13
7.0 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES 15
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES 15
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 16
10.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION 16
11.0 CONCLUSION 16
Kimley>»Horn

1
NCDA — Troutman Logistics Park
June 2022
1.0 INTRODUCTION
NC Development Acquisition, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, is proposing the
construction of a multi -building logistics park in Iredell County, North Carolina. The project area
totals approximately 157 acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road in the
town of Troutman, Iredell County, NC (35.689908°,-80.861081°). The project is located
approximately 1.5 miles from 1-77, 12 miles from 1-40, and 11 miles from the Charlotte Douglas
International Airport (CLT). The proposed project will include two distribution center warehouses,
totaling 1,700,000 square feet (SF). Associated access roads, parking, utilities, and stormwater
management facilities are also proposed as a part of this development. The project proposes
impacts to 2,467 linear feet (LF) of jurisdictional streams.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The south/southeast United States demands around 32% of the national need for new industrial,
warehouse, and distribution center space, which translates into approximately 80 million SF of
traditional demand and approximately 160 million SF of projected demand (Meyer, Craig S.,
Jones Lang, and Lasalle, 2020 Industrial Demand Study, September 2020). This growth may
accelerate even more in the south and southeast, which leads the nation in population growth
(Census.gov; ncdemography.org). Charlotte, for example, has seen its total industrial,
warehouse, and distribution space demands more than double in the past 5 years (Jones Lang
and LaSalle, Charlotte Industrial Market Report, Q2 2020). Where demand was approximately
8-9 million SF in 2019, it is anticipated to grow to 16-18 million SF annually over the next decade
(CBRE, Industrial & Logistics Insights Panel, "Impact of Covid-19 on Future Industrial
Demand", May 28, 2020, Breeze, James; Meyer, Craig S., Jones Lang, and Lasalle, 2020
Industrial Demand Study, September 2020). The problem is that the supply of products is not
keeping up with the projected demand, particularly within the Charlotte region.
Currently, the Charlotte warehouse market is sitting just above a 6% vacancy rate (Cushman &
Wakefield, US Industrial Report, Q2 2021). For functional space that can accommodate current
material handling equipment, the vacancy rate is lower, closer to 2% (Cushman & Wakefield,
Industrial Insights - Charlotte, NC, Q1 2020). For new projects that are either under
construction or are planned, the total anticipated new inventory is less than 10 million SF in the
Charlotte market (Jones Lang and Lasalle, Charlotte Industrial Market Report, Q3 2020). This
means that there will not be enough supply to accommodate demand over the next 12 months.
There is increasing concern that supply cannot meet demand over the next 2 years, much less
the next decade. Additionally, there is a shortage of industrial sites in Mecklenburg County which
is pushing development into surrounding counties. The proximity to Interstate 77 has made
developers more and more interested in Iredell County, Troutman specifically (Distribution
Dynamo, Charlotte Business Journal, August 20, 2021).
Kimley>»Horn

2
Considering the projected needs for the Charlotte Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) industrial
market, the applicant determined that Iredell County —and more specifically Troutman —was the
most appropriate project location for the following reasons:
• Location within the 1-77 corridor;
• Proximity to a major interchange for access to a major highway/interstate in the Charlotte
MSA;
• Iredell County provides a large supply of qualified labor pool;
• Availability of large tracts of land.
For Iredell County, the proposed logistics park project will create approximately 2,000-3,100
direct jobs with an estimated annual payroll of around $97M—$162M. Annual real property taxes
are projected to be roughly $1.8M at build -out of the park, and an anticipated additional +/-$1.0M
of personal property taxes associated with furniture, fixture, and equipment in the building. The
project will provide greater economic mobility for citizens in Iredell County and will stimulate
economic growth, which is desperately needed given the catastrophic economic impacts from the
COVID-19 pandemic. The project not only will result in significant Tong -term benefits to the
adjacent communities of Troutman but will also benefit the rural areas of Iredell County and the
metropolitan areas of Charlotte.
3.0 PROJECT PURPOSE & NEED
Generally, the project's purpose is to provide warehousing and supply -chain distribution space to
service the Charlotte MSA. Specifically, the purpose of the proposed project is to construct a
multi -building industrial logistics park within the 1-77 corridor of the Charlotte MSA for connection
to 1-85, 1-40, and CLT airport, providing eCommerce and traditional brick and mortar support
warehousing and supply -chain distribution space to optimize the efficiency of their distribution
network in the region, meeting current and future demands. While this project —with
approximately 1.7 million SF represents approximately 5 percent of the projected 2-year market
need —the proposed logistics center will assist with maintaining a healthy regional market required
to support the continued growth of the Charlotte MSA.
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site totals 157 acres and consists of undeveloped forested land and an open field. An
aquatic resources delineation was completed within the project site and was verified by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on March 22, 2021. The project area contains 7,300 LF of
streams, no wetlands, and no open waters. A vegetation community consisting of predominately
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), willow oak (Quercus phellos), sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), IobIo11y pine (Pinus taeda), and (Quercus alba) covers the
majority of the site.
5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The proposed project includes the construction of access roads, parking, utilities, and stormwater
management facilities. The proposed project seeks to construct two (2) distribution warehouse
buildings, totaling 1,700,000 SF. Trailer and employee parking are required. While the stormwater
plan has not been finalized, it is anticipated that three or four ponds will be required to satisfy the
stormwater management needs of the site and are strategically positioned within the western
portion of the site where the construction of warehouse facilities is not feasible without additional
stream impacts. Permit drawings depicting the proposed project are included in Appendix C.
Due to the size of the warehouse buildings and the north/south orientation of the project site, the
location and layout of the facilities were limited to the eastern portion of the property where a
larger, contiguous development cluster could be created. The applicant chose the eastern portion
Kimley>»Horn

3
of the property to maximize the use of uplands and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest
extent practicable. As shown in the attached permit drawings, the proposed site plan requires
impacts to aquatic resources totaling 2,221 LF of stream. An additional 246 LF of stream is
assumed to be indirectly affected by the downstream development, resulting in an indirect loss of
waters. In total, the project will result in 2,467 LF of stream impacts. Table 1 below summarizes
the proposed stream impacts.
Table 1: Proposed Stream Impacts Summary
Stream impact
number —
Permanent or
Temporary
Type of Impact
Stream
Name
Perennial
(PER) or
intermittent
(INT)?
Type of
jurisdiction
(Corps,
DWQ)
Impact
Length
(linear feet)
Impact 1 — S2
Permanent
Grading/Fill
S2
PER
Corps &
DWQ
1,544
Impact 2 — S3B
Permanent
Grading/Fill
S3B
INT
Corps &
DWQ
331
Impact 3 — S4
Permanent
Grading/Fill
S4
INT
Corps &
DWQ
82
Impact 4 — S5
Permanent
Grading/Fill
S5
INT
Corps &
DWQ
264
Impact 5 — S2
Indirect Loss
Hydrology/Indirect
S2
PER
Corps &
DWQ
192
Impact 6 — S6
Indirect Loss
Hydrology/Indirect
S6
INT
Corps &
DWQ
54
Total Stream Impacts
2,467
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
As part of the overall project, the applicant completed a thorough alternatives analysis. A review
of the 404(b)(1) guidelines indicates that "(a) Except as provided under section 404(b)(2), no
discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the
proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as
the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences." The
guidelines define practicable alternatives as "(q) The term practicable means available and
capable of being constructed after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics
in light of overall project purposes."
The guidelines outline further consideration of practicable alternatives: "(1) For the purpose of this
requirement, practicable alternatives include, but are not limited to: (i) Activities which do not
involve a discharge of dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States or ocean waters;
(ii) Discharges of dredged or fill material at other locations in waters of the United States or ocean
waters; (2) An alternative is practicable if it is available and capable of being constructed after
taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
purposes. If it is otherwise a practicable alternative, an area not presently owned by the applicant
which could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded, or managed to fulfill the basic purpose
of the proposed activity may be considered."
Considering the guidelines above and having identified Iredell County as the most advantageous
location for the proposed industrial park, the applicant evaluated a No Action Alternative and six
alternative sites including the applicant's preferred site. In addition, three on -site configurations
were evaluated including the applicant's preferred on -site configuration. As noted above, the
Kimley>»Horn

4
permit drawings depicting the proposed site plan are provided in Appendix C. Mapping information
for off -site alternatives is provided in Appendix D and on -site configuration alternatives are
provided in Appendix E. As part of this alternative evaluation, the following
"Practicability/Reasonability Screening Selection Criteria" were applied to each alternative to
confirm whether the particular alternative and/or on -site configuration was practicable:
• Capable of being constructed considering cost (Is the cost reasonable considering scope
and type of project considering total cost, funding source, profit margin, etc.)
• Capable of being constructed considering logistics (Must consider existing infrastructure,
traffic patterns, etc.)
• Property can be reasonably obtained (Must consider availability, liens, etc.)
• Proximity to workforce
• Meets basic project purpose
• Meets overall project purpose
6.1 No Action Alternative
A "no action" alternative must be considered, and complete avoidance of aquatic resources was
the first alternative considered for this project. Due to the location of aquatic resources and
proposed land use (industrial warehousing), it was determined that complete avoidance of stream
impacts was not feasible. Unlike many development activities (i.e., residential, recreational, or
light commercial), little flexibility in warehouse design is afforded. Industry standards dictate
building widths and lengths; and access, parking, and docking requirements associated with semi-
trailer truck traffic greatly limit design flexibility. For these reasons, major modifications to the
facility footprint beyond a reduction in square footage to the minimum square feet are not feasible.
While this option would result in no impacts to jurisdictional features, it would not fulfill the need
for warehousing distribution space in the Charlotte MSA. Because the "no action" alternative and
complete avoidance of impacts prohibits the construction of the proposed logistics park, this
alternative was determined to be unreasonable and not practicable.
6.2 Off -Site Alternatives
In addition to the six general Practicability/ Reasonability Screening Selection Criteria evaluated,
specific criteria including geographic location, size, zoning, utilities, access, and availability were
considered. The following provides a summary of each criterion.
• Size — The potential site must be 150 acres or more to accommodate the required
minimum size of the development.
• Geographic Location — The proposed project will provide warehousing and logistics
services to the Charlotte MSA. Sites considered for this project were limited to the 1-77
corridor with connectivity to 1-40 and 1-85. Additionally, potential sites within the Lake
Norman Water Supply Watershed (WSW) area were excluded to avoid high -density
development within the environmentally sensitive watershed.
• Land Use/Zoning — Land use restrictions associated with current zoning are a major
consideration in all industrial projects. Truck traffic, equipment operation, adjoining land
use, buffers, etc. make the location of the project and the current zoning a critical
component. For this site screening criterion, tracts that are currently zoned for the intended
use or that could be reasonably re -zoned to accommodate the proposed project were
considered.
• Utilities — Utility services or access to utility services (water, sewer, electrical, gas,
phone, cable, etc.) are required. For this reason, the location of existing utilities and the
Kimley>»Horn

5
cost associated with servicing the project site if those utilities were not already available
was a consideration in the site screening criteria.
• Availability — Sites listed for sale and/or known to be available for purchase were
considered.
Access — Access to a warehousing and distribution facility requires the continual
operation of large semi -trailer trucks. For this project, three access criteria were
established. First, the site must provide suitable access to a major interstate. Suitable
access to a major interstate would be defined as direct access to the site from a paved
road suitable to support truck traffic associated with the proposed facility. Second, the site
must be located adjacent to or within two miles of an interstate interchange. For this
project, alternative sites, except for one, were limited to major interchanges within the
Interstate 77 corridor. Third, the site must allow for truck access that avoids at -grade rail
crossings and/or minimizes at -grade rail crossing relocations.
6.2.1 Applicant's Preferred Site
The applicant's preferred alternative totals 157 acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt
Amity Road in Iredell County. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for
the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics, the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals approximately 157 acres which meets the size criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated immediately
adjacent to 1-77, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which meets the
minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property has been petitioned and, according to the Town of Troutman, the
rezoning petition is anticipated to be accepted.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is currently listed for sale and can be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads, is Tess than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange, and affords truck access that avoids at -grade rail crossings.
In summary, the applicant's preferred site meets all the site screening criteria and is therefore a
practicable alternative.
6.2.2 Off -Site Alternative 1
This tract totals approximately 271.2 acres and is located east of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: The property can be reasonably obtained, and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose; however, due to the presence of
overhead power lines, the 700,000 SF building cannot be constructed. This alternative is
not capable of being constructed when considering cost and logistics.
• Size: The site totals 271.2 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated immediately
adjacent to 1-77, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the
minimum criteria for the project.
Kimley>»Horn

6
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is not for sale and cannot be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads, is less than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange, and affords truck access that avoids at -grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off -Site Alternative 1 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.3 Off -Site Alternative 2
This tract totals approximately 389 acres and is located west of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 389 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated west of 1-77, and
is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the minimum criteria for
the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use. Rezoning of the
site is assumed unfeasible due to the current residential zoning designation, proximity to
the Barium Springs Home for Children, and the proximity to residential developments to
the north and south.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is currently listed for sale and can be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads and is more than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange. Truck access avoids at -grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off -Site Alternative 2 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is, therefore,
is not a practicable alternative.
6.2.4 Off -Site Alternative 3
This tract totals approximately 192 acres and is located along Gilbert Road immediately south of
1-40. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred
site:
• General Screening Criteria: The property can be reasonably obtained, and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose; however, based on the geographic
configuration of the property, the 700,000 SF building does not fit within the property
boundary. This alternative is not capable of being constructed when considering cost and
logistics.
• Size: The site totals 192 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated south of 1-40, in
proximity to the 1-77 corridor, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which
does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use. Rezoning of the
site is assumed unfeasible due to the current residential zoning designation and the
proximity to residential developments to the south and east.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
Kimley>»Horn

7
• Availability: The site is not for sale and cannot be purchased
• Access: Construction of access roads would be required. The site is less than 2 miles to
an 1-40 interchange but is greater than 2 miles to an 1-77 interchange. Truck access avoids
at -grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off -Site Alternative 3 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.5 Off -Site Alternative 4
This tract totals approximately 336 acres and is situated at the northeastern corner of 1-77 and I-
40. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 336 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated at the NE corner
of 1-77 and 1-40, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the
minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is listed for sale; however, it is currently under contract and cannot
be purchased.
• Access: The site has very poor access from a logistics perspective given the proximity to
1-40 and 1-77. The site is surrounded by paved roads and is Tess than 2 miles to an 1-40
interchange but is greater than 2 miles from an 1-77 interchange. Truck access avoids at -
grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off -Site Alternative 4 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.6 Off -Site Alternative 5
This tract totals approximately 260 acres and is located west of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 260 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated just west of 1-77,
and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the minimum criteria
for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is not currently listed for sale but is known to be available.
• Access: The site has poor access as trucks must use a narrow residential road to access
the interstate; however, the site is less than 2 miles to an 1-77 interchange and affords
truck access that avoids at -grade rail crossings.
Kimley>»Horn

8
In summary, Off -Site Alternative 5 does meet all the site screening criteria and is, therefore, a
practicable alternative.
6.3 On -Site Configurations
In addition to considering off -site alternatives, the applicant considered on -site alternatives. The
following provides a summary of each alternative during the design review process.
6.3.1 On -Site Configuration 1
This configuration was a preliminary 2-building design that provided the greatest logistical
functionality for the applicant but resulted in greater impacts to aquatic resources and a lower
than desirable square footage yield. The design includes 2 buildings of 523,260 SF and 1,046,529
SF, 3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The
configuration totals 1,523,260 SF of warehouse space. This concept would impact 3,100 LF of
streams.
6.3.2 On -Site Configuration 2
This configuration was the initial site plan reviewed by the applicant designed for a single -building
build -to -suit warehouse tenant. During design, the agreement with the build -to -suit tenant was
terminated, resulting in a speculative redesign of the site. This configuration includes one
1,501,200 SF building, 6 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee
parking. This concept would impact 2,400 LF of streams.
6.3.3 On -Site Configuration 3 (Applicant's Preferred)
This configuration is the applicant's preferred alternative. The site plan was specifically designed
to minimize impacts to aquatic resources to the greatest extent practicable by maximizing the use
of retaining walls and proposes Con/Span bridge structures to minimize additional stream
impacts. The design includes 2 buildings of 700,000 SF and 1,000,000 SF, 3-4 stormwater
detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The configuration totals
1,700,00 SF of warehouse space. This concept would impact 2,467 LF of streams.
6.4 Alternatives Not Practicable or Reasonable
Following reviews of both off -site alternatives and on -site configurations, the applicant completed
a comparison of alternatives to the practicability/reasonability screening criteria. Table 1 on the
following page summarizes a comparison of each alternative discussed above to the screening
criteria for practicability and reasonableness.
Kimley>»Horn

rn
Table 2: Summary Table for Practicability and Reasonableness Screening Selection Criteria
a
o.°
z u
Q
o
z
o
z
o
z
o
z
o
z
o
z
o
z
o
z
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 3
(Applicant's
Preferred)
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 2
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 1
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
...�
a
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
>-
... �
Q
a
a
a
a
a)
a
>-
O
a)
a
>-
O
or M
Z
}
}
Z
w
}
o
Z
}
Z
N
++
Q
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
O
Z
a
>-
a
>-
O
Z
O
Z
��
Q
O
Z
a
}
a
}
a
}
a
}
O
Z
a
}
O
Z
Applicant's
Preferred
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
a
>-
Practicability/
Reasonability
Screening
Selection
Criteria
General
Screening
Criteria
N
N
Geographic
Location
Land
use/Zoning
v)
N
-
(B
(B
Q
Access
Practicable
Site (Y or N)

10
6.5 Review of Practicable Alternatives
Following a determination of practicable alternatives using the "Practicability/Reasonability
Screening Selection Criteria", the applicant completed an analysis of practicable alternatives to
identify the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative pursuant to 40 CFR 230.7(b)(1).
The purpose of the below analysis is to ensure that "no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be
permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have a less
adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem". The applicant evaluated potential environmental impacts
that would result from the construction of the proposed facility. This evaluation was completed by
considering environmental factors that could impact the development of the site. The environmental
factors included:
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The estimated linear footage of potential stream impact
was evaluated for each practicable alternative.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — The functional value of potential stream impact areas was
evaluated for each practicable alternative utilizing the most recent version of the North
Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NCSAM). Results of the NCSAM assessment include
a qualitative rating of low, medium, or high value based on an overall function class rating
which considers hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — The estimated acreage of potential wetland impact was
evaluated for each practicable alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — The functional value of potential wetland impact areas
was evaluated for each practicable alternative utilizing the most recent version of the North
Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM). Results of the NCWAM assessment
include a qualitative rating of low, medium, or high value based on an overall function class
rating which considers hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions.
• Federally -Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — A preliminary assessment of
each practicable alternative was conducted to determine the potential occurrence of animal
and plants species (or their preferred habitats) currently listed as threatened or endangered
by state and federal regulations [Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531-
1543)]. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information, Planning, and Conservation
System (IPaC) database at http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ database was reviewed to determine
plant and animal species as endangered or threatened for each alternative.
• Cultural Resources — A preliminary assessment of cultural resources was conducted for
each site by reviewing available State Historic Preservation Office information. Potential
impacts to sites listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were
noted for each alternative.
• Floodplain Impacts — The estimated acreage of flood plain impact was evaluated for each
practicable alternative.
Considering the assessment criteria above, the applicant evaluated 4 alternatives consisting of 2
alternative sites (including the applicant's preferred site) and 3 alternative on -site configurations
(including the applicant's preferred on -site configuration). The following provides a summary of each
practicable alternative and associated environmental impacts.
6.5.1 Proposed Action or Applicant's Preferred Alternative/On-Site Configuration 3
The applicant's preferred site and the preferred on -site configuration include two (2) distribution
warehouse buildings, totaling 1,700,000 SF, 3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and
parking, and employee parking. The formal aquatic resources delineation documents no wetlands
Kimley>>>Horn

11
and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with this on -site
configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 2,467 LF of stream impact, including 246 LF of
indirect loss of waters, is required for the preferred site and on -site configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on -site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally -Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources — A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.2 Alternative Site #5
Alternative Site 5 includes 2 buildings, 1,000,000 SF and 700,000 SF, two stormwater detention
basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. This configuration totals 1,700,000 SF of
warehouse space. The NWI/aerial/Lidar desktop assessment indicates that the 260.5-acre project
site contains 41.2 acres of wetlands. The NHD/Lidar desktop assessment indicates that the project
site contains 13,694 LF of stream. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with this on -
site configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
flowlines and desktop lidar stream assessment, approximately 2,438 LF of stream would be
impacted by this alternative.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — A review of current and historical aerial photography
indicates that the property has been utilized for agricultural purposes in the northeastern area
of the site. The streams on -site, however, are present in the forested portions of the site. It
appears that the forested areas have been undeveloped, and it is likely that the functional
value of the streams that would be impacted by this alternative are assigned a medium value
based on the assumed results of an NCSAM assessment.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the NWI, 0-acres of wetland would be
impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
Kimley>>>Horn

12
• Federally -Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife IPaC and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database,
no federally listed species are known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Based
on the location of the tract and site conditions, no adverse impacts to federally listed
threatened and endangered species would be expected.
• Cultural Resources — Upon review of the NCSHPO's HPOWeb online database, the
property does not contain any National Register -eligible historic sites.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.3 On -Site Configuration #1
On -Site Configuration #1 includes two (2) distribution warehouse buildings, totaling 1,523,260 SF,
3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The formal
aquatic resources delineation documents no wetlands and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the
environmental impacts associated with this on -site configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 3,100 LF of stream would be impacted by this
configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on -site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally -Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources — A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.4 On -Site Configuration #2
On -Site Configuration #2 includes one (1) distribution warehouse building, totaling 1,501,200 SF, 6
stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The formal aquatic
resources delineation documents no wetlands and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the
environmental impacts associated with this on -site configuration is provided below.
Kimley>>>Horn

13
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 2,400 LF of stream would be impacted by this
configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on -site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally -Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources — A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.6 Summary of Alternatives Analysis
When comparing the practicable alternatives, the Applicant's Preferred Alternative requires fewer
stream impacts. When considering environmental impacts, the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
represents the least environmentally damaging alternative. Table 2 provides a summary of the
practicable alternatives and the values for each factor.
Kimley>>>Horn

d
E
co
co
d
co
co
Q
d
>
r
co
a
Q
d
Ta
C1
'5
C1
12
L
a
a)
a
a)
co
E
co
0
TS
O
d
E
O
O
L
.>
a
w
t.
co
a)
J
d
t
r
O
co
E
E
7
M
d
Ta
co
H
On -Site Configuration
Alt 2
o
o
N
Medium
Q
z
Q
z
May affect, not likely to
adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
O
O
Z
On -Site Configuration
Alt 1
O
rico
Medium
Q
Z
Q
Z
May affect, not likely
to adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
O
O
Z
Alternative Site # 5
co
N
Medium
Q
z
Q
z
May affect, not likely
to adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
O
O
Z
Preferred Alternative
& Configuration
CO
N
Medium
Q
Z
Q
Z
May affect, not likely to
adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
cr)
>-
FACTORS
Environmental Factors
Stream Impacts (LF)
NHD-Lidar/Delineation
Functional Value of Impacted
Streams
Wetland Impacts (AC)
NWI/Delineation
Functional Value of Impacted
Wetlands
Federally Protected Species
Impact
Cultural Resources Impact
Floodplain Impact (AC)
LEDPA

15
In summary, the applicant and design team considered a variety of alternatives that would avoid and
minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent practicable while satisfying the overall project
purpose. Through a comprehensive analysis of both off -site alternatives and on -site configurations,
the applicant has been able to reduce the overall environmental impacts and demonstrate that the
proposed site and design is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative. Specific to
the on -site configurations, the applicant reduced the overall aquatic resource impacts by 1,105 LF
of stream through the proposed design and facility layout.
7.0 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES
Kimley-Horn (KH) completed a threatened and endangered species assessment for the project site.
KH reviewed state and federal records to determine if any listed species were known to occur within
and/or in the general vicinity of the project area. A review of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) was conducted on February 1, 2021, to identify species that are known to occur
within Iredell County. Based on the review, the range of the plant species dwarf -flowered heartleaf
(Hexastylis naniflora) includes Iredell County. No known occurrences of dwarf -flowered heartleaf
were identified within 1.0 miles of the project site. Following the review of available information, KH
conducted a pedestrian survey of the project site throughout areas of potentially suitable habitat on
March 30, 2021, to document occurrences of listed species. No individuals of dwarf -flowered
heartleaf were observed during the survey.
A Project Review Certification Letter was submitted to USFWS on April 20, 2021, summarizing the
results of the species survey. Since the project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant
species, but no occurrences were detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological
conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
A concurrence response letter from USFWS was received on May 18, 2021, indicating that the
USFWS was in agreeance with the MANLAA biological conclusion.
Following receipt of the concurrence response letter, the USFWS Asheville Office modified the
current range and area of influence (AOI) for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). As a
result of the modification, the project site is now within the range of Schweinitz's sunflower. On
August 31, 2021, KH performed a pedestrian survey for Schweinitz's sunflower throughout areas of
potentially suitable habitat. No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed during the
pedestrian surveys. A revised Project Review Certification Letter recommending a MANLAA
biological conclusion for Schweinitz's sunflower has been prepared and submitted to USFWS for
their concurrence. Upon receipt, the revised concurrence response letter will be provided to the
applicable review agencies.
Copies of all USFW correspondence are including in Appendix G.
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES
A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted to the North Carolina Department
of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021.
NCSHPO responded on April 29, 2021, and requested further information regarding all structures 50
years or older within the project site. Kimley-Horn visited the site on May 13, 2021, to photograph
and document the existing 50-year-old structures. Following the site visit, Kimley-Horn prepared a
photographic documentation package and submitted the information to NCSHPO. On July 9, 2021,
NCSHPO provided a response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural
resources within the project boundary. A copy of the correspondence is provided in Appendix H.
No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project boundary were identified.
Kimley>>>Horn

16
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The Town of Troutman and Iredell County are Phase II stormwater delegated local authorities that
jointly implement NCDEQ's Post -Construction Stormwater Program. The stormwater management
plan, designed by KH, has been submitted to NCDEQ. Town of Troutman / NCDEQ stormwater
quantity regulations require the post -development runoff rate from the 2-year and 10-year, 24-hour
storm events to be attenuated to the pre -development flow rates. Proposed storm sewer pipes shall
be designed for the 10-year, 24 hour frequency storm. NCDEQ stormwater quality regulations require
the control and treatment of the first 1" of rainfall over the development. Runoff volume drawdown
for the first 1" of rainfall shall be between 48 and 120 hours. Additionally, all structural stormwater
treatment systems shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average annual removal for Total
Suspended Solids (TSS). The proposed project will meet the above requirements through the
installation and maintenance of two wet ponds. Approvals will be provided to NCDWR once they are
received.
10.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS) in -lieu fee program. 2,467 LF of stream impacts, including 246 LF of indirect
loss of waters, will be mitigated through the purchase of stream mitigation credits. Based on an
NCSAM assessment of Medium for intermittent Streams 3B, 4, and 5, mitigation is proposed at a
1.5:1 ratio for impacts to these features, or 1,016 stream mitigation credits. A quality assessment
result of Medium for perennial Stream 2 proposes mitigation at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to this feature,
or 3,088 stream mitigation credits. It is assumed that indirect loss of waters impacts may result to
the upstream portion of Stream 2 and the entirety of Stream 6. Based on these assumed impacts,
mitigation is proposed at a 1:1 ratio, or 246 stream mitigation credits. In total, 4,350 stream mitigation
credits will be purchased from NCDMS to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality
assessment results and NCDMS mitigation acceptance are included in Appendix F.
11.0 CONCLUSION
NC Development Acquisition, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, is proposing the
construction of a multi -building industrial logistics park in Iredell County, North Carolina. The project
area totals approximately 157-acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road in the
town of Troutman, Iredell County, NC (35.689908°,-80.861081°). The industrial warehousing
complex will include two distribution center warehouses, totaling 1,700,000 SF of warehouse space,
and will provide warehousing and logistics services to Charlotte MSA-related clients and the 1-77
corridor. As compensatory mitigation for impacts to aquatic resources, the applicant is proposing to
purchase 4,350 stream mitigation credits from NCDMS. The proposed project is the result of
numerous development plan reviews during which the applicant was able to further avoid and
minimize impacts to aquatic resources. All development activities will be conducted using best
management practices to prevent incidental impacts to the remaining on -site aquatic resources.
Kimley>>>Horn

Permit Drawings

LEI,Et.E.702
Sti 3116,,NO 0.311n5 IS No wr,nos
WOH AalIWD1
LL
0
0
vonA N.,21,3
.03`.153,3
1,101-12 SY 3,3S
F.E00/.3
niva
LOOZOOS 0
FIN
11V213A0
NVid 30VNIV2la
aNv ONICIVNO
VNI10.0 H1,0,1 NVNI,Odl
311 'ONV1
NvinunoH_L
HOJ C111Vc131,1
H3IN33 S3I1S1001 WM111101,11
x-
2 Ca
°
itilifinalllThlignabuilikkaarail'1,10==f-::-=
Atom au Essatirif
/ ------_------- -%//( /
0)/

RFAI NCDWR Response

Kimley>>)Horn
December 9, 2021
Paul Wojoski, Supervisor
401 & Buffer Permitting Branch
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
RE: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DWR#2021-1406 (USACE SAW-2021-00535)
NC Development Acquisition, LLC— Troutman Logistics Center
Iredell County, North Carolina
Dear Mr. Wojoski,
On behalf of our client, North Carolina Development Acquisition, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting
the response to the Request for Additional Information for the above-referenced Project per the NC
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) request received on November 9, 2021.
Below is an outline of NCDWR's requested additional information with a brief narrative addressing each
item. The NCDWR requested additional information with Kimley-Horn response and explanation are
as follows:
1. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b) "a 401 Water Quality Certification may only be issued upon
determining that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards which includes
designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria and the state's antidegradation policy, as defined
in rules of 15A NCAC 028.0200...In assessing whether the proposed activity will comply with water
quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the proposed activity: (1)has avoided and minimized
impacts to surface waters and wetlands..."As this project is speculative with a stated purpose as
"to provide warehousing and supply-chain distribution space to service the Charlotte MSA", please
provide a detailed justification for the sizes of the proposed buildings and the specific need for the
amount of parking proposed. It appears that the site could be re-designed to further avoid and
minimize stream and/or wetland impacts and still meet the stated purpose.
Due to recent changes in consumer spending habits, population growth and supply chain
constraints, the Charlotte regional industrial real estate market is experiencing tremendous growth.
To accommodate for these changes,several factors are taking place within the region. The average
size of industrial buildings has tripled since 2019, which has pushed development outside of the
core industrial market and into the outlying surrounding counties due to additional land being needed
for the larger facilities. However, these facilities still need to be located within proximity to the
growing population areas and within 1-2 miles from a major interstate.
Furthermore, there are over 22.5M square feet of tenant demand within the Charlotte market
representing over 50 companies. 18% of this demand represents tenants seeking facilities of 1 M
SF and greater. As of Q4 2021, there are only five buildings, within the region, planned for 1 M SF
or greater. As of the date of this submittal,there are 11 current requests in the Charlotte area market
for buildings of 1 M SF or greater.
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

Kimley>>)Horn
Please see the attached modified site plan for reference. While it is possible to build a warehouse
on this property with fewer stream impacts, the smaller buildings do not fulfill the highest and best
use of the property. Due to its proximity to 1-77, this site needs to be utilized for Build to Suit
distribution or 1 M+ SF users. The number of available sites for buildings of this size is rare in this
market and demand currently exceeds supply. Due to the absence of wetlands on this property,
this site lends itself even more to larger products while minimizing environmental impacts.
From a financial standpoint, the larger buildings are necessary to make the site financially viable
due to a large amount of wall required to minimize stream impact, the volume of earthwork, and the
cost of offsite improvements.
2. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b) "a 401 Water Quality Certification may only be issued upon
determining that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards which includes
designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria and the state's antidegradation policy, as defined
in rules of 15A NCA C 028.0200...In assessing whether the proposed activity will comply with water
quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the proposed activity: (2) would cause or contribute
to a violation of water quality standards; (3) would result in secondary or cumulative impacts that
cause or contribute to, or will cause or contribute to, a violation of water quality standards;"Based
on the information provided in the application the Division has the following concerns:
a. Along the eastern boundary of the project site a small segment of Stream 2 and Stream
6 will be indirectly affected by becoming disconnected, and essentially isolated, from
all other natural features. This small, disconnected portion of Stream 2 and Stream 6
are unlikely to continue to provide the same hydrologic and biological function and
therefore should be counted as indirect "loss of water". Please revise the application,
plan sheets, and impact tables accordingly.
Please find the attached revised application, plan sheets, and impact tables indicating
an indirect "loss of water" for Streams 2 &6.
b. All surface flow from the project is proposed to be rerouted through multiple storm water
wet detention basins. In order to review possible secondary impacts to downstream
hydrology, please provide plans that clearly show the outlet location from each
storm water control measure. Please note that the rerouting of any drainage area and
surface flow has the potential to remove existing hydrology from features adjacent to
this project and therefore remove existing uses of the stream channels or wetlands.
Based on the location of the proposed storm water basins, it appears that the lower
portion of stream 3 and stream 1 will have a significantly reduced hydrology.
To continue contributing hydrology to the lower portion of Stream 3, the applicant will
direct 2-acres of greenspace runoff from the northwestern portion of the site to the
beginning of Stream 3.
The southern portion of Stream 1 will continue to receive flow from 4-acres west of the
stream and 30-acres from the parcel directly south of the proposed development.
The Stormwater Management Plan will be prepared after completion of annexation into
the Town of Troutman and the associated rezoning to Industrial. This hearing date is
scheduled for December 9, 2021. The plan which will include detailed plans
demonstrating the outlet locations at each stormwater control measure will be
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

Kimley>>)Horn Page
submitted upon completion. We are currently targeting a March 31, 2022 submittal
date.
3. Please submit a complete Storm water Management Plan for the project which shall include all
appropriate supplemental forms, O&M agreements, calculations, engineering drawings, etc., that
complies with the requirements of the State Storm water Program. The Stormwater Design Manual
and applicable forms may be found on the DEMLR's website at
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land-permit-
guidance/stormwater-bmp-manual. In addition, please also submit the application form SWU-101
(attached). However, the $505 application fee and last two signature pages of this form may be
omitted. [15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2) and(3)]
The Stormwater Management Plan will be prepared after completion of annexation into the Town of
Troutman and the associated rezoning to Industrial. This hearing date is scheduled for December
9, 2021. This plan will be submitted upon completion. We are currently targeting a March 31, 2022
submittal date.
Please feel free to contact me at [phone] if you have any questions or if additional information
is necessary.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
Attachments
Cc: Dominic Reinicker, NC Development Acquisition, LLC
Matt Prince, NC Development Acquisition, LLC
Austin Watts, Kimley-Horn
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704-333-5131

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Form Approved-
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT OMB No.0710-0003
33 CFR 325.The proponent agency is CECW-CO-R. Expires:02-28-2022
The public reporting burden for this collection of information, OMB Control Number 0710-0003, is estimated to average 11 hours per response, including the time
for reviewing instructions,searching existing data sources,gathering and maintaining the data needed,and completing and reviewing the collection of
information.Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense,Washington Headquarters Services,
at [e-mail]. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law,no person shall
be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT
RETURN YOUR APPLICATION TO THE ABOVE EMAIL.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 10,33 USC 403;Clean Water Act,Section 404,33 USC 1344;Marine Protection, Research,and Sanctuaries Act,
Section 103,33 USC 1413; Regulatory Programs of the Corps of Engineers; Final Rule 33 CFR 320-332. Principal Purpose: Information provided on this form
will be used in evaluating the application for a permit. Routine Uses:This information may be shared with the Department of Justice and other federal,state,and
local government agencies,and the public and may be made available as part of a public notice as required by Federal law. Submission of requested information
is voluntary,however, if information is not provided the permit application cannot be evaluated nor can a permit be issued. One set of original drawings or good
reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this application(see sample drawings and/or instructions)
and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.An application that is not completed in full will be returned.
System of Record Notice(SORN). The information received is entered into our permit tracking database and a SORN has been completed(SORN#A1145b)
and may be accessed at the following website: http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNslndex/DOD-wide-SORN-Article-View/Article/570115/a1145b-ce.aspx
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO. 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 3. DATE RECEIVED 4. DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANTS NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENTS NAME AND TITLE(agent is not required)
First-Matt Middle- Last-Prince First-Chris Middle- Last Tinklenberg
Company- NC Development Acquisition,LLC Company- Kimley-Horn&Associates,Inc.
E-mail Address-mprince(a`tpa-grp.com E-mail [e-mail]
6. APPLICANTS ADDRESS: 9. AGENTS ADDRESS:
Address- 1776 Peachtree Street,NW,Suite 100 Address- 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
City- Atlanta State- GA Zip- 30309 Country-USA City- Charlotte State- NC Zip- 28202 Country-USA
7. APPLICANTS PHONE NOs.w/AREA CODE 10. AGENTS PHONE NOs.w/AREA CODE
a. Residence b. Business c. Fax a. Residence b. Business c. Fax
770-4361791 704-409-1802
STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
11. I hereby authorize, Kimley-Horn&Associates, Inc. to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this permit application.
2021-12-09
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
NAME,LOCATION,AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE(see instructions)
Troutman Logistics Center
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN(if applicable) 14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS(if applicable)
I-L Creek Address NW corner of I-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Latitude:oN 35.689908 Longitude: oW -80.861081 City- Troutman State- NC Zip- 28166
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN(see instructions)
State Tax Parcel ID Multiple Municipality
Section- Township- Range-
ENG FORM 4345, FEB 2019 PREVIOUS EDITIONS ARE OBSOLETE. Page 1 of 3

17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Statesville,head south on I-77 for approximately 6.5-miles then take Exit 42 for US-21/State Hwy 115,towards Troutman.Turn left
onto US-21 N/State Hwy 115 N.Continue for 0.6-miles and turn right onto Ostwalt Amity Road,continue for another 0.6-miles and turn left
onto Perry Road.Continue for 0.3-miles and the Site is on the left.
18. Nature of Activity(Description of project, include all features)
See attached.
19. Project Purpose(Describe the reason or purpose of the project,see instructions)
See attached.
USE BLOCKS 20-23 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. Reason(s)for Discharge
The proposed project includes the construction of two(2)distribution center warehouses,as well as associated access roads,parking,utilities,
and stormwater management facilities.Due to the size of the warehouse buildings,the location and layout of these facilities were limited to
areas within the property where larger development clusters could be created.Areas were chosen that maximize the use of uplands
and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent practicable.
21. Type(s)of Material Being Discharged and the Amount of Each Type in Cubic Yards:
Type Type Type
Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards Amount in Cubic Yards
Structural Fill/Earthen Material-300,000 cy
22. Surface Area in Acres of Wetlands or Other Waters Filled(see instructions)
Acres
or
Linear Feet 2,236(Streams-includes 241 indirect loss of waters)
23. Description of Avoidance,Minimization,and Compensation(see instructions)
See attached.
ENG FORM 4345,FEB 2019 Page 2 of 3

24. Is Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? fYes No IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
25. Addresses of Adjoining Property Owners, Lessees, Etc.,Whose Property Adjoins the Waterbody (if more than can be entered here,please attach a supplemental list).
a.Address- 121 Ostwalt Amity Road
City- Troutman State- NC Zip- 28166
b.Address- 103 Ostwalt Amity Road
City- Troutman State- NC Zip- 28166
c.Address- 168 Levo Drive
City- Troutman State- NC Zip- 28166
d.Address-
City- State- Zip-
e.Address-
City- State- Zip-
26. List of Other Certificates or Approvals/Denials received from other Federal, State,or Local Agencies for Work Described in This Application.
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL' IDENTIFICATION DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
NUMBER
Would include but is not restricted to zoning, building,and flood plain permits
'27. Application is hereby made for permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that this information in this application is
complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the
applicant.
2021-12-09 fie: — 2021-12-09
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF AGENT DATE
The Application must be signed by the person who desires to undertake the proposed activity(applicant)or it may be signed by a duly
authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and signed.
18 U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States
knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent
statements or entry, shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
ENG FORM 4345,FEB 2019 Page 3 of 3

Troutman Logistics Center
SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT APPLICATION
SEPTEMBER 2021
(Revised December 2021)
Applicant: NC Development Acquisition, LLC,
a North Carolina limited liability company
Agent: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Engineer: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Kimley>>)Horn

Table of Contents
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 BACKGROUND 1
3.0 PROJECT PURPOSE & NEED 2
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 2
5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 3
6.1 No Action Alternative 3
6.2 Off-Site Alternatives 4
6.2.1 Applicant's Preferred Site 4
6.2.2 Off-Site Alternative 1 5
6.2.3 Off-Site Alternative 2 5
6.2.4 Off-Site Alternative 3 6
6.2.5 Off-Site Alternative 4 6
6.2.6 Off-Site Alternative 5 7
6.3 On-Site Configurations 7
6.3.1 On-Site Configuration 1 7
6.3.2 On-Site Configuration 2 7
6.3.3 On-Site Configuration 3 (Applicant's Preferred) 8
6.4 Alternatives Not Practicable or Reasonable 8
6.5 Review of Practicable Alternatives 10
6.5.1 Proposed Action or Applicant's Preferred Alternative/On-Site Configuration 3 10
6.5.2 Alternative Site #2 11
6.5.3 On-Site Configuration #1 12
6.5.4 On-Site Configuration #2 12
6.6 Summary of Alternatives Analysis 13
7.0 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES 15
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES 15
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 16
10.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION 16
11.0 CONCLUSION 16
Kimley>>)Horn

I I
APPENDIX:
A: Figures/Site Maps
B: USACE Jurisdictional Determination
C: Permit Drawings (Applicant's Preferred Alternative)
D: Off-Site Alternatives Information
E: On-Site Configurations
F: Compensatory Mitigation
G: USFWS Survey Report
H: NCSHPO HPOWeb Public Database Information
Kimley>>)Horn

1
NCDA—Troutman Logistics Park
September 2021
1.0 INTRODUCTION
NC Development Acquisition, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, is proposing the
construction of a multi-building logistics park in Iredell County, North Carolina. The project area
totals approximately 157 acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road in the
town of Troutman, Iredell County, NC (35.689908°, -80.861081°). The project is located
approximately 1.5 miles from 1-77, 12 miles from 1-40, and 11 miles from the Charlotte Douglas
International Airport (CLT). The proposed project will include two distribution center warehouses,
totaling 1,700,000 square feet (SF). Associated access roads, parking, utilities, and stormwater
management facilities are also proposed as a part of this development. The project proposes
impacts to 1,995 linear feet (LF) of jurisdictional streams.
2.0 BACKGROUND
The south/southeast United States demands around 32% of the national need for new industrial,
warehouse, and distribution center space, which translates into approximately 80 million SF of
traditional demand and approximately 160 million SF of projected demand (Meyer, Craig S.,
Jones Lang, and Lasalle, 2020 Industrial Demand Study, September 2020). This growth may
accelerate even more in the south and southeast, which leads the nation in population growth
(Census.gov; ncdemography.org). Charlotte, for example, has seen its total industrial,
warehouse, and distribution space demands more than double in the past 5 years (Jones Lang
and LaSalle, Charlotte Industrial Market Report, Q2 2020). Where demand was approximately
8-9 million SF in 2019, it is anticipated to grow to 16-18 million SF annually over the next decade
(CBRE, Industrial & Logistics Insights Panel, "Impact of Covid-19 on Future Industrial
Demand", May 28, 2020, Breeze, James; Meyer, Craig S., Jones Lang, and Lasalle, 2020
Industrial Demand Study, September 2020). The problem is that the supply of products is not
keeping up with the projected demand, particularly within the Charlotte region.
Currently, the Charlotte warehouse market is sitting just above a 6% vacancy rate (Cushman &
Wakefield, US Industrial Report, Q2 2021). For functional space that can accommodate current
material handling equipment, the vacancy rate is lower, closer to 2% (Cushman & Wakefield,
Industrial Insights - Charlotte, NC, Q1 2020). For new projects that are either under
construction or are planned, the total anticipated new inventory is less than 10 million SF in the
Charlotte market(Jones Lang and Lasalle, Charlotte Industrial Market Report, Q3 2020). This
means that there will not be enough supply to accommodate demand over the next 12 months.
There is increasing concern that supply cannot meet demand over the next 2 years, much less
the next decade. Additionally, there is a shortage of industrial sites in Mecklenburg County which
is pushing development into surrounding counties. The proximity to Interstate 77 has made
developers more and more interested in Iredell County, Troutman specifically (Distribution
Dynamo, Charlotte Business Journal, August 20, 2021).
Kimley>>)Horn

2
Considering the projected needs for the Charlotte Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) industrial
market, the applicant determined that Iredell County—and more specifically Troutman—was the
most appropriate project location for the following reasons:
• Location within the 1-77 corridor;
• Proximity to a major interchange for access to a major highway/interstate in the Charlotte
MSA;
• Iredell County provides a large supply of qualified labor pool;
• Availability of large tracts of land.
For Iredell County, the proposed logistics park project will create approximately 2,000-3,100
direct jobs with an estimated annual payroll of around $97M—$162M. Annual real property taxes
are projected to be roughly$1.8M at build-out of the park, and an anticipated additional +/-$1.0M
of personal property taxes associated with furniture, fixture, and equipment in the building. The
project will provide greater economic mobility for citizens in Iredell County and will stimulate
economic growth, which is desperately needed given the catastrophic economic impacts from the
COVID-19 pandemic. The project not only will result in significant long-term benefits to the
adjacent communities of Troutman but will also benefit the rural areas of Iredell County and the
metropolitan areas of Charlotte.
3.0 PROJECT PURPOSE & NEED
Generally, the project's purpose is to provide warehousing and supply-chain distribution space to
service the Charlotte MSA. Specifically, the purpose of the proposed project is to construct a
multi-building industrial logistics park within the 1-77 corridor of the Charlotte MSA for connection
to 1-85, 1-40, and CLT airport, providing eCommerce and traditional brick and mortar support
warehousing and supply-chain distribution space to optimize the efficiency of their distribution
network in the region, meeting current and future demands. While this project—with
approximately 1.7 million SF represents approximately 5 percent of the projected 2-year market
need—the proposed logistics center will assist with maintaining a healthy regional market required
to support the continued growth of the Charlotte MSA.
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site totals 157 acres and consists of undeveloped forested land and an open field. An
aquatic resources delineation was completed within the project site and was verified by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on March 22, 2021. The project area contains 6,863 LF of
streams, no wetlands, and no open waters. A vegetation community consisting of predominately
American beech (Fagus grandifolia), willow oak (Quercus phellos), sweetgum (Liquidambar
styraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), and (Quercus alba) covers the
majority of the site.
5.0 PROPOSED PROJECT & DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The proposed project includes the construction of access roads, parking, utilities, and stormwater
management facilities. The proposed project seeks to construct two (2) distribution warehouse
buildings, totaling 1,700,000 SF. Trailer and employee parking are required. While the stormwater
plan has not been finalized, it is anticipated that three or four ponds will be required to satisfy the
stormwater management needs of the site and are strategically positioned within the western
portion of the site where the construction of warehouse facilities is not feasible without additional
stream impacts. Permit drawings depicting the proposed project are included in Appendix C.
Due to the size of the warehouse buildings and the north/south orientation of the project site, the
location and layout of the facilities were limited to the eastern portion of the property where a
larger, contiguous development cluster could be created. The applicant chose the eastern portion
Kimley>>)Horn

3
of the property to maximize the use of uplands and minimize impacts to streams to the greatest
extent practicable. As shown in the attached permit drawings, the proposed site plan requires
impacts to aquatic resources totaling 1,995 LF of stream. An additional 241 LF of stream is
assumed to be indirectly affected by the downstream development, resulting in an indirect loss of
waters. In total, the project will result in 2,236 LF of stream impacts. The applicant has been in
coordination with the owner of an approximately 10-acre parcel, located between the project site
and Perry Road, to establish a purchase agreement for this property; however, the sale of the
property is not feasible at this time due to continuing legal issues.
6.0 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
As part of the overall project, the applicant completed a thorough alternatives analysis. A review
of the 404(b)(1) guidelines indicates that "(a) Except as provided under section 404(b)(2), no
discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the
proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as
the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences." The
guidelines define practicable alternatives as "(q) The term practicable means available and
capable of being constructed after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics
in light of overall project purposes."
The guidelines outline further consideration of practicable alternatives: "(1) For the purpose of this
requirement, practicable alternatives include, but are not limited to: (i) Activities which do not
involve a discharge of dredged or fill material into the waters of the United States or ocean waters;
(ii) Discharges of dredged or fill material at other locations in waters of the United States or ocean
waters; (2) An alternative is practicable if it is available and capable of being constructed after
taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project
purposes. If it is otherwise a practicable alternative, an area not presently owned by the applicant
which could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded, or managed to fulfill the basic purpose
of the proposed activity may be considered."
Considering the guidelines above and having identified Iredell County as the most advantageous
location for the proposed industrial park, the applicant evaluated a No Action Alternative and six
alternative sites including the applicant's preferred site. In addition, three on-site configurations
were evaluated including the applicant's preferred on-site configuration. As noted above, the
permit drawings depicting the proposed site plan are provided in Appendix C. Mapping information
for off-site alternatives is provided in Appendix D and on-site configuration alternatives are
provided in Appendix E. As part of this alternative evaluation, the following
"Practicability/Reasonability Screening Selection Criteria" were applied to each alternative to
confirm whether the particular alternative and/or on-site configuration was practicable:
• Capable of being constructed considering cost (Is the cost reasonable considering scope
and type of project considering total cost, funding source, profit margin, etc.)
• Capable of being constructed considering logistics (Must consider existing infrastructure,
traffic patterns, etc.)
• Property can be reasonably obtained (Must consider availability, liens, etc.)
• Proximity to workforce
• Meets basic project purpose
• Meets overall project purpose
6.1 No Action Alternative
A "no action" alternative must be considered, and complete avoidance of aquatic resources was
the first alternative considered for this project. Due to the location of aquatic resources and
Kimley>>)Horn

4
proposed land use (industrial warehousing), it was determined that complete avoidance of stream
impacts was not feasible. Unlike many development activities (i.e., residential, recreational, or
light commercial), little flexibility in warehouse design is afforded. Industry standards dictate
building widths and lengths; and access, parking, and docking requirements associated with semi-
trailer truck traffic greatly limit design flexibility. For these reasons, major modifications to the
facility footprint beyond a reduction in square footage to the minimum square feet are not feasible.
While this option would result in no impacts to jurisdictional features, it would not fulfill the need
for warehousing distribution space in the Charlotte MSA. Because the "no action" alternative and
complete avoidance of impacts prohibits the construction of the proposed logistics park, this
alternative was determined to be unreasonable and not practicable.
6.2 Off-Site Alternatives
In addition to the six general Practicability/ Reasonability Screening Selection Criteria evaluated,
specific criteria including geographic location, size, zoning, utilities, access, and availability were
considered. The following provides a summary of each criterion.
• Size — The potential site must be 150 acres or more to accommodate the required
minimum size of the development.
• Geographic Location — The proposed project will provide warehousing and logistics
services to the Charlotte MSA. Sites considered for this project were limited to the 1-77
corridor with connectivity to 1-40 and 1-85. Additionally, potential sites within the Lake
Norman Water Supply Watershed (WSVV) area were excluded to avoid high-density
development within the environmentally sensitive watershed.
• Land Use/Zoning — Land use restrictions associated with current zoning are a major
consideration in all industrial projects. Truck traffic, equipment operation, adjoining land
use, buffers, etc. make the location of the project and the current zoning a critical
component. For this site screening criterion, tracts that are currently zoned for the intended
use or that could be reasonably re-zoned to accommodate the proposed project were
considered.
• Utilities — Utility services or access to utility services (water, sewer, electrical, gas,
phone, cable, etc.) are required. For this reason, the location of existing utilities and the
cost associated with servicing the project site if those utilities were not already available
was a consideration in the site screening criteria.
• Availability — Sites listed for sale and/or known to be available for purchase were
considered.
Access — Access to a warehousing and distribution facility requires the continual
operation of large semi-trailer trucks. For this project, three access criteria were
established. First, the site must provide suitable access to a major interstate. Suitable
access to a major interstate would be defined as direct access to the site from a paved
road suitable to support truck traffic associated with the proposed facility. Second, the site
must be located adjacent to or within two miles of an interstate interchange. For this
project, alternative sites, except for one, were limited to major interchanges within the
Interstate 77 corridor. Third, the site must allow for truck access that avoids at-grade rail
crossings and/or minimizes at-grade rail crossing relocations.
6.2.1 Applicant's Preferred Site
The applicant's preferred alternative totals 157 acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt
Amity Road in Iredell County. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for
the applicant's preferred site:
Kimley>>)Horn

5
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics, the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals approximately 157 acres which meets the size criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated immediately
adjacent to 1-77, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which meets the
minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property has been petitioned and, according to the Town of Troutman, the
rezoning petition is anticipated to be accepted.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is currently listed for sale and can be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads, is less than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange, and affords truck access that avoids at-grade rail crossings.
In summary, the applicant's preferred site meets all the site screening criteria and is therefore a
practicable alternative.
6.2.2 Off-Site Alternative 1
This tract totals approximately 271.2 acres and is located east of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: The property can be reasonably obtained, and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose; however, due to the presence of
overhead power lines, the 700,000 SF building cannot be constructed. This alternative is
not capable of being constructed when considering cost and logistics.
• Size: The site totals 271.2 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated immediately
adjacent to 1-77, and is located outside of the Lake Norman VVSW, which does meet the
minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is not for sale and cannot be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads, is less than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange, and affords truck access that avoids at-grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off-Site Alternative 1 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.3 Off-Site Alternative 2
This tract totals approximately 389 acres and is located west of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 389 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated west of 1-77, and
is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the minimum criteria for
the project.
Kimley>>)Horn

6
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use. Rezoning of the
site is assumed unfeasible due to the current residential zoning designation, proximity to
the Barium Springs Home for Children, and the proximity to residential developments to
the north and south.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is currently listed for sale and can be purchased.
• Access: The site is surrounded by paved roads and is more than 2 miles to an 1-77
interchange. Truck access avoids at-grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off-Site Alternative 2 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is, therefore,
is not a practicable alternative.
6.2.4 Off-Site Alternative 3
This tract totals approximately 192 acres and is located along Gilbert Road immediately south of
1-40. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred
site:
• General Screening Criteria: The property can be reasonably obtained, and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose; however, based on the geographic
configuration of the property, the 700,000 SF building does not fit within the property
boundary. This alternative is not capable of being constructed when considering cost and
logistics.
• Size: The site totals 192 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated south of 1-40, in
proximity to the 1-77 corridor, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which
does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use. Rezoning of the
site is assumed unfeasible due to the current residential zoning designation and the
proximity to residential developments to the south and east.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is not for sale and cannot be purchased
• Access: Construction of access roads would be required. The site is less than 2 miles to
an 1-40 interchange but is greater than 2 miles to an 1-77 interchange. Truck access avoids
at-grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off-Site Alternative 3 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.5 Off-Site Alternative 4
This tract totals approximately 336 acres and is situated at the northeastern corner of 1-77 and I-
40. The following provides a summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 336 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated at the NE corner
of 1-77 and 1-40, and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the
minimum criteria for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
Kimley>>)Horn

7
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is listed for sale; however, it is currently under contract and cannot
be purchased.
• Access: The site has very poor access from a logistics perspective given the proximity to
1-40 and 1-77. The site is surrounded by paved roads and is less than 2 miles to an 1-40
interchange but is greater than 2 miles from an 1-77 interchange. Truck access avoids at-
grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off-Site Alternative 4 does not meet all the site screening criteria and is therefore
not a practicable alternative.
6.2.6 Off-Site Alternative 5
This tract totals approximately 260 acres and is located west of 1-77. The following provides a
summary of each criterion reviewed for the applicant's preferred site:
• General Screening Criteria: This alternative is capable of being constructed when
considering cost and logistics; the property can be reasonably obtained and the project
site meets the basic and overall project purpose.
• Size: The site totals 260 acres which does meet the minimum criteria for the project.
• Geographic Location: The site is located in Iredell County, is situated just west of 1-77,
and is located outside of the Lake Norman WSW, which does meet the minimum criteria
for the project.
• Land Use/Zoning: The site is not currently zoned for the proposed use, however,
rezoning of the property is assumed to be feasible.
• Utilities: All required utilities can be feasibly extended to the site.
• Availability: The site is not currently listed for sale but is known to be available.
• Access: The site has poor access as trucks must use a narrow residential road to access
the interstate; however, the site is less than 2 miles to an 1-77 interchange and affords
truck access that avoids at-grade rail crossings.
In summary, Off-Site Alternative 5 does meet all the site screening criteria and is, therefore, a
practicable alternative.
6.3 On-Site Configurations
In addition to considering off-site alternatives, the applicant considered on-site alternatives. The
following provides a summary of each alternative during the design review process.
6.3.1 On-Site Configuration 1
This configuration was a preliminary 2-building design that provided the greatest logistical
functionality for the applicant but resulted in greater impacts to aquatic resources and a lower
than desirable square footage yield. The design includes 2 buildings of 523,260 SF and 1,046,529
SF, 3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The
configuration totals 1,523,260 SF of warehouse space. This concept would impact 3,100 LF of
streams.
6.3.2 On-Site Configuration 2
This configuration was the initial site plan reviewed by the applicant designed for a single-building
build-to-suit warehouse tenant. During design, the agreement with the build-to-suit tenant was
terminated, resulting in a speculative redesign of the site. This configuration includes one
1,501,200 SF building, 6 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee
parking. This concept would impact 2,400 LF of streams.
Kimley>>)Horn

8
6.3.3 On-Site Configuration 3 (Applicant's Preferred)
This configuration is the applicant's preferred alternative. The site plan was specifically designed
to minimize impacts to aquatic resources to the greatest extent practicable by maximizing the use
of retaining walls and proposes Con/Span bridge structures to minimize additional stream
impacts. The design includes 2 buildings of 700,000 SF and 1,000,000 SF, 3-4 stormwater
detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The configuration totals
1,700,00 SF of warehouse space. This concept would impact 2,236 LF of streams.
6.4 Alternatives Not Practicable or Reasonable
Following reviews of both off-site alternatives and on-site configurations, the applicant completed
a comparison of alternatives to the practicability/reasonability screening criteria. Table 1 on the
following page summarizes a comparison of each alternative discussed above to the screening
criteria for practicability and reasonableness.
Kimley>>)Horn

rn
Table 1: Summary Table for Practicability and Reasonableness Screening Selection Criteria
a
o.°
Z j
a
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
o
Z
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 3
(Applicant's
Preferred)
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 2
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
On -Site
Configuration
Alt 1
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
aIn
>-
a�
>-
z
>-
z
aM
z
z
ct
z
ct
z
Cl
Q
N
>-
N
>-
N
>-
O
z
N
>-
N
>-
O
z
O
z
a'
z
>-
z
>- ct
z
Applicant's
Preferred
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
a)
>-
Practicability/
Reasonability
Screening
Selection
Criteria
General
Screening
Criteria
a)
N_
U)
Geographic
Location
Land
use/Zoning
ct
a)
+=
5
Availability
Access
Practicable
Site (Y or N)

10
6.5 Review of Practicable Alternatives
Following a determination of practicable alternatives using the "Practicability/Reasonability
Screening Selection Criteria", the applicant completed an analysis of practicable alternatives to
identify the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative pursuant to 40 CFR 230.7(b)(1).
The purpose of the below analysis is to ensure that "no discharge of dredged or fill material shall be
permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have a less
adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem". The applicant evaluated potential environmental impacts
that would result from the construction of the proposed facility. This evaluation was completed by
considering environmental factors that could impact the development of the site. The environmental
factors included:
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The estimated linear footage of potential stream impact
was evaluated for each practicable alternative.
• Stream Function (qualitative) —The functional value of potential stream impact areas was
evaluated for each practicable alternative utilizing the most recent version of the North
Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NCSAM). Results of the NCSAM assessment include
a qualitative rating of low, medium, or high value based on an overall function class rating
which considers hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) —The estimated acreage of potential wetland impact was
evaluated for each practicable alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — The functional value of potential wetland impact areas
was evaluated for each practicable alternative utilizing the most recent version of the North
Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM). Results of the NCWAM assessment
include a qualitative rating of low, medium, or high value based on an overall function class
rating which considers hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions.
• Federally-Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — A preliminary assessment of
each practicable alternative was conducted to determine the potential occurrence of animal
and plants species (or their preferred habitats) currently listed as threatened or endangered
by state and federal regulations [Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USC 1531-
1543)]. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFVVS) Information, Planning, and Conservation
System (IPaC) database at http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ database was reviewed to determine
plant and animal species as endangered or threatened for each alternative.
• Cultural Resources — A preliminary assessment of cultural resources was conducted for
each site by reviewing available State Historic Preservation Office information. Potential
impacts to sites listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places were
noted for each alternative.
• Floodplain Impacts —The estimated acreage of flood plain impact was evaluated for each
practicable alternative.
Considering the assessment criteria above, the applicant evaluated 4 alternatives consisting of 2
alternative sites (including the applicant's preferred site) and 3 alternative on-site configurations
(including the applicant's preferred on-site configuration). The following provides a summary of each
practicable alternative and associated environmental impacts.
6.5.1 Proposed Action or Applicant's Preferred Alternative/On-Site Configuration 3
The applicant's preferred site and the preferred on-site configuration include two (2) distribution
warehouse buildings, totaling 1,700,000 SF, 3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and
parking, and employee parking. The formal aquatic resources delineation documents no wetlands
Kimley}>>Horn

11
and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with this on-site
configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 2,236 LF of stream impact, including 241 LF of
indirect loss of waters, is required for the preferred site and on-site configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on-site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally-Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources —A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.2 Alternative Site #5
Alternative Site 5 includes 2 buildings, 1,000,000 SF and 700,000 SF, two stormwater detention
basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. This configuration totals 1,700,000 SF of
warehouse space. The NWI/aerial/Lidar desktop assessment indicates that the 260.5-acre project
site contains 41.2 acres of wetlands. The NHD/Lidar desktop assessment indicates that the project
site contains 13,694 LF of stream. A summary of the environmental impacts associated with this on-
site configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD)
flowlines and desktop lidar stream assessment, approximately 2,438 LF of stream would be
impacted by this alternative.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — A review of current and historical aerial photography
indicates that the property has been utilized for agricultural purposes in the northeastern area
of the site. The streams on-site, however, are present in the forested portions of the site. It
appears that the forested areas have been undeveloped, and it is likely that the functional
value of the streams that would be impacted by this alternative are assigned a medium value
based on the assumed results of an NCSAM assessment.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the NWI, 0-acres of wetland would be
impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
Kimley}>>Horn

12
• Federally-Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife IPaC and the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database,
no federally listed species are known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Based
on the location of the tract and site conditions, no adverse impacts to federally listed
threatened and endangered species would be expected.
• Cultural Resources — Upon review of the NCSHPO's HPOWeb online database, the
property does not contain any National Register-eligible historic sites.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.3 On-Site Configuration #1
On-Site Configuration #1 includes two (2) distribution warehouse buildings, totaling 1,523,260 SF,
3-4 stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The formal
aquatic resources delineation documents no wetlands and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the
environmental impacts associated with this on-site configuration is provided below.
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 3,100 LF of stream would be impacted by this
configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on-site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally-Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources —A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.5.4 On-Site Configuration #2
On-Site Configuration #2 includes one (1) distribution warehouse building, totaling 1,501,200 SF, 6
stormwater detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee parking. The formal aquatic
resources delineation documents no wetlands and 6,863 LF of stream. A summary of the
environmental impacts associated with this on-site configuration is provided below.
Kimley}>>Horn

13
• Stream Impacts (quantitative) — The aquatic resources delineation that has been
completed within the project area indicates 2,400 LF of stream would be impacted by this
configuration.
• Stream Function (qualitative) — Results of the NCSAM assessment include an overall
function class rating of medium for on-site streams.
• Wetland Impacts (quantitative) — Based on the jurisdictional determination, 0-acres of
wetland would be impacted by this alternative.
• Wetland Function (qualitative) — N/A
• Federally-Listed Threatened or Endangered Species — Based on a review of the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) database, no federally listed species are
known to occur within this site or proximity of the site. Pedestrian surveys were conducted
on March 30, 2021, and August 31, 2021. No individuals of listed species or critical habitat
associated with a listed species were observed during the pedestrian surveys. Since the
project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant species, but no occurrences were
detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological conclusion of "may affect, not
likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
• Cultural Resources —A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted
to the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic
Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021. On July 9, 2021, NCSHPO provided a
response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural resources within
the project boundary. No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project
boundary were identified.
• Floodplain Impacts — Based on a review of available FEMA maps, impacts to FEMA-
regulated floodplains are not anticipated by the proposed project.
6.6 Summary of Alternatives Analysis
When comparing the practicable alternatives, the Applicant's Preferred Alternative requires fewer
stream impacts. When considering environmental impacts, the Applicant's Preferred Alternative
represents the least environmentally damaging alternative. Table 2 provides a summary of the
practicable alternatives and the values for each factor.
Kimley}>>Horn

N
E
co
co
N
N
N
a
4-
al
1
L
ad
N
.71
oa
4-
t.,
Ei
a
a)
a
cz
E
cz
0
>
a
N
E
a
2 L_
i
W
to
al
d
J
N
t
r.,
w
0
cz
E
E
7
N
N
N
.71
al
H
On -Site Configuration
Alt 2
-a-
c\i.
Medium
Q
Z
Q
Z
May affect, not likely to
adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
o
0
Z
On -Site Configuration
Alt 1
O
crioo
Medium
Q
Z
Q
Z
May affect, not likely
to adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
O
o
Z
Alternative Site # 5
M�
c\i.
Medium
Q
z
Q
z
May affect, not likely
to adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
O
o
z
Preferred Alternative
& Configuration
M
`N'
c\i.
Medium
Q
z
Q
z
May affect, not likely to
adversely affect
Not Likely to adversely
affect
o
N
›-
FACTORS
Environmental Factors
Stream Impacts (LF)
NHD-Lidar/Delineation
Functional Value of Impacted
Streams
Wetland Impacts (AC)
NWI/Delineation
Functional Value of Impacted
Wetlands
Federally Protected Species
Impact
Cultural Resources Impact
Floodplain Impact (AC)
LEDPA

15
In summary, the applicant and design team considered a variety of alternatives that would avoid and
minimize impacts to streams to the greatest extent practicable while satisfying the overall project
purpose. Through a comprehensive analysis of both off-site alternatives and on-site configurations,
the applicant has been able to reduce the overall environmental impacts and demonstrate that the
proposed site and design is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative. Specific to
the on-site configurations, the applicant reduced the overall aquatic resource impacts by 1,105 LF
of stream through the proposed design and facility layout.
7.0 THREATENED & ENDANGERED SPECIES
Kimley-Horn (KH) completed a threatened and endangered species assessment for the project site.
KH reviewed state and federal records to determine if any listed species were known to occur within
and/or in the general vicinity of the project area. A review of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) System and the North Carolina Natural Heritage
Program (NCNHP) was conducted on February 1, 2021, to identify species that are known to occur
within Iredell County. Based on the review, the range of the plant species dwarf-flowered heartleaf
(Hexastylis naniflora) includes Iredell County. No known occurrences of dwarf-flowered heartleaf
were identified within 1.0 miles of the project site. Following the review of available information, KH
conducted a pedestrian survey of the project site throughout areas of potentially suitable habitat on
March 30, 2021, to document occurrences of listed species. No individuals of dwarf-flowered
heartleaf were observed during the survey.
A Project Review Certification Letter was submitted to USFWS on April 20, 2021, summarizing the
results of the species survey. Since the project seeks impacts to suitable habitat of listed plant
species, but no occurrences were detected during the appropriate survey window, a biological
conclusion of "may affect, not likely to adversely affect" (MANLAA) was recommended to USFWS.
A concurrence response letter from USFVVS was received on May 18, 2021, indicating that the
USFVVS was in agreeance with the MANLAA biological conclusion.
Following receipt of the concurrence response letter, the USFWS Asheville Office modified the
current range and area of influence (AOI) for Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). As a
result of the modification, the project site is now within the range of Schweinitz's sunflower. On
August 31, 2021, KH performed a pedestrian survey for Schweinitz's sunflower throughout areas of
potentially suitable habitat. No individuals of Schweinitz's sunflower were observed during the
pedestrian surveys. A revised Project Review Certification Letter recommending a MANLAA
biological conclusion for Schweinitz's sunflower has been prepared and submitted to USFVVS for
their concurrence. Upon receipt, the revised concurrence response letter will be provided to the
applicable review agencies.
Copies of all USFW correspondence are including in Appendix G.
8.0 CULTURAL RESOURCES
A request for a review of potential cultural resources was submitted to the North Carolina Department
of Natural and Cultural Resources State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO) on March 12, 2021.
NCSHPO responded on April 29, 2021, and requested further information regarding all structures 50
years or older within the project site. Kimley-Hom visited the site on May 13, 2021, to photograph
and document the existing 50-year-old structures. Following the site visit, Kimley-Horn prepared a
photographic documentation package and submitted the information to NCSHPO. On July 9, 2021,
NCSHPO provided a response letter concurring with the absence of potentially eligible cultural
resources within the project boundary. A copy of the correspondence is provided in Appendix H.
No documented archaeological sites of significance within the project boundary were identified.
Kimley}>>Horn

16
9.0 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
The Town of Troutman and Iredell County are Phase II stormwater delegated local authorities that
jointly implement NCDEQ's Post-Construction Stormwater Program. A preliminary stormwater
management plan is being designed by KH and although this plan has not yet been finalized, the
preliminary plan includes the construction of stormwater ponds designed to accommodate the
stormwater volume associated with the development of the site. The final stormwater management
plan will meet all stormwater management requirements and will be submitted to the delegated local
authorities for review. Approvals will be provided to NCDWR once they are received
10.0 COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Compensatory mitigation will be met by the purchase of credits through the NC Division of Mitigation
Services (NCDMS) in-lieu fee program. 2,236 LF of stream impacts, including 241 LF of indirect
loss of waters, will be mitigated through the purchase of stream mitigation credits. Based on an
NCSAM assessment of Medium for intermittent Streams 3B, 4, and 5, mitigation is proposed at a
1.5:1 ratio for impacts to these features, or 882 stream mitigation credits. A quality assessment
result of Medium for perennial Stream 2 proposes mitigation at a 2:1 ratio for impacts to this feature,
or 2,814 stream mitigation credits. It is assumed that indirect loss of waters impacts may result to
the upstream portion of Stream 2 and the entirety of Stream 6. Based on these assumed impacts,
mitigation is proposed at a 1:1 ratio, or 241 stream mitigation credits. In total, 3,937 stream mitigation
credits will be purchased from NCDMS to offset impacts associated with this project. Quality
assessment results and NCDMS mitigation acceptance are included in Appendix F.
11.0 CONCLUSION
NC Development Acquisition, LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, is proposing the
construction of a multi-building industrial logistics park in Iredell County, North Carolina. The project
area totals approximately 157-acres located at the NW corner of 1-77 and Ostwalt Amity Road in the
town of Troutman, Iredell County, NC (35.689908°, -80.861081°). The industrial warehousing
complex will include two distribution center warehouses, totaling 1,700,000 SF of warehouse space,
and will provide warehousing and logistics services to Charlotte MSA-related clients and the 1-77
corridor. As compensatory mitigation for impacts to aquatic resources, the applicant is proposing to
purchase 3,696 stream mitigation credits from NCDMS. The proposed project is the result of
numerous development plan reviews during which the applicant was able to further avoid and
minimize impacts to aquatic resources. All development activities will be conducted using best
management practices to prevent incidental impacts to the remaining on-site aquatic resources.
Kimley}>>Horn

APPENDIX C
Permit Drawings

10' EASEMENT DEDICATED FOR
-FROCK
SE' EASEMENT DEDICATED FOR
EASTSIDE TR TRAIL PROJECT T-6
Kimley>>> Horn
Go o-ech Precast
Span • Nolmpac'
COntOGll PTe0BE1
Span - No Impact
tram 38 - Impart
257 LF -Perna nenF
TRAILER
PARKING
/1
I
,
fE
J _G�
MONUMENT SIGN,
y 444
PA 1• eP-LANDSCAPE
ER MP)
50 STREAM BUFFER
8 TRE- SAVE AREA
TRUCK
ENTRANCE
AND EXIT
Stream 4- Impact 3
59 LF - Parmanml
1 SCOS003F
DISTRIBUTION
CENTER
a R
.. ��I I
I 10' EASEMENT DEDICATED FOR
. • / `\
EASTSIDE TR TRAIL PROJECT TE`
EMPLOYEE
ENTRANCE
5,10,000 SF
DISTRFEUTIDNI
CENTER I
l
TRAILER
PARKING
EMPLOYEE]
ENTRANCEI
rf
MONUMENT G GN
G4earrr. 2 • Impaci 1
1,407 LF • Pennarrmt
Stream 6 - Impact 6
56 LF -Permanent (Indirect Loss)
Stream 2- Impact 5
185 LF- Permanent (Indirect Loss)
EMPLOYEE
ENTRANCE
MON ,1FNT SIGN
SO' TYPE A BUFFER.
GOOF REQUIREMENT:PER 100 LF
NTREES •50%EVERGREEN IMSMA PY0 RWIO.D)
40 SHRUBS 113FRONDE01
s%EVERGREEN I1005ymoyDEm
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
SITE PLAN CONCEPT - 08
SHEET 1311
AUGUST25, 2021
EVERGREEN campy TREt=1a1
ECIPMWS CANOPY TREE 1]I
EVERGREENSwtuSS 401
51PNACE RF➢II NEWTS
1. MONUMENT SFGNS SHALL BE ALLOWED AT EACH PROJECT
DRIVEWAY AND SHALL NOT E.tE0 MO Sr Or RGNADE -AREA
FEP FACE.
ALL BE ALLOY,. ON Oa TO THREE
ALLOY,.S ACADES PER BUILDING ANG NO MORE MAN TWO INDEPEUCENT
TO 500 RE ALLOEACHWEO PER FACE. EACH NON SHALL BE LIMITED
LEGEND
--- ---
BUDDING SETBACK
— — — —
LANDSCAPE
BUFFER
STREAM BUFFER
-
STREAM IMPACT
PROVIDED PARKING
EMPLOYEE PARKING 451
TRUCK PARKING X
SITE DEVELOPMENT
TOTAL AREA:
160-ACs
BUILDING AREA:
35-AC3
BUILDING SQUARE
FOOTAGE:
1700000-5Fz
SITE COVERAGE
24.46

Z5
-55533,,
tt
17=-5
<-1
J -
7
rift
M11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1:11
1111
11
111,
1111111111111111111111111111111E1
PROP. ROUGH GRADE SURFACE
;.ilk'
I
51v),
...‘7114
-'14‘
-111,.a...ohimmullimmiummum 11-1-7:liSLItI,Iiill‘11
milrAhht,T4x I,-
Pdpt.,,41,14"1"1- OP 1
50
---.1411111111111111111111111111111111111M1114ffir -
J.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1.11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.. maniggi,
/51
///
— — —
illmmul111010101111111HIEll111111 1111111111
4114 :4
a
C5
17=-5
<-1
J -
7
rift
M11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
1:11
1111
11
111,
1111111111111111111111111111111E1
PROP. ROUGH GRADE SURFACE
;.ilk'
I
51v),
...‘7114
-'14‘
-111,.a...ohimmullimmiummum 11-1-7:liSLItI,Iiill‘11
milrAhht,T4x I,-
Pdpt.,,41,14"1"1- OP 1
50
---.1411111111111111111111111111111111111M1114ffir -
J.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1.11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.. maniggi,
/51
///
— — —
illmmul111010101111111HIEll111111 1111111111
4114 :4
a
C5

O_
w
0
z
0
0
z
a
w
H
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
IIIIIII"'
111111
"I.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN
IRIIIIIIII J111111
it
g'
. LIIIII LLIIIIINIII

RFAI USACE Response

Kimley>>>Horn
February 2, 2022
Ms. Krysta Stygar
Wilmington District, Charlotte Regulatory Field Office
US Army Corps of Engineers
8430 University Executive Park Drive
Charlotte, NC 28262
RE: USACE and Agency Response to Public Notice Comments
USACE SAW-2021-00535(DWR#2021-1406)
NC Development Acquisition, LLC— Troutman Logistics Center
Iredell County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Stygar,
On behalf of our client, North Carolina Development Acquisition, LLC, Kimley-Horn (KH) is submitting the
following responses to the Public Notice comments for the above-referenced project per the US Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) Public Notice Comments issued on January 11, 2022.
Below is an outline of the USACE comments with a brief narrative addressing each item. The USACE
comments with the applicant's response and explanation are as follows:
1. With respect to the project purpose,its analysis is a critical first step in the Corps permitting process.
The Corps is responsible in all cases for independently defining the project purposes from both the
applicant's and the public's perspective. Initially, the Corps evaluates a project's "basic purpose"to
assess whether the project is water-dependent. Once the Corps has determined the water
dependency of the project, it no longer considers the basic project purpose, but analyses
practicable alternatives in the light of the "overall project purpose". The overall project purpose must
be specific enough to define the applicant's need, but not so restrictive as to preclude an analysis
of all reasonable alternatives. The project purpose stated in your application is, "to construct a multi-
building industrial logistics park within the 1-77 corridor of the Charlotte MSA for connection to 1-85,
1-40, and CLT airport, providing eCommerce and traditional brick and mortar support warehousing
and supply-chain distribution space to optimize the efficiency of their distribution network in the
region, meeting current and future demands." The basic purpose being, "to provide warehousing
and supply chain distribution space to service Charlotte and Southeastern US and consumers
within those areas."In considering the overall project purpose, we have determined that this project
purpose is too specific. Therefore, we have determined the overall project purpose of this project
is "to construct a large scale, master-planned industrial logistics complex to provide warehousing
and supply-chain distribution space to meet current and future demands within the southeastern
United States."
Response: The applicant takes no exception to this change to the purpose and need
statement.
2. The applicant determined that Iredell County and more specifically Troutman was the most
appropriate project location based on the following criteria: 1) Location/proximity to interstate
roadway system; 2) proximity to airport/international airport; 3) availability of qualified workforce,
and 4) proximity to large urban/metropolitan city. The applicant did not state which other areas,
counties, and/or cities were considered for the proposed development. Therefore, please provide
the other locations considered along with the reasons/justifications as to why those areas were not
chosen. Within this response, please provide why this particular section of 1-77 was the preferred
location for this center.
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street,Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
Response: Due to market demand, the applicant continues to search for available large-
tract properties in surrounding cities and counties, including those within the 1-77, 1-85,
and 1-485 corridors in Mecklenburg, Gaston, Iredell, York, and Cabarrus Counties. Any
identified large-tract sites which could facilitate the size and scope of this development are
highly sought after in the Charlotte market. At present, there are over 60 development
companies similar to North Carolina Development Acquisition, LLC that are actively seeking
similar tracts. If/when large-tract sites become available, the applicant would seek to
purchase and construct industrial/logistical parks similar to this development on said
properties.
In addition to the Charlotte MSA, the applicant currently meets supply-chain distribution
needs in nearly every major logistical market center throughout the southeastern US
including but not limited to Charleston, SC; Greenville, SC; Atlanta, GA; Savannah, GA;
Tampa, FL; Orlando, FL; West Palm Beach, FL; and Huntsville, AL.
As of January 2022, a market analysis performed by Colliers International, a Charlotte-
based industrial brokerage firm, for the current Charlotte industrial market is as follows:
• Total Demand (Requirements in the Market): 22,827,544 SF
• 40% of the Total Demand are requirements seeking a 1MM SF or larger single-
tenant building
• Total Existing Available or Under Construction: 11,867,737 SF
• Number of 1MM SF or larger buildings existing or under construction: 1
Tenant demand in the Charlotte market is at an all-time high. Third-party logistics, E-
commerce, traditional retail, wholesale distribution companies, and manufacturing to a
lesser extent, are driving the market demand which is at a significant deficit as indicated
above.
3. The applicant analyzed six specific siting criteria to determine if the off-site alternatives would be a
practicable alternative. One of the six criteria was Land Use/ Zoning which looked at
parcel(s)/tract(s) of land currently zoned for the intended use or that could be reasonably re-zoned
to accommodate the proposed project. Off-site alternative 1-3 states, "the site not currently zoned
for the proposed use; however, re-zoning of the property is assumed to be feasible." What
additional work, costs, extended timeline would be needed to re-zone parcels listing in off-site
alternative 1-3 to commercial use? Were Land Use/ Zoning criteria petitioned in the other
alternatives or just the preferred, please explain.
a. In addition, the preferred alternative is "not currently zoned for the proposed use, however
rezoning the property has been petitioned and according to the Town of Troutman, the rezoning
petition is anticipated to be accepted."What is the current designation of the preferred alternative?
Response: The preferred alternative is now properly zoned Industrial and annexed into
the Town of Troutman.
Rezoning of alternate sites would entail a timeline of approximately 6 months to potentially
obtain the required documents, file applications, and hold the required public hearings at
a cost of up to $250,000+ per site based on recent experience.
4. The applicant analyzed six specific siting criteria to determine if off-site alternatives would be a
practicable alternative. One of the six criteria was Access which specifically looked at three different
components. The description of this criteria stated, "the site must provide suitable access to a major
interstate. Suitable access to a major interstate would be defined as direct access to the site from
a paved road suitable to support truck traffic associated with the proposed facility. Second, the site
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
must be located adjacent to within two miles of an interstate exchange. Third, the site must allow
for truck access that avoids at-grade rail crossings and/or minimizes at-grade rail crossing
relocation."
a. What is the significance of a 2-mile radius and why was the radius not expanded to three, five,
or ten miles?Please provide additional details/justification as to why only a 2-mile radius.
b. What is the significance of access to a major interstate? Please define "major interstate" and
additional justification why a further location would not be acceptable?
Response: In general, warehouse distribution center projects utilize a large number of
semi-trucks (WB-67's), typically 500-1,000 or more per day, that are best suited for
interstate travel. The 2-mile radius is significant due to the trucking costs associated with
being more than 2-miles from a major interstate, e.g. Interstate Highway System or
freeway, part of a network of controlled-access highways that link major cities in the 48
contiguous states. The analytics show that on city streets it costs $3/mile for distances 2-
10 miles and $4.25/mile for distances 11-20 miles from the interstate. For highway travel
to the interstate, the additional trucking cost above 2 miles is $2.25/mile. These increased
costs would create a financial hardship on prospective tenants and decrease the number
of interested parties in a given development.
In addition, all prospective tenants seek to limit the intermingling of trucks and passenger
cars to the extent practical and seek sites close to interstates to promote safer driving
conditions for truck and commuter traffic. Moreover, additional distance from interstate
results in wasted fuel, increased CO2 emissions, increased truck driver costs, including
layover costs, and longer employee commutes. Longer employee commutes increase
operational costs which handicap remote sites compared to those in proximity to
interstates. Prospective tenants generally do not entertain multi-mile one-way trips due to
these added costs. Additionally, prospective tenants often reject sites that require more
than two turns from an interstate. For those reasons, an increased distance from major
interstates would make the project inviable.
Lastly, local streets are not well suited for the number of trucks nor the typical 80,000-
pound weight. In many cases, aging infrastructure is not rated for today's increased weight
limits, forcing drivers to utilize alternative routes, often resulting in increased driving
distances or unscheduled layovers. From a political standpoint, rural sites that are greater
than 2-miles from an interstate begin to encroach on residential areas. Rezonings become
more difficult as the number of neighbor objections begins to sway elected officials'
opinions.
5. The preferred alternative shows several configurations for the on-site alternatives.
a. Please provide additional information as to why the building space is necessitated to be
1,700,000 SF?Is there an option to potentially build up vertically, potentially replacing two buildings
with one, that has two stories? Please justify and provide additional information. Why would a
smaller space not be as beneficial?
b. For configuration 2, as stated, "during design, the agreement with the build-to-suit warehouse
tenant was terminated, resulting in a speculative redesign of the site. This configuration includes
one 1,501,200 SF building, 6 storm water detention basins, truck access and parking, and employee
parking."Additional details about the future use of the designed warehouse are requested. Is there
a tenant?Is the tenant only speculative at this point?If the building size would work with 1.5 million
feet, why is the desired/preferred alternative 1.7 million SF?
Response: Please refer to the included building plans for a visual depiction of what is
proposed for construction. The operational requirements of distribution centers require
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
direct access to both sides of the building with semi-trucks (WB-67's). Multi-level loading
docks would not be a viable alternative due to operational requirements. The next level
up would be approximately 40' above grade which isn't operational or financially feasible.
Tenant demand is what is driving the building sizes. 5 years ago, a 200,000 SF building
was a common product. Due to changes in shopping patterns that have been exacerbated
by the pandemic, building sizes have steadily increased over the last 5 years in order to
meet the demand, while the number of developable large-tract sites necessary to facilitate
larger building sizes continues to decrease.
While the previous build-to-suit tenant's proposed building was slightly smaller than the
current 1.7M SF proposed plan, the overall development footprint was much larger. The
previous plan required over 1,000 trailer parking spaces and 600 employee parking
spaces. For comparison, the current 2-building plan proposes 474 trailer parking spaces
and 484 employee parking spaces. As a result, the previous plan yielded slightly more
aquatic resource impacts than the currently proposed 2-building plan.
We understand the general concerns with speculative development; however, the
applicant is currently in discussions with four prospective tenants interested in leasing the
facilities. A tenant will most likely be known within the first few months of construction to
allow for proper internal building customization. In addition, 27.6M SF of speculative
warehouse distribution space has been leased over the past 10 years within the Charlotte
market. 100% of those facilities were under lease upon receiving a certificate of
occupancy.
For reference, here is a summary of industrial warehouse facilities and their uses:
Cross-Dock
Cross-docking is unloading inbound freight from one truck, holding it in the warehouse
building for a very short period of time, and loading it onto another truck for outbound
shipping. Often there is one side that is designated for Receiving and one side for
Shipping. Goods are unloaded on the Receiving side and routed "across" the warehouse
to awaiting trucks on the Shipping side. The buildings are typically much larger than a
rear load building and are usually occupied by one tenant, sometimes two. The volume
of material handled by these tenants requires a large number of trucks/loading docks,
large warehouse space for temporary storage, and a large number of trailer parking
spaces. The width of these buildings is limited by fire code to about 620' before special
designs are required. Building floors are raised 48" above the surrounding grade to allow
for unloading semi-trucks. The internal ceilings are typically 32' high or higher. The
tenants of these buildings are large Fortune 500 companies and these buildings form the
backbone of their supply chain supplying goods to each brick and mortar store. Every
retailer and grocery store utilizes this type of facility. Due to the volume of inbound and
outbound trucks, these are located adjacent to major arterial road networks.
Rear-Load
Rear load buildings are essentially half of a cross-dock and max out at approximately 300'
deep and are usually smaller than 300,000 SF. These are often occupied by multiple
smaller users that have a much smaller volume of inbound/outbound goods. Target
tenants occupy 5,000 SF to 50,000 SF each and up to 10 loading docks. These tenants
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
are smaller companies and may only serve a few local locations. These buildings are
often located in industrial parks near the industrial/manufacturing centers of a jurisdiction.
Front-Load
Front-load buildings are almost the same as rear-load buildings only with parking located
on the ends of the facilities. These buildings often are more manufacturing-based.
6. Off-site alternative 1 states, "in summary, off-site alternative 1 does not meet all the site screening
criteria and is therefore not a practicable alternative." In the general screening criteria provided,
"the property can be reasonably obtained, and the project site meets the basic and overall project
purpose, however, due to the presence of overhead power lines, the 700,000 SF building cannot
be constructed. This alternative is not capable of being constructed when considering costs and
logistics." This is a broad/vague statement that needs additional information to support that
assumption. Therefore, please provide additional details about the added costs and logistical
support preventing this off-site alternative from not being a viable option.
Response: The overhead powerlines in question are major transmission towers. Due to
the size of the structures and the disruption to the electrical grid, they cannot be feasibly
relocated. The estimated relocation cost for a double circuit transmission tower is
approximately$3M per tower plus changes to two additional towers due to the new angles
for a total of approximately $10M. This work requires approximately two years to design,
build the relocated towers, prepare temporary rerouting to keep customers powered,
reroute the main power line, and then demolish the old towers.
7. Off-site alternative 2 states, "This site is not currently zoned for the proposed land use, rezoning of
the site is assumed unfeasible due to the current residential zoning designation, proximity to the
Barium Springs Home for Children, and the proximity to residential developments to the North and
South." Please provide more detail as to why rezoning is not feasible. Please provide additional
support about the added costs and logistical support preventing this site from being a viable option.
Response: Rezoning for this alternate is not feasible due to the proximity to major
residential areas. Neither the applicant nor future tenants are willing to locate next to the
area with lots of pedestrian traffic and/or interaction with residences. In this particular
case, the neighbor is an orphanage facility. Additionally, following the original submittal
of the alternatives analysis, we understand that this site is now under consideration by a
national home builder seeking to develop a residential neighborhood.
8. Off-site alternative 3 states, "The site is not for sale and cannot be purchased."Further information
is requested why an alternative that could not be purchased was considered. (How is this a
reasonable alternative if it is not an option?) Availability was stated to be a consideration when
determining off-site alternatives, "availability of large tracts of land".
Response: "Availability" in this instance simply refers to the existence of a property that
initially appears to have sufficient area to be a viable site. There is a small number of
large sites in the vicinity of the preferred alternative. Better wording for off-site alternative
3 is that the site is "not currently listed for sale but is assumed to be available for purchase
upon receipt of an acceptable offer".
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
9. The introduction states, "associated access roads, parking, utilities, and storm water management
facilities are also proposed." This is a broad statement and additional details describing the
infrastructure are needed. Are there any additional or anticipated impacts to waters of the United
States associated with this proposed work? Were these impacts evaluated for both the preferred
alternative and other alternatives?
Response:The items referenced above are shown on the provided plans and associated
impacts are already included within the application. No additional impacts are proposed.
10. The information requested above is essential to the expeditious processing of the application;
please submit one consolidated response to all comments by February 24, 2022. This information
is required pursuant to 33 CFR 325, Appendix B, and 40 CFR 1506.5 If you do not submit this
information within the given timeframe, the application will be administratively withdrawn.
Withdrawal of the application does not preclude you from reopening the application at a later time,
provided you submit the required information.
Response: Understood.
Greg Cain (Neighbor)
11. I live at 171 Levo Drive, Troutman, and this 1.7 million SF distribution center project is planned on
land that connects to my property. The environmental concern I have is the water runoff damage
from the proposed property site and my property. (see attached photos) During medium to heavy
rainfalls, there is a stream of water collected from the proposed distribution center site that flows
through my property. This stream of water already causes a great deal of erosion damage along
with significant trash pollution. My family and I pick up bags of trash yearly from the runoff that is
dumped off our property. This runoff goes through my property and ends up in I-L Creek. I reviewed
the maps and information in the public notice I do not see this intermittent stream listed on the
maps. In figure 6 of the notice "existing conditions map"there is a stream labeled S1. This would
be the nearest stream but is not what runs through my property. I am concerned that with the
construction and building of distribution centers that runoff into this stream causing significant
erosion damage and dumping trash/pollution into my property and the I-L stream will only intensify.
I want to make sure that this concern is addressed and resolved during the planning/application
period. I am requesting a conversation with representatives from the Corps of Engineers, North
Carolina Acquisitions, LLC, and the Town of Troutman. I am also requesting a written plan on my
concerns listed above that will be addressed by the developer. Ideally, representatives would visit
my property so we can walk the property line and discuss the area I have described.
Response: The applicant invited Mr. Cain to a virtual meeting on December 7, 2021, to
discuss the project in detail and address his concerns. During this meeting, it was
explained that the development of the site would eliminate the illegal trash dumping
upgradient from his residence that was making its way to his property during rain events.
The applicant also showed that the non-jurisdictional stormwater drainage feature on his
property would not receive a significant discharge from the proposed development and
erosion damage should decrease. The applicant also has walked the property line with
the residents to listen to and help address concerns.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
12. We recommend seeking alternatives in other counties or towns, as well as brownfield sites.
Response: Please see the response to Comment#2 above.
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
13. For the employee parking, we recommend parking structures or another alternative
Response: Structured parking is not financially or operationally viable for this type of use.
At an average cost of$10,000 per parking space, structured parking would add a minimum
of a $5M premium to the construction cost. Additionally, prospective tenants do not want
to handicap their ability to attract employees due to the nuisance of navigating a parking
deck. The limited amount of area devoted to car parking would not generate substantial
decreases to environmental resources.
14. The applicant should use non-invasive native species and Low Impact Development in
landscaping. Using LID technology in landscaping will not only help maintain the predevelopment
hydrologic regime but also enhance the aesthetic and habitat value of the site. LID Techniques
include permeable pavement and bioretention areas that can collect storm water from driveways
and parking areas. Additional alternatives include narrower roads, swales versus curbs/gutters,
and permeable surfaces such as turf stone, brick, and cobblestone. Compared to conventional
developments, implementing appropriate LID techniques can be more cost-effective, increase
property values, provide space-saving advantages, reduce runoff, and protect water quality.
Response: The applicant will utilize native species in the proposed landscaping as
irrigation is intended to be limited. Sand filters are proposed for stormwater quality
treatment prior to discharge.
15. Maintain a minimum 100-foot undisturbed, native, forested buffer along perennial streams and a
minimum 50-foot buffer along intermittent streams and wetlands. Maintaining undisturbed, forested
buffers along these areas will minimize the impacts to aquatic and terrestrial wildlife resources,
water quality, and aquatic habitat both within and downstream of the project area.
Response: The Town of Troutman Unified Development Ordinance requires a 50-ft
undisturbed buffer along perennial streams (solid-blue line) illustrated on the most recent
version of the USGS topographic map. The applicant will maintain the 50-ft buffers
generating a 100' total width forested buffer on all remaining streams not proposed to be
impacted by the development.
16. Due to the decline in populations of tree-roosting bat species, avoid tree clearing activities during
the maternity roosting season for bats (May 15-August 15)
Response: To the extent practicable, tree clearing activities will be limited to proposed
development areas only. The applicant intends to leave as many trees as practical to limit
habitat disruption and buffer the site from neighbors.
17. We recommend not clearing the entire site, but rather maintaining the maximum amount of native
vegetation as possible. We suggest having the site logged or repurposing the wood instead of
burning the cleared trees.
Response: The applicant intends to leave as many trees as practical to limit habitat
disruption and buffer the site from neighbors.
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
18. Disturbed areas should be re-seeded with native seed mixtures and plants. Avoid fescue-based
mixtures or lespedeza because they are invasive and provide little benefit to wildlife. Native, annual
small grains appropriate for the season are preferred and recommended. For areas adjacent to
buildings, a native shrub/grass option may also be beneficial. Avoid using invasive, non-native
plants in seed mixtures or landscaping plants, such as Bermuda grass, lespedeza, and nandina.
Response: Temporary and permanent native seed mixtures will be incorporated into the
stabilization plan to help prevent erosion and stabilize slopes. Turfgrass will be limited
within the development.
19. Sediment and erosion control measures should be installed prior to any land-disturbing activity.
The use of biodegradable and wildlife-friendly sediment and erosion control devices is strongly
recommended. Silt fencing, fiber rolls, and/or other products should have loose-weave netting that
is made of natural fiber materials with movable joints between the vertical and horizontal twines.
Silt fencing that has been reinforced with plastic or metal mesh should be avoided as it impeded
the movement of terrestrial wildlife species. Excessive silt and sediment loads can have detrimental
effects on aquatic resources including the destruction of spawning habitat, suffocation of eggs, and
clogging of gills.
Response:Sediment and erosion control measures as required, reviewed, and approved
by Iredell County will be implemented prior to land disturbance.
20. We recommend considering additional measures to address secondary and cumulative impacts of
development on water and aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitat before degradation of streams
occurs. Measures to address the issues of development can be found in NCWRC's Guidance
Memorandum to Address and Mitigate Secondary and Cumulative Impacts to Aquatic and
Terrestrial Wildlife Resources and Water Quality.
Response: The Town of Troutman Unified Development Ordinance requires a 50-ft
undisturbed buffer along perennial streams (solid-blue line) illustrated on the most recent
version of the USGS topographic map. The applicant will maintain the 50-ft buffers
generating a 100' total width forested buffer on all remaining streams not proposed to be
impacted by the development. Stream crossings will be designed to allow passage of
aquatic life, as many existing trees as practical will be preserved, and stormwater will be
treated and discharge velocities will be attenuated by stormwater control measures. Direct
discharge of stormwater into streams will not occur.
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
21. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b) "a 401 Water Quality Certification may only be issued upon
determining that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards which include
designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria, and the state's antidegradation policy as
defined in rules of 15A NCACO28.0200... In assessing whether the proposed activity will comply
with water quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the proposed activity: (1) has avoided
and minimized impacts to surface waters and wetlands.."As this project is speculative with a stated
purpose as to "provide warehousing and supply-chain distribution space to service the Charlotte
MSA",please provide a detailed justification for the sizes of the proposed buildings and the specific
need for the amount of parking proposed. It appears that the site could be re-designed to further
avoid and minimize stream and/or wetland impacts and still meet the stated purpose.
Response: Due to recent changes in consumer spending habits, population growth and
supply chain constraints, the Charlotte regional industrial real estate market is
experiencing tremendous growth. To accommodate for these changes, several factors
are taking place within the region. The average size of industrial buildings has tripled
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
since 2019, which has pushed development outside of the core industrial market and into
the outlying surrounding counties due to additional land being needed for the larger
facilities. However, these facilities still need to be located within proximity to the growing
population areas and within 1-2 miles from a major interstate.
Furthermore, there are over 22.5M square feet of tenant demand within the Charlotte
market representing over 50 companies. 18% of this demand represents tenants seeking
facilities of 1 M SF and greater. As of Q4 2021, there are only five buildings, within the
region, planned for 1 M SF or greater. As of the date of this submittal, there are 11 current
requests in the Charlotte area market for buildings of 1 M SF or greater.
Please see the attached modified site plan for reference. While it is possible to build a
warehouse on this property with fewer stream impacts, the smaller buildings do not fulfill
the highest and best use of the property. Due to its proximity to 1-77, this site needs to be
utilized for distribution or 1 M+ SF users. The number of available sites for buildings of this
size is rare in this market and demand currently exceeds supply. Due to the absence of
wetlands on this property, this site lends itself even more to larger products while
minimizing environmental impacts.
From a financial standpoint, the larger buildings are necessary to make the site financially
viable due to a large amount of wall required to minimize stream impact, the volume of
earthwork, and the cost of offsite improvements.
22. Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02H.0506(b) "a 401 Water Quality Certification may only be issued upon
determining that the proposed activity will comply with state water quality standards which includes
designated uses, numeric criteria, narrative criteria, and the state's antidegradation policy, as
defined in rules of 15A NCACA 028.0200... In assessing whether the proposed activity will comply
with water quality standards, the Division shall evaluate if the proposed activity: (2) would cause or
contribute to a violation of water quality standards; (3) would result in secondary or cumulative
impacts that cause or contribute to, or will cause or contribute to, a violation of water quality
standards; "Based on the information provided in the application the Division has
the following concerns:
a. Along the eastern boundary of the project site a small segment of stream 2 and stream 6 will be
indirectly affected by becoming disconnected, and essentially isolated, from all other natural
features. This small, disconnected portion of Stream 2 and Stream 6 are unlikely to continue to
provide the same hydrologic and biological function and therefore should be counted as indirect
"loss of water". Please revise the application, plan sheets, and impact tables accordingly.
b. All surface flow from the project is proposed to be routed through multiple stormwater and wet
detention basins. In order to review possible secondary impacts to downstream hydrology, please
provide plans that clearly show the outlet location from each storm water control measure. Please
note that the rerouting of any draining area and surface flow has the potential to remove existing
hydrology from features adjacent to this project and therefore remove existing uses of the stream
channels or wetlands. Based on the location of the proposed storm water basins, it appears that the
lower portion of stream 3 and stream 1 will have significantly reduced hydrology.
Response:
a.) Please find the attached revised application, plan sheets, and impact tables indicating
an indirect "loss of water" for Streams 2 & 6.
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>)Horn
b.) To continue contributing hydrology to the lower portion of Stream 3, the applicant will
direct 2-acres of greenspace runoff from the northwestern portion of the site to the
beginning of Stream 3.
The southern portion of Stream 1 will continue to receive flow from 4-acres west of the
stream and 30-acres from the parcel directly south of the proposed development.
The Stormwater Management Plan is currently in design and will be submitted to NCDWR
upon completion. The design will include detailed plans demonstrating the outlet locations
at each stormwater control measure. We are currently targeting a May 2022 submittal
date.
23. Please submit a complete Storm water Management Plan for the project which shall include all
appropriate supplemental forms, 0 & M agreements, calculations, engineering drawings, etc., that
complies with the requirements of the State Storm water Program. The Storm water Design Manual
and applicable forms may be found on DEMLR's website at
https.//deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energymineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land-
permitguidance/stormwater-bmp-manual. In addition, please also submit the application form
SWU-101(attached). However, the $505 application fee and last two signature pages of this form
may be omitted. {15A NCAC 02H.0506(b)(2) and (3)) Pursuant to Title 15A NCAC 02H .0502(e),
the applicant shall furnish all of the above-requested information for the proper consideration of the
application. Please respond in writing within 30 calendar days of receipt of this letter by sending
one(1) copy of all the above requested information to the 401 &Buffer permitting branch, 1617 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 OR by submitting all of the above-requested information
through this link: https.//edocs.deq.nc.gov/Forms/Supplemental-Information-Form
Response:The Stormwater Management Plan is currently in design and will be submitted
to NCDWR upon completion. We are currently targeting a May 2022 submittal date.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
24. Based on the information provided, the project would occur at a location where any incidental take
that may result from associated activities is exempt under the 4(d) rule for this species. (I.e.
Northern Long-eared Bat)
Suitable habitat occurs onsite for the federally threatened dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis
Naniflora). We acknowledge that targeted botanical surveys conducted during the appropriate
survey window did not detect evidence for this species at that time. Your correspondence did not
describe the project in enough detail to discern the action area and effects of the action (50 CFR
402.02) Generally, proposed impacts to suitable habitats for listed plant species, but negative
survey results collected during the appropriate survey window, warrant our concurrence with a "may
affect, not likely to adversely affect"determination from the appropriate federal action agency.
In accordance with the Act, it is the responsibility of the appropriate federal agency or its designated
representative to review its activities or programs and to identify any such activities or programs
that may affect endangered or threatened species and their habitats. If it is determined that the
proposed activity may adversely affect any species federally listed as endangered or
threatened, formal consultation with this office must be initiated.
Response: A revised response was obtained by USFWS on September 30, 2021, with
the following revised statement:
Based on the information provided, suitable habitat occurs onsite for the federally
threatened dwarf-flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis naniflora) and endangered Schweinitz's
sunflower (Helianthus schweinitzii). We acknowledge that targeted botanical surveys
conducted during the appropriate survey windows did not detect evidence for these
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

Kimley>>>Horn
species at that time. Since the proposed project would impact suitable habitat for these
species, but no evidence for these plants was detected using appropriate methods, we
would concur with a may affect, not likely to adversely affect determination from the action
agency for these species.
The revised USFWS response is attached.
25. Although not required, we encourage the applicant to avoid any associated tree clearing activities
during this animal's maternity roosting season from May 15-AUG 15.
Response: To the extent practicable, tree clearing activities will be limited to proposed
development areas only. The applicant intends to leave as many trees as practical to limit
habitat disruption and buffer the site from neighbors.
North Carolina Department of Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office
26. We have conducted a review of the project and are aware of no historic resources which would be
affected by the project. Therefore, we have no comment on the project as proposed.
Response: SHPO has determined that the project will not affect historic resources.
Sincerely,
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Chris Tinklenberg, PWS
Environmental Scientist
Attachments
Cc: Dominic Reinicker, NC Development Acquisition, LLC
Matt Prince, NC Development Acquisition, LLC
Austin Watts, Kimley-Horn
kimley-horn.com 200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202 704 333 5131

O_
aN
w
0
z
0
0
z
a
w
H
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
• ram{lTy' uuu11 `11uuuuuu11uuu
Iii!1111.16gT 1112111MIIHL,
IIIIIIIIIII IIIIII11E11
11Ill1I111Ill

APPENDIX C
Permit Drawings

SITE DEVELOPMENT
liacimimmoilreeimiusweianiaz
44
PROVIDED PARKING
14

/55
.
ow
,
.
.
z
.; 5
3 5, 5
33333333;33
:A
....1
.533;33333335333;333
'v13
3
fl1N;13"i"M
5-3-3-31
177-5 _ 3
5'4++,
55 I
43-
1111111111111111111111111111111E1
"7.4,711M-
4111111}INV.
E1111111111111111111111111111111111111TAM111111111
"m17ff4 milmmmins1.73amMlitis
/51
PROP. ROUGH GRADE SURFACE
I I/
01:1111102111€.111111111111111111111111111111111
INIIIIN1111011unnolomm1111 1111111111
.11111Mil 11/i1111101a-010

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
September 30, 2021
Taylor Kiker
Kimley-horn
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
[e-mail]
Dear Taylor Kiker:
Subject: NCDA Douglas Troutman Logistics Center; Iredell County, North Carolina
f us. 1
FISH &WILDLIFE
SERVICE
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondences dated April20, 2021 and September 27, 2021, wherein you solicit our
comments regarding project -mediated impacts to federally protected species. We submit the
following comments in accordance with the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321
et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531-1543) (Act).
Proj ect Description
According to the information provided, the proposed commercial development would entail the
construction a distribution center (approximately 1.7 million square foot total building space),
and parking/access appurtenances on approximately 39 acres in Troutman, North Carolina. The
proposed project is anticipated to require authorization from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The action area is composed of undeveloped open space, mixed successional forest, riparian
areas, and transitional habitats.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
According to Service records, suitable summer roosting habitat may be present in the action area
(50CFR 402.02) for the federally threatened northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).
However, the final 4(d) rule, (effective as of February 16, 2016) exempts incidental take of
northern long-eared bat associated with activities that occur greater than 0.25 miles from a
known hibernation site, and greater than 150 feet from a known, occupied maternity roost during
the pup season (June 1— July 31). Based on the information provided, the project would occur at
a location where any incidental take that may result from associated activities is exempt under
the 4(d) rule for this species. Although not required, we encourage the Applicant to avoid
any associated free clearing activities during this animal's active season from April 1 —
October 15.
Based on the information provided, suitable habitat occurs onsite for the federally threatened
dwarf -flowered heartleaf (Hexastylis nanora) and endangered Schweinitz's sunflower

(Helianthus schweinitzii). We acknowledge that targeted botanical surveys conducted during the
appropriate survey windows did not detect evidence for these species at that time. Since the
proposed project would impact suitable habitat for these species, but no evidence for these plants
were detected using appropriate methods, we would concur with a may affect, not likely to
adversely affect determination from the action agency for these species.
Based on the information provided, we believe that suitable habitat is not present onsite for any
other federally protected species, and we require no further action at this time. Please be aware
that obligations under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new
information reveals impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical
habitat in a manner not previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a
manner that was not considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is
determined that may be affected by the identified action.
We offer the following recommendations on behalf of natural resources:
Erosion and Sediment Control
Measures to control sediment and erosion should be installed before any ground -disturbing
activities occur. Grading and backfilling should be minimized, and existing native vegetation
should be retained (if possible) to maintain riparian cover for fish and wildlife. Disturbed areas
should be revegetated with native vegetation as soon as the project is completed. Ground
disturbance should be limited to what will be stabilized quickly, preferably by the end of the
workday. Natural fiber matting (coir) should be used for erosion control as synthetic
netting can trap animals and persist in the environment beyond its intended purpose.
Riparian Buffers
Natural, forested riparian buffers are critical to the health of aquatic ecosystems. They
accomplish the following:
1. Catch and filter runoff, thereby helping to prevent nonpoint-source pollutants
from reaching streams.
2 Enhance the in -stream processing of both point- and nonpoint-source
pollutants.
3. Act as "sponges" by absorbing runoff (which reduces the severity of floods)
and by allowing runoff to infiltrate and recharge groundwater levels (which
maintains stream flows during dry periods).
4. Catch and help prevent excess woody debris from entering the stream and
creating logjams.
5. Stabilize stream banks and maintain natural channel morphology.
6. Provide coarse woody debris for habitat structure and most of the dissolved
organic carbon and other nutrients necessary for the aquatic food web.
7. Maintain air and water temperatures around the stream.
Forested riparian buffers (a minimum 50 feet wide along intermittent streams and 100 feet wide
along perennial streams [or the full extent of the 100-year floodplain, whichever is greater])
should be created and/or maintained adjacent to all aquatic areas. Impervious surfaces, ditches,
2

pipes, roads, utility lines (sewer, water, gas, transmission, etc.), and other infrastructure that
requires maintenance, cleared rights -of -way and/or compromise the functions and values of the
forested buffers should not occur within these riparian areas.
Utility Lines
We encourage the Applicant to consider utilizing directional drilling to accomplish any
necessary utility line installation. Utility crossings of streams should be kept to a minimum, and
all utility infrastructure (including manholes) should be kept out of riparian buffer areas.
Directional boring under streams significantly minimizes impacts to aquatic resources and
riparian buffers.
If directional boring cannot be used and trenching is determined to be the only viable method,
every effort should be made to ensure that impacts to in -stream features are minimized and
stabilized upon completion of the project. Our past experiences with open -trench crossings
indicate that this technique increases the likelihood for future lateral movement of the stream
(which could undercut or erode around the utility line), and the correction of such problems
could result in costly future maintenance and devastating impacts to natural resources.
Therefore, as much work as possible should be accomplished in the dry, and the amount of
disturbance should not exceed what can be successfully stabilized by the end of the workday.
Regardless of the crossing method, all utility lines should cross streams perpendicularly.
Stream Crossings
Bridges or spanning structures should be used for all permanent roadway crossings of streams
and associated wetlands. Structures should span the channel and the floodplain in order to
minimize impacts to aquatic resources, allow for the movement of aquatic and terrestrial
organisms, and eliminate the need to place fill in streams, wetlands, and floodplains.
Bridges should be designed and constructed so that no piers or bents are placed in the stream,
approaches and abutments do not constrict the stream channel, and the crossing is perpendicular
to the stream. Spanning some or all of the floodplain allows stream access to the floodplain,
dissipates energy during high flows, and provides terrestrial wildlife passage. When bank
stabilization is necessary, we recommend that the use of riprap be minimized and that a
riprap-free buffer zone be maintained under the bridge to allow for wildlife movement. If fill in
the floodplain is necessary, floodplain culverts should be added through the fill to allow the
stream access to the floodplain during high flows.
If bridges are not possible and culverts are the only option, we suggest using bottomless culverts.
Bottomless culverts preserve the natural stream substrate, create less disturbance during
construction, and provide a more natural post -construction channel. Culverts should be of
sufficient size to leave natural stream functions and habitats at the crossing site unimpeded.
Culvert installation and presence should not change water depth, volume (flow), or velocity
levels that permit aquatic organism passage; and accommodate the movement of debris and bed
material during bankfull events. Widening the stream channel must be avoided.
In the event that a traditional culvert is the only option, the culvert design should provide for a
minimum water depth in the structure during low flow or dry periods. Sufficient water depth
3

should be maintained in all flow regimes so as to accommodate both the upstream and
downstream movement of aquatic species. Water depth inside the culvert must be adequate for
fish to be completely submerged and all other aquatic life to move freely, even during low flow
periods. The culvert should be designed and installed at the same slope as the stream grade to
maintain an acceptable water velocity for aquatic life passage and for stream substrate
characteristics to be retained within the culvert.
Where feasible, we recommend the use of multiple barrels, in addition to a low flow barrel, to
accommodate flood flows. Floodplain barrels should be placed on or near stream bankfull or
floodplain bench elevations and discharge onto floodplain benches. Where appropriate, install
sills on the upstream end of floodplain barrels to restrict or divert the base stream flow to a single
barrel. If the culvert is longer than 40 linear feet, alternating or notched baffles should be
installed in a manner that mimics the existing stream pattern. This will enhance the passage of
aquatic life by: (1) depositing and retaining sediment in the barrel, (2) maintaining channel
depth and flow regimes, and (3) providing resting places for fish and other aquatic organisms.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at [e-mail], if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-21-246.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
4

NCDEQ Stormwater Management
Calculations

Stormwater Management Calculations
Troutman Logistics Center
Troutman, NC 28166
Prepared for:
Town of Troutman
Engineering Department
400 N Eastway Drive
Troutman, NC 28166
NCDEQ
512 N. Salisbury St. (9th Floor)
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604
Date: May 16, 2022
KHA Reference #: 015002007 ��••�AR•,,�*
�N• 0�
��
��
SEAL
KimIey» Horn
C Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2022
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200, Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone: [phone]
NC License #F-0102
0308611/4s-
• ':�'l'G 1 NE��•• .
,,,,,,,...•'05/27/2022

TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
TROUTMAN, NC
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CALCULATIONS
Prepared for:
Town of Troutman
Engineering Department
400 N Eastway Drive
Troutman, NC 28166
&
NCDEQ
512 N. Salisbury St. (9th Floor)
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27604
Prepared by:
KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
200 South Tryon Street, Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28202
NC CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION:
F-0102
May 2022
015 002 007
Stormwater Anais and Calculations

TABLE OF CONTENTS
NARRATIVE
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 SITE LOCATION MAP
USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
FEMA FLOOD RATE INSURANCE MAP
NRCS WEB SOIL SURVEY MAP
APPENDIX 2
FIGURE 1
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 4
NOAA PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES FIGURE 5
PRE -DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP FIGURE 6
POST -DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP FIGURE 7
TIME OF CONCENTRATION CALCULATIONS FIGURE 8
WET POND DESIGN CALCULATIONS FIGURE 9
HYDROCAD PRE- AND POST -DEVELOPMENT REPORT
FIGURE 10
STORMWATER CONVEYANCE NETWORK CALCULATIONS
FIGURE 11
RIP -RAP CALCULATIONS FIGURE 12
Stormwater Anais and Calculations

OVERVIEW
This report contains the approach and results of a stormwater analysis for the development of the
Troutman Logistics Center to be located northwest of the intersection of Main Street and Ostwalt
Amity Road in Troutman, NC. This project consists of two large distribution centers. Building 1
consists of the northern 1M square foot building and associated access and infrastructure
improvements while Building 2 consists of the southern 700K square foot building and associated
parking areas.
Due to the requirement of a 404/401 permit, the proposed development will be subject to both
stormwater quantity and quality regulations. Town of Troutman / NCDEQ stormwater quantity
regulations require the post -development runoff rate from the 2-year and 10-year, 24-hour storm
events to be attenuated to the pre -development flow rates. Proposed storm sewer pipes shall be
designed for the 10-year, 24 hour frequency storm. NCDEQ stormwater quality regulations
require the control and treatment of the first 1" of rainfall over the development. Runoff volume
drawdown for the first 1" of rainfall shall be between 48 and 120 hours. Additionally, all
structural stormwater treatment systems shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average
annual removal for Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The proposed project will meet the above
requirements through the installation and maintenance of two wet ponds.
This project consists of the following components:
• Mass grading over approximately 158 acres
• Construction of two distribution center buildings and all associated site appurtenances for
operation (i.e. parking, utilities, landscaping, etc.)
• Construction of two wet detention ponds
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The existing site is generally undeveloped, with the exception of a few single family residences.
Overall existing site slopes towards the middle, draining to the onsite IL Creek. There is one main
point of analysis for on -site runoff, illustrated on the pre -development map (Figure 5).
GEOLOGY
The project site is located in the Piedmont Physiographic Province, an area underlain by ancient
igneous and metamorphic rocks. The residual soils in this area are the product of in -place
chemical weathering of rock. The typical residual soil profile consists of clayey soils near the
surface where soil weathering is more advanced, underlain by sandy silts and silty sands that
generally become harder with depth to the top of parent bedrock. Alluvial soils are typically
present within floodplain areas along creeks and rivers in the Piedmont. According to the 1985
Geologic Map of North Carolina, the site is along the borders of the Kings Mountain and
Charlotte Belts. The bedrock underlying the site generally consists of biotite gneiss.
The boundary between soil and rock in the Piedmont is not sharply defined. A transitional zone
termed "partially weathered rock" is normally found overlying the parent bedrock. Partially
weathered rock (PWR) is defined for engineering purposes as residual material with a standard
penetration test resistance exceeding 100 blows per foot. The transition between hard/dense
residual soils and partially weathered rock occurs at irregular depths due to variations in degree of
weathering.
Stormwater Anais and Calculations

FLOODPLAIN/FLOODWAY/FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP
Based on the effective FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 3710474000J, dated March 18,
2008, the site is with the area of minimal flood hazard, Zone X.
WATER QUANTITY
In accordance with the Town of Troutman Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Section 8.4
and NCDEQ regulations, a stormwater quantity control system designed to attenuate the post -
development 2-year, and 10-year, 24-hour storm events to pre -development conditions has been
provided. The proposed stormwater quantity control system will also pass the 50-year, 24-hour
storm event with at least 6 inches of freeboard.
The system was modeled in HydroCAD, which utilizes the NRCS TR-55 (SCS) Method of
calculating runoff, curve numbers, and time of concentration. The NOAA Rainfall Depth Table
was used to determine the rainfall depths used for calculations (2-year, 24-hour = 3.42 in; 10-
year, 24-hour = 5.03 in; 50-year, 24-hour = 6.77 in). Ponds outfall to Point of Analysis 1 (POA
1). Table IA below show results of a HydroCAD analysis for the proposed BMP.
TABLE IA: Pre- & Post -Development Peak Flows POA 1
Storm
Event
Pre-
Development
(cfs)
Post-
Development
(cfs)
POND 1
POND 2
Stage
Freeboard
Stage
Freeboard
2-year,
24-hour
62.76
55.16
859.21
3.79'
870.06
2.94'
10-year,
24-hour
254.55
223.02
861.03
1.97'
871.27
1.73'
50-year,
24-hour
540.42
491.94
862.41
0.59'
872.42
0.58'
WATER QUALITY
Per the Town of Troutman UDO Section 8.4 and NCDEQ standards, all stormwater quality
control requirements must be provided to control and treat the first 1" of rainfall over the entire
site. Runoff volume drawdown time is required to be between 48 and 120 hours. Additionally, all
structural stormwater treatment systems shall be designed to have a minimum of 85% average
annual removal for Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The required 85% TSS average annual
removal will be accomplished through the use of an NCDEQ compliant wet ponds provided
onsite. Drawdown of the first one (1) inch of runoff for the proposed wet pond is approximately
2.45 days (59 hours). For detailed calculations, see the calculation tables attached to this report.
STORM CONVEYANCE NETWORK ANALYSIS
The pipe storm drainage system on site was analyzed with AutoCAD Civil 3D Hydraflow Storm
Sewers Extention by Autodesk, which uses the Rational Method to estimate onsite runoff. The
proposed storm drainage system was designed to convey the 10-year storm event. Rainfall
intensities used in the model were obtained from NOAA. Please see provided Storm Sewers
report for the location/elevation of the 10-year, 24-hour hydraulic grade lines within the proposed
system. No hydraulic grade line rises above the rim of the proposed stormwater structures.
Stormwater Anais and Calculations

CONCLUSION
The proposed industrial development will utilize the proposed onsite wet ponds to satisfy water
quantity and quality requirements. All new impervious surface from onsite will drain to the
proposed onsite wet ponds to achieve 85% TSS removal. Additionally, the proposed onsite storm
network has been designed to meet Town of Troutman drainage requirements.
Stormwater Anais and Calculations

APPENDIX 1
Stormwater Analysis and Calculations
Troutman Logistics Center, Troutman, NC

ConnectGlS Feature Report
4/19/22, 1:29 PM
https://iredell.connectgis.com/DownloadFile.ashx?i=_ags_map92fa6b01 b3c24058886f21 cd9d376606x.htm&t=print

ZUSGS
U.S. DEPARTMENT Of THE INTERIOR
D.5- GEOLOGICAL SURREY
•:T USSTTop°
SHEPHERDS QUADRANGLE
NORTH CAROLINA
7.5-NINVIE SERIES
411.5.1
15
19
20
21
22
14144111
56
55 55
13 51
51 - .. - - 1 51
30 \ - _ 1 50
A3
1a
Prodx. 141..11. Rates 4. 1 .13494.my
,444
5444 [..wi•s,.wm+ !v�elicsi1i 1,44,14,441
Site Location
SCALE 1121000
11.
mrlse
46
N
44.4464
‘g1..2Tj Y�
000
0011
0.144.1
SHEPHERDS. NC
2019

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette
FEMA
Legend
80°52'W 35°41'38"N
3r1.nn7'1 M {71
eft, 3/18/1(70i3
0 250 500
Feet
1,000 1,500 2,000
Basemap: USGS National Map: Orthoimagery: Data refreshed October, 2020
89°51'23"W 35°41'9"N
1:6,000
SEE FPS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
SPECIAL FLOOD
HAZARD AREAS
Without Base Flood Elevation (BFE)
Zane R. Y. R99
With BFE or Depth Zone RE. AD. AN. V. AR
Regulatory Floodway
OTHER AREAS OF
FLOOD HAZARD
OTHER AREAS
GENERAL
STRUCTURES
OTHER
FEATURES
MAP PANELS
9
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Areas
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth less than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mile Zn is
_Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard Zane x
FAF Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Notes. Zone
,f' Area with Flood Risk due to Leveez.,,r, o
NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zr,,, x
Effective LOMRs
Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard zrr n
- — - - Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
1 l r 1 l l Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
zos Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance
� r•s Water Surface Elevation
a- - - Coastal Transect
—sn--- Base Flood Elevation Line (BFE)
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
Coastal Transect Baseline
— Profile Baseline
Hydrographic Feature
Digital Data Available Ni
No Digital Data Available _ '`
Unmapped 4(�
The pin displayed on the map Is an approximate
point selected by the user and does not represent
an authoritative property location.
This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
accuracy standards
The flood hazard information is derived directly from the
authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map
was exported on 4/19/2022 at 1:10 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
time. The NFHL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image Is voict if the one or more of the following map
elements do not appear: basemap imagery, Hood zone labels,
legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers,
FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for
unmapped and unmodernlzed areas cannot be used for
regulatory purposes.

4/13/22, 9:00 AM Precipitation Frequency Data Server
Large scale terrain
nysport ' Bristol •
ohnson City' .::'..
',...N
. .0...L., .Fit Mitchell
• Asheville
t
7,
• r-:*1gE -
•,7.) • 7 ---
0
Winston -Sal em
Durham
Greenshqoro
NOTH CAROLINA
Charlotte
•
100km
mi
r 'I 'I L_T A 13 T T
Fa yet
_Kinsp5xt Brjst-ol
a
5 N7
Jcnnsoncrity
Large scale map
North
Carolina
rlotte
Gre !e
100km
6 mi
Large scale aerial
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.7035&lon=-80.8902&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 3/4

35° 41' 55" N
35° 40' 33" N
a
r
E
8
510900
510900
$ N
511300
511300
511700
PaE PcD2 MaD4
Hydrologic Soil Group—Iredell County, North Carolina
512100
-5:.{
'CgE
. PcEy2
ICE-2
pcPcC62
2vim.
MaE4
\CeB2
CeC2
I I
511700 512100
Map Scale: 1:17,900 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
512500
0
253 500
1000
Feet
Meters
1500
0 500 1000 2000 AJLU
Mapprojedion: Web Mercator Conerwordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
512900
MaD4
DrB
512900
513300
CeB2 Ce0-41�
wi Pc�G2
Fr2. � PcD2► MaD4
RtA Pc©2'
C•eC�2 PaF
Pc&2
PcB2
CeB2
MaD4
513700
MaD4
C•eC►-2
513300
514100
I I
513700 514100
8
514500
514500
35° 41'55"N
35° 40' 33" N
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
2/22/2022
Page 1 of 5

Hydrologic Soil Group—Iredell County, North Carolina
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI) ❑ C The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
Area of Interest (AOI) 1:12,000.
O C/D
Soils Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
Soil Rating Polygons 0 D measurements.
0 A 0 Not rated or not available Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
0 A/D Water Features Web Soil Survey URL:
Streams and Canals Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
0 B Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
Transportation
0 B/D Rails projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
0 C —• Interstate Highways Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
0 C/D US Routes
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
0 D Major Roads of the version date(s) listed below.
0 Not rated or not available Local Roads
Soil Survey Area: Iredell County, North Carolina
Soil Rating Lines Background Survey Area Data: Version 27, Jan 21, 2022
" • A hia Aerial Photography Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
" • ND 1:50,000 or larger.
y B
" .0. B/D
" • C
" C/D
" • D
Not rated or not available
Soil Rating Points
▪ A
O A/D
O
O B/D
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Nov 17, 2019—Dec
18, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
2/22/2022
Page 2 of 5

Hydrologic Soil Group—Iredell County, North Carolina
Hydrologic Soil Group
Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
ApB
Appling sandy loam, 2 to
6 percent slopes
B
8.2
0.8%
CeB2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 2
to 6 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
B
239.4
23.3%
CeC2
Cecil sandy clay loam, 6
to 10 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
B
196.1
19.1%
CfB
Cecil -Bethlehem-
Spartanburg complex,
2 to 8 percent slopes
A
8.8
0.9%
CgC
Cecil -Urban land
complex, 2 to 10
percent slopes
B
23.9
2.3%
CgE
Cecil -Urban land
complex, 10 to 25
percent slopes
B
1.6
0.2%
DrB
Dorian fine sandy loam,
0 to 6 percent slopes,
rarely flooded
C
1.7
0.2%
MaD4
Madison-Udorthents
complex, 2 to 15
percent slopes, gullied
B
99.0
9.6%
MaE4
Madison-Udorthents
complex, 15 to 25
percent slopes, gullied
B
19.6
1.9%
MaF4
Madison-Udorthents
complex, 25 to 45
percent slopes, gullied
B
2.0
0.2%
PaE
Pacolet sandy loam, 15
to 25 percent slopes
B
10.6
1.0%
PaF
Pacolet sandy loam, 25
to 45 percent slopes
B
5.9
0.6%
PcB2
Pacolet sandy clay
loam, 2 to 6 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
B
24.7
2.4%
PcC2
Pacolet sandy clay
loam, 6 to 10 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
B
81.1
7.9%
PcD2
Pacolet sandy clay
loam, 10 to 15 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
B
95.8
9.3%
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
2/22/2022
Page 3 of 5

Hydrologic Soil Group—Iredell County, North Carolina
Map unit symbol
Map unit name
Rating
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
PcE2
Pacolet sandy clay
loam, 15 to 25 percent
slopes, moderately
eroded
B
71.0
6.9%
RiF
Rion sandy loam, 15 to
45 percent slopes
C
0.8
0.1%
RtA
Riverview and Toccoa
soils, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, occasionally
flooded
B
22.4
2.2%
ScD
Spartanburg -Cecil-
Bethlehem complex, 8
to 15 percent slopes,
stony
B
5.1
0.5%
UmF
Udorthents-Urban land
complex, 0 to 45
percent slopes
C
108.7
10.6%
Totals for Area of Interest
1,026.6
100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2022
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 5

Hydrologic Soil Group—Iredell County, North Carolina
Description
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive
precipitation from long -duration storms.
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (A/D, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows:
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively
drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water
transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well
drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture.
These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of
water transmission.
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay
layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious
material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission.
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in
their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes.
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified
Tie -break Rule: Higher
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2022
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 5 of 5

APPENDIX 2
Stormwater Analysis and Calculations
Troutman Logistics Center, Troutman, NC

4/13/22, 9:00 AM
Precipitation Frequency Data Server
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3
Location name: Troutman, North Carolina, USA*
Latitude: 35.7035°, Longitude: -80.8902°
Elevation: 939.48 ft**
*source: ESRI Maps
"'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 1 Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1
Average recurrence interval (years)
Duration
1
2
5
10
25
50
100
200
500
1000
5-min
0.378
(0.348-0.411)
0.447
(0.412-0.488)
0.524
(0.482-0.571)
0.580
(0.532-0.630)
0.645
(0.587-0.701)
0.690
(0.625-0.751)
0.733
(0.659-0.799)
0.772
(0.687-0.843)
0.816
(0.718-0.898)
0.849
(0.738-0.938)
10-min
0.604
(0.556-0.657)
0.716
(0.660-0.780)
0.840
(0.772-0.915)
0.928
(0.850-1.01)
1.03
(0.936-1.12)
1.10
(0.996-1.20)
1.16
(1.05-1.27)
1.22
(1.09-1.34)
1.29
(1.14-1.42)
1.34
(1.16-1.48)
15-min
0.755
(0.696-0.821)
0.900
(0.829-0.980)
1.06
(0.977-1.16)
1.17
(1.08-1.27)
1.30
(1.19-1.42)
1.39
(1.26-1.51)
1.47
(1.32-1.60)
1.54
(1.38-1.69)
1.63
(1.43-1.79)
1.68
(1.46-1.85)
30-min
1.03
(0.954-1.13)
1.24
(1.15-1.35)
1.51
(1.39-1.64)
1.70
(1.56-1.85)
1.93
(1.76-2.10)
2.10
(1.90-2.28)
2.25
(2.03-2.46)
2.40
(2.14-2.63)
2.59
(2.28-2.85)
2.72
(2.36-3.00)
60-min
1.29
(1.19-1.40)
1.56
(1.44-1.70)
1.94
(1.78-2.11)
2.21
(2.03-2.41)
2.57
(2.34-2.79)
2.84
(2.57-3.09)
3.11
(2.79-3.38)
3.37
(3.00-3.68)
3.71
(3.27-4.08)
3.97
(3.45-4.38)
2-hr
1.50
(1.38-1.63)
1.81
(1.67-1.98)
2.27
(2.08-2.47)
2.61
(2.39-2.84)
3.07
(2.79-3.34)
3.42
(3.09-3.73)
3.77
(3.38-4.12)
4.13
(3.66-4.52)
4.60
(4.03-5.07)
4.97
(4.29-5.50)
3-hr
1.60
(1.48-1.75)
1.94
(1.79-2.12)
2.43
(2.24-2.66)
2.81
(2.58-3.07)
3.33
(3.03-3.63)
3.75
(3.38-4.09)
4.16
(3.73-4.55)
4.59
(4.07-5.03)
5.18
(4.51-5.71)
5.64
(4.85-6.25)
6-hr
1.97
(1.82-2.14)
2.38
(2.20-2.59)
2.98
(2.75-3.24)
3.46
(3.18-3.75)
4.10
(3.75-4.44)
4.62
(4.19-5.00)
5.14
(4.62-5.58)
5.68
(5.05-6.18)
6.43
(5.62-7.02)
7.02
(6.06-7.70)
12-hr
2.36
(2.19-2.57)
2.86
(2.65-3.11)
3.59
(3.32-3.90)
4.17
(3.84-4.51)
4.96
(4.54-5.37)
5.60
(5.08-6.05)
6.26
(5.63-6.76)
6.95
(6.17-7.50)
7.91
(6.91-8.55)
8.66
(7.46-9.39)
24-hr
2.1
(2.62- .O5)
(3. 0)
(4. .68)
(4. .44)
(5. 49)
6.- 7FLA
(6.227.32)
8.38
(7.64-9.07)
9.51
(8.62-10.3)
10.4
(9.38-11.3)
2-day
3.32
(3.08-3.58)
4.01
(3.72-4.34)
5.02
(4.65-5.42)
5.80
(5.37-6.27)
6.87
(6.34-7.42)
7.71
(7.10-8.33)
8.57
(7.86-9.26)
9.45
(8.64-10.2)
10.6
(9.69-11.5)
11.6
(10.5-12.6)
3-day
3.53
(3.29-3.80)
4.25
(3.96-4.59)
5.29
(4.92-5.71)
6.10
(5.66-6.57)
7.20
(6.65-7.76)
8.07
(7.44-8.70)
8.96
(8.23-9.66)
9.86
(9.04-10.6)
11.1
(10.1-12.0)
12.1
(11.0-13.1)
4-day
3.74
(3.49-4.02)
4.49
(4.19-4.84)
5.56
(5.18-5.99)
6.40
(5.94-6.88)
7.53
(6.97-8.10)
8.43
(7.78-9.07)
9.34
(8.60-10.1)
10.3
(9.43-11.1)
11.5
(10.6-12.5)
12.5
(11.4-13.5)
7-day
4.31
(4.05-4.61)
5.15
(4.84-5.51)
6.28
(5.89-6.71)
7.15
(6.69-7.64)
8.33
(7.77-8.90)
9.25
(8.61-9.89)
10.2
(9.45-10.9)
11.1
(10.3-11.9)
12.4
(11.4-13.3)
13.4
(12.3-14.4)
10-day
4.95
(4.66-5.27)
5.89
(5.55-6.27)
7.08
(6.66-7.53)
7.99
(7.51-8.50)
9.19
(8.62-9.79)
10.1
(9.48-10.8)
11.1
(10.3-11.8)
12.0
(11.2-12.8)
13.3
(12.3-14.2)
14.2
(13.2-15.2)
20-day
6.64
(6.30-6.99)
7.84
(7.44-8.26)
9.26
(8.78-9.75)
10.4
(9.81-10.9)
11.8
(11.2-12.5)
13.0
(12.2-13.7)
14.1
(13.2-14.9)
15.3
(14.3-16.1)
16.8
(15.7-17.8)
18.0
(16.7-19.0)
30-day
8.21
(7.84-8.60)
9.65
(9.22-10.1)
11.1
(10.6-11.7)
12.3
(11.7-12.9)
13.7
(13.1-14.4)
14.8
(14.1-15.6)
15.9
(15.1-16.7)
17.0
(16.1-17.8)
18.4
(17.3-19.3)
19.4
(18.3-20.5)
45-day
10.3
(9.91-10.8)
12.1
(11.6-12.6)
13.7
(13.1-14.3)
14.9
(14.3-15.6)
16.5
(15.8-17.2)
17.7
(16.9-18.5)
18.8
(17.9-19.6)
19.9
(18.9-20.8)
21.3
(20.2-22.3)
22.3
(21.1-23.4)
60-day
12.3
(11.8-12.8)
14.3
(13.8-14.9)
16.1
(15.5-16.8)
17.5
(16.8-18.2)
19.2
(18.4-20.0)
20.5
(19.6-21.3)
21.7
(20.8-22.6)
22.9
(21.9-23.9)
24.4
(23.3-25.5)
25.6
(24.3-26.7)
1 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 hat precipitation 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%. Estimates 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.
Back to Top
PF graphical
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.7035&Ion=-80.8902&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 1/4

4/13/22, 9:00 AM
Precipitation Frequency Data Server
Precipitation depth (in)
Precipitation depth (in)
30
25
20
15
10
5
PDS-based depth -duration -frequency {DDF). curves
Latitude: 35.7035'. Longitude: -80.8902°
r0 r0 rq ro r0 +V rq r4 ro r4
N A r O O O
ri N rn Le,
5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 2, Version 3
Average recurrence interval (years)
Created (GMT): Wed Apr 13 13:00:39 2022
Back to Top
Maps & aerials
Small scale terrain
Average recurrence
interval
;years}
1
2
5
10
25
50
100
200
500
1000
Duration
— 5-min
— 16-min
15-rnin
— 30-min
— 63-rain
— 2-hr
— 3-hr
— 6-hr
— 12- r
24-t r
2-day
3-day
4-day
7-day
10-day
20-day
30-day
4 5-Cay
60-5ay
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.7035&Ion=-80.8902&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 2/4

4/13/22, 9:00 AM Precipitation Frequency Data Server
Ki.ogsR4d_..Bri st of
Johnson Ci
Winston-5'alem
Greensboro Durham
Asheville
•.
r.. 'Charlotte
Greenville
. •
100km
6 mi 1
N ort h
Carolina
Back to Top
US Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Weather Service
National Water Center
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Questions?: [e-mail]
Disclaimer
https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_printpage.html?lat=35.7035&Ion=-80.8902&data=depth&units=english&series=pds 4/4

VN1n02J VJ HILON NvlAuno2ll
011 NOI11SInOOV
1N3Wd013A34 ON
JOd 0J Vd3?Jd

(Li // II\C'\ �(^—= ���,)
r� � �� { {111\�' 1�1 �II � /�
(/ // ill r IIW)Ili I,III') , ; / /j
% II I1,( III I,,p III\, \ ~`
j j/ \ J* ,.
%% / ;, \ ° rl\{\� 1 .. � •.:\ \III "l<,,1
r !f /� ..,y . �1 \ \_ .�,I I)
.✓�/ _ / /! _ III) III1, '\\ 1 \ r
� `�\ {I -- a /
�. r , ! t.\ \ 11�1 \ ( % ' j�(1 'Yvi S'FE
,\, My II �- f,) \(�� _
a� ^\\ — (/// 1 �LL_
, � �,:, f\\, ,��))
�%/ ��� ', III
) _ \
/"�° Ir\ 11
/ / \ �... \\I \ \ \r
// .. ,\\�/b _ .II( '\\\Il�f)f,) I
) \ ji �� III I 1I /...
-1 \' I ( I IIl �-
I �\ \ .\ �� � ' , /4)141 I��
_s; _ 1� _ /� A�
��' IJ1I\\
II
)1 )�
`;,
` �\
, /�/ /\\\\
,q ( \ \\ \
/ �� o
y �� �'^`'t
,�, / �. -_
/ 88 J
,"b ��/ �� �\ "' S
�( ��- ��. -
I//�\ -�\
(,����I ��\��!
1 I\`��
(�
',%N 11
\
\ \�
\ \ _
`�
..,,:� \�
\ -
POST -DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREA 1
TOTAL AREA± 78 ACRES
IMPERVIOUS AREA: 59.60 ACRES
TC TIME: 5 MIN
YDRAULIC SOIL GROUP. B
POST -DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREA 2
o
TOTAi +_
IMPER,.-�•
TC TIME: 32.3 MN
HYDRAULIC SOIL GROUP: B
_ AREA 3
POTAL DARER OP ED7 DACRE
P�vI\\�
k /i
v le
vv� �v
/�� Si „ i �� Ai
. �`\- II I)' 7
/
�� ? ��% II 1\�_
\ � � ._ _ \ 1 �� //
\ �\-\ �\C\ II� \I,�I,(1 //!
ki,1M f 1,./
\�v/A �� Ih' �/
�A v v " 1A I
'4 ,)I'I I /��r/
A \ l
VllAvi vIl�n+'mrc � V��
/ // _ `C \ �
k���ll�'a ., �I 1
1 I
I v ��)1�
vI 11
! > �I 1Ag
ia�1aIIP
I�
,,
y t,,
' Y "`
\:;
�b v <"`� m.
'\
Ir
l
�i'i'
I
;
r- " "�
_"..
LOGISTICS
CENTER
1,005,269
SF
1
/
s
__ _ _
,\\ - -
.".. 1 --
TROUTMAN
LOGISTICS
' CENTER
1,665269
l/
i
_
�
1
I
o
/
IIII
/v�
\-
I
l �1'V{
d I^/
P/-
I
)� \I
�\ '
i 0 .\ tr'
�" av�1v1
VG v v
.A \ VA A � Ilk
A 1) g
'�
.\
\ts'_�
� _ — y -
— - - 11\
�-- -�I
I III
V�
(�
\ a
8' _
f\(l(/ / \\ \�
111('/ ' 'R\\ \'�� \;;�
�u I vv v A0/
% v
/, ,� 11, `v v
III' / 1 Avg
v = %\�
\\ t:\�
�s4(r /, �vv/�4\ 11�
-\�\ R
� !(;jam- J� //�� \\ \14
;�\ ,rl 1l�/� �j �/
���{�// ��%�
may\ - �. ii// /� ��
�/ ��
� AQ�l / ��vv
/) )� �> ��
{'"i'i( �� i/ J /
a 1 �-��� i/ ��%
My
��!� r �,
r -iJ
1 �,� v J II
V�;Il
4+ I1 -
�1:NI
^-
���
�^�_
��
)
// --,.-
«««�
a)
_ o`
SGE
IMPERVIOUS AREA: 0 ACRES
TC TIME: 32,3 MIN
HYDRAULIC SOIL GROUP: B
POST DEVELOPED DRAINAGE AREA 4
TOTAL AREA: ± 44 ACRES
MPERVI OUS AREA:± 38. 35
TC TIME: 5 MIN
HYDRAULIC SOIL GROUP:
ACRES
B•"
•
CONSTRUCTIONNOT FOR
�
�'� _iS III 11 t © II / /
`x'--
r.�
\
1'` \ �_ l /���
�
j�. j � z /05
i
v)A �// '2 -44
■
I �t pp
��� 1 \ LI1. W; _ °,
� \V '�
N
,�',I
1Ial 1� � ��/�/ /`
t /r % \BUILDINI :�% i\ i /ice / l ////\ �j
f;;.,v I, IIII, I se ' �`� �I i(/I, ,_,
yp
2.7
POST DEVELOPED
DRAINAGE MAP
CENTER
—
4p �I fI\2/I f / ,-- 1v I�
-i,\L
/IIII\ \
�\
7/ p\OT\\\\
(/,f1V /\� "'
-
I
\ ` �—
/f�� . .�\ {S..r"
�)II01 Illlll ll illil - � )J �.,�,t�- AA/ -__ ��
y
\
\11111 11 \ \ \\n
\ \ _
\�\II
�\ . \ L rilkI�HHYMMLCV/MNi6G $qi \ f �\ L' �" .��-
\) \ JT1 /
#
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
PREPARED FOR
NC DEVELOPMENT
ACQUISITION, LLC
TROUTMAN NORTH CA ROLL NA
II \1\
)„J� ��
$
�.
11
1
\\11111III I���
\\III (�) \\� 1 / i�-- T`�/
1 ) \ I�I� I(II I / 1 `�//�// - 111 \
, ,, )' /, III,�,���,A 7, �� ���
�� / A\\ i/ //p� ((Il1 , ���
i 1�� �� {1\ �i/��/(7)
n �i- _n.�� 2/./��� %
� IIIv /ice )
I�°�%l/
C_
V� - - a'
_ 1
x\ '��N. 4./ \f L>1/III i\ �•�\1�
\\ \ ��` '" " I
\,� �\ \\ J / I/// \ pfl
I , �I _ —_ // �A All
_ ��— / %�/, —__ice} �1 lj /'%j-./1
�--moo sAV /i/ -- �/
/��% _\_���_� 1 ) '/ • �V 11 A
i /Iw // �� ) II)�\\
/� ) I ii� // / f I) III I�
�! (l i
-- ��i Av v 1 1 v {I
r,VA
�\ l/ �—
l�� \/� - \�_
_
�1,/i//' 888i,
��' i��� / /� ��
�i/%/ce/G�
c�/
i
,
SAP
GRAPHIC SCALE oRT�
itt I
MC51Ua
"Va'iref eleW.
Call nerore vox die.

Kimley >» Horn
Project Information
Project Name:
KHA Project #:
Designed by: MJP
Revised by:
Checked by:
Pre vs. Post Runoff Analysis
Time of Concentration
Troutman
15002007
Date: 5/12/2022
Date:
Date:
Minimum Time of Concentration 5.0 minutes
2YR-24HR Rainfall, P2 3.42
Pre -Development
Drainage Area: DA-1
Flow Length, L
(ft)
Slope, s (ft/ft)
Manning's Roughness
Coefficient, n
Two-year, 24-hr rainfall,
P2 (in)
Paved or
Unpaved
Cross Sectional Area of
Flow, A (ftZ)
Wetted Perimeter, pw
(ft)
Hydraulic radius,
r (ft)
Average Velocity, V
(ft/s)**
Travel Time, Tt
(min)
SHEET
nsHEET FLOW
100.00
0.036
0.30
3.42
13.04
SHALLOW CONCENTRATED
T2 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW
528.00
0.078
U
4.50
1.95
SHALLOW CONCENTRATED
T3sHALLow CONCENTRATED FLOW
1218.00
0.04
U
3.23
6.29
CHANNEL
T4 CHANNEL FLOW
4996.00
0.01
0.03
U
34.41
19.44
1.77
7.53
11.05
_
0.00
0.00
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
Pre -Development Time of Concentration, DA-1
32.34
Post -Development
Drainage Area: DA-2 & 3
Flow Length, L
(ft)
Slope, s (ft/ft)
Manning's Roughness
Coefficient, n
Two-year, 24-hr rainfall,
P2 (in)
Paved or
Unpaved
Cross Sectional Area of
Flow, A (ftZ)
Wetted Perimeter, pw
(ft)
Hydraulic radius,
r (ft)
Average Velocity, V
(ft/s)**
Travel Time, Tt
(min)
SHEET
TisHEET FLOW
100.00
0.036
0.30
3.42
13.04
SHALLOW CONCENTRATED
T2 SHALLOW CONCENTRATED FLOW
528.00
0.078
U
4.50
1.95
SHALLOW CONCENTRATED
T3sHALLow CONCENTRATED FLOW
1218.00
0.04
U
3.23
6.29
CHANNEL
T4 CHANNEL FLOW
4996.00
0.01
0.03
U
34.41
19.44
1.77
7.53
11.05
0.00
0.00
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
Post -Development Time of Concentration DA-2 & 3
32.34

Kimley >» Horn
Project Information
Project Name:
KHA Project #:
Designed by: MJP
Revised by:
Checked by:
Pre vs. Post Runoff Analysis
Time of Concentration
Troutman
15002007
Date: 5/12/2022
Date:
Date:
Minimum Time of Concentration 5.0 minutes
2YR-24HR Rainfall, P2 3.42
Post-Developmet
Drainage Area: DA-1 & 4
Flow Length, L
(ft)
Slope, s (ft/ft)
Manning's Roughness
Coefficient, n
Two-year, 24-hr rainfall,
P2 (in)
Paved or
Unpaved
Cross Sectional Area of
Flow, A (ftZ)
Wetted Perimeter, pw
(ft)
Hydraulic radius,
r (ft)
Average Velocity, V
(ft/s)**
Travel Time, Tt
(min)
MINIMUM TC
Tl MINIMUM T[ FLOW
5.00
-
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
-
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
-
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
_
0.00
U
5.00
2.00
2.50
0.00
Post-Developmet Time of Concentration, DA-1 & 4
5.00
Post -Development
Drainage Area:
Flow Length, L
(ft)
Slope, s (ft/ft)
Manning's Roughness
Coefficient, n
Two-year, 24-hr rainfall,
P2 (in)
Paved or
Unpaved
Cross Sectional Area of
Flow, A (ftZ)
Wetted Perimeter, pw
(ft)
Hydraulic radius,
r (ft)
Average Velocity, V
(ft/s)**
Travel Time, Tt
(min)
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
0.00
U
#DIV/0!
0.00
Post -Development Time of Concentration,
o.00

Kimley>)) Horn
Project Information
Site Information
WET DETENTION BASIN
(Water Quality Calculations)
Project Name: Project Troutman
KHA Project #: 015002007
Designed by: MJP
Revised by:
Revised by:
Revised by:
Sub Area Location: DA-1
Drainage Area (DA) =
Impervious Area (IA) =
Percent Impervious (I) =
Required Temporary Pool Storage Volume:
Design Storm =
Determine Rv Value =
Temporary Storage Volume Required =
Temporary Storage Volume Provided =
Date: 5/11/2022
Date:
Date:
Date:
78.35 Acres
59.60 Acres
77.0
1 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA waters)
0.05 + .009 (I) = 0.74 in/in
211,317 cf (above Permanent Pool)
302,985 cf GOOD
Required Surface Area (Average Depth SA/DA Method)
Volume of permanent pool: 425,018 cf
Area of permanent pool: 105,384 sf
Average depth= 4.0 ft
Average Permanent Pool Depth:
SA/DA =
Min Required Surface Area =
Surface Area Provided =
Forebay Volume Required:
Forebay Volume Provided:
Percent of Volume Provided:
4.0 ft (Average Depth in Ft)
2.31 (Interpolated From Table 1 of C-3 of NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual)
78,839 sf (at Permanent Pool)
105,384 sf GOOD
63,752.70 cf
73,520.00 cf
17.3% GOOD

Q
Project Information
E
0
FOREBAY VOLUME
Description Stage Area Area Volume Total Volume
(FT) (SF) (ac) (CF) (CF)
I OZS'EL I 9T8'9Z I 60bE'0 I 0S80T I LS8 I Aegooj Jo dol
LS0E'0
LbLZ'0
Sediment Storage
Total Volume Above
Temp Pool (ct)
1601'608
TOZ'ZLE
MAIN POND VOLUME- DA1
Description Stage Area Area Volume Total Volume
(FT) (SF) (ac) (CF) (CF)
425,018
728,003
Forebay Volume Required 15%-20% of Permanent Pool Volume
Percent Provided I I 17.30%
3.2107
3.4760
4125,0148
105,384
86,417
88,145
98,658
100,435
E
E E
n n
>
T o
m E
Q r
v
Q E
To i5
o
E 92
r u
m in
E E
n r
'Emergency Spillway
r
n Block Calculations
Q

Kimley>)) Horn
Project Information
Site Information
WET DETENTION BASIN
(Water Quality Calculations)
Project Name: Troutman Pond 2
KHA Project #: 015002007
Designed by: MJP
Revised by:
Revised by:
Revised by:
Sub Area Location: DA-4
Drainage Area (DA) =
Impervious Area (IA) =
Percent Impervious (I) =
Required Temporary Pool Storage Volume:
Design Storm =
Determine Rv Value =
Temporary Storage Volume Required =
Temporary Storage Volume Provided =
Date: 5/11/2022
Date:
Date:
Date:
44.10 Acres
38.35 Acres
87.0
1 inch (Project Does Not Drain to SA waters)
0.05 + .009 (I) = 0.83 in/in
133,349 cf (above Permanent Pool)
193,164 cf GOOD
Required Surface Area (Average Depth SA/DA Method)
Volume of permanent pool: 241,824 cf
Area of permanent pool: 52,666 sf
Average depth= 4.6 ft
Average Permanent Pool Depth:
SA/DA =
Min Required Surface Area =
Surface Area Provided =
Forebay Volume Required:
Forebay Volume Provided:
Percent of Volume Provided:
4.6 ft (Average Depth in Ft)
2.37 (Interpolated From Table 1 of C-3 of NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual)
45,528 sf (at Permanent Pool)
52,666 sf GOOD
36,273.56 cf
47,675.75 cf
19.7% GOOD

Q
Project Information
E
0
FOREBAY VOLUME
Description Stage Area Area Volume Total Volume
(FT) (SF) (ac) (CF) (CF)
16,469
36,422
ES6'61
TLS'TT
6811'0
6S0T'0
17981'0
L96T'0
863
864
on
Li
Sediment Storage
Total Volume Above Temp Pool (of)
MAIN POND VOLUME- DA4
Description Stage Area Area Volume Total Volume
(FT) (SF) (ac) (CF) (CF)
241,824
434,988
985'6E9
0T9'ELb
Forebay Volume Required 10%-20%of Permanent Pool Volume
Percent Provided I I 19.72%
38,622
165,976
1.2090
1.7472
241,824
52,666
76,110
47,676
37,455
38,600
39,751
42,072
52,666
76,110
78,379
87,597
92,290
864
866
870
872
873
E E
n n
m E
Q r
v
Q E
o
E
r u
m in
E E
n r
'Emergency Spillway
r
n Block Calculations
Q

Interpolated Cell
Percent
Impervious Permanent Pool Average Depth
CO
0.25
0.36 I
V
O
Tr
O
Li-)
O
0.65
0.71 I
00
O
0.87 I
O
O
O
Ti
O�
e-I
c^-I
Ti
N
c-I
V
Ti
c-I
L�f1
Ti
N
lO
c-I
VI
N
Ti
Ln
N
O
0.37
0.42
L1
O
0.59
0.68
N
O
0.84
01
O
0.98
1.08
r^i
,i
N
,i
1.38
IA
,i
IA
,i
1.72
N
,i
01
,i
N.
N
N
O
0.39
0.44
0.53
0.61
ci
N
O
0.78
0.88
V1
01
O
N
O
.-I
N
r1
Ti
1.23
1.34
1.48
N
l0
Ti
l0
c-I
1.84
1.88
2.04
Ln
t0
N
O
0.42
0.48
Lt
O
0.67
Nci
O
0.85
0.96
1.04
,i
1.22
m
,i
cr
,i
in
,i
1.72
1.74
01
,i
01
,i
e-i
N
ka
O
rn
O
0.45
r1
V1
O
N
lO
O
N
N
O
0.83
c-I
01
O
1.04
CO
T-1
Ti
1.20
c-I
n
Ti
1.44
lO
V1
Ti
Cri
t0
r-I
N
co
Ti
1.84
2.04
2.10
V
n
N
5.9
0.31
0.46
in
O
0.63
0.73
0.85
0.93
e-I
r-I
e-I
1.22
M
e-I
cr
e-I
in
e-I
I-1
N
e-I
IA
00
e-I
1.87
2.07
2.13
2.36
N
M
O
0.54
0.61
0.73
V
co
O
cri
C1
O
01
O
Ti
1.22
T -1
n
Ti
1.38
1.49
in
l0
ci
1.80
Tr
cri
ei
N
O
N
O
O
N
c-I
rn
N
2.35
N
V1
N
4.4
0.41
0.58
0.66
0.78
0.90
1.07
N
r-I
M
e-I
Tr
e-I
in
, -I
t0
, -I
1.82
01
,-i
2.12
2.27
2.30
in
N
2.54
2.68
d,
0.43
ei
tO
O
01
lO
O
0.82
0.94
N
e-I
ei
V
N
Ti
1.40
c-I
V1
Ti
ei
lO
r-I
1.77
M
cn
ei
2.09
in
N
N
2.41
m
Tr
N
2.64
N
tO
N
01
N
N
3.6
0.46
0.66
in
N
O
0.89
1.03
1.22
in
M
ei
r-I
in
ei
N
tO
ei
1.73
0
01
ei
2.08
2.26
2.44
e-I
t0
N
2.64
2.88
2.93
3.09
rn
T-1
V1
O
0.74
V
00
O
ei
O
e-I
N
c-I
Ti
1.37
cti
V1
Ti
00
lO
r-I
01
N
Ti
'
O
e-I
2.09
2.30
T-1
V1
N
2.72
N
Ol
N
ill
01
N
V1
N
cn
r-I
M
M
V1
V1
cn
O�
lly
I 20
N
I 30
M
40
46
50
54
ltp
ttOO
O^
^
I 80
CO
011
Crt
O%--1

Pre -Developed Area 1
Pre -Developed POI
<Subca>
Reach
Post -Developed Area 1
Pon 1
Pond 2
Post Developed F�OI
<8S>
Off-site Drainage (Areas
2&3)
K6S)
PosDeveloped Area 4
Routing Diagram for Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn, Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 2
Project Notes
Defined 10 rainfall events from IDF Troutman IDF

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 3
Rainfall Events Listing
Event# Event Storm Type Curve Mode Duration BIB Depth AMC
Name
(hours) (inches)
1 1 inch Type II 6-hr Default 6.00 1 1.00 2
2 1-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 2.82 2
3 2-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 3.42 2
4 5-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 4.33 2
5 10-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 5.03 2
6 25-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 6.01 2
7 50-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 6.78 2
8 100-yr Type II 24-hr Default 24.00 1 7.58 2

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 4
Area Listing (all nodes)
Area CN Description
(acres) (subcatchment-numbers)
23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots (1S)
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B (3S)
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious (3S)
38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious (6S)
79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good (1S)
1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good (1S)
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good (8S)
5.750 61 Open Area (6S)
20.560 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B (3S, 8S)
204.930 55 Wood, B, Good (1S)
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good (8S)
619.660 64 TOTAL AREA

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 5
Soil Listing (all nodes)
Area Soil Subcatchment
(acres) Group Numbers
0.000 HSG A
206.130 HSG B 3S, 8S
0.000 HSG C
0.000 HSG D
413.530 Other 1 S, 3S, 6S
619.660 TOTAL AREA

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6
Ground Covers (all nodes)
HSG-A HSG-B HSG-C HSG-D Other Total Ground Subcatchment
(acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) Cover Numbers
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.500 23.500 1 /2 Acre Lots 1S
0.000 17.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 17.020 >75% Grass cover, Good 3S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 59.600 59.600 Building 1 Impervious 3S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 38.350 38.350 Building 2 Impervious 6S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 79.920 79.920 Crops/Farmland, B, Good 1S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.480 1.480 Impervious, B, Good 1S
0.000 18.300 0.000 0.000 0.000 18.300 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre 8S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.750 5.750 Open Area 6S
0.000 20.560 0.000 0.000 0.000 20.560 Pasture/grassland/range, Good 3S
8S
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 204.930 204.930 Wood, B, Good 1S
0.000 150.250 0.000 0.000 0.000 150.250 Woods 8S
0.000 206.130 0.000 0.000 413.530 619.660 TOTAL AREA

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 7
Pipe Listing (all nodes)
Line# Node In -Invert Out -Invert Length Slope n Width Diam/Height Inside -Fill
Number (feet) (feet) (feet) (ft/ft) (inches) (inches) (inches)
1 4P 850.47 850.00 77.6 0.0061 0.011 0.0
2 7P 854.44 854.00 72.8 0.0060 0.011 0.0
36.0 0.0
48.0 0.0

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.28"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=57.84 cfs 1.861 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.45"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=51.66 cfs 1.655 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=856.52' Storage=63,838 cf Inflow=57.84 cfs 1.861 af
Primary=1.79 cfs 1.860 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=1.79 cfs 1.860 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=867.32' Storage=49,967 cf Inflow=51.66 cfs 1.655 af
Primary=2.26 cfs 1.655 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=2.26 cfs 1.655 af
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI Inflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Primary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=3.98 cfs 3.515 af
Primary=3.98 cfs 3.515 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 3.516 af Average Runoff Depth = 0.07"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
[45] Hint: Runoff=Zero
Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Depth= 0.00"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
0
LL
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hyd rog raph
10.00 cfs
0
Type II
6-hr
1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Runoff Area=309T830 ac
Runoff Volume=0.000 af
RnnOff Depth=0.0O"
Tc=3.3 min
CIS=58
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 57.84 cfs @ 2.97 hrs, Volume= 1.861 af, Depth= 0.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
61 57.84 cf
55-
50-
45
40 "
u 35 /
0 30-'
LT_ -
25-'
20='"
15-'
10-'
Type IF
6-hr
1 inch Rainfall=1'.0O"
Runoff Area=78T350 ac
Runoff Volume=1.861 af
Riinbff
Depth=0.28"
Tc=6.0'mlp_-
Cts =89--
A
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 51.66 cfs @ 2.96 hrs, Volume= 1.655 af, Depth= 0.45"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
51.6 cfs
35--
N
-(2- 30-
0
u 25--
20--
15--
10
Type II
6-Fir
inch Rainifall=1:00`r-
'Rungff Are-a=44T100 ac
Runoff -Volume=1.6-55 of -
▪ Rlr n bff Depth=11.45"
=5.0 min
CN=9a
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
[45] Hint: Runoff=Zero
Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Depth= 0.00"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Area (ac) CN Description
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
0
LL
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
T
T
T
r
Type II
6-hr
1 inch Riinfall=1.00"
Runoff Area=187T380 ac
Runoff Volume=0.000 af
RUnOff Depth=0.0O"
Tc=3.3 min
CIS=57
0 r�< 7777
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 13
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.28" for 1 inch event
57.84 cfs @ 2.97 hrs, Volume=
1.79 cfs @ 6.03 hrs, Volume=
1.79 cfs @ 6.03 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
1.861 af
1.860 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 183.3 min
1.860 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 856.52' @ 6.03 hrs Surf.Area= 124,539 sf Storage= 63,838 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 867.8 min calculated for 1.860 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 867.7 min (1,083.0 - 215.3 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14
Primary OutFlow Max=1.80 cfs @ 6.03 hrs HW=856.52' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 1.80 cfs of 84.07 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 1.80 cfs @ 2.40 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=856.00' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)
60
557'
50-
45-'
40-
u 35-'
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
57.84 fs
r r 4- 4- 4 4 - -
Ir Ir IT 1 1 1 1 1
L L L L LI
-Inflow area=78.350 at
Peak Elev=856 52'
Storage=03,,830 of
- - r r
II
IF IF
rr r
+ r + + + + + +
r
1.79 c s
5-
0.00 cfs
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
//
Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 15
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.45" for 1 inch event
51.66 cfs @ 2.96 hrs, Volume=
2.26 cfs @ 4.57 hrs, Volume=
2.26 cfs @ 4.57 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
1.655 af
1.655 af, Atten= 96%, Lag= 96.2 min
1.655 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 867.32' @ 4.57 hrs Surf.Area= 63,222 sf Storage= 49,967 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 439.6 min calculated for 1.655 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 441.3 min (648.8 - 207.5 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 16
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=2.26 cfs @ 4.57 hrs HW=867.32' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 2.26 cfs of 199.61 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.26 cfs @ 3.62 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
•=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
7=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
8=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
9=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
10=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
11=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
12=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
13=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 17
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
55
50
45
40
35
30
0
LL 25
20
15
10
n I%
Inflow Area=44.100 at
Peak EIev=867.32'
Storage=49,967 of
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 1 inch event
Inflow = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af
Primary = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
T
T
T T 1 F
Inflow Area=3Q9.83Q ac
(
l'«c/fs�y
10.00 cfs/�/(/////
o
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
z
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 ©2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Primary =
Primary outflow =
4
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Type 11 6-hr 1 inch Rainfall=1.00"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 19
309.830 ac, 31.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.14" for 1 inch event
3.98 cfs @ 5.49 hrs, Volume= 3.515 af
3.98 cfs @ 5.49 hrs, Volume= 3.515 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
3.98 cfs
L
L L
Inflow Area=3Q9.83Q ac
L
1
H
L
1
L
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 20
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.22"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=21.31 cfs 5.640 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.74"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=240.63 cfs 11.347 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.08"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=156.64 cfs 7.653 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.19"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=10.07 cfs 3.032 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=858.52' Storage=325,729 cf Inflow=240.63 cfs 11.347 af
Primary=5.43 cfs 11.346 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=5.43 cfs 11.346 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=869.60' Storage=206,932 cf Inflow=156.64 cfs 7.653 af
Primary=5.08 cfs 7.653 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=5.08 cfs 7.653 af
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI Inflow=21.31 cfs 5.640 af
Primary=21.31 cfs 5.640 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=20.11 cfs 22.030 af
Primary=20.11 cfs 22.030 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 27.672 af Average Runoff Depth = 0.54"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 21
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 21.31 cfs @ 12.45 hrs, Volume=
5.640 af, Depth= 0.22"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall=2.82"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
0 11
LT 10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
1 T I L 1- -4 1- -4 4- 1 1 T 1
7 -T 7 li + li r r 1 r Ir 7 lr i + li
21.31 cfs I I I I I I I I I I
T T T T T T T T Type-1-��I •�•'•
1-y-r Reinfa1I=2.82!
rt T r r y r y r rt T
Runoff Area=309.83O ac
L L
loff-VILLmo 5�.640 af
7 T r r 7 RulnOff .I t11 0.22"
r t r t HHTT34ftaI
L L L L
li l▪ i 7 li T li li r 7 r _, Ir 7 li T li
7 T T r 7 T 7 T 7 T
L L L L L L I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 22
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 240.63 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 11.347 af, Depth= 1.74"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall=2.82"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
260 -
1240.63 cfs
240—
_
220�
-/
200 -
180-
160�
140-
120�
100—
80-
60—
40_
20—
L
L
4-
r
✓
i
1 4-
+ H + + 1 +
Type 11- 4Jir-
;1-yr F airnfaI*2 8Z„
Ru 'off -
RurFoff VtIt] Ine*1-11 347 -f -
fiunoff Depth=1.7411-
1 1c=$.O min
L J 1 L
DIsil=819
i
i
i
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
+
✓
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 23
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 156.64 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 7.653 af, Depth= 2.08"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall=2.82"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
/+----
1 701 �
160� 56.64 ors I
150
140�
130J
120—▪ "
110-7▪ "�
w 1oo-
90�'
807.
LT_
70- ,L
607 i l
50=
40_
30
20�
10=
0
i i r
Type IC2',4=fir
1 infall=�'$�" -yr
1 uncff Aria=' 4.110O
Runoff Depfhi=2.-0'-
T -&O matt
I C14=9`3
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 24
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 10.07 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume=
3.032 af, Depth= 0.19"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall=2.82"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
• 150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
0
LL
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
11
10.0 cfs
10
9
$_
7-'
5-'
4 -
3-' r--
2-'
1
T
J
r T 1 T 1
L L 1 L 1
Type 24-hr
T
4
1-yr Rainfall=2.82"
Runoff Aires=187380 ac
Runoff Volumo=3.032 af
Runoff Depth=0.19"
T
▪ L
▪ L J
Tc=32.3'mih
L
i
L
L
CN=57
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
7/
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 25
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.74" for 1-yr event
240.63 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume=
5.43 cfs @ 15.35 hrs, Volume=
5.43 cfs @ 15.35 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
11.347 af
11.346 af, Atten= 98%, Lag= 204.0 min
11.346 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 858.52' @ 15.35 hrs Surf.Area= 137,104 sf Storage= 325,729 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 866.0 min calculated for 11.346 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 865.9 min (1,678.1 - 812.2 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 26
Primary OutFlow Max=5.43 cfs @ 15.35 hrs HW=858.52' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 5.43 cfs of 105.22 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 5.43 cfs @ 7.24 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=856.00' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)
260-
2407"
220
200
180-
160-
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
240.63 cfs
+ IlnfilowA,rea=78.5©-a5 _
Peak-EIe=858.52' -
r r r r + + + + +milli
storage=32-5,(2J -Of -
1407'
1:;-- --1--------------T--T----------_T--
.2 120�1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
L L L L L 1 1 i i i 1 - - 1
100� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1
.7- --I1- r--r--r--r--+--+---r -r r--r--r--r--rr-- 11
80' I I I I I I I I I I I
60"/
407-
0.00 cfs
0
5 43 cfs
7 7 -T
�% ////�
%/'
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
— Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 27
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.08" for 1-yr event
156.64 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
5.08 cfs @ 13.75 hrs, Volume=
5.08 cfs @ 13.75 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
7.653 af
7.653 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 108.0 min
7.653 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 869.60' @ 13.75 hrs Surf.Area= 73,883 sf Storage= 206,932 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 557.0 min calculated for 7.653 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 556.6 min (1,349.6 - 793.0 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 28
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=5.08 cfs @ 13.75 hrs HW=869.60' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 5.08 cfs of 219.53 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 5.08 cfs @ 8.13 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
•=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
7=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
8=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
9=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
10=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
11=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
12=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
13=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 29
T — — T T — — T
ri 156.64 cfs
170�
160� '
150
1407:-
1307:-'
120-
110±'
w 100�
• 90�
0 80%
LT_
70J
60�
50J
40J
30�
20-'
r0.00 cfs
0
I'InfCow Area=44.i00 at
Peak EIev=869.S8' -
Sto
rage=206r932 cf -
II II II II
,
Prz,
A----r--r--r-
oiiiii/
E08 cfs
5.08 cfs
10 20 30 40 50 60
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 30
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.22" for 1-yr event
Inflow = 21.31 cfs @ 12.45 hrs, Volume= 5.640 af
Primary = 21.31 cfs @ 12.45 hrs, Volume= 5.640 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
23
22=
214-
20-
19
18
17=�
16
15
14='�
'
13
3 12
o 114'
- 10='
9
8-'
7-
5='
4
3-,
2-
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
[ Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 1-yr Rainfall =2.82"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 31
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.85" for 1-yr event
Inflow = 20.11 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 22.030 af
Primary = 20.11 cfs @ 12.49 hrs, Volume= 22.030 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
L 1
L 1
22 20.11 cfs I 1 + + +
214" 1 20.11 cfs 1 1 1 1
204' -�%% 1 1 L
19='
18
17-
16�
15
14
H 13
12
11
.—°° 10='
9
8
7
6
5=' - -1
1
i
i
L 1
1
L 1
L 1 1 L 1
1 in#io Area=3 9.83Q-arc-
✓ Y Y rt 1 Y rt 1 r rt 1 r r
✓ 1 1 LI 1 1 L 1 1 L 1 1 L 1
✓ Y Y rt 1 Y rt 1 r rt 1 r r
LI 1 1 LI 1 1 L 1
7
LI 1
✓ + 1 r 4 1 r r 1 r r 1 r r
✓ + 1 r r 1 r r 1 r r 1 r r
7 1 r 7 1 r 7 1 r 7
+ + + + + + + + + + +
r 7 1 r 7 1 T 7 1 r 7 1 r 7
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 32
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.42"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=62.76 cfs 10.895 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.28"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=312.18 cfs 14.908 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.66"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=196.86 cfs 9.767 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.39"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=32.47 cfs 6.033 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=859.21' Storage=422,122 cf Inflow=312.18 cfs 14.908 af
Primary=8.71 cfs 14.906 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=8.71 cfs 14.906 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=870.06' Storage=240,863 cf Inflow=196.86 cfs 9.767 af
Primary=16.43 cfs 9.767 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=16.43 cfs 9.767 af
Link 2L: Pre-DevelopedPOl Inflow=62.76 cfs 10.895 af
Primary=62.76 cfs 10.895 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=55.16 cfs 30.706 af
Primary=55.16 cfs 30.706 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 41.603 af Average Runoff Depth = 0.81"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 33
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 62.76 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume=
10.895 af, Depth= 0.42"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3
70-/
Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
✓
1
✓
r
65— ' 62.76 0
60=-'
55 _''
50-'
45
40=' /
3 35-'
o
u- 30-'
25-'�II
20-
15='
10-'
5-
I
✓
✓
t
Ti
r
t
Ti
r
r
r
t
r1 r r P 7 T
Type 1f4-F�r
• JI 1-2-yr F ainfa I=3.42"
r r r r r r t
Runoff Area=309.830 alc
• 1 T 1 r 7 T
Runoff Volume=19.&95 Af
i
L
i
Runoff Depth 0 42►"
rl 4c5 8-
L 1 L 1 L 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 34
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 312.18 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 14.908 af, Depth= 2.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
340J 4
320 _ 1312.18 cfs
3007"
280/
260/
240_
220_
200="
180
160=
140=
120=
100=
80=
60=
40J
20J
0
I- 7
1
r
r 4
r 7
j Ty'pe jll4 fir
2-yr F as rif-a0=3 4 -"
11111
Rur:off Ar4eat 78:.356
Rurtoff Vbkitne*14 9O8 at -
7
L 1
I- 7
r
1
Runoff- Depth=2.28" -
--Yc=$.0'min
i
1
ouir
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 35
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 196.86 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 9.767 af, Depth= 2.66"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
220J '�
210�
�l 196.86 cfs I
200," / -
190� - -
180� - -
170 -/-
160- )- - -
150 �,r - -
140--
130-
1 207:" - -
110�z -
100� T -
90
80_
70i z k
60 _ ,r
50 -
40J
30
20,r
10. I
0
r
Y 1 Y
I - 1 Y 1 + 1
4 1 +
+ 1 r 1 r T 1 +
rIT I
IT 1 r Y 1 Y
y type 1[ 2'4-I1-r
2-yr Rain�1fa11=3�1.4Z" -
1 r�dff Area=''C-10O ae
Rut) V011 m =J';.707
r r Runoff -Depth=2.-66"
+ + r + + 1 r + I + I + I r
i
T Tt=5.0 min
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I cNI 9113
IIT
+ - 4 1 + 1 I- - 1 + 1 + 1
+ 1 r 1 r r 1 + 1 r r 1 + 1 + 1 r
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 36
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 32.47 cfs @ 12.39 hrs, Volume=
6.033 af, Depth= 0.39"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Area (ac) CN Description
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
36 '
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
34 32.47 cf
32
30=
-
26�
24L-
22 -✓
u 20'
18-
o =
a 16
14=' T
12/,
10 ��
8 -
6
2'
0
4-
r +
r
Type 4i-24-4r--
2-yr Rainifalr=a.-42"
r r r r r r
Runoff Are =1�87380 -ac -
it.11100 Vol me=6.0 3 af
Runoff
Depth =a.39„
1
Tc7=32.3'mih
Cif=-57-
0 10 20 30 40
50 60
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 37
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.28" for 2-yr event
312.18 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
8.71 cfs @ 14.22 hrs, Volume=
8.71 cfs @ 14.22 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
14.908 af
14.906 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 135.7 min
14.906 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 859.21' @ 14.22 hrs Surf.Area= 141,063 sf Storage= 422,122 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 867.4 min calculated for 14.906 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 867.3 min (1,671.7 - 804.4 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 38
Primary OutFlow Max=8.71 cfs @ 14.22 hrs HW=859.21' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 8.71 cfs of 111.63 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 6.21 cfs @ 8.28 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.50 cfs @ 2.18 fps)
=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=856.00' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)
340
320
300
280
260
240
220
H 200
180
0 160
LL 140
120
100
80
60
40
0.00 cfs
0
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
II II II II
312.18 cfs I
IlnffoW Ares 78.35O at
Ptak-EIev=S59.-21' -
fitora9e=422,12-2 of -
DEM /�///%%//'����
,ff7
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 39
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.66" for 2-yr event
196.86 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
16.43 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume=
16.43 cfs @ 12.46 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
9.767 af
9.767 af, Atten= 92%, Lag= 30.3 min
9.767 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 870.06' @ 12.46 hrs Surf.Area= 75,859 sf Storage= 240,863 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 509.9 min calculated for 9.767 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 509.5 min (1,295.7 - 786.2 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 40
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=16.38 cfs @ 12.46 hrs HW=870.06' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 16.38 cfs of 223.28 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 5.47 cfs @ 8.75 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.73 cfs @ 1.78 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.73 cfs @ 1.78 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.73 cfs @ 1.78 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 2.73 cfs @ 1.78 fps)
7=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
8=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
9=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
10=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
11=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
12=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
13=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
220
210
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
H 130
u 120
110
0 100
LL 90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
0.00 cfs
0
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 41
r — — r — — r — — r — — T — — 1 T — — T — — T — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7
L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — 1 — — 1 L — — L — — L — — 1 — — 1 — — 1 — — 1 — — 1 — — 1 — — L
196.86 cfs I r r r r r + + + + + t t t t t + + +
} I n l o�N► Area=44 1O©
Peak Elev= 7V4.-U6'
t�ra a 240,86 -0
7 — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7
L__L__L__L__L__1__1__1--1--1--1__1__1__1__1__L —_ —1
r — — r — — r — — r — — r — — T — — T — — t — — t — — t — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7 — — 7
L _ _ L _ _ L _ _ L _ _ L _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ _ L _ _ L _ _ L _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ _ 1 _ _ L _ _ L _ _ L
+ r r r r + + + + + + + + + + 1 1 +
+++++ + ++ + + + + + + + + + +
..1 1
1
,,zi_ 1_
,1 P 1 7 7 r r r r T T T T T 7777 7 7 - 7 L__L__L_—L__L__1_-1__L__L__L--1--1--1--1--1--1--1—_1
16.43 cfs I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
10 20 30 40 50 60
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 42
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.42" for 2-yr event
Inflow = 62.76 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 10.895 af
Primary = 62.76 cfs @ 12.37 hrs, Volume= 10.895 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
70-`
65-',
,
60-
55-
,
50-
45-'
w 40-'
35-'
a 30-''
25-'
20-',
,
15-'
,
10-'
5-'
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
✓
r r
r
✓
✓ r 1 r r
62.76 cfs
62.76 cfs
L 1
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
1
n#low AreaL=3O9:83Q ac
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
r
r
r
r
r
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 2-yr Rainfall=3.42"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 43
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.19" for 2-yr event
Inflow = 55.16 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 30.706 af
Primary = 55.16 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 30.706 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
60-'
50--
45 '
40-/
H 35-
25--
20-'
5-',
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
7
55.16 cfs
55.16 cf
10 20 30 40 50 60
r 1 1
r rt 1 r rt 1 r -t
nflpvur Ares=3 9 83Q arc-
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
[ Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 44
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.82"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=159.29 cfs 21.180 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.13"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=421.06 cfs 20.463 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.54"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=257.43 cfs 13.016 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.77"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=87.12 cfs 11.991 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak EIev=860.20' Storage=564,549 cf Inflow=421.06 cfs 20.463 af
Primary=13.97 cfs 20.461 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=13.97 cfs 20.461 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak EIev=870.74' Storage=293,578 cf Inflow=257.43 cfs 13.016 af
Primary=51.65 cfs 13.016 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=51.65 cfs 13.016 af
Link 2L: Pre-DevelopedPOl Inflow=159.29 cfs 21.180 af
Primary=159.29 cfs 21.180 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=143.84 cfs 45.467 af
Primary=143.84 cfs 45.467 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 66.649 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.29"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 45
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 159.29 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume=
21.180 af, Depth= 0.82"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
170J
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
159.29 cf
160-
1501
140�
130�
120�
110J I
-
w 100�
3 90�
• 80J
70=-'' -
60—'�
50 '�� _
40 k
30
20
10
0
Ti
1-
Y
1-
L
r-
✓
4-
Y
+
4-
L
I
Y r
TYpe il- firr-
115-yr Rainfaf=4.33"
-R4 nt ff Area=30 11.ff0- at -
Runoff Vdfuhne*2T.180 of
Y Y Y I Y
Runoff Dept =O.32"
+ —+
I— —I
L
Tc=3.3 min
Gisii=58-
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 46
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 421.06 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 20.463 af, Depth= 3.13"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0
Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
46/
z
440; I 421.06 ors
420-
400
380
360
340
320�
300
280
260J
240
220
• 200
180
160
140
120-z
100=
80
60
40=
20=
HI L
1 'L 1 11 I'1 IL L I'I
L L 5-y1r-RainfaU=4 3�"-
RunoffAmaT78:3-50-ac -
r rt
r 7 1 Y 1 t 1
Runoff Val-uIaT+�463 f-
1 1 1 1 L
L L I T
Runoff DepfM=3.13"
.0' min
r 1 r 1 + 1 r
r 1 r 7 1 T 1 r 7 1 7
Ic=8-
T 1 r
L L L I 1 L
+ r r 7 1 T 1 r 7 1 7 1 T 1 r
+ - - + 1 + 1 +
+ 1 +
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 47
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 257.43 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 13.016 af, Depth= 3.54"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
280-
257.43 cf
260�
240�
22O- 1/
200i,
180�
3 1401"
o -
�` 120- /
100-
80= /T
60-
40-
20� 1
0
r
t
L 1
t
Y
t 1
; Type Il 4-Mr-
5-y1t~ f ainfa )=4;3 „-
Runloff Area=44.1-60 ac
Runoff Vdluine=13.016 of
✓ 4
r
✓ 7
-L
Runoff Depth=3.54"
II
Th4. 1 m111ri -
r-IIT Tr
11111
r
L 1
t
r r1
i
i
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 48
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 87.12 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume=
11.991 af, Depth= 0.77"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Area (ac) CN Description
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
95
90=-
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
r
87.1 c
85
80 '�-
75- -
70 =''
65=' T-
60='
55=' r-
50 -
0 45='/I
LL
40 =-
35= -
30 '
25- I
20'' I�
15-'/
10
5='
Tr r r T I T I
r T r T r T I T I
r 'rT�p�II111
r 1-5-yrRainfall1=4 33'-
rT r r r I r I
r Runcif#Area=1$7.380-aic -
Runoff Volume=11.S91 af
F F r r r r
rI 7 -IIr r {'�
T �31 man
T
T
-5T
10 20
r
r
r r r r r r
r r r r r r
r
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 49
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.13" for 5-yr event
421.06 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
13.97 cfs @ 13.72 hrs, Volume=
13.97 cfs @ 13.72 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
20.463 af
20.461 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 105.9 min
20.461 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 860.20' @ 13.72 hrs Surf.Area= 146,764 sf Storage= 564,549 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 777.3 min calculated for 20.461 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 777.2 min (1,572.7 - 795.5 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 50
Primary OutFlow Max=13.97 cfs @ 13.72 hrs HW=860.20' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 13.97 cfs of 120.20 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.18 cfs @ 9.57 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 6.58 cfs @ 5.26 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.21 cfs @ 4.37 fps)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=856.00' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)
450�
400—'
350
300—'
- 250—'
0
u 2001
150�
100:-
50-
0.00 cfs
0
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
421.06 cfs
Iinfrow Area7& 35©-arc -
Peak-EIev=-8sO.-2e' -
it it ato rage=564,-549 -0f -
T T T
r.97 cfs
13.97 cfs
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
j
Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 51
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.54" for 5-yr event
257.43 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
51.65 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume=
51.65 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
13.016 af
13.016 af, Atten= 80%, Lag= 10.1 min
13.016 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 870.74' @ 12.12 hrs Surf.Area= 78,865 sf Storage= 293,578 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 424.7 min calculated for 13.016 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 424.2 min (1,202.6 - 778.4 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 52
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=51.03 cfs @ 12
4-1=Culvert (Passes 51.03 cfs of 228.
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
•=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
7=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
8=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
9=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
10=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
11=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
12=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
13=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
.12 hrs HW=870.73' (Free Discharge)
71 cfs potential flow)
6.00 cfs @ 9.60 fps)
10.21 cfs @ 4.09 fps)
10.21 cfs @ 4.09 fps)
10.21 cfs @ 4.09 fps)
10.21 cfs @ 4.09 fps)
1.39 cfs @ 1.53 fps)
1.39 cfs @ 1.53 fps)
1.39 cfs @ 1.53 fps)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
280
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
257.43 cfs
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 53
T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — 1 1 — — 1 — — 1 — Inflow A ea=44.100 a
r r r r r T T T T T Peak EIev=13701.74T
L L L L L L L L
Storage=29 ,5713 cf
IL — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L — — L
111111111111111111
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 1 1 T
- L L L L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 54
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.82" for 5-yr event
Inflow = 159.29 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 21.180 af
Primary = 159.29 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 21.180 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
0
LL
1707'
160'
150'
140-
130'
120'
110-/
100-
90'
80
70�
60=
50
40
30
20
10
0
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
59.29 cfs
159.29 cfs
1!rfI w
A ea=3 9 S3Q- ac- -
1
Ti
Ti
+
+
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
[ Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 5-yr Rainfall=4.33"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 55
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61 % Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.76" for 5-yr event
Inflow = 143.84 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 45.467 af
Primary = 143.84 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 45.467 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
0
LL
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
160s
' 143.84cfs I
1507' 143.84 cfs
140�
130�
120t'
110��
100-
90
80�
70J�
607-
40�
30-
20-
10
0
IiifIpw
Area=3Q9.133Q ac
T
IT T
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 56
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.19"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=254.55 cfs 30.604 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.80"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=504.62 cfs 24.815 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.23"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=303.69 cfs 15.536 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.12"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=142.22 cfs 17.497 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak EIev=861.03' Storage=687,830 cf Inflow=504.62 cfs 24.815 af
Primary=16.75 cfs 24.813 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=16.75 cfs 24.813 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak EIev=871.27' Storage=335,770 cf Inflow=303.69 cfs 15.536 af
Primary=85.05 cfs 15.536 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=85.05 cfs 15.536 af
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI Inflow=254.55 cfs 30.604 af
Primary=254.55 cfs 30.604 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=223.02 cfs 57.846 af
Primary=223.02 cfs 57.846 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 88.452 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.71"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 254.55 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume=
30.604 af, Depth= 1.19"
Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 57
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Area (ac) CN
Description
• 79.920 61
• 23.500 70
• 204.930 55
• 1.480 98
Crops/Farmland, B, Good
1/2 Acre Lots
Wood, B, Good
Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58
308.350
1.480
Tc Length
(min) (feet)
Weighted Average
99.52% Pervious Area
0.48% Impervious Area
Slope Velocity Capacity
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Description
32.3
0
LL
280J
Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
4
2607- 254.55 cfs
240�
2207
200�
180--'
1607
140—
_
120-
100-
807
z 607
40-
fi —
20J
0 �F
✓
Ty pe 1114-tt r -
10=yr Rai nfall=51.03�'F -
Y
r
Y
Runoff Area=309.830 aic
Runoff Vdluhne=30.604 of
Y Y Y
Runoff_' Depth=1.19" -
Tc=3-.3 min
eN=sK—
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Y
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 58
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 504.62 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 24.815 af, Depth= 3.80"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
550-
500-
450-
400-
350-
300—
250-
200-
150
100
50-
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
T
504.62 cfs
T
T T
L
T
L
T
Type II 4-Mr
L
10-yr Rainfall=51.031"
L
Runoff ArIea=781.3510 ac
Runoff Vdluine=24.815 of
Runoff Depth=3.8O" -
tc=5.0 min
L
L
tom'
L J L
L -1 pi r
L L 1 i L
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 59
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 303.69 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 15.536 af, Depth= 4.23"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
340J
3201
300J
2807:'
260�
240J
220J
200
180-
160-
140'
120=
100-
80=
60=
40=
20�
0
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
T
4
303.69 cfs
i
4
1
✓
r
✓
4
L Li i ~
1 1
Typeaa- 4-1ir
O_yr Rainfa j_5.0�`
Runoff Area= 44.100 ac
Runoff VoiuMe*15.536 f
i
i
Runoff Depth=4.23"-
r —H
L
r
4 1
i
tc=$_.0_min-
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 60
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 142.22 cfs @ 12.32 hrs, Volume=
17.497 af, Depth= 1.12"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Area (ac) CN Description
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
0
LL
4
150 r 142.22 cfs
140�
-
130
120�
110J
100
90J
80� 1
70-
z -
60-
50
40� I -
30-
20=
10=
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
L
L
1
r
L
+Type!II
10-y-r- Rai rkfa w=5.-03- " -
Runoff Are' -a= 37t.380 ac-
r _i 1 i
Runoff VdluineT17.497 of
Runoff Depth=1.-1 "-
Tc=3.3 min
1 -1
CN=57
r
L
0-1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 61
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.80" for 10-yr event
504.62 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
16.75 cfs @ 13.68 hrs, Volume=
16.75 cfs @ 13.68 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
24.815 af
24.813 af, Atten= 97%, Lag= 103.9 min
24.813 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 861.03' @ 13.68 hrs Surf.Area= 151,563 sf Storage= 687,830 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 749.6 min calculated for 24.807 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 751.7 min (1,541.8 - 790.1 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 62
Primary OutFlow Max=16.75 cfs @ 13.68 hrs HW=861.03' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 16.75 cfs of 126.91 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.89 cfs @ 10.52 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 8.56 cfs @ 6.85 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.30 cfs @ 6.19 fps)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=856.00' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)
550-
500-
4501-
400-
3501-
45 300�
3 =
LL 2507-
200-
1507-
100-
507-
0.00 cfs
0
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
504.62 cfs
r
r
II II II II II II
111111
Inflow Area=78.350 at
T T T T T r r r - -T
Peak Elev=861'.03'
--r--r--r
--r--r--r
r.75 cfs
16.75 cfs
fit_Ora_ge=667,83_0 f -
T T T
T T r r
T T T T
rt--rt---r -r r--7--7--7--7--7-- --�--,
T T r r
TTTTT
t--t--r--r--r--rt--rt--rt--rt--rt--'--'--'1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 63
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.23" for 10-yr event
303.69 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
85.05 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=
85.05 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
15.536 af
15.536 af, Atten= 72%, Lag= 8.5 min
15.536 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 871.27' @ 12.09 hrs Surf.Area= 81,205 sf Storage= 335,770 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 378.4 min calculated for 15.532 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 379.8 min (1,153.5 - 773.7 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 64
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=84.77 cfs @ 12
4-1=Culvert (Passes 84.77 cfs of 232.
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
•=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
7=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
8=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
9=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls
10=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
11=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
12=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
13=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00
.09 hrs HW=871.26' (Free Discharge)
93 cfs potential flow)
6.39 cfs @ 10.22 fps)
13.49 cfs @ 5.40 fps)
13.49 cfs @ 5.40 fps)
13.49 cfs @ 5.40 fps)
13.49 cfs @ 5.40 fps)
8.14 cfs @ 3.05 fps)
8.14 cfs @ 3.05 fps)
8.14 cfs @ 3.05 fps)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
340
320
300
280
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
85.05 cfs
85.05 cfs
10 20
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 65
7 - - 7 - - r - - r - - r - - r - - T - - , r - - r - - r - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7
7 - - 7 - - r - - r - - r - - r - - T - - T - - r - - r - - r - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 -
303.69 cfs I —
7 r--r--r--r--T__T__T_-T--T--7777--7--777
▪ r r r r T T r r I;ntr'oW-RA rea=44100 at
▪ r r r r T T T T T 7Peak EIev=87T.27!
7 - - r - - r - - r - - r - - T - - T - - r - - r - - r - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 7 - - 7 - - 7 - - 7 - -
✓ rrrrTTrrr-
storage_3 517 }t t
7 r r r r T T r r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
✓ r r r r T T r r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
7 - - r - - r - - r - - r - - T - - T - - r - - r - - T 7 - - 7 - - 7 -
✓ r r r r T T r r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
✓ --r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--
✓ r r r r T T r r r r r r r r 7 7 r
✓ --r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--
77
7
7
7
TTrrr77777777
✓ --r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--r--
7 r r r r T T r r r 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 66
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.19" for 10-yr event
Inflow = 254.55 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 30.604 af
Primary = 254.55 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 30.604 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
280-
260J
240J
220-:"
200-:"
180J
n 160-
3 140J
0
LT_
120�
100-:"
80-
60-
40
20-
0
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
254.55 cfs
254.55 cf
rl
L 1
4
rt
A ea=3 9 B3Q- ac-
L 1
iL 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 10-yr Rainfall=5.03"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 67
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.24" for 10-yr event
Inflow = 223.02 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 57.846 af
Primary = 223.02 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 57.846 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
240 -
230- 1223.02 cfs
220
2101
200
190
180
170
160-
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80='
70-
60
50�
40
30�'�
20
10
0
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
1
1
223.02 cfs
•
L 1
T 7
L J
1
T 7
J
L 1 1
rL
r 1
J iPfI wlA ea=3 9- B3Q-ae--
1
7 1
1 1 1 L 1
T7 1 T T
1 J 1 L 1
J 1— J
1 4 1 1 1 J 1 L J
L J L 1
1 1 1 1 1 J L 1
J J 1
1 J J 1
J 1— J
1 4 1 1 1 J L J
4 4
H 4
H 4
4 4 4 4
1 4 4 r 4
1 4 1 1 + -4 4 4
11 4 11 11 + -4 4 4
11 4 11 11 + 4 4 4
10 20 30 40 50 60
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
r Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 68
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.76"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=407.89 cfs 45.520 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.75"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=621.08 cfs 30.982 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.19"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=368.08 cfs 19.082 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.68"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=232.11 cfs 26.266 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=862.11' Storage=855,230 cf Inflow=621.08 cfs 30.982 af
Primary=19.74 cfs 30.456 af Secondary=5.92 cfs 0.523 af Outflow=25.65 cfs 30.979 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=871.97' Storage=394,321 cf Inflow=368.08 cfs 19.082 af
Primary=131.94 cfs 19.082 af Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 af Outflow=131.94 cfs 19.082 af
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI Inflow=407.89 cfs 45.520 af
Primary=407.89 cfs 45.520 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=345.05 cfs 76.328 af
Primary=345.05 cfs 76.328 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 121.850 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.36"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 69
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 407.89 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume=
45.520 af, Depth= 1.76"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
440-
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
1 1 +
r I r
420=' 1407.89 cf
400� z —
380J+ -
360
340-
320� )-
300 r1
280
H 260
u 240+:- r
220
0
LL 200
180J
160� z T
140=
120 z
100-
80
60
40
20
0
r
r r
r 1 1 +
r I T
r
r
r
J1 y ype'iI- 4 -br-
-25-yr Ra▪ infa i=8.011"
Runoff Area=309.830-a�c-
Ru rioff VOW ine*45.52f of
I Fit un'off Depth=1.-76"
Tc=3 3 min
-
10 20 30
+ 1 ] 1 ' 1 + 1 1 1 + 1 + 1
7 11-
r T 7 rII
40 50 60
r
+ 1 + 1 r + 1 ▪ 1 + 1 r
70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 70
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 621.08 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 30.982 af, Depth= 4.75"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
6507-
600J
550
500J
450J
400J
350J
3001-
250J
200-
150
100
50
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
621.08 cfs
110 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
r
r
r
✓
LI
ri
▪ _
— —
I L
Type jH 4-fir
2▪ 11r
5-yr RainfaII=6.011"
'r r T I
Runoff Area=781.3510 ac
r
r
✓
1 Rurioff_Volutne=3O.982 f _
Tti
▪ Runoff +Depth=4.-75 '
✓ 7 Y tc= . mi11
II�1�=8.7
r
r
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 71
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 368.08 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 19.082 af, Depth= 5.19"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
400''
380='
360
340-
320
300-
280
260 -
• 240
▪ 220
0 2004
a 180
160
140=
120=
100=
80
60
40-
20-
0
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
t
-r
t
I— t
368.08 cfs
v
-r
I r
Y
r
t
t
✓ 4
▪ t
Type II 4-1ir-
25-yr Rainfall=6.01'-
Runoff Ara= 44t 100-ao -
Runoff VokiMe*19 082 -f
I— t
• Runoff Depth=5.197-
Tc=5.0-' min -
r
✓ 4
▪ t
I— t
✓ 7
i
i
t
✓ 4
✓ 4
I— t
i
i
Y
4- 1 L-
1
It
t 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 72
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 232.11 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume=
26.266 af, Depth= 1.68"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
• 150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
1
250;-�7
240� 1232.11 cfs
230
2204-
210�
200
190
180-;-
-0 150
13 140
3 130
0 120=
II 110
100_
90-
80J
70-
60J
50-
40
30-
20
10-
0
1
7
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
L I L
✓ i r
� I L
✓ I r
L I L
• I r
L I L
L • I L
1 I L I L 1 I 1 L I L
7 i T I r 7 I 7 T I r
1 I 1 I L J I 1 _L I L
i i lTypeil1- 4frr-
i T r 25-yrRai nfaU=6.017
7 T R ff AreTa=ii87L3180-aic
I- 7
1
Runoff Yegu eT26.26_6f -
unoff Depth=1'I..-68" -
7 r r 7 I r I r
1 I • I L 1 I 1
T r r 7
T L 7 T
Te=3.Irif
7
EN-=5L7
1 J L 1 I 1 I L J I 1 I 1 I L
1 J J 4 I 1 I J J I 1 I 1 I J
T r 7 T i r 7 I T i T I I-
L
1 J L 1 I 1 I L J I 1 I 1 I L
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01 "
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 73
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.75" for 25-yr event
621.08 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
25.65 cfs @ 13.23 hrs, Volume=
19.74 cfs @ 13.23 hrs, Volume=
5.92 cfs @ 13.23 hrs, Volume= 0.523 af
30.982 af
30.979 af, Atten= 96%, Lag= 76.8 min
30.456 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 862.11' @ 13.23 hrs Surf.Area= 157,913 sf Storage= 855,230 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 735.3 min calculated for 30.979 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 735.2 min (1,519.1 - 783.9 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 74
Primary OutFlow Max=19.74 cfs @ 13.23 hrs HW=862.11' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 19.74 cfs of 135.19 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 8.74 cfs @ 11.65 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 10.61 cfs @ 8.49 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.39 cfs @ 7.96 fps)
5=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=5.75 cfs @ 13.23 hrs HW=862.11' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 5.75 cfs @ 1.07 fps)
650�
600�
550
500
4507:-
w 400�
3 350J
LL 300:
250-
200=
150=
100_
50-
0
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
621.08 cfs
Inflow Area=78.350 at
r r r r r t t + + + rt rt rt rt rt y y
Peak -EIev=862. is
�r r t-ra9e=80-5;23f1-cf -
L_ L L L L L 'IL 1 1 1 1..
r r T T T T T T T T T T T;; T
,1 T T T T 4 4 T T T -L -L -L -L 1 1 41
zI
,
II � II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II II
175.65 cfs
sir
19.74 cfs
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
z
— Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01 "
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 75
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.19" for 25-yr event
368.08 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
131.94 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
131.94 cfs @ 12.07 hrs, Volume=
0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
19.082 af
19.082 af, Atten= 64%, Lag= 7.3 min
19.082 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 871.97' @ 12.07 hrs Surf.Area= 84,365 sf Storage= 394,321 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 332.7 min calculated for 19.077 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 334.1 min (1,102.6 - 768.5 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 76
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=129.23 cfs @ 12.07 hrs HW=871.94' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 129.23 cfs of 238.22 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 6.86 cfs @ 10.97 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.75 cfs @ 6.70 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.75 cfs @ 6.70 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.75 cfs @ 6.70 fps)
•=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.75 cfs @ 6.70 fps)
7=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 13.46 cfs @ 5.05 fps)
8=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 13.46 cfs @ 5.05 fps)
9=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 13.46 cfs @ 5.05 fps)
10=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 3.75 cfs @ 2.13 fps)
11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 3.75 cfs @ 2.13 fps)
12=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 3.75 cfs @ 2.13 fps)
13=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 3.75 cfs @ 2.13 fps)
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs HW=866.50' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir( Controls 0.00 cfs)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
400
380
360
340
320
300
280
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01 "
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 77
7 — — — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T — — T -------------------------------T
1111111111111111111
368.08 cfs
131.94 cfs
131.94 cfs
Itlfrow Atea=44.1-0©-arc -
1111111111
r r r r r + + + + + speak -E+Iev=8f t-97'-
1111111111
L L L L 1 1 1 1 1 S-t-ciraige 394,_321' _ -0t -
L L L L L 1 1 L L L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
r r r r r t t r r r r r r r r r r r
L L L L L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
tTTTTT
t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t
40 %
���
0
10 20
1 1 L L L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
T T T T T T 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 78
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.76" for 25-yr event
Inflow = 407.89 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 45.520 af
Primary = 407.89 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume= 45.520 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
0
LL
440�
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
4-
1-
4
r 4
T
407.89 cfs
420L'
400
380
360�
340�
320
300
280='
260�
240
220
200
180=
160
140
-r/
z�'
100-
80-
60
40-
20-
0
407.89 cfs
r r
1fI3w
r-- r 1 r -- y
r i r
r -4 1 1-
T r i r
r — — r r — — y
L 1 L 1 i i 1
r r r r
• r r r
Atea=3-Q9. a3
L
rr 41
T r i r r
✓ r 1
r r r r
r -4 r 4
✓ T r T
ac--
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
[ Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 25-yr Rainfall=6.01"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 79
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61 % Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.96" for 25-yr event
Inflow = 345.05 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 76.328 af
Primary = 345.05 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 76.328 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
380� z 1 345.05 cfs
360- 1345.05 cf
340
320 /
300
280 '
260H"
240H
▪ 220H"
• 200 "
180H"
• 160H
140H"
120H"
80
60
40-
20
0
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 80
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.26"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=540.42 cfs 58.376 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 RunoffArea=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.49"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=712.11 cfs 35.868 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.95"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=418.41 cfs 21.879 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.17"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=310.36 cfs 33.857 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=862.41' Storage=903,568 cf Inflow=712.11 cfs 35.868 af
Primary=28.32 cfs 32.172 af Secondary=43.24 cfs 3.694 af Outflow=71.57 cfs 35.865 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=872.42' Storage=432,285 cf Inflow=418.41 cfs 21.879 af
Primary=165.44 cfs 21.717 af Secondary=17.47 cfs 0.162 af Outflow=182.91 cfs 21.879 af
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI Inflow=540.42 cfs 58.376 af
Primary=540.42 cfs 58.376 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=491.95 cfs 91.601 af
Primary=491.95 cfs 91.601 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 149.980 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.90"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 81
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 540.42 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume=
58.376 af, Depth= 2.26"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Area (ac) CN
Description
• 79.920 61
• 23.500 70
• 204.930 55
• 1.480 98
Crops/Farmland, B, Good
1/2 Acre Lots
Wood, B, Good
Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58
308.350
1.480
Tc Length
(min) (feet)
Weighted Average
99.52% Pervious Area
0.48% Impervious Area
Slope Velocity Capacity
(ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
Description
32.3
0
LL
4
600-
550-
500-
450—
400—
350—
300-
250—
200—
'
150-
100-
50-
0�{
Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
L
L
H
T
r
L
L J
i
Ty
Pe
50-yr Rain -fall
i
II -Z4-h1 r -
=6.7a„
- Runoff Area=309.&30- ac -
Ruroff VoluteT58 37& f -
_unoff Depth=2,26 ' -
Tc=3Z3 min -
C 1-5f_
T r
L J i T L
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 82
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 712.11 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 35.868 af, Depth= 5.49"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
7501
700
650E
600E
550
500E
, 450E
3 400E
o -
a 350E
300=
250E
200=
150=
100E
50=
0
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
4
712. 1 cfs
4
r--t
L 1
4 4
t
+Type;11 4Jir
-50-yr-Rai ifaW=t.-7$"
Runoff ArreaT78:730-mac -
Runoff Vdluine*35.868 of
Runoff Depth=5.4r-" -
CI l=8,9
it
L
r ?
L 1
r
L
i
iT
1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
it
L
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 83
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 418.41 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 21.879 af, Depth= 5.95"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Area (ac) CN Description
38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
I I I I I I I 1
460""
440 /zI418.41 cfs r T
r r-F1 i r i
+
380� - T
360� �-
340"- +
320� r T T
300� - -
280 - - 1 T 1 r 1 I- 4 1 T
' 260� T
240
0 2201-- A+ + + + + 1 + H 1 + tC= o-i min -
a 200= T T r + T + T T I...180-;tr =U*
160:�+-
140= 1-
120' -
100L +-
803
60=
40= + r i r rt i t r 1 + t r
20=(/'
1 T 1
+Type)] 41ir
50-yr teal rfa[I=6.78"
Runoff' AreaT44.100-a`o -
T T
Runoff btFuOne*2 .879-af
Runoff Depth=5.95,"
- - - - - - +---i---+
T r I-T T r T T T r
1 1 L 1 L 1 1 1 1 L J 1 1 1 L 1 L
0
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 84
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 310.36 cfs @ 12.30 hrs, Volume=
33.857 af, Depth= 2.17"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Area (ac) CN Description
18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry,
0
LL
340
3207"
3007:"
2807:'
260J
2407'
220J
200
1807"
1607:"
140J
120J
100J
80_
60=
40:
20_
0
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
r
310.36 cfs
r
1
IL
t i IT III'
50,y-r Rain fa-1=6.-78„
1R9npift irera=!87i.3 0-arc
1 Runoff Voluine 33.857 of -
Runoff Depth=2.1 r
-ITc=3.3 mi+n
r
1 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 85
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.49" for 50-yr event
712.11 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
71.57 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume=
28.32 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume=
43.24 cfs @ 12.35 hrs, Volume= 3.694 af
35.868 af
35.865 af, Atten= 90%, Lag= 23.8 min
32.172 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 862.41' @ 12.35 hrs Surf.Area= 159,725 sf Storage= 903,568 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 662.8 min calculated for 35.865 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 662.7 min (1,442.6 - 780.0 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 86
Primary OutFlow Max=28.26 cfs @ 12.35 hrs HW=862.41' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 28.26 cfs of 137.43 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 8.96 cfs @ 11.95 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 11.11 cfs @ 8.89 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.41 cfs @ 8.39 fps)
5=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 7.77 cfs @ 1.61 fps)
Secondary OutFlow Max=43.11 cfs @ 12.35 hrs HW=862.41' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 43.11 cfs @ 2.10 fps)
750/
700
650�
600�
5507"
500-
N 450J
3 400�
E 3501'
300=
250=
200=
150-
100-
50
0
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
12.11 cfs I
71.57 cfs
43.24 cfs
Peak Ehv=862.41 `
ato
rage=9Q3,b6$ ct _
T T T T T
+ 'I-
'I- + + +
1 1 1
7
+
4
4
1
- -T
—I —I +
4 — — 4 — — 4
4 — — 4 — — 4
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
v
— Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 87
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.95" for 50-yr event
418.41 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
182.91 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume=
165.44 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume=
17.47 cfs @ 12.06 hrs, Volume= 0.162 af
21.879 af
21.879 af, Atten= 56%, Lag= 6.6 min
21.717 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 872.42' @ 12.06 hrs Surf.Area= 86,375 sf Storage= 432,285 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 305.0 min calculated for 21.874 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 306.3 min (1,071.5 - 765.1 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 88
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50' 48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
871.50' 48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
872.00' 20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
872.44' 60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=163.81 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=872.39' (Free Discharge)
4-1=Culvert (Passes 163.81 cfs of 241.67 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.15 cfs @ 11.44 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 18.61 cfs @ 7.44 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 18.61 cfs @ 7.44 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 18.61 cfs @ 7.44 fps)
•=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 18.61 cfs @ 7.44 fps)
7=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.00 cfs @ 6.00 fps)
8=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.00 cfs @ 6.00 fps)
9=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 16.00 cfs @ 6.00 fps)
10=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 9.45 cfs @ 3.54 fps)
11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 9.45 cfs @ 3.54 fps)
12=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.67 cfs @ 3.83 fps)
13=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.67 cfs @ 3.83 fps)
15=Orifice/Grate ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Secondary OutFlow Max=16.15 cfs @ 12.06 hrs HW=872.39' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 16.15 cfs @ 2.05 fps)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
460'
440=
420
400
380 ,
360=
340
320
300 /
280=
- 260
2404'
220-,
a 200—
1804
160
140 ,
120=
100
80-
60'
40i
20=
0-
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 89
T T r r r T T T T T T T T
J 418.41 cfs I L t
t
t
,r
zr-
L
182.91 cfs
'[ 165.44 cfs
Fr
10 20
L L L L T T Iinf[oWA;rea=44 aia
Peak E+1ev= 7L.'2'
-- -- -- ----+--+--+--+--+--$t4raige=43-2-28-5cf31
-
7 t t t t t t t t t r r r r r r r r
t t t t t t t t t t r r r r r r r r
L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L L
I— r r r r T T T T T 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
T r r r r r r r r r Y Y Y Y Y T T T
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 90
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.26" for 50-yr event
Inflow = 540.42 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 58.376 af
Primary = 540.42 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 58.376 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
600J
550-
500-
450-
400-
350�
300�
250:
200J
150�
100
50-
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
540.42 cfs I
1 0l{m
Are 3-Q9 83Q- ac
1
H
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 50-yr Rainfall=6.78"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 91
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61 % Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.55" for 50-yr event
Inflow = 491.95 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 91.601 af
Primary = 491.95 cfs @ 12.27 hrs, Volume= 91.601 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
550-
500J
450-
400:
350L"
u 300 �
200-
150-
100-
50—
t
1
t t
H
L
t
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
t
1!1flpw
t t i t t
Area=3 9.S3Q ac
iL L L
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 92
Time span=0.00-199.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 3981 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method
SubcatchmentlS: Pre-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=309.830 ac 0.48% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.81"
Tc=32.3 min CN=58 Runoff=686.76 cfs 72.590 af
Subcatchment3S: Post-DevelopedArea 1 Runoff Area=78.350 ac 76.07% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.28"
Tc=5.0 min CN=89 Runoff=806.28 cfs 40.971 af
Subcatchment6S: Post-DevelopedArea 4 Runoff Area=44.100 ac 86.96% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.75"
Tc=5.0 min CN=93 Runoff=470.52 cfs 24.792 af
Subcatchment8S: Off -site Drainage Runoff Area=187.380 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.71"
Tc=32.3 min CN=57 Runoff=397.08 cfs 42.274 af
Pond 4P: Pond 1 Peak Elev=862.83' Storage=971,673 cf Inflow=806.28 cfs 40.971 af
Primary=56.94 cfs 34.195 af Secondary=124.29 cfs 6.774 af Outflow=181.23 cfs 40.969 af
Pond 7P: Pond 2 Peak Elev=872.79' Storage=464,871 cf Inflow=470.52 cfs 24.792 af
Primary=199.88 cfs 24.224 af Secondary=45.68 cfs 0.567 af Outflow=245.56 cfs 24.792 af
Link 2L: Pre-DevelopedPOl Inflow=686.76 cfs 72.590 af
Primary=686.76 cfs 72.590 af
Link 5L: Post Developed POI Inflow=669.93 cfs 108.035 af
Primary=669.93 cfs 108.035 af
Total Runoff Area = 619.660 ac Runoff Volume = 180.627 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.50"
83.95% Pervious = 520.230 ac 16.05% Impervious = 99.430 ac

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 93
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Runoff = 686.76 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume=
72.590 af, Depth= 2.81"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 79.920 61 Crops/Farmland, B, Good
• 23.500 70 1/2 Acre Lots
• 204.930 55 Wood, B, Good
• 1.480 98 Impervious, B, Good
309.830 58 Weighted Average
308.350 99.52% Pervious Area
1.480 0.48% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3 Direct Entry, Worksheet Value
0
LL
Subcatchment 1S: Pre -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
750
1
700EI I686.76 cfs I
650E
600E
550E
500E
450-
400E
350E
300E
250E
200E
150.
100-
50-
0-
r
Type]]- 4t�r
�do-yr F ai fa0=-.58�`-
r + i i i r
Rwndff Ares=3O9L$3'O_ac_
Rur%off VoIu
fiunof f Depth=2.-81,,l -
r--+
1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 94
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 806.28 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 40.971 af, Depth= 6.28"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Area (ac) CN Description
59.600 98 Building 1 Impervious
17.020 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.730 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
78.350 89 Weighted Average
18.750 23.93% Pervious Area
59.600 76.07% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
Subcatchment 3S: Post -Developed Area 1
Hydrograph
900_ 4
850_
800J
750J
700J
650J
600�
550�
500
-
4507:'
400=
350=
300-
250-
200=
150:
100-
50-
0
806. 8 cfs 1-
1
r
+
1-
L
r-
+
4-
L
Ti
r
L
1
• i
L i
Typeas-24-1ir-
100-yr F aintall=7.58'F-
+ Runoff Area=7&350-ac -
RurloffVdCunneT40.97i af-
1
L _unoffl Depth=6.28" -
tc=6.0 min
—
1-
L
4
+ —+
4 4
L
cN=8
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
❑ Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 95
Summary for Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
[49] Hint: Tc<2dt may require smaller dt
Runoff = 470.52 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 24.792 af, Depth= 6.75"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 38.350 98 Building 2 Impervious
• 5.750 61 Open Area
44.100 93 Weighted Average
5.750 13.04% Pervious Area
38.350 86.96% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
0
LL
5.0 Direct Entry, Direct
520:
500=
480
460J
440
4204-
400J
380
360J
340
320J
300
2804-
260J
240=
220J
200=
180-
'1]
140:
1204
100''
80
60
40'
20=
Subcatchment 6S: Post -Developed Area 4
Hydrograph
L
L 1 1 L
L L 1
L
L
1 i 1
70.52 cf
v
J J 1 J I J J 1 J
1 i
+ J J 1 + J J T'y
pe ll 4-Mr-
4 4 4 44 1{0=pr-f Raiff-MI=7.58"
Runoff Artaa= 44� 100 at
4 Ru rtoff l OI-u tnQT24: 792 of
+ + + + + Runoff DeptI6.75'
tG .0min
+ + 1 + + + 1 +r-91-3
L 1
✓ 1 1
L J
r 1-
4 J
L 1 L J 1 L
1
• 1 1 1 ▪ 1
1
L J i J
1
• 1 1 1 ▪ 1
1
J I J J 1 J
1 1 1
1 1 1 L
1 T 1 1—
_L i L
1 T 1 1
i J i J
J J J J 1 J I J J 1 J 1 1 I J
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
• Runoff

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 96
Summary for Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Runoff = 397.08 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume=
42.274 af, Depth= 2.71"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Area (ac) CN Description
• 18.300 70 Off -Site Houses, 1/2 Acre, HSG B, Good
• 150.250 55 Woods, HSG B, Good
18.830 61 Pasture/grassland/range, Good, HSG B
187.380 57 Weighted Average
187.380 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
32.3
Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 8S: Off -site Drainage (Areas 2&3)
Hydrograph
i
440," H + r rt +
420." 1397.08 cfs II II II II II
400
380� - 1 1 1
360 - t
3404" / I -
320'=" '
r 1 r T 1 T
300-"' / t 1 1 t
Runoff Vol-uIne=42.-274- f -
280
II-
1_
tTpe11r
It11:0=y,r�Rainfal=71.-5e-
✓ T 1 T I t r
Runt ff Area=187.380-ac-
H
260."
w =
240.:'
3 220�� --
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
✓ - 1 r 1 t 1 1-
0 200= ---
u_
180'
160=
140=
120=
100=
80
60
40
20
0
Y
1 1 t 1
unoff Depth 2.71'�, ,,
t T61=3 3i mite =
C1 =57
r 1 r 1 r -4 1 r 1 t 1
11-
t t 1 t 1 t t 1 Y 1 t 1 t
- 1 t 1 1—
r H 1 1 1 ~
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 97
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Summary for Pond 4P: Pond 1
78.350 ac, 76.07% Impervious, Inflow Depth =
806.28 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
181.23 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=
56.94 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume=
40.971
40.969
34.195
Secondary = 124.29 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 6.774
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05
Peak Elev= 862.83' @ 12.11 hrs Surf.Area= 162,221 sf Storage=
6.28" for 100-yr event
af
af, Atten= 78%,
af
af
Plug -Flow detention time= 602.0 min calculated for 40.969 af (100%
Center -of -Mass det. time= 601.9 min (1,378.3 - 776.4 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
hrs
971,673 cf
of inflow)
Lag= 9.8 min
#1
Elevation
(feet)
856.00
857.00
858.00
859.00
860.00
861.00
862.00
862.50
863.00
856.00' 998,544 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
120,191
128,526
134,164
139,859
145,608
151,413
157,274
160,250
163,193
Device Routing Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
131,345
137,012
142,734
148,511
154,344
79,381
80,861
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
124,359
255,704
392,715
535,449
683,959
838,303
917,684
998,544
#1 Primary 850.47'
#2 Device 1 856.00'
#3 Device 1 858.75'
#4 Device 1 859.25'
#5 Device 1 862.17'
#6 Secondary 862.00'
36.0" Round Culvert
L= 77.6' RCP, groove end projecting, Ke= 0.200
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 850.47' / 850.00' S= 0.0061 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 7.07 sf
18.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
30.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
3.0" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
50.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 98
Primary OutFlow Max=55.71 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=862.82' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 55.71 cfs of 140.13 cfs potential flow)
44
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 9.26 cfs @ 12.34 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 11.76 cfs @ 9.41 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.44 cfs @ 8.94 fps)
5=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 34.25 cfs @ 2.64 fps)
Secondary OutFlow Max=120.94 cfs @ 12.11 hrs HW=862.82' (Free Discharge)
L6=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 120.94 cfs @ 2.96 fps)
Pond 4P: Pond 1
Hyd rog raph
806.28 cfs
900=
850-
800
750
700
650�
600J
550-
4,3 500�
450 - /
.2 400
350
181.23 c
250-
200�
150L'
100�%/
0-
0
r--r--r--r
t--t--r--r
T T T T Tirl
1
ltifk:•W-Aiva=78-.350-at-
T
Peak-Elev=862.83'
torage=97T,67T ©f =
T
T
T
T
4
4
///
4
4
4 — — 4 — — 4
4 — — 4 — — 4
--r--r
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
L Outflow
El Primary
❑ Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 99
Inflow Area =
Inflow =
Outflow =
Primary =
Secondary =
Summary for Pond 7P: Pond 2
44.100 ac, 86.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 6.75" for 100-yr event
470.52 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume=
245.56 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume=
199.88 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume=
45.68 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.567 af
24.792 af
24.792 af, Atten= 48%, Lag= 5.9 min
24.224 af
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 872.79' @ 12.05 hrs Surf.Area= 88,065 sf Storage= 464,871 cf
Plug -Flow detention time= 283.3 min calculated for 24.792 af (100% of inflow)
Center -of -Mass det. time= 282.8 min (1,044.9 - 762.1 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1
Elevation
(feet)
866.50
867.00
868.00
869.00
870.00
871.00
872.00
873.00
866.50' 483,361 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc)
Device Routing
Surf.Area
(sq-ft)
57,822
61,438
66,956
71,253
75,608
80,019
84,486
89,010
Invert
Inc.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
64,197
69,105
73,431
77,814
82,253
86,748
Outlet Devices
Cum.Store
(cubic -feet)
0
29,815
94,012
163,117
236,547
314,361
396,613
483,361
#1 Primary
#2 Device 1
#3 Device 1
#4 Device 1
#5 Device 1
#6 Device 1
#7 Device 1
#8 Device 1
#9 Device 1
#10 Device 1
854.44'
866.50'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
869.75'
870.50'
870.50'
870.50'
871.50'
48.0" Round Culvert
L= 72.8' RCP, sq.cut end projecting, Ke= 0.500
Inlet / Outlet Invert= 854.44' / 854.00' S= 0.0060'/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.011 Concrete pipe, straight & clean, Flow Area= 12.57 sf
15.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
60.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 100
#11 Device 1
#12 Device 1
#13 Device 1
#14 Secondary
#15 Device 1
871.50'
871.50'
871.50'
872.00'
872.44'
48.0" W x 8.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
48.0" W x 6.0" H Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
20.0' long Sharp -Crested Rectangular Weir 2 End Contraction(s)
60.0" x 60.0" Horiz. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
Primary OutFlow Max=199.50 cfs @ 12.05 hrs HW=872.79' (Free
4-1=Culvert (Passes 199.50 cfs of 244.64 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 7.39 cfs @ 11.83 fps)
3=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 20.09 cfs @ 8.04 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 20.09 cfs @ 8.04 fps)
=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 20.09 cfs @ 8.04 fps)
•=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 20.09 cfs @ 8.04 fps)
7=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 17.93 cfs @ 6.72 fps)
8=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 17.93 cfs @ 6.72 fps)
9=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 17.93 cfs @ 6.72 fps)
10=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 12.48 cfs @ 4.68 fps)
11=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 12.48 cfs @ 4.68 fps)
12=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 9.79 cfs @ 4.89 fps)
13=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 9.79 cfs @ 4.89 fps)
15=Orifice/Grate (Weir Controls 13.42 cfs @ 1.93 fps)
Discharge)
Secondary OutFlow Max=45.38 cfs @ 12.05 hrs HW=872.79' (Free Discharge)
4-14=Sharp-Crested Rectangular Weir(Weir Controls 45.38 cfs @ 2.90 fps)

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds
Prepared by Kimely-Horn
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 7P: Pond 2
Hyd rog raph
Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Printed 5/16/2022
Page 101
70.52 cfs
500—'
450:
400—'
350-
w 300L'
250- 1199.88 cfs
LL
200
150:-
100
,I 45.68 cfs
50—
T T ITnflow Area=44.IOO arc
h Peak-Elev=872.79'
Storage=4b4,o7i ©f
- -- ▪ -- ▪ ---F
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
■ Inflow
Outflow
❑ Primary
Secondary

Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 102
Summary for Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 0.48% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.81" for 100-yr event
Inflow = 686.76 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 72.590 af
Primary = 686.76 cfs @ 12.29 hrs, Volume= 72.590 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
750':"
700J
650-
6007-
550-
500�
450+:"
400�
350+:"
300�
250:
200
150-
100
50�
0
Link 2L: Pre -Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
1 686.76 cf
686.76 cf
+
i
A ea=39 a3Q ac -
i
1
L 1
L 1
Hi HI
4
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

650-
600�
550-
500-
450-
400--
0 350�
LL
300-
250�
200=
150-
100
50-
0
Troutman Stormwater Split Ponds Type 11 24-hr 100-yr Rainfall=7.58"
Prepared by Kimely-Horn Printed 5/16/2022
HydroCAD® 10.10-5a s/n 09843 © 2020 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 103
Summary for Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Inflow Area = 309.830 ac, 31.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.18" for 100-yr event
Inflow = 669.93 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 108.035 af
Primary = 669.93 cfs @ 12.20 hrs, Volume= 108.035 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-199.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Link 5L: Post Developed POI
Hyd rog raph
750J
669.93 (cfs I
700- 1669.93 cfs
/ r
r T
L L
Area=3Q9.33Q ac
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Time (hours)
Inflow
❑ Primary

APPENDIX 3
Stormwater Analysis and Calculations
Troutman Logistics Center, Troutman, NC

Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® Plan
Outfall •
29 30 31 32
2
48
10
11
13
56
12
59
55
54
49
26
25
24
18
16
50
.47
41
42
l9
17
22 23
15
14`.4
20
21
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Date: 5/11/2022
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 1
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
1
1100 TO 1000
104.6
48
Cir
137.864
856.49
857.18
0.498
860.16
860.27
n/a
860.27
End
Manhole
2
1105 TO 1100
7.02
18
Cir
307.954
877.53
886.29
2.845
878.10
887.31
0.46
887.31
1
Manhole
3
1110 TO 1105
3.29
18
Cir
60.000
886.29
886.59
0.500
887.31
887.28
n/a
887.28 j
2
Manhole
4
1200 TO 1100
102.0
48
Cir
206.655
857.18
858.21
0.500
860.27
861.27
1.52
861.27
1
Manhole
5
1300 TO 1200
100.1
48
Cir
357.344
858.21
860.00
0.500
861.27
863.02
n/a
863.02
4
Manhole
6
1400 TO 1300
61.45
42
Cir
57.881
860.50
860.79
0.500
863.02
863.24
0.64
863.24
5
Manhole
7
1500 TO 1400 (1)
60.42
42
Cir
102.231
860.79
861.30
0.500
863.24
863.73
1.11
863.73
6
Manhole
8
1500 TO 1400
56.92
36
Cir
231.386
861.80
862.95
0.500
864.08
865.40
n/a
865.40
7
Manhole
9
1600 TO 1500
57.25
36
Cir
249.883
862.95
864.20
0.500
865.40
866.65
1.34
866.65
8
Manhole
10
1700 TO 1600
56.40
36
Cir
74.003
864.20
864.57
0.500
866.65
867.01
n/a
867.01
9
Manhole
11
1800 TO 1700
55.88
36
Cir
114.400
864.57
865.15
0.500
867.01
867.57
n/a
867.57
10
Manhole
12
1900 TO 1800
54.36
36
Cir
93.275
865.15
865.61
0.500
867.57
868.00
n/a
868.00
11
Manhole
13
2000 TO 1900
52.97
36
Cir
129.971
865.61
866.26
0.500
868.00
868.62
1.22
868.62
12
Manhole
14
2100 TO 2000
53.05
36
Cir
67.119
866.26
866.60
0.500
868.62
868.96
n/a
868.96
13
Manhole
15
2200 TO 2100
50.59
36
Cir
143.640
866.60
867.32
0.500
868.96
869.63
n/a
869.63
14
Manhole
16
2300 TO 2200
44.71
36
Cir
170.000
867.32
868.17
0.500
869.63
870.34
n/a
870.34 j
15
Manhole
17
2400 TO 2300 (1)
40.54
36
Cir
170.000
868.17
869.02
0.500
870.34
871.09
n/a
871.09 j
16
Manhole
18
2400 TO 2300
35.52
36
Cir
170.000
869.02
869.87
0.500
871.09
871.80
n/a
871.80 j
17
Manhole
19
2510 TO 2500
6.73
18
Cir
13.000
876.76
877.15
3.030
877.30
878.15
0.07
878.15
18
Manhole
20
2520 TO 2510
3.10
18
Cir
196.275
877.15
883.10
3.030
878.15
883.77
n/a
883.77 j
19
Manhole
21
2530 TO 2520
2.18
18
Cir
24.000
885.54
885.66
0.500
886.02
886.22
n/a
886.22
20
Manhole
22
2120 TO 2110
6.04
18
Cir
60.702
877.04
880.01
4.900
877.49
880.96
0.13
880.96
15
Manhole
23
2130 TO 2120
5.08
18
Cir
24.000
880.01
881.19
4.901
880.96
882.06
n/a
882.06 j
22
Manhole
24
2600 TO 2500
29.31
30
Cir
170.000
870.37
871.22
0.500
872.02
873.06
n/a
873.06
18
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 10 Yrs. ; j - Line contains hyd. jump.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 2
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
25
2700 TO 2600
23.54
30
Cir
170.000
871.22
872.07
0.500
873.06
873.72
n/a
873.72 j
24
Manhole
26
2800 TO 2700
17.81
24
Cir
170.000
872.57
873.42
0.500
873.99
874.93
0.75
874.93
25
Manhole
27
PIPE -85
6.08
18
Cir
13.000
878.56
878.62
0.500
879.42
879.57
n/a
879.57
26
Manhole
28
1306 TO 1400
10.62
24
Cir
37.245
875.94
876.13
0.500
876.96
877.30
n/a
877.30
7
Manhole
29
1307 TO 1306
8.82
18
Cir
81.269
876.63
877.04
0.500
877.76
878.18
0.09
878.18
28
Manhole
30
1308 TO 1307
6.95
18
Cir
61.000
877.04
877.34
0.500
878.18
878.36
n/a
878.36 j
29
Manhole
31
1309 TO 1308 (1)
5.12
18
Cir
173.880
877.34
878.21
0.500
878.36
879.08
n/a
879.08 j
30
Manhole
32
1309 TO 1308
1.92
18
Cir
174.086
878.21
879.08
0.500
879.08
879.60
n/a
879.60 j
31
Manhole
33
2110 TO 2100
3.84
18
Cir
18.097
876.62
877.65
5.707
876.97
878.40
0.04
878.40
14
Manhole
34
2111 TO 2110
2.24
18
Cir
24.000
877.65
879.02
5.706
878.40
879.59
n/a
879.59 j
33
Manhole
35
1310 TO 1300
103.5
48
Cir
80.002
866.03
866.43
0.500
868.69
869.50
0.23
869.50
5
Manhole
36
1315 TO 1310 (1)
95.90
48
Cir
205.870
866.43
867.46
0.500
869.50
870.42
0.21
870.42
35
Manhole
37
1315 TO 1310
97.35
48
Cir
168.596
867.46
868.30
0.500
870.42
871.29
n/a
871.29
36
Manhole
38
1320 TO 1315
90.21
42
Cir
124.500
868.80
869.42
0.500
871.59
872.37
0.25
872.37
37
Manhole
39
1325 TO 1320
81.85
42
Cir
170.000
869.42
870.27
0.500
872.37
873.09
n/a
873.09
38
Manhole
40
1330 TO 1325
72.11
42
Cir
170.000
870.27
871.12
0.500
873.09
873.78
0.20
873.78
39
Manhole
41
1335 TO 1330
62.17
42
Cir
182.070
871.12
872.03
0.500
873.78
874.50
0.17
874.50
40
Manhole
42
1340 TO 1335
52.33
36
Cir
182.070
872.53
873.44
0.500
874.66
875.79
0.18
875.79
41
Manhole
43
1345 TO 1340
41.33
36
Cir
170.000
873.44
874.29
0.500
875.79
876.38
n/a
876.38 j
42
Manhole
44
1350 TO 1345
29.95
30
Cir
170.000
874.79
875.64
0.500
876.47
877.51
n/a
877.51
43
Manhole
45
1355 TO 1350
19.11
24
Cir
141.553
876.14
876.85
0.500
877.65
878.42
n/a
878.42
44
Manhole
46
1360 TO 1355
9.58
18
Cir
59.873
876.85
877.15
0.500
878.42*
878.72*
0.39
879.11
45
Manhole
47
1365 TO 1360
4.67
18
Cir
168.234
877.65
878.49
0.500
879.11
879.32
n/a
879.32 j
46
Manhole
48
1610 TO 1600
1.05
18
Cir
60.000
877.49
877.79
0.500
877.83
878.17
0.14
878.17
9
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 10 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hyd. jump.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 3
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
49
2900 TO 2800
11.87
24
Cir
179.860
873.42
874.31
0.500
874.93
875.55
n/a
875.55 j
26
Manhole
50
2910 TO 2900
3.06
18
Cir
9.265
877.07
877.12
0.500
877.65
877.78
0.25
877.78
49
Manhole
51
2710 TO 2700
5.48
18
Cir
13.000
877.07
877.13
0.500
877.87
878.03
n/a
878.03
25
Manhole
52
2610 TO 2600
5.91
18
Cir
13.000
877.06
877.12
0.500
877.90
878.06
0.40
878.06
24
Manhole
53
PIPE -86
3.94
18
Cir
11.179
877.00
877.06
0.500
877.67
877.82
n/a
877.82
17
Manhole
54
3000 TO 2900
6.84
24
Cir
176.500
874.31
875.20
0.500
875.55
876.12
n/a
876.12 j
49
Manhole
55
3100 TO 3000
11.32
24
Cir
69.179
875.20
875.54
0.500
876.25
876.75
0.49
876.75
54
Manhole
56
3200 TO 3100
4.81
18
Cir
97.426
876.04
876.53
0.500
876.79
877.37
0.34
877.37
55
Manhole
57
1210 TO 1200
4.99
18
Cir
30.000
875.00
875.15
0.500
875.76
876.01
0.35
876.01
4
Manhole
58
1200 TO 1201
4.09
18
Cir
30.000
874.95
875.10
0.500
875.63
875.87
n/a
875.87
4
Manhole
59
1810 TO 1800
1.51
18
Cir
91.500
874.57
875.03
0.500
874.97
875.49
0.17
875.49
11
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 10 Yrs. ; "Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hyd. jump.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
1
End
137.864
0.51
56.34
0.90
0.46
51.13
5.0
66.4
2.0
104.6
131.7
9.34
48
0.50
856.49
857.18
860.16
860.27
860.69
883.59
1100 TO 1000
2
1
307.954
0.71
1.30
0.80
0.56
1.04
5.0
5.5
6.7
7.02
23.02
8.45
18
2.84
877.53
886.29
878.10
887.31
883.59
891.09
1105 TO 1100
3
2
60.000
0.60
0.60
0.80
0.48
0.48
5.0
5.0
6.9
3.29
9.65
3.35
18
0.50
886.29
886.59
887.31
887.28
891.09
891.09
1110 TO 1105
4
1
206.655
0.00
54.52
0.00
0.00
49.63
0.0
65.9
2.1
102.0
132.0
9.84
48
0.50
857.18
858.21
860.27
861.27
883.59
879.20
1200 TO 1100
5
4
357.344
0.00
53.14
0.00
0.00
48.31
0.0
65.2
2.1
100.1
132.0
9.76
48
0.50
858.21
860.00
861.27
863.02
879.20
882.78
1300 TO 1200
6
5
57.881
0.73
33.16
0.80
0.58
29.61
5.0
65.0
2.1
61.45
92.48
8.39
42
0.50
860.50
860.79
863.02
863.24
882.78
882.67
1400 TO 1300
7
6
102.231
0.00
32.43
0.00
0.00
29.02
0.0
64.7
2.1
60.42
92.49
8.42
42
0.50
860.79
861.30
863.24
863.73
882.67
883.69
1500 TO 1400 (1)
8
7
231.386
0.00
30.51
0.00
0.00
27.20
0.0
64.2
2.1
56.92
61.31
9.54
36
0.50
861.80
862.95
864.08
865.40
883.69
886.01
1500 TO 1400
9
8
249.883
0.37
30.51
0.80
0.29
27.20
5.0
63.7
2.1
57.25
61.31
9.28
36
0.50
862.95
864.20
865.40
866.65
886.01
882.29
1600 TO 1500
10
9
74.003
0.34
29.98
0.95
0.32
26.75
5.0
63.5
2.1
56.40
61.31
9.16
36
0.50
864.20
864.57
866.65
867.01
882.29
881.19
1700 TO 1600
11
10
114.400
0.70
29.65
0.80
0.56
26.43
5.0
63.2
2.1
55.88
61.31
9.12
36
0.50
864.57
865.15
867.01
867.57
881.19
878.96
1800 TO 1700
12
11
93.275
0.87
28.72
0.85
0.74
25.66
5.0
63.0
2.1
54.36
61.31
8.94
36
0.50
865.15
865.61
867.57
868.00
878.96
880.49
1900 TO 1800
13
12
129.971
0.00
27.85
0.00
0.00
24.92
0.0
62.7
2.1
52.97
61.31
8.82
36
0.50
865.61
866.26
868.00
868.62
880.49
882.61
2000 TO 1900
14
13
67.119
0.76
27.85
0.90
0.68
24.92
5.0
62.6
2.1
53.05
61.31
8.88
36
0.50
866.26
866.60
868.62
868.96
882.61
884.00
2100 TO 2000
15
14
143.640
2.19
26.42
0.90
1.97
23.67
5.0
62.2
2.1
50.59
61.31
8.56
36
0.50
866.60
867.32
868.96
869.63
884.00
880.94
2200 TO 2100
16
15
170.000
2.27
23.16
0.90
2.05
20.82
5.0
61.8
2.1
44.71
61.31
7.89
36
0.50
867.32
868.17
869.63
870.34
880.94
881.00
2300 TO 2200
17
16
170.000
1.95
20.89
0.95
1.86
18.77
5.0
61.3
2.2
40.54
61.31
7.58
36
0.50
868.17
869.02
870.34
871.09
881.00
880.93
2400 TO 2300 (1)
18
17
170.000
1.95
18.17
0.95
1.86
16.35
5.0
60.7
2.2
35.52
61.31
7.09
36
0.50
869.02
869.87
871.09
871.80
880.93
880.93
2400 TO 2300
19
18
13.000
0.77
1.31
0.80
0.62
1.07
5.0
7.2
6.3
6.73
23.76
8.46
18
3.03
876.76
877.15
877.30
878.15
880.93
881.76
2510 TO 2500
20
19
196.275
0.15
0.54
0.95
0.14
0.46
5.0
5.3
6.8
3.10
23.76
3.26
18
3.03
877.15
883.10
878.15
883.77
881.76
890.16
2520 TO 2510
21
20
24.000
0.39
0.39
0.80
0.32
0.32
5.0
5.0
6.9
2.18
9.65
4.03
18
0.50
885.54
885.66
886.02
886.22
890.16
890.16
2530 TO 2520
22
15
60.702
0.15
1.07
0.95
0.14
0.88
5.0
5.1
6.9
6.04
30.22
9.24
18
4.90
877.04
880.01
877.49
880.96
880.94
884.85
2120 TO 2110
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 69.46 / (Inlet time + 12.50) A 0.81; Return period =Yrs. 10 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 2
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
23
22
24.000
0.92
0.92
0.80
0.74
0.74
5.0
5.0
6.9
5.08
30.22
4.55
18
4.90
880.01
881.19
880.96
882.06
884.85
884.85
2130 TO 2120
24
18
170.000
1.95
14.91
0.95
1.86
13.42
5.0
60.2
2.2
29.31
37.70
8.02
30
0.50
870.37
871.22
872.02
873.06
880.93
880.92
2600 TO 2500
25
24
170.000
1.95
12.00
0.95
1.86
10.71
5.0
59.6
2.2
23.54
37.70
6.46
30
0.50
871.22
872.07
873.06
873.72
880.92
880.92
2700 TO 2600
26
25
170.000
1.95
9.16
0.95
1.86
8.06
5.0
59.1
2.2
17.81
20.79
7.20
24
0.50
872.57
873.42
873.99
874.93
880.92
880.92
2800 TO 2700
27
26
13.000
0.93
0.93
0.95
0.88
0.88
5.0
5.0
6.9
6.08
9.65
5.46
18
0.50
878.56
878.62
879.42
879.57
880.92
881.62
PIPE -85
28
7
37.245
0.34
1.92
0.95
0.32
1.82
5.0
9.1
5.8
10.62
20.79
6.12
24
0.50
875.94
876.13
876.96
877.30
883.69
884.37
1306 TO 1400
29
28
81.269
0.35
1.58
0.95
0.33
1.50
5.0
8.8
5.9
8.82
9.65
6.13
18
0.50
876.63
877.04
877.76
878.18
884.37
883.56
1307 TO 1306
30
29
61.000
0.36
1.23
0.95
0.34
1.17
5.0
8.6
5.9
6.95
9.65
5.11
18
0.50
877.04
877.34
878.18
878.36
883.56
883.59
1308 TO 1307
31
30
173.880
0.58
0.88
0.95
0.55
0.83
5.0
7.6
6.2
5.12
9.65
4.41
18
0.50
877.34
878.21
878.36
879.08
883.59
883.57
1309 TO 1308 (1)
32
31
174.086
0.29
0.29
0.95
0.28
0.28
5.0
5.0
6.9
1.92
9.65
2.66
18
0.50
878.21
879.08
879.08
879.60
883.57
883.58
1309 TO 1308
33
14
18.097
0.27
0.67
0.90
0.24
0.56
5.0
5.3
6.8
3.84
32.61
8.36
18
5.71
876.62
877.65
876.97
878.40
884.00
883.30
2110 TO 2100
34
33
24.000
0.41
0.41
0.80
0.32
0.32
5.0
5.0
6.9
2.24
32.61
3.11
18
5.71
877.65
879.02
878.40
879.59
883.30
883.30
2111 TO 2110
35
5
80.002
1.78
19.98
0.95
1.69
18.70
5.0
10.5
5.5
103.5
132.0
10.80
48
0.50
866.03
866.43
868.69
869.50
882.78
881.67
1310 TO 1300
36
35
205.870
0.00
18.20
0.00
0.00
17.01
0.0
10.0
5.6
95.90
132.1
9.42
48
0.50
866.43
867.46
869.50
870.42
881.67
882.31
1315 TO 1310 (1)
37
36
168.596
1.47
18.20
0.95
1.39
17.01
5.0
9.6
5.7
97.35
132.0
9.71
48
0.50
867.46
868.30
870.42
871.29
882.31
882.14
1315 TO 1310
38
37
124.500
1.73
16.73
0.95
1.64
15.62
5.0
9.3
5.8
90.21
92.48
10.70
42
0.50
868.80
869.42
871.59
872.37
882.14
882.37
1320 TO 1315
39
38
170.000
1.95
15.00
0.95
1.86
13.98
5.0
8.9
5.9
81.85
92.48
9.66
42
0.50
869.42
870.27
872.37
873.09
882.37
882.13
1325 TO 1320
40
39
170.000
1.97
13.05
0.95
1.87
12.12
5.0
8.5
5.9
72.11
92.48
8.94
42
0.50
870.27
871.12
873.09
873.78
882.13
882.13
1330 TO 1325
41
40
182.070
1.86
11.08
0.95
1.77
10.25
5.0
8.0
6.1
62.17
92.49
8.25
42
0.50
871.12
872.03
873.78
874.50
882.13
882.07
1335 TO 1330
42
41
182.070
2.02
9.21
0.95
1.92
8.48
5.0
7.6
6.2
52.33
61.31
9.28
36
0.50
872.53
873.44
874.66
875.79
882.07
882.13
1340 TO 1335
43
42
170.000
2.00
7.20
0.95
1.90
6.56
5.0
7.1
6.3
41.33
61.31
7.41
36
0.50
873.44
874.29
875.79
876.38
882.13
882.13
1345 TO 1340
44
43
170.000
1.83
5.20
0.95
1.74
4.66
5.0
6.6
6.4
29.95
37.70
8.08
30
0.50
874.79
875.64
876.47
877.51
882.13
882.27
1350 TO 1345
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 69.46 / (Inlet time + 12.50) A 0.81; Return period =Yrs. 10 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 3
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
45
44
141.553
1.55
3.37
0.95
1.47
2.93
5.0
6.2
6.5
19.11
20.79
7.36
24
0.50
876.14
876.85
877.65
878.42
882.27
882.42
1355 TO 1350
46
45
59.873
0.97
1.82
0.80
0.78
1.46
5.0
6.0
6.6
9.58
9.65
5.42
18
0.50
876.85
877.15
878.42
878.72
882.42
883.04
1360 TO 1355
47
46
168.234
0.85
0.85
0.80
0.68
0.68
5.0
5.0
6.9
4.67
9.65
3.66
18
0.50
877.65
878.49
879.11
879.32
883.04
882.99
1365 TO 1360
48
9
60.000
0.16
0.16
0.95
0.15
0.15
5.0
5.0
6.9
1.05
9.65
3.27
18
0.50
877.49
877.79
877.83
878.17
882.29
882.29
1610 TO 1600
49
26
179.860
1.95
6.28
0.95
1.86
5.32
5.0
58.4
2.2
11.87
20.79
5.23
24
0.50
873.42
874.31
874.93
875.55
880.92
880.91
2900 TO 2800
50
49
9.265
0.55
0.55
0.80
0.44
0.44
5.0
5.0
6.9
3.06
9.65
4.44
18
0.50
877.07
877.12
877.65
877.78
880.91
881.65
2910 TO 2900
51
25
13.000
0.88
0.88
0.90
0.79
0.79
5.0
5.0
6.9
5.48
9.65
5.29
18
0.50
877.07
877.13
877.87
878.03
880.92
881.73
2710 TO 2700
52
24
13.000
0.95
0.95
0.90
0.86
0.86
5.0
5.0
6.9
5.91
9.65
5.41
18
0.50
877.06
877.12
877.90
878.06
880.92
881.73
2610 TO 2600
53
17
11.179
0.76
0.76
0.75
0.57
0.57
5.0
5.0
6.9
3.94
9.65
4.79
18
0.50
877.00
877.06
877.67
877.82
880.93
881.56
PIPE -86
54
49
176.500
1.67
3.78
0.80
1.34
3.02
57.0
57.0
2.3
6.84
20.79
4.08
24
0.50
874.31
875.20
875.55
876.12
880.91
880.95
3000 TO 2900
55
54
69.179
1.23
2.11
0.80
0.99
1.68
5.0
5.6
6.7
11.32
20.79
6.24
24
0.50
875.20
875.54
876.25
876.75
880.95
882.62
3100 TO 3000
56
55
97.426
0.87
0.87
0.80
0.70
0.70
5.0
5.0
6.9
4.81
9.65
5.08
18
0.50
876.04
876.53
876.79
877.37
882.62
880.91
3200 TO 3100
57
4
30.000
0.76
0.76
0.95
0.72
0.72
5.0
5.0
6.9
4.99
9.65
5.14
18
0.50
875.00
875.15
875.76
876.01
879.20
878.60
1210 TO 1200
58
4
30.000
0.62
0.62
0.95
0.59
0.59
5.0
5.0
6.9
4.09
9.65
4.84
18
0.50
874.95
875.10
875.63
875.87
879.20
878.60
1200 TO 1201
59
11
91.500
0.23
0.23
0.95
0.22
0.22
5.0
5.0
6.9
1.51
9.65
3.62
18
0.50
874.57
875.03
874.97
875.49
878.96
879.53
1810 TO 1800
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 69.46 / (Inlet time + 12.50) A 0.81; Return period =Yrs. 10 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
1
48
104.6
856.49
860.16
3.67
10.43
8.66
1.56
861.72
0.000
137.864857.18
860.27
3.09**
10.43
10.03
1.56
861.83
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
2
18
7.02
877.53
878.10
0.57*
0.61
11.43
0.46
878.56
0.000
307.954886.29
887.31
1.02**
1.29
5.46
0.46
887.78
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.46
3
18
3.29
886.29
887.31
1.02
0.79
2.56
0.27
887.58
0.000
60.000
886.59
887.28 j
0.69**
0.79
4.14
0.27
887.55
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
4
48
102.0
857.18
860.27
3.09
10.30
9.78
1.52
861.79
0.000
206.655858.21
861.27
3.06**
10.30
9.90
1.52
862.79
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
1.52
5
48
100.1
858.21
861.27
3.06
10.21
9.71
1.50
862.76
0.000
357.344860.00
863.02
3.03**
10.21
9.81
1.50
864.52
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
6
42
61.45
860.50
863.02
2.53
7.21
8.26
1.13
864.15
0.000
57.881
860.79
863.24
2.45**
7.21
8.53
1.13
864.37
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.57
0.64
7
42
60.42
860.79
863.24
2.45
7.14
8.38
1.11
864.35
0.000
102.231861.30
863.73
2.43**
7.14
8.46
1.11
864.84
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
1.11
8
36
56.92
861.80
864.08
2.29*
5.78
9.85
1.33
865.41
0.000
231.386862.95
865.40
2.44**
6.16
9.24
1.33
866.72
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
9
36
57.25
862.95
865.40
2.44
6.16
9.29
1.34
866.73
0.000
249.883864.20
866.65
2.45**
6.18
9.27
1.34
867.99
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
1.34
10
36
56.40
864.20
866.65
2.45
6.14
9.13
1.31
867.96
0.000
74.003
864.57
867.01
2.43**
6.14
9.19
1.31
868.32
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.32
n/a
11
36
55.88
864.57
867.01
2.43
6.12
9.10
1.30
868.30
0.000
114.400865.15
867.57
2.42**
6.12
9.14
1.30
868.87
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
12
36
54.36
865.15
867.57
2.42
6.04
8.89
1.26
868.83
0.000
93.275
865.61
868.00
2.39**
6.04
9.00
1.26
869.26
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
13
36
52.97
865.61
868.00
2.39
5.97
8.77
1.22
869.23
0.000
129.971866.26
868.62
2.36**
5.97
8.87
1.22
869.85
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
1.22
14
36
53.05
866.26
868.62
2.36
5.97
8.88
1.22
869.85
0.000
67.119
866.60
868.96
2.36**
5.98
8.88
1.22
870.19
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
15
36
50.59
866.60
868.96
2.36
5.85
8.46
1.16
870.13
0.000
143.640867.32
869.63
2.31**
5.85
8.65
1.16
870.79
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
16
36
44.71
867.32
869.63
2.31
5.49
7.65
1.03
870.66
0.000
170.000868.17
870.34j
2.18**
5.49
8.14
1.03
871.37
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.15
17
36
40.54
868.17
870.34
2.18
5.21
7.38
0.94
871.28
0.000
170.000869.02
871.09j
2.07**
5.21
7.79
0.94
872.03
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
18
36
35.52
869.02
871.09
2.07
4.82
6.82
0.84
871.93
0.000
170.000869.87
871.80j
1.94**
4.82
7.37
0.84
872.64
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
19
18
6.73
876.76
877.30
0.55*
0.58
11.57
0.45
877.75
0.000
13.000
877.15
878.15
1.00**
1.26
5.36
0.45
878.60
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.07
20
18
3.10
877.15
878.15
1.00
0.76
2.46
0.26
878.41
0.000
196.275883.10
883.77j
0.67**
0.76
4.06
0.26
884.02
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.33
0.08
21
18
2.18
885.54
886.02
0.48*
0.49
4.41
0.21
886.23
0.000
24.000
885.66
886.22
0.56**
0.60
3.65
0.21
886.42
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
22
18
6.04
877.04
877.49
0.45*
0.45
13.35
0.41
877.90
0.000
60.702
880.01
880.96
0.95**
1.18
5.13
0.41
881.37
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.33
0.13
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 2
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
23
18
5.08
880.01
880.96
0.95
1.06
4.31
0.36
881.32
0.000
24.000
881.19
882.06 j
0.87**
1.06
4.80
0.36
882.41
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
24
30
29.31
870.37
872.02
1.66*
3.45
8.48
0.89
872.91
0.000
170.000871.22
873.06
1.84**
3.88
7.55
0.89
873.95
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
25
30
23.54
871.22
873.06
1.84
3.44
6.06
0.73
873.79
0.000
170.000872.07
873.72 j
1.65**
3.44
6.85
0.73
874.44
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.73
26
24
17.81
872.57
873.99
1.43*
2.40
7.44
0.75
874.74
0.000
170.000873.42
874.93
1.52**
2.56
6.96
0.75
875.69
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.75
27
18
6.08
878.56
879.42
0.86*
1.05
5.77
0.41
879.83
0.000
13.000
878.62
879.57
0.95**
1.18
5.14
0.41
879.98
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
28
24
10.62
875.94
876.96
1.01 *
1.60
6.65
0.48
877.44
0.000
37.245
876.13
877.30
1.17**
1.90
5.58
0.48
877.78
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
29
18
8.82
876.63
877.76
1.13*
1.42
6.19
0.57
878.33
0.000
81.269
877.04
878.18
1.15**
1.45
6.07
0.57
878.76
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.09
30
18
6.95
877.04
878.18
1.15
1.28
4.78
0.46
878.64
0.000
61.000
877.34
878.36 j
1.02**
1.28
5.43
0.46
878.82
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.07
31
18
5.12
877.34
878.36
1.02
1.06
4.00
0.36
878.72
0.000
173.880878.21
879.08j
0.87**
1.06
4.82
0.36
879.44
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.05
32
18
1.92
878.21
879.08
0.87
0.55
1.81
0.19
879.27
0.000
174.086879.08
879.60j
0.52**
0.55
3.52
0.19
879.79
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.19
33
18
3.84
876.62
876.97
0.35*
0.31
12.36
0.29
877.26
0.000
18.097
877.65
878.40
0.75**
0.88
4.35
0.29
878.69
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.04
34
18
2.24
877.65
878.40
0.75
0.61
2.54
0.21
878.61
0.000
24.000
879.02
879.59 j
0.56**
0.61
3.68
0.21
879.80
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
35
48
103.5
866.03
868.69
2.67*
8.90
11.63
1.55
870.24
0.000
80.002
866.43
869.50
3.08**
10.38
9.98
1.55
871.05
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.23
36
48
95.90
866.43
869.50
3.08
9.99
9.24
1.43
870.94
0.000
205.870867.46
870.42
2.97**
9.99
9.60
1.43
871.85
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.21
37
48
97.35
867.46
870.42
2.97
9.99
9.74
1.45
871.88
0.000
168.596868.30
871.29
2.99**
10.07
9.67
1.45
872.74
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
38
42
90.21
868.80
871.59
2.79*
8.24
10.95
1.70
873.29
0.000
124.500869.42
872.37
2.94**
8.64
10.44
1.70
874.06
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.25
39
42
81.85
869.42
872.37
2.94
8.31
9.47
1.51
873.87
0.000
170.000870.27
873.09
2.82**
8.31
9.85
1.51
874.60
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
40
42
72.11
870.27
873.09
2.82
7.84
8.68
1.32
874.41
0.000
170.000871.12
873.78
2.66**
7.84
9.20
1.32
875.09
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.20
41
42
62.17
871.12
873.78
2.66
7.26
7.93
1.14
874.92
0.000
182.070872.03
874.50
2.47**
7.26
8.57
1.14
875.64
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.17
42
36
52.33
872.53
874.66
2.13*
5.37
9.74
1.21
875.87
0.000
182.070873.44
875.79
2.35**
5.94
8.81
1.21
877.00
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.18
43
36
41.33
873.44
875.79
2.35
5.26
6.96
0.96
876.75
0.000
170.000874.29
876.38j
2.09**
5.26
7.85
0.96
877.34
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
44
30
29.95
874.79
876.47
1.68*
3.51
8.52
0.91
877.38
0.000
170.000875.64
877.51
1.86**
3.92
7.63
0.91
878.41
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 3
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
45
24
19.11
876.14
877.65
1.51*
2.55
7.51
0.81
878.46
0.000
141.553876.85
878.42
1.57**
2.65
7.22
0.81
879.23
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
46
18
9.58
876.85
878.42
1.50
1.77
5.42
0.46
878.88
0.493
59.873
877.15
878.72
1.50
1.77
5.42
0.46
879.17
0.493
0.493
0.295
0.86
0.39
47
18
4.67
877.65
879.11
1.46
1.00
2.67
0.34
879.45
0.000
168.234878.49
879.32 j
0.83**
1.00
4.66
0.34
879.66
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
48
18
1.05
877.49
877.83
0.34*
0.29
3.58
0.14
877.96
0.000
60.000
877.79
878.17
0.38**
0.36
2.96
0.14
878.31
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.14
49
24
11.87
873.42
874.93
1.52
2.04
4.63
0.53
875.46
0.000
179.860874.31
875.55j
1.24**
2.04
5.82
0.53
876.08
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
50
18
3.06
877.07
877.65
0.58*
0.63
4.84
0.25
877.91
0.000
9.265
877.12
877.78
0.66**
0.76
4.05
0.25
878.04
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.25
51
18
5.48
877.07
877.87
0.81*
0.97
5.63
0.38
878.25
0.000
13.000
877.13
878.03
0.90**
1.11
4.94
0.38
878.41
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
52
18
5.91
877.06
877.90
0.85*
1.03
5.74
0.40
878.31
0.000
13.000
877.12
878.06
0.94**
1.16
5.09
0.40
878.46
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.40
53
18
3.94
877.00
877.67
0.67*
0.76
5.18
0.30
877.97
0.000
11.179
877.06
877.82
0.76**
0.90
4.39
0.30
878.12
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
54
24
6.84
874.31
875.55
1.24
1.43
3.36
0.36
875.91
0.000
176.500875.20
876.12 j
0.93**
1.43
4.80
0.36
876.48
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.97
n/a
55
24
11.32
875.20
876.25
1.05*
1.67
6.76
0.51
876.76
0.000
69.179
875.54
876.75
1.21**
1.98
5.72
0.51
877.26
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.96
0.49
56
18
4.81
876.04
876.79
0.75*
0.88
5.46
0.34
877.14
0.000
97.426
876.53
877.37
0.84**
1.02
4.71
0.34
877.72
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.34
57
18
4.99
875.00
875.76
0.76*
0.91
5.51
0.35
876.12
0.000
30.000
875.15
876.01
0.86**
1.05
4.77
0.35
876.36
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.35
58
18
4.09
874.95
875.63
0.68*
0.78
5.23
0.31
875.94
0.000
30.000
875.10
875.87
0.77**
0.92
4.45
0.31
876.18
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
59
18
1.51
874.57
874.97
0.40*
0.38
3.97
0.17
875.14
0.000
91.500
875.03
875.49
0.46**
0.46
3.27
0.17
875.66
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.17
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 59
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® Plan
19
18
33
20
32 31
21 22
34
24
17 25
16 26
Outfall15
27
2 28
3
4
5
12
13
14
6
7
29
30
11
8
9
10
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Date: 5/11/2022
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 1
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
1
4010 TO 4000
127.0
48
Cir
115.542
864.38
864.96
0.505
867.51
868.34
1.96
868.34
End
Manhole
2
4020 TO 4010
53.77
30
Cir
178.000
889.01
892.57
2.000
890.57
894.91
1.40
894.91
1
Manhole
3
4030 TO 4020
44.10
30
Cir
119.670
892.57
894.96
2.000
894.91
897.17
n/a
897.17
2
Manhole
4
4040 TO 4030
40.27
24
Cir
102.869
895.46
897.52
2.000
897.17
899.47
0.96
899.47
3
Manhole
5
4050 TO 4040
38.70
24
Cir
249.633
897.52
902.51
2.000
899.47
904.46
n/a
904.46 j
4
Manhole
6
4060 TO 4050
24.92
24
Cir
261.935
902.76
908.00
2.000
904.46
909.76
n/a
909.76
5
Manhole
7
4070 TO 4060
22.89
24
Cir
391.919
908.00
915.84
2.000
909.76
917.54
n/a
917.54 j
6
Manhole
8
4080 TO 4070
8.19
18
Cir
289.390
918.92
921.81
1.000
919.76
922.92
n/a
922.92
7
Manhole
9
4090 TO 4080
5.05
18
Cir
220.730
932.42
934.63
1.000
933.06
935.49
0.05
935.49
8
Manhole
10
4100 TO 4090
2.29
18
Cir
173.160
939.77
941.50
1.000
940.18
942.07
0.21
942.07
9
Manhole
11
PIPE -22
13.03
18
Cir
186.361
919.77
934.68
8.000
920.37
936.03
n/a
936.03
7
Manhole
12
4051 TO 4050
15.62
24
Cir
173.383
901.04
901.91
0.500
904.46*
904.95*
0.33
905.28
5
Manhole
13
4052 TO 4051
10.33
24
Cir
156.000
901.91
902.69
0.500
905.28*
905.47*
0.03
905.50
12
Manhole
14
4053 TO 4052
6.48
18
Cir
156.000
903.19
903.97
0.500
905.50*
905.85*
0.21
906.06
13
Manhole
15
503010 TO 4010
78.98
42
Cir
178.000
869.02
869.91
0.500
871.32
872.69
n/a
872.69
1
Manhole
16
503110 TO 503010
72.02
42
Cir
178.000
869.91
870.80
0.500
872.69
873.46
n/a
873.46
15
Manhole
17
503210 TO 503110
64.77
36
Cir
178.000
871.80
872.69
0.500
874.14
875.27
0.23
875.27
16
Manhole
18
503310 TO 503210
57.30
36
Cir
131.500
872.69
873.35
0.500
875.27
875.80
1.07
875.80
17
Manhole
19
503410 TO 503310
55.63
36
Cir
117.796
872.35
872.94
0.500
875.80*
876.28*
0.14
876.43
18
Manhole
20
503510 TO 503410
53.53
36
Cir
105.084
872.94
873.46
0.500
876.43*
876.83*
0.84
877.67
19
Manhole
21
503610 TO 503510
49.28
36
Cir
308.383
873.46
875.00
0.500
877.67*
878.66*
0.76
879.42
20
Manhole
22
503710 TO 503610
46.57
36
Cir
303.258
875.00
876.52
0.500
879.42*
880.29*
0.67
880.97
21
Manhole
23
503810 TO 503710
44.56
36
Cir
93.281
893.19
893.66
0.500
895.09
895.83
0.83
895.83
22
Manhole
24
503910 TO 503810
39.85
30
Cir
207.988
894.16
896.30
1.031
895.83
898.43
0.19
898.43
23
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 10 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hyd. jump.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 2
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
25
504010 TO 503910
31.68
30
Cir
178.000
896.30
897.19
0.500
898.43
899.11
n/a
899.11 j
24
Manhole
26
504110 TO 504010
23.40
30
Cir
178.000
897.19
898.08
0.500
899.11
899.73
n/a
899.73 j
25
Manhole
27
504210 TO 504110
14.81
24
Cir
178.000
898.58
899.47
0.500
899.83
900.86
n/a
900.86
26
Manhole
28
504310 TO 504210
17.97
24
Cir
178.000
899.47
900.36
0.500
900.91
901.89
0.11
901.89
27
Manhole
29
504410 TO 504310
6.54
18
Cir
111.001
900.86
901.42
0.500
901.89
902.41
n/a
902.41 j
28
Manhole
30
504510 TO 504410
1.00
18
Cir
77.347
901.45
904.51
3.948
902.41
904.88
n/a
904.88 j
29
Manhole
31
PIPE -21
5.84
18
Cir
112.606
879.14
879.70
0.500
879.98
880.63
n/a
880.63
21
Manhole
32
5041 TO 503510
7.68
18
Cir
117.615
878.41
879.00
0.500
879.42
880.07
n/a
880.07
20
Manhole
33
5041 TO 41
2.11
18
Cir
161.943
879.00
879.81
0.500
880.07
880.36
n/a
880.36 j
32
Manhole
34
5051 TO 503710
3.57
18
Cir
178.967
876.52
877.41
0.500
880.97*
881.09*
0.06
881.16
22
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 10 Yrs. ; *Surcharged (HGL above crown). ; j - Line contains hyd. jump.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
1
End
115.542
1.98
36.57
0.95
1.88
31.17
5.0
21.1
4.1
127.0
132.7
11.62
48
0.51
864.38
864.96
867.51
868.34
868.07
901.20
4010 TO 4000
2
1
178.000
1.98
11.69
0.95
1.88
10.09
5.0
11.6
5.3
53.77
75.40
13.97
30
2.00
889.01
892.57
890.57
894.91
901.20
901.20
4020 TO 4010
3
2
119.670
0.83
9.71
0.90
0.75
8.21
5.0
11.4
5.4
44.10
75.40
9.42
30
2.00
892.57
894.96
894.91
897.17
901.20
904.24
4030 TO 4020
4
3
102.869
0.40
8.87
0.95
0.38
7.46
5.0
11.2
5.4
40.27
41.58
13.49
24
2.00
895.46
897.52
897.17
899.47
904.24
906.63
4040 TO 4030
5
4
249.633
0.20
8.48
0.95
0.19
7.08
5.0
10.9
5.5
38.70
41.58
12.40
24
2.00
897.52
902.51
899.47
904.46
906.63
911.60
4050 TO 4040
6
5
261.935
0.58
5.25
0.85
0.49
4.47
5.0
10.3
5.6
24.92
41.58
8.65
24
2.00
902.76
908.00
904.46
909.76
911.60
916.69
4060 TO 4050
7
6
391.919
0.90
4.67
0.80
0.72
3.98
5.0
9.4
5.8
22.89
41.58
7.93
24
2.00
908.00
915.84
909.76
917.54
916.69
924.27
4070 TO 4060
8
7
289.390
0.71
1.78
0.80
0.57
1.37
5.0
8.4
6.0
8.19
13.65
6.96
18
1.00
918.92
921.81
919.76
922.92
924.27
935.88
4080 TO 4070
9
8
220.730
0.63
1.07
0.75
0.47
0.81
5.0
7.2
6.3
5.05
13.65
5.96
18
1.00
932.42
934.63
933.06
935.49
935.88
944.73
4090 TO 4080
10
9
173.160
0.44
0.44
0.75
0.33
0.33
5.0
5.0
6.9
2.29
13.65
4.72
18
1.00
939.77
941.50
940.18
942.07
944.73
951.67
4100 TO 4090
11
7
186.361
1.99
1.99
0.95
1.89
1.89
5.0
5.0
6.9
13.03
38.61
13.74
18
8.00
919.77
934.68
920.37
936.03
924.27
950.58
PIPE -22
12
5
173.383
1.09
3.02
0.80
0.87
2.42
5.0
6.5
6.5
15.62
20.79
4.97
24
0.50
901.04
901.91
904.46
904.95
911.60
908.55
4051 TO 4050
13
12
156.000
0.76
1.93
0.80
0.61
1.55
5.0
5.7
6.7
10.33
20.79
3.29
24
0.50
901.91
902.69
905.28
905.47
908.55
908.55
4052 TO 4051
14
13
156.000
1.17
1.17
0.80
0.94
0.94
5.0
5.0
6.9
6.48
9.65
3.67
18
0.50
903.19
903.97
905.50
905.85
908.55
908.55
4053 TO 4052
15
1
178.000
1.98
22.90
0.95
1.88
19.19
5.0
20.7
4.1
78.98
102.8
10.71
42
0.50
869.02
869.91
871.32
872.69
901.20
901.20
503010 TO 4010
16
15
178.000
1.98
20.92
0.95
1.88
17.31
5.0
20.2
4.2
72.02
102.8
9.00
42
0.50
869.91
870.80
872.69
873.46
901.20
901.20
503110 TO 50301
17
16
178.000
1.98
18.94
0.95
1.88
15.43
5.0
19.9
4.2
64.77
68.12
10.49
36
0.50
871.80
872.69
874.14
875.27
901.20
901.20
503210 TO 50311
18
17
131.500
0.51
16.96
0.95
0.49
13.55
5.0
19.6
4.2
57.30
68.12
9.07
36
0.50
872.69
873.35
875.27
875.80
901.20
901.20
503310 TO 50321
19
18
117.796
0.68
16.45
0.85
0.57
13.06
5.0
19.3
4.3
55.63
61.31
7.87
36
0.50
872.35
872.94
875.80
876.28
901.20
898.31
503410 TO 50331
20
19
105.084
0.00
15.77
0.00
0.00
12.49
0.0
19.0
4.3
53.53
61.31
7.57
36
0.50
872.94
873.46
876.43
876.83
898.31
900.07
503510 TO 50341
21
20
308.383
0.00
14.10
0.00
0.00
11.26
0.0
18.2
4.4
49.28
61.31
6.97
36
0.50
873.46
875.00
877.67
878.66
900.07
900.70
503610 TO 50351
22
21
303.258
0.00
12.89
0.00
0.00
10.41
0.0
17.4
4.5
46.57
61.31
6.59
36
0.50
875.00
876.52
879.42
880.29
900.70
901.69
503710 TO 50361
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 69.46 / (Inlet time + 12.50) A 0.81; Return period =Yrs. 10 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 2
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
23
22
93.281
1.21
12.28
0.95
1.15
9.89
5.0
17.2
4.5
44.56
61.31
8.79
36
0.50
893.19
893.66
895.09
895.83
901.69
898.66
503810 TO 50371
24
23
207.988
1.98
11.06
0.95
1.88
8.74
5.0
16.7
4.6
39.85
54.13
10.19
30
1.03
894.16
896.30
895.83
898.43
898.66
904.50
503910 TO 50381
25
24
178.000
1.98
9.08
0.95
1.88
6.86
5.0
16.3
4.6
31.68
37.70
7.49
30
0.50
896.30
897.19
898.43
899.11
904.50
904.50
504010 TO 50391
26
25
178.000
1.98
7.10
0.95
1.88
4.98
5.0
15.6
4.7
23.40
37.70
6.31
30
0.50
897.19
898.08
899.11
899.73
904.50
904.50
504110 TO 50401
27
26
178.000
1.98
5.12
0.08
0.16
3.09
15.0
15.0
4.8
14.81
20.79
6.78
24
0.50
898.58
899.47
899.83
900.86
904.50
904.50
504210 TO 50411
28
27
178.000
1.98
3.14
0.95
1.88
2.93
5.0
7.7
6.1
17.97
20.79
7.22
24
0.50
899.47
900.36
900.91
901.89
904.50
904.50
504310 TO 50421
29
28
111.001
1.00
1.15
0.90
0.90
1.05
5.0
7.3
6.3
6.54
9.65
5.19
18
0.50
900.86
901.42
901.89
902.41
904.50
905.14
504410 TO 50431
30
29
77.347
0.15
0.15
0.95
0.14
0.14
5.0
5.0
6.9
1.00
27.13
1.88
18
3.95
901.45
904.51
902.41
904.88
905.14
910.00
504510 TO 50441
31
21
112.606
1.21
1.21
0.70
0.85
0.85
5.0
5.0
6.9
5.84
9.65
5.39
18
0.50
879.14
879.70
879.98
880.63
900.70
883.20
PIPE -21
32
20
117.615
1.31
1.67
0.70
0.92
1.23
5.0
7.2
6.3
7.68
9.65
5.87
18
0.50
878.41
879.00
879.42
880.07
900.07
885.45
5041 TO 503510
33
32
161.943
0.36
0.36
0.85
0.31
0.31
5.0
5.0
6.9
2.11
9.65
2.59
18
0.50
879.00
879.81
880.07
880.36
885.45
883.31
5041 TO 41
34
22
178.967
0.61
0.61
0.85
0.52
0.52
5.0
5.0
6.9
3.57
9.65
2.02
18
0.50
876.52
877.41
880.97
881.09
901.69
881.14
5051 TO 503710
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 69.46 / (Inlet time + 12.50) A 0.81; Return period =Yrs. 10 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
1
48
127.0
864.38
867.51
3.13
10.56
12.02
1.96
869.47
0.000
115.542864.96
868.34
3.38**
11.31
11.22
1.96
870.30
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
1.96
2
30
53.77
889.01
890.57
1.56*
3.22
16.68
1.97
892.54
0.000
178.000892.57
894.91
2.34**
4.78
11.25
1.97
896.88
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.71
1.40
3
30
44.10
892.57
894.91
2.34
4.59
9.23
1.44
896.35
0.000
119.670894.96
897.17
2.21**
4.59
9.61
1.44
898.61
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.38
n/a
4
24
40.27
895.46
897.17
1.71
2.86
14.09
2.59
899.75
0.000
102.869897.52
899.47
1.95**
3.12
12.90
2.59
902.06
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.37
0.96
5
24
38.70
897.52
899.47
1.95
3.12
12.39
2.40
901.87
0.000
249.633902.51
904.46 j
1.95**
3.12
12.41
2.40
906.85
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
2.40
6
24
24.92
902.76
904.46
1.70
2.84
8.78
1.13
905.58
0.000
261.935908.00
909.76
1.76**
2.93
8.52
1.13
910.89
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
7
24
22.89
908.00
909.76
1.76
2.85
7.82
1.00
910.76
0.000
391.919915.84
917.54 j
1.70**
2.85
8.04
1.00
918.54
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.81
0.81
8
18
8.19
918.92
919.76
0.84*
1.01
8.07
0.53
920.29
0.000
289.390921.81
922.92
1.11**
1.40
5.86
0.53
923.45
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
9
18
5.05
932.42
933.06
0.63*
0.71
7.14
0.36
933.41
0.000
220.730934.63
935.49
0.86**
1.05
4.79
0.36
935.85
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.05
10
18
2.29
939.77
940.18
0.42*
0.40
5.73
0.21
940.39
0.000
173.160941.50
942.07
0.57**
0.62
3.70
0.21
942.28
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.21
11
18
13.03
919.77
920.37
0.60*
0.66
19.71
0.94
921.31
0.000
186.361934.68
936.03
1.35**
1.68
7.77
0.94
936.97
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
12
24
15.62
901.04
904.46
2.00
3.14
4.97
0.38
904.84
0.282
173.383901.91
904.95
2.00
3.14
4.97
0.38
905.33
0.282
0.282
0.489
0.87
0.33
13
24
10.33
901.91
905.28
2.00
3.14
3.29
0.17
905.45
0.123
156.000902.69
905.47
2.00
3.14
3.29
0.17
905.64
0.123
0.123
0.193
0.15
0.03
14
18
6.48
903.19
905.50
1.50
1.77
3.67
0.21
905.71
0.225
156.000903.97
905.85
1.50
1.77
3.67
0.21
906.06
0.225
0.225
0.352
1.00
0.21
15
42
78.98
869.02
871.32
2.30*
6.71
11.78
1.45
872.77
0.000
178.000869.91
872.69
2.78**
8.18
9.65
1.45
874.13
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
16
42
72.02
869.91
872.69
2.78
7.83
8.80
1.31
874.00
0.000
178.000870.80
873.46
2.66**
7.83
9.19
1.31
874.77
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
17
36
64.77
871.80
874.14
2.34*
5.91
10.97
1.56
875.70
0.000
178.000872.69
875.27
2.58**
6.47
10.02
1.56
876.83
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.23
18
36
57.30
872.69
875.27
2.58
6.18
8.86
1.34
876.61
0.000
131.500873.35
875.80
2.45**
6.18
9.27
1.34
877.13
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.80
1.07
19
36
55.63
872.35
875.80
3.00
7.07
7.87
0.96
876.76
0.412
117.796872.94
876.28
3.00
7.07
7.87
0.96
877.25
0.412
0.412
0.485
0.15
0.14
20
36
53.53
872.94
876.43
3.00
7.07
7.57
0.89
877.32
0.381
105.084873.46
876.83
3.00
7.07
7.57
0.89
877.72
0.381
0.381
0.401
0.94
0.84
21
36
49.28
873.46
877.67
3.00
7.07
6.97
0.76
878.42
0.323
308.383875.00
878.66
3.00
7.07
6.97
0.76
879.42
0.323
0.323
0.996
1.00
0.76
22
36
46.57
875.00
879.42
3.00
7.07
6.59
0.68
880.09
0.289
303.25
876.52
880.29
3.00
7.07
6.59
0.67
880.97
0.289
0.289
0.875
1.00
0.67
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 2
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
23
36
44.56
893.19
895.09
1.90*
4.71
9.46
1.03
896.12
0.000
93.281
893.66
895.83
2.17**
5.48
8.13
1.03
896.86
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.81
0.83
24
30
39.85
894.16
895.83
1.67
3.49
11.42
1.25
897.08
0.000
207.988896.30
898.43
2.12**
4.45
8.96
1.25
899.68
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.19
25
30
31.68
896.30
898.43
2.12
4.04
7.13
0.96
899.39
0.000
178.000897.19
899.11 j
1.92**
4.04
7.85
0.96
900.07
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
26
30
23.40
897.19
899.11
1.92
3.43
5.80
0.73
899.84
0.000
178.000898.08
899.73j
1.65**
3.43
6.83
0.73
900.45
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.11
27
24
14.81
898.58
899.83
1.25*
2.06
7.19
0.63
900.46
0.000
178.000899.47
900.86
1.39**
2.32
6.38
0.63
901.49
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
28
24
17.97
899.47
900.91
1.44*
2.41
7.45
0.76
901.67
0.000
178.000900.36
901.89
1.53**
2.57
6.99
0.76
902.65
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.11
29
18
6.54
900.86
901.89
1.03
1.24
5.08
0.44
902.33
0.000
111.001901.42
902.41 j
0.99**
1.24
5.30
0.44
902.84
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
30
18
1.00
901.45
902.41
0.95
0.34
0.84
0.13
902.54
0.000
77.347
904.51
904.88 j
0.37**
0.34
2.92
0.13
905.01
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.13
31
18
5.84
879.14
879.98
0.84*
1.02
5.72
0.40
880.38
0.000
112.606879.70
880.63
0.93**
1.15
5.06
0.40
881.03
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
32
18
7.68
878.41
879.42
1.01*
1.27
6.06
0.50
879.92
0.000
117.615879.00
880.07
1.07**
1.35
5.68
0.50
880.57
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.97
n/a
33
18
2.11
879.00
880.07
1.07
0.58
1.56
0.20
880.28
0.000
161.943879.81
880.36j
0.55**
0.58
3.61
0.20
880.56
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
34
18
3.57
876.52
880.97
1.50
1.77
2.02
0.06
881.03
0.069
178.967877.41
881.09
1.50
1.77
2.02
0.06
881.16
0.069
0.069
0.123
1.00
0.06
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 34
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth.; j-Line contains hyd. jump ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraflow Storm Sewers Extension for Autodesk® Civil 3D® Plan
Outfall
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 12
Date: 5/11/2022
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Summary Report
Page 1
Line
No.
Line ID
Flow
rate
(cfs)
Line
Size
(in)
Line
shape
Line
length
(ft)
Invert
EL Dn
(ft)
Invert
EL Up
(ft)
Line
Slope
(%)
HGL
Down
(ft)
HGL
Up
(ft)
Minor
loss
(ft)
HGL
Junct
(ft)
Dns
Line
No.
Junction
Type
1
PIPE -69 (1) (1) (1)
199.4
60
Cir
22.769
855.43
855.53
0.426
859.15
859.56
1.38
859.56
End
Manhole
2
PIPE -69 (1) (1)
200.5
60
Cir
133.137
855.51
856.17
0.500
859.56
860.21
1.39
860.21
1
Manhole
3
PIPE -69 (1)
203.2
60
Cir
310.891
856.17
857.73
0.500
860.21
861.79
n/a
861.79
2
Manhole
4
PIPE -69 (2)
205.7
60
Cir
298.813
857.73
859.22
0.500
861.79
863.31
0.38
863.31
3
Manhole
5
PIPE -69
207.4
60
Cir
209.718
859.22
860.27
0.500
863.31
864.37
2.25
864.37
4
Manhole
6
PIPE -68
57.73
36
Cir
165.428
862.02
870.29
5.000
864.37
872.75
n/a
872.75
5
Manhole
7
PIPE -81
41.04
36
Cir
205.007
876.63
880.73
2.000
877.82
882.81
0.14
882.81
6
Manhole
8
PIPE -80
42.10
36
Cir
342.805
880.73
882.44
0.500
882.81
884.55
n/a
884.55
7
Manhole
9
PIPE -79
43.09
36
Cir
317.264
882.44
884.03
0.500
884.55
886.16
0.15
886.16
8
Manhole
10
PIPE -78
44.23
36
Cir
362.401
884.03
885.84
0.500
886.16
888.00
1.00
888.00
9
Manhole
11
PIPE -77
18.78
24
Cir
138.468
886.84
887.53
0.500
888.33
889.09
0.79
889.09
10
Manhole
12
PIPE -70
167.6
54
Cir
449.893
860.86
863.11
0.500
864.37
866.88
n/a
866.88
5
Manhole
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 12
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES: Return period = 50 Yrs.
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Storm Sewer Tabulation
Page 1
Station
Len
(ft)
Drng Area
Rnoff
coeff
(C)
Area x C
Tc
Rain
(I)
(in/hr)
Total
flow
(cfs)
Cap
full
(cfs)
Vel
(ft/s)
Pipe
Invert Elev
HGL Elev
Grnd / Rim Elev
Line ID
Line
To
Line
Incr
(ac)
Total
(ac)
Incr
Total
Inlet
(min)
Syst
(min)
Size
(in)
Slope
(%)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
Dn
(ft)
Up
(ft)
1
End
22.769
0.00
57.65
0.00
0.00
40.36
0.0
21.0
4.9
199.4
220.9
12.25
60
0.43
855.43
855.53
859.15
859.56
860.56
864.83
PIPE -69 (1) (1) (1
2
1
133.137
0.00
57.65
0.00
0.00
40.36
0.0
20.7
5.0
200.5
239.4
11.79
60
0.50
855.51
856.17
859.56
860.21
864.83
883.00
PIPE -69 (1) (1)
3
2
310.891
0.00
57.65
0.00
0.00
40.36
0.0
20.2
5.0
203.2
239.4
11.92
60
0.50
856.17
857.73
860.21
861.79
883.00
886.11
PIPE -69 (1)
4
3
298.813
0.00
57.65
0.00
0.00
40.36
0.0
19.6
5.1
205.7
239.4
12.01
60
0.50
857.73
859.22
861.79
863.31
886.11
881.52
PIPE -69 (2)
5
4
209.718
0.00
57.65
0.00
0.00
40.36
0.0
19.3
5.1
207.4
239.4
12.06
60
0.50
859.22
860.27
863.31
864.37
881.52
868.00
PIPE -69
6
5
165.428
4.77
15.91
0.70
3.34
11.13
15.0
18.9
5.2
57.73
193.9
9.52
36
5.00
862.02
870.29
864.37
872.75
868.00
883.04
PIPE -68
7
6
205.007
0.00
11.14
0.00
0.00
7.79
0.0
18.3
5.3
41.04
122.6
11.72
36
2.00
876.63
880.73
877.82
882.81
883.04
895.64
PIPE -81
8
7
342.805
0.00
11.14
0.00
0.00
7.79
0.0
17.3
5.4
42.10
61.31
7.97
36
0.50
880.73
882.44
882.81
884.55
895.64
898.71
PIPE -80
9
8
317.264
0.00
11.14
0.00
0.00
7.79
0.0
16.4
5.5
43.09
61.31
8.05
36
0.50
882.44
884.03
884.55
886.16
898.71
901.82
PIPE -79
10
9
362.401
6.46
11.14
0.70
4.52
7.79
15.0
15.4
5.7
44.23
61.31
8.16
36
0.50
884.03
885.84
886.16
888.00
901.82
897.34
PIPE -78
11
10
138.468
4.68
4.68
0.70
3.27
3.27
15.0
15.0
5.7
18.78
20.79
7.32
24
0.50
886.84
887.53
888.33
889.09
897.34
892.20
PIPE -77
12
5
449.893
41.75
41.75
0.70
29.22
29.22
15.0
15.0
5.7
167.6
180.8
12.18
54
0.50
860.86
863.11
864.37
866.88
868.00
869.80
PIPE -70
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 12
Run Date: 5/11/2022
NOTES:Intensity = 52.90 / (Inlet time + 9.90) ^ 0.69; Return period =Yrs. 50 ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

Hydraulic Grade Line Computations
Page 1
Line
Size
(in)
Q
(cfs)
Downstream
Len
(ft)
Upstream
Check
JL
coeff
(K)
Minor
loss
(ft)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Invert
elev
(ft)
HGL
elev
(ft)
Depth
(ft)
Area
(sqft)
Vel
(ft/s)
Vel
head
(ft)
EGL
elev
(ft)
Sf
(%)
Ave
Sf
(%)
Enrgy
loss
(ft)
1
60
199.4
855.43
859.15
3.72
15.65
12.74
2.15
861.30
0.000
22.769
855.53
859.56
4.03**
16.95
11.76
2.15
861.71
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.64
1.38
2
60
200.5
855.51
859.56
4.05
16.99
11.78
2.16
861.72
0.000
133.137856.17
860.21
4.04**
16.99
11.80
2.16
862.38
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.64
1.39
3
60
203.2
856.17
860.21
4.04
16.99
11.95
2.20
862.41
0.000
310.891857.73
861.79
4.06**
17.09
11.89
2.20
863.99
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
4
60
205.7
857.73
861.79
4.06
17.09
12.04
2.23
864.02
0.000
298.813859.22
863.31
4.08**
17.17
11.98
2.23
865.54
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.17
0.38
5
60
207.4
859.22
863.31
4.08
17.17
12.08
2.25
865.56
0.000
209.718860.27
864.37
4.10**
17.23
12.04
2.25
866.62
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
2.25
6
36
57.73
862.02
864.37
2.35
5.94
9.72
1.35
865.72
0.000
165.428870.29
872.75
2.46**
6.20
9.31
1.35
874.10
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
7
36
41.04
876.63
877.82
1.20*
2.63
15.62
0.95
878.77
0.000
205.007880.73
882.81
2.08**
5.24
7.83
0.95
883.76
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.14
8
36
42.10
880.73
882.81
2.08
5.24
8.03
0.97
883.78
0.000
342.805882.44
884.55
2.11**
5.32
7.92
0.97
885.53
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
n/a
9
36
43.09
882.44
884.55
2.11
5.32
8.10
1.00
885.55
0.000
317.264884.03
886.16
2.14**
5.38
8.00
1.00
887.16
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.15
0.15
10
36
44.23
884.03
886.16
2.14
5.38
8.21
1.02
887.18
0.000
362.401885.84
888.00
2.16**
5.46
8.10
1.02
889.02
0.000
0.000
n/a
0.98
1.00
11
24
18.78
886.84
888.33
1.49*
2.51
7.49
0.79
889.12
0.000
138.468887.53
889.09
1.56**
2.63
7.15
0.79
889.88
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
0.79
12
54
167.6
860.86
864.37
3.51
13.31
12.59
2.16
866.53
0.000
449.893863.11
866.88
3.77**
14.23
11.77
2.16
869.04
0.000
0.000
n/a
1.00
n/a
Project File: New.stm
Number of lines: 12
Run Date: 5/11/2022
Notes: * depth assumed; ** Critical depth. ; c = cir e = ellip b = box
Storm Sewers v2020.40

STORMWATER CONVEYANCE NETWORK CALCULATIONS
DISSIPATOR PAD CALCULATIONS (HEC14)
Project Information:
Project Name:
KHA Project #:
Designed by: SMM
Revised by:
Checked by:
Troutman Logistics Center
015002007
TABLE 10.1 RIPRAP CLASSES AND APRON DIMENSIONS
RIP -RAP CLASS
(#)
NOMINAL SIZE
D50
(in.)
NOMINAL SIZE
D50
(ft)
APRON LENGTH
MULTIPLIER
(X)
APRON DEPTH
MULTIPLIER
(Z)
1
5.0
0.4
4
3.5
2
6.0
0.5
4
3.3
3
10.0
0.8
5
2.4
4
14.0
1.2
6
2.2
5
20.0
1.7
7
2.0
6
22.0
1.8
8
2.0
*TABLE 10.1 WAS OVELOPEO FROM HVORAU C ENGINEERING CIRCULAR 14 (HEC-14) - "ENERGY OISSIPATORS"REVISED 13-
AUG -2012
Date: 5/12/2022
Date:
Date:
RIPRAP APRON ANALYSIS TABLE
CALCULATE NOMINAL RIP -RAP SIZE
SYMBOL (UNITS)
ST:1000-FES
ST:100-FES
ST:BYPASS-100
NOMINAL RIP -RAP SIZE
D50 (ft)
0.970
0.156
1.708
(10-YR) DESIGN DISCHARGE
Q (ft^3/S)
105.53
16.19
238.38
PIPE DIAMETER (FT)
D(ft)
4
3
5
TAIL WATER DEPTH (ASSUMED TO BE 0.4*D)
TW (ft)
1.6
1.2
2
GRAVITY CONSTANT
RIP RAP APRON CHARACTARISTICS
g (ft/s)
32.2
32.2
32.2
CLASS
A
1
C
RIP RAP CLASS
APRON WIDTH (FT) (START)
3*D (ft)
12
9
15
LENGTH (FT)
X*D (ft)
24
12
35
DEPTH (INCHES)
Z*D50 (in.)
31.00
18.00
40.00
APRON WIDTH (END)
3*D+(2/3)*L (ft)
28.00
17.00
38.40
ALL RIP RAP CALCULATIONS WERE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FHWA "HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING CIRCULAR" 14

STORMWATER CONVEYANCE NETWORK CALCULATIONS
DISSIPATOR PAD CALCULATIONS (HEC14)
Project Information:
Project Name:
KHA Project #:
Designed by: SMM
Revised by:
Checked by:
Troutman Logistics Center
015002007
TABLE 10.1 RIPRAP CLASSES AND APRON DIMENSIONS
RIP -RAP CLASS
(#)
NOMINAL SIZE
D50
(in.)
NOMINAL SIZE
D50
(ft)
APRON LENGTH
MULTIPLIER
(X)
APRON DEPTH
MULTIPLIER
(Z)
1
5.0
0.4
4
3.5
2
6.0
0.5
4
3.3
3
10.0
0.8
5
2.4
4
14.0
1.2
6
2.2
5
20.0
1.7
7
2.0
6
22.0
1.8
8
2.0
*TABLE 10.1 WAS OVELOPEO FROM HVORAU C ENGINEERING CIRCULAR 14 (HEC-14) - "ENERGY OISSIPATORS"REVISED 13-
AUG -2012
Date: 5/12/2022
Date:
Date:
RIPRAP APRON ANALYSIS TABLE
CALCULATE NOMINAL RIP -RAP SIZE
SYMBOL (UNITS)
ST:B1000-FES
ST:4000-FES
NOMINAL RIP -RAP SIZE
D50 (ft)
0.811
1.242
#DIV/0!
(10-YR) DESIGN DISCHARGE
Q (ft^3/S)
92.26
127.00
PIPE DIAMETER (FT)
D(ft)
4
4
TAIL WATER DEPTH (ASSUMED TO BE 0.4*D)
TW (ft)
1.6
1.6
0
GRAVITY CONSTANT
RIP RAP APRON CHARACTARISTICS
g (ft/s)
32.2
32.2
32.2
CLASS
A
5
RIP RAP CLASS
APRON WIDTH (FT) (START)
3*D (ft)
12
12
0
LENGTH (FT)
X*D (ft)
24
28
0
DEPTH (INCHES)
Z*D50 (in.)
31.00
40.00
40.00
APRON WIDTH (END)
3*D+(2/3)*L (ft)
28.00
30.70
0.00
ALL RIP RAP CALCULATIONS WERE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FHWA "HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING CIRCULAR" 14

NCDEQ Stormwater Management Plans

MAJOR SITE PLAN
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
MAIN STREET
TOWN OF TROUTMAN, IREDELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
UTILITY AND GOVERNING AGENCIES
CONTACT LIST:
WATER COMPANY
TOWN OF TROUTMAN
400 NORTH EASTWAY DRIVE
TROUTMAN,
oa) 52e60C3 its
70
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
NORTH
1ouN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SANITARY SEWER COMPANY PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
TOWN OF TROUTMAN
400 NORTH EASTWAY DRIVE
(704)h.- euucL 166
FIRE MARSHAL
IREDELL COUNTY
DAVID SOUTHER
VO4)87a3035 N Oa6n
EROSION CONTROL
IREDELL COUNTY
JONNY WILLIAMS
349 N CENTER STREET
poa) 878-3118 NCCa6n
POWER COMPANY
VO4)832-1UNITED
TROUTMAN,TOWN OF TROUTMAN
LYNNE HAIR - PLANNING DIRECTOR
400 NORTH EASTWAY DRIVE
NC]H166
(7oa) 528-7600
PHONE COMPANY
(7o4)76lssa
GAS COMPANY
DOMINION ENERGY
(866)-366-4357
CABLE COMPANY
SITE LOCATION MAP
XOT TO SCALE
KIM LEY -HORN SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY WHATSOEVER FOR
ANY COSTS ARISING OUT OF THE CLIENT'S DECISION TO OBTAIN
BIOS, ORDER MATERIALS, OR PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION
BEFORE KI M LEY -HORN HAS ISSUED FINAL, FULLY -APPROVED
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. THE CLIENT ACKNOWLEDGES
THAT ALL PRELIMINARY PLANS ARE SUBJECT TO SUBSTANTIAL
REVISION UNTIL PLANS ARE FULLY APPROVED AND ALL
PERMITS OBTAINED.
REZONING CONDITIONS ARE LISTED ON Coot GENERAL NOTES.
PROJECT OWNER AND CONSULTANT INFORMATION
DEVELOPER:
ENGINEER:
SURVEYOR:
ARCHITECT:
NC DEVELOPMENT ACQUISITION, uc
1776 PEACHTREE STREET, NW
ASSOCIATES, INCCOLLABORATIVE
2LIU SI, I H I I -MN S I 12 Et I
13331 YORK CENTER DRIVE
50 TECHNOLOGY PKVN SOUTH
SUITE 1001
SUITE 200
UNIT E
SUITE 100
PHNE(770(436-4714
DOMINIC REINECKER
CHARLOTTE,
TEL CARouNA,�m
CONTACT AUSTIN L WATTS, P E
PHONE[phone]
CONTACT KEITH BURNS
PHOONNE(404(594-881 GA3ouvLCONTACT
CONTACT SASHAVINITSKY, LEED AP BI-C
Sheet List Table
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
811
Kn. what's beleW.
Call before you dig.
COVER SHEET
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C001

CONSTRUCTION TESTING
AS-BUILTSIRECORD DRAWINGS
GENERAL ACCESSIBILITY NOTES
WATER DISTRIBUTION NOTES
SANITARY SEWER NOTES
lam? o 5, 1s, 1, x ,PERSE, opos,u . N,E px o pp E
° r.%1VAluN.
DUCT!. IM
DaErPanal"
Lan:Pr:
M.V=PN aD"P
STORMWATER NOTES
' lallaIDEMO%U
2 ZM 'PTP1713aSaa
3 DIaPaE=PaPaD
CONDITIONS
4 ALL STORM PIPE
1%'PaE1r27ED1aaa
g'PaCIPP PH% "CAM
O ALL PIPES ...BEDDED PEMIPTIMMTUP EP. PECOMMEMPTIONS
a 3' a al`Pala Par aa "a a"a"aa aaaa a" aa aaaa'" a""
8 =CM31H02UTRCACIPEP S.M. THE PAVEMENT SECTIONS SHALL BE PMEDPOPHEMVDUPP
:==a
P=C737
PP."PrIa"
Ca0aNa.
" alrNUPTC
12 OPPDE ...EPS TO MINTAIN POSITIVESLOPE ..„.BUMINO
2r4sT,RNA.e-rp" BEMEEN. OPOSED PAVEMENT MD
Er:aTVC
SANITARY SEWER SMALL FORCE MAIN NOTES -NC
1 PROEpC=CONSTPUCTION STATE MD FEDER. PULES MD
2 MIME MIN SHALL BE PVC SCHEDULE .
3 33"3""3 SHALL 33 .3a3ILL33 333 33a.L33331.3"33"33U3""U333" 3333""333"a"3
=7F7RTE-rznnt:EArn-rLIr;:°" aaa"a""aaaaa " "STALL" "aa aaaa aa
""a aaara aa """ aaaa"aaaaaa ""aaa " MAW" "aaa " 'Sea" aa Faa aa ,„a as 0„0,.
P.P7Eala1rNaSaHaa"
VEPTIC.
alaTlalarlaE8ar
SEPAPPTI
GENERAL DEMOLITION NOTES
GENERAL GRADING NOTES
rPTPI.a1aa"a
2 OrFaZElaH%
aPIRDZP8aP=T4
3 1BagLaPaEaMal
IarIMala.141V
=Pala 0
OENEML
8MalaMaMaTaPaM
O ME COMP.
arEaL aL"E PT
DUNS.=
Pta0PaNDE"D%
Ora..140"
SHALL BE
SMaCIPINTB
STME L
laSaMaL
REEONIONG CONDITIONS
ffITTICIalaITMMETO=EIT4=7..3131"13V =Tag" TM MEOLMTS
MM. MEM
r.-.11rpowgzLeffx,7:A=7-;fAR0.,,,m co. -7,,%%-pm
;,-.1:==-prozwIN0=-,-.%,-..rzTgrem-onPaTo,pr,,PuTnozg
,EvELE,==,`,.%erfilrWTZ.gfrgrpgji'io:',GZT,T,ZNIM
TONT,1 `4Zol'ITZLIMTLAtZ,M=UT mroilvzonzturz=
FLF-Ii.....zEmisFmm-mmtgrn.17,,I=.7.707=
3 SCIMMTIC ITATME OF MZOITETS PLMT ME LOTS AM MOT.. PAPROVEMEMS MOWN
N.RfAlf=4,,T.,:ce=7`G'=o7n7lo'nunc,LL:12AZ; :MIT,E=EG
=Nef.7,177NaT,Ln7,17.E.V=E 71=ITIWorro7L:W=
ITIMTIV,11=-ITZTTTLIT,===oMkt
V,IELTETZPG=1=`.:7MITATVZ:El "rnE'E
'=PEE..747.-FrEiTiEELIEEFEEFE0DaGEE
AD ES -L
a
'...,,t;.17'..71,211' 4 MA`017mpIrTagv'T tITLIE."1=TILT
VTL.A1°.-Tn.c.,MV,TT
To- --
FIL:szFr,I=E=Dcgo-p=xt-svgpmturp=
. ',ZTaTrnITZTTWoVTilnTgf %WA= cl= TOT=
VLVI.UTATIn=.7...T.74,LEAR.roWgEf:74=7" " "

1 A. CEFEM BEN. ENC.... AMER. 0,4 OR OhEG MATER THAT .PEAGS FCR FIRM 111. TLC PUBUC RECORDS CR IS OPEATED, ATT.®. OH IS
21:
AI. DBSREo TA76 C=11.1'20 CUD PAr E CI T,AT Nnr BEDa.E BE CUD PAr.D.B .S « (T) S.
1. ��DET(x)"AND Nd.Srd-BOA. FOR ROADS OR FUSUC/PNrA,E MUTES [.,. EAS,0es Aw xd,s d WAY FOR ROADS d POBJC/REVA,E DILUTES
BLSBREx1(6) 0....-001_981 "F"w, OF w1E Pam, carom R:CO.. N Cod 110 PA.461 (TRACT 4) [5• G3 M.A.®EMT 0 :VT ,xER.N ARC.
PLOTTED BEMY ANDPELL Rd,s SET FORTH IN DEED wCmED IN BOCK 62 6 (TRAM 5i)s) [Lorna'OFNL zC RIwT,r NA0.r.
a:,BIL:L71.�,
NL=T NOAw T w R,B.`>aA5c1"��`.BOPO�°.°�. �""Sm°` (C. on°1K�R IµD CwJm Rr nlE 11.N„mdAPO SET FORTH IN SCHER..
w Ac`Zr 9KR1A¢ w Vo OR Baxurer S hTMNmL Erv= 1 °.14 y VNaAnM mvaM,
'"ore LAND 00.'n'Ir 1110 MEAN MAW OR 17-IN
CO0El▪ oR u,14 400S .t3LA MATERALS CR TENT. MANE. SET C.
BO00(0) ORYad1s)- /a TRACT 5) [EASTIOATS CONTAIN. THEREIN
TRACT a CUT NE NOT FU TACEME Lew cvrcrcD IN THE ROW Is NDr wEuoED VIT1w >re LEGAL DEswIPRCu mw-r s]
04,00 TILE ...ACE COMPANY
L°1riz �El AT BOO AM
.A.MF EL SmRdµ�dES�SmEOfa'" TYFw114700,NuiC'i :07ANwTHTat: d w6dOu6FlAS�TMmNTE wBlc 61mttP«d2,7e
.
FAmAB1T(5) 0TNd,(5-1-WAY 40BO6mDE RIB0ET/PNV0TunuT6 (TRACT 6) [11EP"1£Cx [6WP110,15 Do NOT INCLUDE ANY .0
THIN NO. RIOTS OF WAY AND A, OBSERVED ,S.EA. AND RIP. OF .1' F. 1.6110/P6VAIE MITES W..ED PRE RATTED wow]
D CURB (IRADI N) [DOES TOT..ECE LEGAL 66S 0Pnd
�' SG SHORTAGE E IN A ORroARY TAR ENOLTAGMENI,IVAr*m0 9 E BOB T«
Nis g MD `DES o 1,,Mml`NT. As ZIL ,"E �TN a ,6' D" NES oSTAALINS Cf MIC714aSVISCREZ 2:0 MATERIALMEN THAT HALE P.M.4100 OR FUGNIMED LABOR, ...MN. DES. CR SUR...
MAT..CR RENTAL EC IPIENT SET COT IN SCI.ULE .1 OF MS Oaw.T.1; ` ECOI 9 N S d gR O.
• NY DEFECT LIM ENTAIBRANCE..YERSE CLAIM. OR 0.ER,LIATITER MAT APPEARS FOR ME
xFIRSTIF
2 int .1.1 OF ALL T.. HAACK. YEAR .1 AND HEREAFTER. WHICH ARE NOT YET DUE ANA
PAYABLE. (TRACT a (TRACT 2) (1A.T 5) (TRACT 4) (TRACT 5) (TRACT 6)
NEWTS) AND RGHT(5)-DP-WAY EC6 ROADS DR PUBLIO/PNVA,E unLm6. [A0Y L"ND ,w1HIN
D A1L
EASEMENTS OR NO 6IIIGT(6)-OF-66015 FAVOR OF TOM.AI°a 19001T... RECORDED N°HBC'ON 1124. PAGE
• i.. (TRACT 1) [THE UTILITY EASEUENT IS DEPIG,m xERE« AND TIE INSTALLATION O< UTETES
APPEARS 70 BE COMPLETE]
z,. (TRACT a [THE LEGAL
NDT NCmDE ANY LAND .THIN n,E ROUNDS DP
6. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
7. INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
DESCRIBED SEEDS RECORDED IA sonk EA® PA. M. BOOK MI. PAGE 776: AND BMA 1136. PAGE
S0 4,NA01 S(A[L,BOsn( 5E1.Is6(PLOTTED HmE«] ,x BODE 811. PAGE 776.
>az. T (25562 BE popECO« sBB,', A' .
EASEMENT.)10. INTENTIONALLY
OMITTED B, PAVG8 Of STATE HIGHWAY 002415SION RECORDED IN BOOB 474.
1m60.
s(TRACT 4) [DOES NOT AFFECT]
N11
0xtt-0v-cwz.x(FAn
1 4)a (SA«Tc1ESHmBu
a,rEL. EPvLx TEms 1E
0ARO«
ANY
w050001480r H4,(wr 58Ii0ECRT 15172ELP018CONsaN
NO2sOR Rwntts)-aF-war IN P016R O 0156 ROVER COMPANY REcdm68 BaR 157.
15. dTsmO8aCTaaxtta-nrc:wnGPAnwBwNEowamUTw RECORDED N BOOK »Ta vATE
F. / / N �
'/ /
/
42. (TRACT 8) [AFFECTS PROPERTY, PLOTTED] / ~ PO
ED_ uos aI� VOI AZIC IssCRI « sTrORxERE"1 / p p D0°T
AMWAnTM[ [1G. ESSCRIPPTIONSL F ELTMµ e. POe aT INC.. ANY PROPERTY INIIIIIN FOB® / xis uxlx ,\ IN ReT7°/ A
wars] / �\ / +' i
Ita,(msr-D - URNS, S N q(Ey « /
d7 T[No nOIEROtaws1RACT5, 1I'S*sOI1105xoRAPv aAILROAOM ttWE / ,a e1aw,m I TB(B
05SEMED ON ME LAND]
16. RIGHTS OR CLAIMS OF //
/ um c/
B..0100 027-Z217110 2 �LRM 1a �CT,E
MIS IS TO 0.11. MAT THIS M. OP PLAT MD hE
0TA/H�
DATE KF P1.,T ,° Do-S1. /„ /_ /
KEI1H BURNS
P.L.S No. L-5265
DISCLOSED BY A CURRENT INSPECTOR AND ACCURATE AND -
COMPLETE L - = are,
_
BODES. NATENrt4iIX:A EBUIPNENT SET COT IN BDxmU1E
TOTAL SIT METES AND BOF MIS OUNDS DESCRIPTION
ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND LYING AND BEING IN BARRIN.R TOPPISNIP, IRECELL COON, NORM ,ROLINA, BEING M.E PARECULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOW® BEGINNING AT A
1n:PIPE EGDI ,x
n-Rm R PD ND A` zzs["`
QS: I aTM`WT7` a°';z°aW'A=o°'9»
*'/*" aRo"2BNER `145'3 8 R"CeosevOA'P a =PIPE L0"P.' "s1;roRE 'pm o ""w a "�"
n aESw In ozEn p 10. yea Fo 2BK En Bx6INB
„r e:: FaN TM TMRE Bn 1 T A 1,z r1rI PD«D; TMEx aDN"�BBB;as,T°: FIo�
vB RmTO A 1). ,~ A 1n.
n0 (MP-, Wt) (s0'TaV"6ut RI/W);n¢D1icE ▪ 000x SsuP 505 wE9T06Lr 9121_06_92r 5 1932a9PE9 0 inNCE«06 65.220 10 6 PP'rv9; T,EnCE s
eW W.10 FEB USo:Nix A { ARE M�1110EC E SHC )1„50
PUTA Cr141I%w): o R - -wnr n srzos 4l w A ols2arvKx of 1s . ID Aes%e' re[I,m:xmcn LrnN,no sAloc morvr-aT-wnY rvD.s 411 L Im 5 .
.67' TO AN AXLE FOUND, THEN RUNNING .9.2.53, FOR 569.16' TO A POINT, RU NINO S5.21.90, FOR 16.85). TO A POINT THEN RUNNING S.T1TOM FOR 12.28 TO A
POINT TH. RUNNING 3557620, FOR 3502' . A POINT TH. RUNNING SOF4.2'47. FOR 4305' TO A POINT, THEN RUNNING Nd13'06). fON 55.10 TO A MINT THENCE MTN A
CURVE TU,NO TO THE LEFT 0/16-1 AN ARC FOR 131.47' TO A 3110r414NT, TEN RUNNING
TO nEPOM: Ix«
POINT
1/'R®v0IX 0BARsu a 1060T^E
PONIT
ME TOT. ACREAGE OF THE ABOVE-DESGRIBED TRACT IS 6.913,772 2s BOST w ,58,8 AC.
BUR.. CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP W. DNA
POUINArlICE=OnlIrrErO*PrE4EM MIS
SURVET
DATUM/EPOCH 10 400 nml R1
xm/1lxm CONTR0. USED:. 18 BAPTIST
KEITH BURNS
P.L.S. No. L-5265
GRAPHIC SCALE
w ..
P�OOLE nc-rT
o-77RRRx<
NOTES
m,Nxm nas, rnEwLE DAreFlaH N.P Snw7aaoDA
z. cxRONA,E1 N>E B44T d w OM NAD..Bn,).
,S aT1.n rva..W .°`AFEECDN,E cPROPERTY
Era -
PAL
(I1„ "
REFERENCES
®x.»x�.1IC�w•.n1
".1,�, E. a
LEGEND
OTP • OPEN TOP PIPE FOUND
g AIR CONDITIONING UNIT
080, CAB. T.V. PEDESTAL
HRE HYDRANT
IS DRAINAGE INLET
g U.T POLE
d MAIL BOX
Oa RDNER POLE
OD, SPIGOT
08, SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT
® SANITARY SEMR MANHOLE
0.0 TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
UNDER.00ND FIBER OP.. MAMIER
Air wWAAT,ATIER
WAT. MANHOLE
- SI - STORM DRAINAGE LINE
- EL.- ELECTRIC ME
-SS - SANITARY SEWER LINE
PROPER, LINE
/- /EDGET1 .06.EHT
- SDUNII.,ENT OR.007.0
NC DEVELOPMENT AOUISITION, LLC.
12 TRACTS TOTALING 158.718 AC
R»w OOUGIASORAc • L ) l: 7NtoTNY
8 87s" CTIRJJO FETA C. HOBS SEPHS.THOMASO(
O UGAfl (OF TlEKELLYCARMGAN
LAING TRUST (TRACT S 45 TIMOTHY R. DO UG! AS
ANDCRYSTAL P. GLA RA ) (TLr , JOYLER. DAY
(TRACT
EDDIES MACY PgrAUPOOLEPI100N(
COm
INDICATED 5TH
rESmo: NDARDS (21CO w In NORTH• 1. 012COMA
oDAY CF DEMO. 2021
/YY/wti
KDT1 euRNs
P.L.S. No. L-5265
ATLAS
SURVEYING, INC.
13331 YORK CENTER DRIVE, UNIT E
CHARLOTTE, NC 20273 STEEI NumEEK
PHONE: [phone]
ALTA - NSPS LAND TITLE SURVEY C101
(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)

LOT INFORMATION
SQUARE FEET/ACRES:
LOT 2 = 3,895,325 SF / 89.424 AC
SETBACKS:
FRONT 30'
CORNER 30'
REAR 100'
LEFT SIDE 100'
RIGHT SIDE 100'
SIDE SETBACK INTERIOR 10'
1
cciN
N
AREA D
//
/ I I
/ I
/ I
/ 1 J. — , —
/ — AREA C
L_
h
/
1
/r
RACK
AREA B
LOT 2
89.4 AC
ouuiuuiluuuuuiluuuuuiluuuuuiluuuuuiluuuur,
uuuu UUuuuu UUuuuuUw5)
LOT 1
69 AC
L
k
aIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIuIIIID k_—
IIII IIIII II IIIII IIIII II IIIII IIIII II IIIII IIIIII (.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANNOTESNFL.
SITE GENERAL NOTES PAVING
A
ING PROPERTIES
COMPLETECONDITIONS' FOR BOUNDARYES
ITE DETAILS'. SHEETS FOR DETAILS REFERENCED ON THE SITE PLANS
GAPE MEASURED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE FOUNDATION WALL
EFER TO RECORD.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS LEGEND
BOLDING i STRUCTURE
-
II11II 1PDAPEDESTRIN CR OSSWAU:
REINNIN WALL
///A PANTED SANDS, 0C @,
_ - __ n
} r A TRAFFIC ARROWS
GUARD RA
0 SIGNS MONUMENT/ PYLON
...-- • SITE UGH,.
WATER S FACE
BOTTOM OE BANK
• BOLLARD WNE
li—AR OMA k Gs G
— PN-RTYBOUNDARY
R HT
PROPOSED PAVEMENT SECTIONS
8 STANDARD DUN ASPHALT PAVEMENT :
OHEAW DUN ASPHALT PAVEMENT:
® STANDARD GUN CONCRETE PARENT
© HEAW DUN CONCRETE PARENT
o CONCRETE /AYAVMENT
PROVIDED PARKING
REQUIRED
PROVIDED
EMPLOYEE
PARKING
N/A
236
ADA PARKING
7
7
TRAILER
PARKING
N/A
213
DOCK DOORS
N/A
182
BICYCLE
SITE DEVELOPMENT
TOTAL AREA.
158 43-ACE
BUILDING AREA.
3s-ACE
BUILDING SQUARE
FOOTAGE
1,005,269-SPE
SITE COVERAGE
246.
BUFFER YARDS SUMMARY TABLE
50' FRONT YARD DEPTH ABUTS ZONING DISTRICT RA
50' LEFT YARD DEPTH ABUTS ZONING DISTRICT RA
50' RIGHT YARD DEPTH ABUTS ZONING DISTRICT RA
50' REAR YARD DEPTH ABUTS ZONING DISTRICT RA
ZONING DISTRICT SUMARRY TABLE
ZONING: HI (CZ)
OVERLAY: NA
WATERSHED DISTRICT: YADKIN PEE-DEE
PERMITTED USE: INDUSTRIAL
CONDITIONS: SEE SHEET C002
PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE: NA
1
r�
II
I
J
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
Kn. what's below.
Call before / ou blo.
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
0
J
0
z
J
C301

ll
;l Th VIII(iIII
U r
ALERT TO CONTRACTOR: CONFIRM WITH GEOTECH REPORT
ALERT TO CONTRACTOR: RETAINING WALLS
r
C402
®®zwairawmenifur
a
C401

Ei
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
'L,
EAST NO ORADE - - - ENERGY GRADE ONE
C;
PC
77777 FRBOIPLERREMBN-
ABH12,1.411UNS
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
X MANHOLE V YARD PET
0 25 50 100
a cA-r. a. N D DOUBLE FILET A AREA FILET
II
DROP FILET D DOUBLE FILET CS OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE
0 CLEAN OUT RD ROOF DRAN
ES FPRED .D SECT ON HP HEADWALL HAM • . WA,
R M . BOTTOM OF CURB , SUTTER L .
NV FES WM HAM P PE NVER T ELEVAT .
IIIIIII°.'
8 D
.S.'s-'...-*".R.dp •ILL'A'SPB--
• E
4
1
I \ \
1 s 1 s
/ 1 1
s \
'II
,
P
E2'
0
—
/—
--R.-_
-
‘20
/ /
,P
.'g!1
r •••••• 23,
.•'...•". ••,.•'...*
a
•
•
.
22
.32
h, '32
2
, \
i ,
\ ‘2
1 •
• I i
--\----
z, I — \
3 I 3 \ 2
T
2
‘3
2
( '3 CO
12
A :A
E
2
1
910
910
111 LILL LILL
MATCH LINE STATION: 21+00
905
STORM PLAN AND
PROFILES
,----- -----
— ._.
_
--- --- —
._
— _
,H,
P
890
22.g..,:',
4.3, ,
.2.,..,
43.3....,
• ..,e
iv','8.7i'
1
s
CUM
—
.
.
s s
. ss.
.
.ii
...
ErUm
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
PREPARED FOR
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS
LAND, LLC
TROUTMAN N ORTH CA ROLI NA
880
a
I
875
1
_
@
MN
870
a PP
I
865
35—
00
34+
00
33+
00
32—
00
3,
00
30+
00
29—
00
28+
00
27+
00
26—
00
25+
00
24+
00
23—
00
22+
00
21
0865
E
21 s
s
STORM LINE 1000
STA:21+00 to STA:36+00
Mitt I NUM.
C502

21
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
900
895
895
590
890
885
885
T
880
575
875
870
870
865
865
560
860
085
20-
00
19+
00
18+00
17+00
16+00
855
EE
STORM LINE 1000
STA:15+00 to 21+00
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
\7f v�Euw Ew
900
900
895
895
90
890
885
9.
E EEL
885
LL
ETE
880
575
875
870
865
MMM
mmIMMM
560
860
855
14400
13+00
12+
00
1,
00
10+
00
STORM LINE 1000
STA:6+00 to 15+00
9+00
00
00
MATCH LINE STATION: 6+00
855
N.
E
oe�fss �'•�
ti
030861
l ,h
;05/2]/022
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
0tt
H
0)
oz
OLLO J
� J J
z 0
I- J
0
1-
0503

MATCH LINE STATION: 6+00
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
1 x1 xqx
595
595
890
890
885
880
875
870
865
885
880
875
870
865
860
860
855
855
850
5+
00
4+
00 3+
00
2+00
1+
00
0+
00
850
STORM LINE 1000
STA:-0+50 to STA:6+00
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
x-x 4x
905
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
905
900
895
89
90
870
870
865
865
SH0 00 9 00
8 00 iJ 00 16 00
STORM LINE 1300
STA:13+00 to STA:20+25
5 00 14 00
2
N.
030861
IN
oslznzozz
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C504

co
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
- xwwwuc ovaoE uxE
\ EREw icu vEaovr
B CAS. BASIN D DOUB. IDLED Al ARE...
I DROP IDLED D DOUB. IDLED CS OUTLET CONTR. STRUCTURE
GRAPHIC SCALE IN
E 0 25 50 100
B BOTTOM Of CURB , OUSTER UNE
IN ES X. R/ND PIPE INVERT ELEVADION
�` \/'/i//
1 mil\ 1
I \ �I \ \
\ \ \
l
/
___� V I/ l / ., __--//�+/
I1
/ ,,� .,//l
♦ //
al
_
efu
\
f
f 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
z
O
/\
ago- =
o
\ I \ IIII'/i/�
1 III l� III /% 1
I I l\I 1 �i lllil///l\ \
/ / \ \ m 1 i
\ ,
\
\ \ y----_--_-
__ / / /
�_ / /
/ i
/ i / )/ / / /' /'12-F_`x�Lro
jrz
/ / / I/ j- J / //
/ / / �� / H / / /�R / '// Ili / /
//� �//
7'/
�/ \
\ 0\8 \
���
I,
__
-
II I lil li IW\
\ v v v vv),,w '\A?.
;/vvv1vvvv1',/ �;
_ —_--�
�` __---- •_______�
��_vI1
,�
,,� ___�
/
/ , /I / // ' / ' '///��
-' / � 1AI
/, %-% ;
i/lam v \
II
-
—
—
113Am ..0ks
'..
_ _
L
\ `
-- _-r
]1\.��\)1111_( \,2 �_
/'/' / '�/
/� -�
/ it
S j11,�\L
_�
�. -
-
a. Z' CA\O(%O
1 \ _ —
/ ' /
_._ i1
_ 11 I/ ��—�---___
_
�\
MATCH LINE STATION: 13+00
890
890
STORM PLAN AND
PROFILES
MIIIIIIIIBIIMIMIIIIIIIIIMIMIItrt
IUUU11111111UUUIIUIIUUUIIUU•UUUI_____875
E.
'—s-
1—
h.
MOI
_
_
_
Imo.__•-
®_;
--
865
865
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
PREPARED FOR
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS
LAND, LLC
TROUTMAN NORTH CA ROLL NA
860,
860
/
I
1
/
�
I
I
855
855
\
�
I
�
I
850
12
00
ii"
/
00
10
00
9+00
8+00
5+00
6+00
-5+00
4+00
3+00
I
2+00
1+00
0+00
850
m $. mm m.
mm mm
H &8
33
m
o�6
STORM LINE 1300
1:
STA:-0+50 to STA:13+00
C505
6 Scale 1,S IV Scale 1

895
895
890
890
885
885
880
880
875
875
870
870
865
865
860
860
855
855
850
5+
00
4+
00 3+
2+
00
00 0+00
850
STORM LINE 1500
900
895
590
885
880
570
0+00
STORM LINE 2900
900
895
890
885
880
875
570
900
900
895
895
890
890
885
EEE
880
880
875
875
00
870
STORM LINE 2800
H Scale 1 ,0 IV Scale 1
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
\+ v�Eou w Ew
900
900
595
890
585
580
875
570
565
860
895
890
885
850
875
870
865
860
855
4+
00
3+
00
2+
00
00
0+
00
855
STORM LINE 1100
N.
E
oP IE`ss �'
f0� Go
030861
IN
osiznzozz
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C506

8F0 20
885
885
880
580
ANgli
875
LA-vi00
875
580
870
870
865
865
e0
880
875
570
865
860
595E
00
STORM LINE 2100
0.
1
0+00
880
875
570
865
860
555
STORM LINE 1200
900
895
900
895
890
890
FF
885
gosi
885
880
vvo
880
875
875
870
870
865 1+
00
0+
00
865
STORM LINE 2200
--MEM
®i1=
STORM LINE 1201
890
890
855
880
870
865
0+00
885
880
875
870
865
STORM LINE 2400
590
890
885
880
575
875
870
870
865
865
560
860
855
0+
00
855
STORM LINE 1600
910
910
905
905
900
900
895
895
9'
590
890
585
sso
575
870
885
880
875
870
857
2+00
1+
00
0+
00
857
7l
' /
STORM LINE 2500
555
585
880
880
875
875
570
570
865
865
STORM LINE 1800
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
REQuiR
STORM LINE 2700
895
895
890
890
885
580
875 '
850
875
870
0+-00
870
STORM LINE 2600
2
N.
E
oe�fss ,•�
ti
030861
oslznzozz
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
0507

Ei
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
'L,
EXST NO GRADE — — — ENEP GY GRADE UNE
- HYDPAUUC TRADE UNE
'Z'
C;
LL'
77777 FPEEPREM:xTs
ABITHSVIAI INNS
X MANHOLE Y YARD NLET
B CATCH B. N D DOUBLE NLET A AREA NLET
(Al
DROP NLET D DOUBLE NLET CS OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE
0 CLEANOUT RD R00, DRAD
ES FLARED .D SECT ON HW HEADWALL MN Rf NO WAUD
P M B BOT OP TTE
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
NV E Rf P P ,
0 25 50 100
11
IIIIIIIT
=
i'l'
--_M__,_-I==r.
_,,. _..--.-.n--P
RR,-_-
,--
.—.
./.-12-.0- .DI-
-,,-,_,-,_-
-
"-..
--7-'--i7-
2--,\,--
----__
_-_- •f_,„"_
-y_--,_-...-.-. -..__.-....-- .
.-r-.,./ -..-..•.•.-..- _„"
.'
._.':-
.-
-_
-_Eff,77_._:-'-
''-"'
._
-_-.
'-n ''.-_'
,__a. .I V,
g =v- .- -, •.•-a
'
/ =
adiiN
-------t-\
1 .4----------7 -
......-.............." / , 1 1
-__--'-'' w:.0% , I I 1 I
f I )
\ , ,
/.. \ ...0. / sTu'ee',O
''.
ci ---
\
lt
f,',,,, ,,''..'0/ '' •
i ORP1 ,
9 9
9 ‘8
910
910
STORM PLAN AND
PROFILES
,- ---
905
H
.s
,
i
905
.
.- .---
_-
MI
M
.
_
895
11
895
- -
890
890
885
885
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
PREPARED FOR
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS
LAND, LLC
TROUTMAN N ORTH CA ROLI NA
r."1*-12M1111
880
HO
878
25+00
24+00
23+00
22+
0
21+00
20+00
19+00
18+00
1,00
16
00
15+00
14+00
13+06
x
s8
Lt7::'
8 8
8-3 F383 8383
83
P P
''3
50 YEAR STORM BYPASS LINE 100
H Scale 1.-59 I V Scale 1,
a
Hozz z selz 1 5:,
SFItt I NUM.
C508

870
870
865
865
860
860
855
855
850
850
845
845
840
840
835
835
DETENTION POND OUT FALL
870
8/0
865
---_,__
865
860
4+00
3+00
2+00
1+00
0+00
860
aeoK
50 YEAR STORM BYPASS LINE 600
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
ABBHEVINIUNS
I I II IIII
890
890
855
880
870
855
880
875
870
865
865
860
860
855
854
11+
00
10400
9+
00
8+
00
74
00
6+
0/4
5+
00
4+
00
3+
00
2+
00
1+
00
0+
00
855
854
50 YEAR STORM BYPASS LINE 100
= 0.
N.
oef'Es,',%',
ti
030861
,h
05I2]I022
0
z
a�
z
J
o_I�
o_
0
1—
co
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C509

■� I == _■■■■■■■■
mmlmEMPIIIII
MEM=
----- ==mm%m-------EMMMMEN.
EEE==:"•==n-Erg==-- mku-______®®_____®
!!
mmmm;
11111111 1111111111 .. ..
STORM LINE 4000
STA:10+00 to STA:22+00
PROPOSED STORM ORA NA GE PROFILE LEGEND
MIUNS
N.
E
oe�fss �'•�
ti
030861
osiznzozz
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
Mitt I NUM.
C510

OO+OL .NOIIVIS 3N17 HO1VW
925
925
920
920
910
905
■■■I-
7-'1-!OM MMMMMMMMM
IS ■■
900
MINIM
•
915
■■■■■N
905
900
IIMENNEMEN
�11
1
•
895
890
890
835
880
880
875
875
870
865
865
860
860
9-00
8-00 7-00 6-00
5-00 4-00
3-00 2-00
00
00
STORM LINE 4000
STA:-0+50 to 10+00
H Scale 1-40 IV Scale 1-4
MATCH LINE STATION: -0+50
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
030861
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C511

3
T 1 L
'�' /'i 1/
T r 1
�1 ���f3lldl
I
I
��
_ %3.3- ;a •u idi,,
I I
I r1 T
I l �i i /ii
11 r r `io� i 1 1
1 1 T 11
,,/ 11II
i'rn�ii�
��il r�i i/r �i
�iiii�r��r ,,, I
0
Ili
11
I
111
^I
�f II \� I
\� ` II 11 1 1
1 1
I I I I 1 ,�—
i ' i 1 1_________
1 1 1 1, __
%�'�� �/
'��%
��/
_
_ _ ,.
T,1
II. II PT
IIIII
II
■�p��
11
II Ifi®
voila �F'�
imiginimmilitimisim��
immiiiiiimimiii
T11T,11,",,,111,
1 IIIII1
,�
+ �
� I
\
�§ 1 11 T
N
1111111=1
^\
�'� /
2 l I I l l
I l i l 1 j 1 l I I I I I (I
II 1111II III/III II2 1
11 II,1110/ 1'11�I11
IOI IN
All
—— i
1 I I I III
2 / / I 1111 111i
1 1,11111
1jj1111 1111111
I11111111I 1111
i111 �r,91i (11 1l
l
II
l l
l�.
i+
��
�j �—/
%, -- /11 1 ! i
l 1 \
1
d 1__`_
6 �_ �
/
\1i� 9 . 1 .
1
1 /, 31;ji111 1,,1ij111 �11,1�1111
III I
II,... i. 1111 d
940
940
935
935
930
930
925
925
920
920
915
915
70,
910
910
905
900
re I
MMMIN
ED
905
—411
900
__■
895
890
890
885
885
880
880
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
875
875
ABBREVIATIONS
MH MA HOLE YI YARD INLET
870
AREA INLET
870
FES FLARED END SECTIO
865
RIM CB BOTTOM OF URB AT GUTTER
865
860
860
2T+00
26+00
25+00
24+00
23+00
22+00
21+00
20+00
STA:14+00 to STA:28+00
19+00
18+00
1,00
16+00
15+00
.sGRAP2I-F IN FEET,.
§
N.
E
oe�fss �'•�
ti
0512]12022
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C512

'NOl1VLS 3NI7 HO LVW
NGRAPSIC SC,LE IN FEET 00
1ILijH 9 aIp!��tip�q.I
'I�qi 1ni
920
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
ABBREVIATIONS
920
I 11
915
915
910
910
905
PROP.. RALBE
900
3,55
905
900
895
895
890
890
885
885
653
880
880
■■■■■
■■■■M
■■■■■
■
875
870
MEN
.1111111111111111
■
NMI
■IMMI
golF
00,
O.
870
865
865
860
860
13+00
12+00
11+00
10+00
9+00
8+00
F+00
6+00
STA:-0+50 to 14+00
5+00
4+00
3+00
2+00
1+00
0+00
MATCH LINE STATION: -0+50
O
N.
E
oslznzozz
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C513

930
ainliMummrim
II
III
930
925
925
TING GRADE
920
920
915
915
LL
PROPOSED G
DE
910
l
910
905
II
II
905
'II
900
900
a
395
STORM LINE 4050
H Seale 1 ',AO IV Scale 1,4
955
955
950
950
945
940
935
930
925
920
915
91
945
940
935
930
925
920
915
2+00
00
0+00
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
ABBREVIATIONS
ERETERNEEEEEEE 'NE
905
905
900
PROPOSED GRADE
895
890
885
880
875
z
900
895
890
885
880
875
870
870
3+00
2+00
1+00
0+00
oe�fss �'•�
ti
03086-1
,h
05/2]/022
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
0514

910
905
900
PR
895
890
585
880
875
570
865
860
855
550
848
O GRADE
910
905
900
895
890
885
880
875
870
865
860
855
850
898
1+00
910
910
905
PRO
900
895
OSED GRADE
905
900
895
890
890
885
885
880
880
875
875
870
870
865
865
2+00
1+00
0+00
PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE PROFILE LEGEND
ABBREVIATIONS
x--
cu
oe�fss �'•�
ti
,h
05/2]/022
STORM PLAN AND
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
SFItt NUM.
C515

STAGE STORAGE TABLE
(al a)
DESCRIPTION
11
�u. ihid g
� � '�.��i e ase / /L,„4
tr
NOTES
ID
WET POND SECTION
Not to Scale
Kimley»Horn
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
Mitt C516

ELLV
STAGE STORAGE TABLE
AREA
SC4LE IN FEET.
NOTES
DESCRIPTION
WET POND SECTION
MAN
a. PVC PIPE AND 8 GATE
n-oVmEo pox
WET POND
TYPICAL SECTION
A
'Jot in Scale
Kimley>NHorn
N.
TROUTMAN LOGISTICS CENTER
C516

EMBANKMENT FILL AND CLAy LINER MATERIALS (IF SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS)
2 BORROW MATERIALs sice,,AvE qupuip LIMIT (LW BETWEEN 4HAND CO AND A HLASTICIW/ INDEX (PI) BETWEEN 15 AND 30 (ASTM D4318)
Ep u EM- KMENTS AN o PONDS SHALL BE UNDERCUT C -NED op IlB BED AND STRIPPED -NV u MATERIAL
VEGETATION op p oo- To DEPTH 0-T --IF OOT UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED -ER s To UNDER Cu T FURTHER To p EA.
p DE- Poo-- UNTIL s px-EN REMOVE Bp um, TREES AND OTHER
3 CUT OUT so-- CI` -GRADE No -ABLE --CT- IN p L-
5 PR OOF ROLL su BGRADE To IDE-- SPOTS `II -No -PACT DENS--- op op-Ep T HAN RE -RE -Ts Su.--
STOCKPILEALL -OIL op soll--INING op -le µ,TTER USE ON - OUTER SHELL CI` THE EME. -NT To -AT E VEGETATIVE
ES,BLI. MEN
, HAUL O. EC TIC -FILE MATERIAL To po ESI ED DISPOSAL AREA
-- MINIMUM PLpe E TEMPORARY -N -sup Es BE.uv E BASIN As s OWN ON T. op As NEED ED BASED ON `I-
DITIONS
-NO THE IN-L --I- --Ts s T.,- DISTURBED AREA Is MINIMIZE- sup- E -ER AN, Ay
ROM Bp-- -A- THE EME. -NT BEFORE - UPSTREAM ARE`, Is CLEARED STABILIZE THE EMER OEN, spl -AVE M -NT
AN o ALL 0 TH ER Ms- BED AREAS ABOVE THE CREST 0-E "-PAL SPILLWAY IMMEDIATELY AFTER -4- Ile
SEEPAGE 1- PLACEMENT 'op CUT OFF -NC 1, I, SHOWN ON PLAN,
1 SEEPAGE 1-p EN -ILL BE LOCATED BE -EN EMBANK- -Flu TM- AN o EXTEND up INTO BOTH ABUTMEN s To AT LEAST T. ELEVATION
CI` THE Top CI` Bp- PER -ENT PON. op THE Top CI` TH E RISER "EST EROSION C ON- BASINS
2 SEEPAGE - SHALL p MINIMUM DEPTH CI` a FEET o p AT LE- FEET INTO s TABLE -.UAL SOIL -C.V. Is GREATER -IN-
BOTTOM TR- -ID Tx SHALL BE 10 EE-N E R EN" SID ENIALLS SHALL BE SLOPED op BEN E-O PROMOTE STABIL- o BONDIN G
BETWEEN E s I o EuvALL SOILS AND SEEPAGE KEY `ILL BUT, N TIME GREATER T AN 1 1
3 µ,TE AN- -PACT- p E.IREMENTS SHALL BE TH E SAME As THOSE E EM- KMEN-E TREN CH SHALL BE NED IN p opy
-K `ILL MATERIAL Fp OM E APPROVED pp Eps S.- ON E op I- Fp OM AN o Tx ER LOC ATI N To o -IN SATISFACTORY
-- TED MOISTURE -ENT s-L BE -EN 1 TO2 PERCENT WET 0-E OPTIMUM MOISTURE -ENT p-ILL -ED
5 MINIMUM COMPACTION SHALL BE AH5% PERCENT OF THE SOILS STANDARD PROCTOR (ASTM maw MOXIMUM DRY HEN., OR AS SPECIFIED ON THE
DRAWINGS
8 AT COMPACTION FILL AND LINER SOILS SHALL HAVE A PERMEABILIN RATE OF NO MORE THAN -MO 5 C
7 FILL SOILS SHOULD BE PLACED IN corni.ous FloRizornALLAYERs FROM ABUTMENT TO ABUTMENT EXISTING SLOPES GREATER THAN 4(H) VW
SHALL BE BENCHED TO PROMOTE BONDING OF N.12/ PLACED F ILL WITH EXISTING SOILS BEr. Hit. SHALL BE PERFORMED AT MAXIMUM OF 2 FEET
VERTICAL IN TERVALS AND SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF FEET HORIZONTALLY OR AS SPECIFIED ON DRAWINGS
8 WITHIN THE UPPER 12 INCHES OF EMBANKMENT FILL SOILS SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 100% OF ITS STANDARD PROCTOR (ASTM D8O3) MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITY
a CONSTRUCT THE EMBANKMENT TO AN ELEVATION 10 PERCENT HIGHER THAN THE .SIGN HEIGHT TO ALLOW FOR SETTLING
10 IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE REQUIRED DEGREE OF COMPACTION NEAR THE FACES OF FILL SLOPES THE FILL SLOPES SHALL BE OVERBUILT AND CUT
BACK TO THE DESIGN SLOPES MINUS TOPSOIL DEPTH
, SPILLWAYS SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUCTED THROUGH FILL SECTIONS
12 FILL AGAINST SUPPORTED STRUCTURES DO NOT FILL AGAINST UNSUPPORTED STRUCTURES
13 PLACE FILL SIMULTANEOUSLY ON EACH SI. OF UNSUPPORTED STRUCTURES UNTIL SUPPORTS ARE IN PLACE
la PLACE A MINIMUM OF FOUR INCHES OF TOPSOIL ACROSS DAM EMBANKMENT TO PROMOTE VEGETATIVE GROWTH
15 [LW/LINER TO HAVE A MINIMUM LIQUID LIMIT OF 45AND A PLASTIC!, INDEX ABOVE20 S.U. BE PLACED IN LOOSE LIFTS NOT TO EXCEED 8
INCHES IN THICKNESS AND COMPACTED TOW MINIMUM OF gox OF THE MATERIALS MOXIMUM LABORATORY DRY HEN., DETERMINED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D8O3 STANDARD PROCTOR MATERIALS SHOULD BE PLACED AND COMPACTED AT MOISTURE C ONTENTS VARYING F ROM1
TO 4% ABOVE THE MATERIALS OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE ASTM PROCEDURE
OUTLET PIPE FILL PLACEMENT
1 FOR PERMANENT PONDS, TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS TO BE CONVERTED TO PERMANENT PONDS) PIPES SHALL BE WATERT!. T REINFORCED
CONCRETE PIPE(RCP) AND SHALL BE BEDDED PER T. SPECIFICATIONS OF THE CROSS SECTIONS AND TRENCH BEDDING DETAILS A DRAINAGE
DIAPHRAGM OR ANTI SEEP COLLARS SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS
2 FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS PIPES SHALL BE WATERTIGHT CORRUGATED METAL PIPE (CI, AND AT LEAST [MEAN, SEEP COLLAR SHALL BE
INSTALLED AND SECURED TO THE PIPE WITH A MINIMUM PROJECTION OF 15 FEET AROUND BARREL CONDUITS 8 INCHES OR LARGER IN DIAMETER
LOCATE THE COLLAR SLIGHTLY DOWNSTREAM FROM THE DAM CENTERLINE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE COLLAR AND THE PIPE SHALL BE
WATERTIGHT
3 FILL OF THE PIPE CULVERTS SHALL BE PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 8 INCH THICK LOOSE LIFTS UP TO 2 FEET ABOVE THE CULVERTS
a DO NOT USE PERVIOUS MATERIAL SUC H AS SAND GRAVEL. OR CRUSHED STONE AS BACKFILL AROUND THE PIPE. ANTI SEEP COLLARS UNLESS
OTHERWISE DETAILED ON THE PLAN
5 -- TIC. SHALL BE PER-MED By xpx-MpEps op SMALL HAND OPERATE -pc Tops
--ST- SHALL. p- MINI-85% CI` THE STAN op. PROCTOR fp STM o .8 py DE- AN No LESS -N THE SURROUNDING
EMBANKMENT COMPACTED MOISTURE -ENT SHALL. BETWEEN, PERCENT BEI-No 3 PERS-BOVE - OPTIMUM MOISTURE -ENT
7 ADDITIONAL -ACTION CI` LIFTS 2 FEET op GREATER ABOVE CULVER Ts s xp-ON ORM To T. EME. -NT `ILL PIACEMENT SECTION of
THIS SPECIFICATION
-ARE SHALL. ,KEN IN THE F IELD D.- OUTLET PIPE INS,LIATION To PROTECT AGAINST `IlTURE PIPIN-Lso -E SHALL BE TAKE N To NOT
-SE E PIPE `ROM FIRM --WIT- `Om+ DATION NI- -pc TING UNDER E PIPE 1- x s
PONDIEMBANKMENT NOTES AND
SPECIFICATIONS
F SHIMMER A. BAFFLES,FOR SEDIMENT BASINS ONLW
1 ASSEMB. THE SKIMMER FOLLOWING THE MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS AND PER THE DETAILS
2 LW/THE ASSEMBLED SKIMMER ON THE BOTTOM OF THE BASIN WITH THE F LEXIBLE JOINT AT THE INLET OF THE RISER
3 CONNECT THE FLEXIBLE PIPE TO THE RISER ASSEMBLY WITH A WATER TIGHT STRUCTURAL CONNECTION AND POSITION THE SKIMMER OVER THE
EXCAVATED PIT OR SUPPORT
4 PREVENT THE SWMMING DEVICE FROM SETTLING INTO THE MUD
5 ATTACH A OPE TO THE SWMMER AND ANCHOR IT TO THE SIDE OF THE BASIN THIS WILL BE USED TO PULL THE SWMMER TO THE SIDE FOR
MAINTENANCE
8 INSTALL BAFF LES PER THE DETAILS SHOWN
7 DISCHARGE WATER INTO THE BASINS IN A MANNER TO PREVENT EROSION TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE USE DIVERSIONS AND SLOPE
DRAINS WITH OUTLET PROTECTION TO DIVERT SEDIMENT LADEN WATER TO THE UPPER END OF THE POOLAREA(UP STREAM OF THE FURTHEST
MOST BAFFLE FROM THE OUTLET) TO IMPROVE BASIN TRAP EFFICIENCY
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY OF SHOWN ON THE PLANI
1 INSTALL THE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY IN UNDISTURBED SOIL THE ACHIFJEMENT OF PLANNED ELEVATIONS GRADE DESIGN WIDTH AND ENTRANCE
AND EXIT CHANNEL SLOPES ARE CRITICAL TO THE SUCC ESSFUL OPERATION OF THE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY
2 THE SPILLWAY SHALL BE LINED WITH LAMINATED PLASTIC OR IMPERMEAB. GEOTEXTILE FABRIC THE FABRIC MUST BE WIDE AND LONG ENOUGH TO
COVER THE BOTTOM AND SIDES AND EXTEND ONTO THE TOP OF THE DAM FOR ANCHORING IN A TRENCH THE EDGES MY BE SECURED 8 IN.
STAPLES OP PINS THE FABRIC MUST BE LONG ENOUGH TO EXTEND DOWN -ME SLOPE... Ern ONTO STAB. GROUND Of -ME FABRIC
MUST BE ONE PIECE NOT JOINED OP SPLICED OTHERWISE WATER CAN GET UNDER -ME FABRIC if -ME LENGTH Of -ME FABRIC IS INSUFFICIENT MP
THE ENTIRE LENGTH Of -ME SPILLWAY MULTIPLE SECTIONS SPANNING THE COMPLETE MO. MAY BE USED -ME UPPER SEC TION(S) SHOULD
OVERLAP THE LOWER SEC SOWS) SO iickiWATEP CANNO,LOW UNDER THE FABRIC SECURE THE UPPER EDGES AND SIDES Of -ME FABRIC IN A
-MEN. STAPLES OP PINS (ADAPTED fliOr,"A MANUAL OP DESIGNING INSTALLING AND MAINTAINING SKIMMER SEDIMENT BASINS"
3 PLACE RIP RAP PER THE PLAN AND DETAILS ON THE FABRIC TOP OF RIP RAP SHALL EQUAL TOP OF SPILLWAY ELEVATION
POND EXCAVATION
1 EXCAVATE THE PERMANENT PONDS TO THE ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND CROSS SECTIONS TO THE VOLUMES INDICATED IN THE DESIGN
TABLES
2 EXCAVATE THE TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS TO THE ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLAN AND TO THE VOLUMES INDICATED IN THE DESIGN TABLES
3 FINAL DESIGN ELEVATIONS SHALL BE FINAL GRADE FOLLowiNG ALL suRFACE TREATMENTS (E CLAY LINER TOPSOIL ETC )
TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN BACHF ILL AND REMOVAL
1 AFTER ALL THE SEDIMENT PRODUCING AREAS WITHIN A DRAINAGE BASIN HAVE BEEN PERMANENTLYSTABILEED REMOVE THE TEMPORARY
SKIMMER AND TEMPORARY RISER STRUCTURE AND ALL THE UNSTABLE SEDIMENT IN A LEGAL MANNER
2 FOR TEMPORARY BASINS THAT ARE NOT PERMANENT PONDS FILL THE TEMPORARY [MP BARREL PIPE WITH 100 PCF LEAN CONCRETE AND CAP OR
LEAVE OPEN ASA CONDUIT FOR A FRENCH DRAIN IF DETAILED ON THE PLANS
3 WHERE BASINS WILL BE CONVERTED TO A PERMANENT POND DISCONNECT THE SWMMER OR BARREL PIPE FROM THE PERMANENT CONTROL
STRUC TURE AND REPAIR THE HOLE IN THE PERMANENT STRUCTURE WITH AWATER TIGHT REPAIR
4 REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM THE BOTTOM OF TEMPORARY SEDIMENTS PRIOR TO CONVERTING TOW PERMANENT POND
5 PER THE SPECIFICATIONS BAGUIO_ AND COMPACT THE AP EA TO THE ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE PLANS AND STABILIZE PROPERLY
FIELD QUALITY CONTROL
Not to Scale
Kimley»>Horn

I
/ --
..--
..""
•
L
•
PLANT SC
HEDULE
sw raza s.arouv wATER Poi
WETPOND IPECIUMEMENTS (POI NCCECLOESIGN MMUALC,3118)
13MP AREA
TOTALQUANITIrb REWIRED TOTALQUAN,11, REQUIRED
SKAILOWIAND(SSMSF.)
SOPLANTS,LERN..rs SF ,388
SOPLANTSPEP 200SP ,370
PLANTS
It•PLANTS
1,376PLANTS
SHALLOW IAND %MRS
BOTANICAL NAME
COMMON NAME
Carex I.e. Quill Sedge
Eupotoriadelobus clubius Dwarf Ice Pie Weed
Hibiscus coccineus Scarlet Rosemollow
Lobelia elogata Longleaf Lobelia
MALLOW WATER PLANTS
BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME
Peltantlra viretnica
Sagittaria lantlf olio
Acores amerionos
Soltpubcyperinus
Attmot
Du. Potato
Sweet Flag
Wool Grass
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 15 30 60
below.
Call before you dig.
=
e o
E
0
0 - z
z <
0 z
• < 0_
z 0 ,1
oLU
CO —
CD 0 2,
,,L4L, -
J
( .7D z d
2 z
<
z
2 • D
H 0
D Et
O H
SFItt I NUM.
L107

Compensatory Mitigation

DMS ILF Mitigation Request Statement of Compliance with §143-214.11 & 143-214.20
(link to G.S. 143-214.111
Prior to accessing the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS), state law requires applicants to
demonstrate compliance with G.S. § 143-214.11 and 143-214.20. All requests MUST include this form
signed and dated by the permit applicant or an authorized agent.
Compliance Statement:
I have read and understand G.S. § 143-214.11 and 214.20 and have, to the best of my
knowledge, complied with the requirements. I understand that participation in the DMS is
voluntary and subject to approval by permitting agencies.
Please check all that apply:
❑ Applicant is a Federal or State Government Entity or a unit of local government
meeting the requirements set forth in G.S. 143-214.11 and is not required to
purchase credits from a mitigation bank.
There are no listed mitigation banks with the credit type I need located in the
hydrologic unit where this impact will take place (link to DWR Usti
Mitigation bank(s) in the hydrologic unit where the impacts will occur have been
contacted and credits are not currently available.
The DWR or the Corps of Engineers did not approve of the use of a mitigation
bank for the required compensatory mitigation for this project.
This is a renewal request and the permit application is under review. Bank
credits were not available at the time the application was submitted.
Enter date permit application was submitted for review:
Note: It is the applicant's responsibility to document any inquiries made to private mitigation
banks regarding credit availability.
CMT
initial here
I have read and understand the DMS refund policies (attached)
Chris Tinklenberg
Signature of Applicant or Agent Printed Name
6/03/2022
Date
Troutman Logistics Center Iredell County, NC
Project Name Location
Clear Form
=orm

DIVISION OF MITIGATION SERVICES (DMS)
IN -LIEU FEE REQUEST FORM Revised 6/30/2019
Complete requested information, sign and date email to kelly.williamsa_ncdenr.gov . Attachments are acceptable for clarification
purposes (location map, address or lat long is required). Information submitted is subject to NC Public Records Law and may
be requested by third parties.
Save Form
CONTACT INFORMATION
APPLICANT'S AGENT
APPLICANT
1. Business/Company Name
Kimley-Horn
NC Development Acquisitions, LLC 0
2. Contact Person
Chris Tinklenberg
Dominic Reinecker
3. Mailing address
200 South Tryon Street, STE 200
1776 Peachtree Street NW, Suite 100
4. City, State, Zip
Charlotte, NC 28202
Atlanta, GA, 30309
5. Telephone Number
704-409-1802
864-263-5431
6. E-Mail Address
[e-mail]
PROJECT INFORMATION
[e-mail]
7. Project Name
Troutman Logistics Center
8. Project Location (nearest town, city)
Troutman, Iredell County, NC
9. Lat-Long Coordinates or attach a map
Latitude: 35.689908, Longitude: -80.861081
10. County
Iredell
11. River Basin & 8-digit HUC (link to Map)
Upper Pee Dee (03040102)
12. Project Type
nGovernment
Private
Project Type: industrial
13. Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.) (e.g., 0.13)
0
14. Non -Riparian Wetland Impact (ac.)
NA
15. Coastal Marsh Impact (ac.)
NA
16. Stream Impact (ft.) (e.g. 1,234)
Warm
Cool
Cold
2,467
NA
NA
17. Riparian Buffer Impact (sq. ft.)
n/a basin/huc above in #11
Zone 1:
NA
Zone 2:
NA
18. Regulatory Agency Staff Contacts
USACE: Krysta Stygar
NCDWR: Paul Wojoski
Other:
CI
Check (�) below if this request is for a:
revision to a current acceptance
renewal of an expired acceptance
extension of unexpired acceptance
By signing below, the applicant is confirming they have
read and understand the DMS refund policy posted at
nceep.net and attached to this form.
Signature of Applicant or Authorized Agent:
A
Date: 06/03/2022
Direct questions to Kelly Williams at 919-707-8915 or kelly.williamsa_ncdenr.gov or to the front desk at 919-707-8976

Refund Policy for Fees Paid to DMS In -Lieu Fee Programs (9/21/2009)
Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to make clear the circumstances and process under which a
permittee can obtain a refund while simultaneously balancing customer service and responsible
business practices. This policy applies to all refund requests made on or after the publication date of
this policy.
Policy Statement: The policy of DMS is to allow for refunds under certain conditions.
1. All refund requests must be made in writing to the DMS In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator at
kelly.williamsnncdenr.gov.
2. All refund requests are subject to fund availability. DMS does not guarantee fund availability for
any request.
3. The request must either come from the entity that made the payment or from an authorized agent.
Third parties requesting refunds must provide written authorization from the entity that made the
payment specifying the name and address of the authorized refund recipient.
4. Refund requests related to unintended overpayments, typographical errors or incorrect invoices
should be brought the attention of the In -Lieu Fee Program Coordinator as soon as possible. Such
requests are typically approved without delay.
5. Payments made under an incremental payment arrangement are not eligible for refunds.
6. Refund requests made within nine months of payment to DMS will only be considered for requests
associated with projects that have been terminated or modified where the permittee's mitigation
requirements have been reduced. Such requests must be accompanied by written verification from the
permitting agency that the project has been canceled, the permits have been rescinded or have been
modified, or the mitigation requirements have been reduced.
7. Refund requests made more than nine months from the payment date will only be considered for
permits that were terminated or modified to not require any mitigation. Such requests must be
accompanied by written verification from the permitting agency that the project has been canceled, the
permits have been rescinded and/or mitigation is no longer required.
8. Refund requests not meeting the criteria specified above are not eligible for a refund.
9. Refund requests that meet the criteria above will be elevated to DMS Senior Management for
review. The following considerations apply to all refund requests:
a. availability of funds after consideration of all existing project and regulatory obligations
b. the date the payment was made
c. the likelihood DMS can use the mitigation procured using the payment to meet other
mitigation requirements
10. Once a refund has been approved, the refund recipient must provide a completed W-9 form to the
DMS In -Lieu fee Program Coordinator within two weeks in order to process the refund though the
State Controller's Office.
11. All decisions shall be final.