20220684 Ver 2_21-027 - The Charles - Stormwater Management Plan_20230517

Baldwm* Design
Consultants,PA
ENGINEERING•SURVEYING•PLANNING
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Charles
File #21-027
City of Greenville, Pitt County, North Carolina
April 25, 2023
Off'
SEAL =
043249 =
PA LYE
I r Palyvoda, P
s 3 - '�-c7
Date
1700-D EAST ARLINGTON BOULEVARD, GREENVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 27858
NCBELS Lic No C-34 TEL [phone] FAx [phone] www,BALDWIN DES IGNCONSULTANTS coM

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN NARRATIVE
THE CHARLES
GREENVILLE, WINTERVILLE TOWNSHIP, PITT COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
April 25, 2023
Project Name: The Charles
Location: Intersection of NC Hwy 43— Charles Boulevard & Tara Court
Greenville, NC 27858
Owner/Developer: The Charles on Charles, LLC
639 Executive Place, Suite 400
Fayetteville, NC 28305
[phone]
Consultant: Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
1700-D East Arlington Boulevard
Greenville, NC 27858
[phone]
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
The project site is located at the intersection of NC Hwy 43 — Charles Boulevard and
Tara Court in Greenville, Winterville Township, Pitt County, North Carolina. The project
site area (tract) consists of 23.797 ac, of which 0.521 ac will be dedicated to a proposed
public street (Pattison Court). The remaining 23.276 acres will be developed as a multi-
family residential apartment complex. The project site is currently used and partially
wooded. The purpose of this project is to build proposed public street (Pattison Court),
and to construct (11) multi-family apartment buildings for a total of (330) apartment units
which consist of (48) 1-bedroom units, (234) 2-bedroom units, and (48) 3-bedroom
units. In addition, associated storm drainage system, utilities, and stormwater wetland
will be installed in order to serve the proposed development. The earliest anticipated
date to begin the construction at this project site is late July 2023. The construction is
anticipated to last between twelve and eighteen months.
Currently, the 23.797-acre considered onsite project area is used for agricultural
purposes to cultivate straight rows of legumes. Approximately 3.661 acres of onsite
project area is wooded. The project site will be developed and approximately 23.1 acres
of land will be disturbed. The total impervious area after proposed improvements are
completed will be 12.141 acres and the remaining pervious area will be 11.656 acres.
The increase in the built upon area will result in minimum nutrient export rates and peak
flows exceeding allowable thresholds. Thus, an SCM capable of reducing nutrient
export rates and providing required attenuation will need to be installed to mitigate water
quality and water quantity impacts due the proposed development.
Existing surface drainage from the tract primarily sheet flows south and east before
being collected by the two existing ditches and one swale and discharged into South
Prong of Meetinghouse Branch. South Prong of Meetinghouse Branch carries collected

runoff along southern property line toward Meetinghouse Branch. This collected runoff
is then conveyed east towards Hardee Creek by Meetinghouse Branch and is
eventually discharged into the Tar River by Hardee Creek. The 100-year flood does not
infringe on this site and there are no wetlands on this property.
After development, runoff from 19.252 ac of onsite drainage area and 3.199 ac of offsite
drainage area will be collected, treated, and attenuated within the proposed stormwater
wetland. Stormwater wetland has the capability of reducing post-development nitrogen
and phosphorus export rates by 44% and 40%, respectively, according to NCDEQ's
latest Stormwater Control Measure Credit Document. To achieve the required reduction
in nutrient export rates due to the proposed development, a one-time nutrient offset
buydown payment will be required as well in order to comply with the City of Greenville
Stormwater Management Program.
The treated runoff from the proposed stormwater wetland will be discharged to South
Prong of Meetinghouse Branch and from there it will follow the same path as pre-
development runoff and flow east toward Hardee Creek. Ultimately, this runoff will be
discharged by Hardee Creek into the Tar River.
Per City of Greenville's Meetinghouse Branch Watershed Master Plan, the project site is
located within an area with documented water quantity problems. Therefore, attenuation
of 1-year through 25-year 24-hour storm events will be required. 22.451 ac of drainage
area, which consists of 19.251 ac of onsite drainage area and 3.199 ac of offsite
drainage area will be attenuated within the proposed stormwater wetland. The runoff
from the remaining 4.545 acres of onsite drainage area will bypass stormwater wetland
and will discharge directly into South Prong of Meetinghouse Branch.
STORMWATER INFORMATION
Per City of Greenville MSDD Detail #680.01, there are two acceptable methods for
determining runoff, the Rational method and the Soil Conservation Service method.
Software called HydroCAD was used for routing purposes for this project. In order to
achieve better routing accuracy, HydroCAD manual recommends that Soil Conservation
Service (SCS) Method using curve numbers is used. In HydroCAD model, a sub-
catchment (green hexagon) represents the runoff from a given area of land. An
impoundment (blue triangle) represents stormwater wetland that fills up with water from
a sub-catchment source.
PROJECT SITE AREA BREAKDOWN
Total Considered Drainage Area in Stormwater Management Plan Calculations =
Total Onsite Tract Area Being Developed + Offsite Area Draining to Stormwater
Wetland = 23.797 ac + 3.199 ac = 26.996 ac
Total Onsite Tract Area Being Developed = Proposed Pattison Court R/W Area + Lot
Area = 0.521 a + 23.276 = 23.797 a

Offsite Area Draining to Stormwater Wetland = Portion of Parcel 19664 (Single-family
Residential) + Portion of Parcel 09010 (Agricultural) = 1.903 ac + 1.296 ac = 3.199 ac
Total Pre-Development Area Considered 26.996 ac
Onsite Impervious Area 0.000 ac
Onsite Pervious Area 23.797 ac
Offsite Impervious Area 0.149 ac
Offsite Pervious Area 3.050 ac
Total Post-Development Area Considered 26.996 ac
Onsite Impervious Area (Draining to Stormwater Wetland) 11.368 ac
Onsite Pervious Area (Draining to Stormwater Wetland) 7.884 ac
Offsite Impervious Area (Draining to Stormwater Wetland) 0.149 ac
Offsite Pervious Area (Draining to Stormwater Wetland) 3.050 ac
Onsite Impervious Area (Bypassing Stormwater Wetland) 0.773 ac
Onsite Pervious Area (Bypassing Stormwater Wetland) 3.772 ac
NUTRIENT CALCULATIONS
The runoff, which will be treated by the proposed stormwater wetland, will enter 42"
reinforced concrete pipe once it passes modified outlet control structure and will be
discharged to the South Prong of Meetinghouse Branch along southern property line.
Bypassed runoff will primarily be directly discharged southeast towards South Prong of
Meetinghouse Branch as well. The combined runoff will then flow east towards Hardee
Creek and will ultimately be discharged by Hardee Creek into the Tar River. Since the
runoff is discharged into the Tar River, Tar-Pamlico River Basin Stormwater rule
applies.
The drainage area tributary to the proposed stormwater wetland includes existing built
upon area consisting of buildings and gravel driveway. Proposed improvements will
result in the net increase of the built upon area. Therefore, per City of Greenville
Stormwater Management and Control Ordinance, nitrogen export rate needs to be
reduced to less than the greater of pre-development nitrogen export rate or 4.00
lb/ac/year. Similarly, phosphorus export rate needs to be reduced to less than the
greater of pre-development phosphorus export rate or 0.40 lb/ac/year since this project
is located in the Tar-Pamlico River Basin.
The post-development nitrogen export rate is 5.14 lb/ac/year after treatment within the
proposed stormwater wetland. The post-development phosphorus export rate is 0.62
lb/ac/year after treatment within the proposed stormwater wetland. The nitrogen and
phosphorus export rates must be held at or below 4.00 lb/ac/year and 0.40 Ib/ac/yr,
respectively. In order to reduce nitrogen export rate below 4.00 lb/ac/year and
phosphorus export rate below 0.40 lb/ac/year, a one-time nutrient buydown offset
payment option will be utilized. Therefore, by providing a one-time nutrient offset
payment for 923.26 lb of nitrogen and 40.49 lb of phosphorus, the required reduction in

nitrogen and phosphorus export rates will be achieved in order to comply with the City
of Greenville Stormwater Management and Control Ordinance.
PEAK FLOW CALCULATIONS
The total post-development runoff area within the property that will drain to the
proposed stormwater wetland is 22.451 ac. Due to the existing topography, 3.199 ac of
this 22.451-acre drainage area, consist of offsite drainage area located upland of the
northwest quadrant of the property. The total onsite drainage area that will be bypassed
and that will not be attenuated or treated within the proposed stormwater wetland is
4.545 ac. The runoff from this area is bypassed because it cannot directly reach
proposed stormwater wetland due to the existing topography.
The proposed stormwater wetland's water quality volume was sized to include the entire
23.797 ac tract plus the offsite drainage area of 3.199 ac as if the entire 26.996 ac
considered project area was draining to the proposed stormwater wetland. Hence, due
to the proposed stormwater wetland being oversized to treat runoff from more drainage
area than it is expected to receive, the untreated bypassed drainage area is being
mitigated for within the stormwater wetland because its equivalent water quality volume
will be treated within the stormwater wetland.
Pre-Development Curve Numbers:
In order to determine correct curve numbers for use in HydroCAD model, it was first
necessary to determine hydrologic soil groups where the project site is located. The
project drainage area with the corresponding soil types is delineated on the attached
NRCS soil map. Individual hydrologic soil group area for each soil type was measured
using Pitt County's OPIS Measure Tool. If a particular land use had two or more
hydrologic soil groups present within it, then that particular land use area was broken
down into individual sub-areas with corresponding hydrologic soil group as reported on
the "Total Pre-Development DA" node, 1 S, of HydroCAD results.
Post-Development Curve Numbers:
Per the attached NRCS soil report, Exum fine sandy loam (ExC) soil belongs to
hydrologic soil group 'C'. Lynchburg fine sandy loam (Ly) soil and Rains fine sandy loam
(Ra) soil both have dual hydrologic soil group classification of `B/D'. Only 1.911 ac of
Rains soils are located within the wooded areas along Southern Prong of Meetinghouse
Branch. Therefore, this 1.911-acre area was assumed to be poorly drained and to
belong to hydrologic soil group `D'. Ocilla loamy fine sand (OcB) soil belongs to
hydrologic soil group 'A/U. Only 1.750 ac of Ocilla soils are located within the wooded
area along existing swale that discharges to South Prong of Meetinghouse Branch.
Therefore, 1.750 ac were assumed to belong to hydrologic soils group 'D' and the
remaining 15.473 ac were determined to belong to hydrologic soil group W.
The appropriate curve numbers (CN) for hydrologic soil groups `A', 'B', `C', and 'D' for

managed pervious areas with grass cover greater than 75% are 39, 61, 74, and 80,
respectively. The areas of each hydrologic soil group present within the 23.797-acre
tract were calculated as shown below by adding up pre-development subareas for each
pre-development land use as shown below.
AHSG A = 15.473 ac (Cultivated areas located within 15.473 ac of Ocilla soils)
AHSG B = 2.012 ac (Cultivated areas located within 0.297 ac of Lynchburg soils, 0.727
ac of Norfolk soils, & 0.988 ac of Rains soils)
AHSG C = 2.651 ac (Cultivated areas located within 0.148 ac of Exum soils and 2.503
ac of Coxville soils)
AHSG D = 3.661 ac (Wooded areas located within 1.750 ac of Ocilla soils and 1.911 ac
of Rains soils)
Therefore, the composite post-development curve number for managed pervious areas
with grass cover greater than 75% was calculated by multiplying the area of each
hydrologic soil group type by its corresponding CN value and then dividing the sum by
the total onsite tract area of 23.797 ac as shown below.
CNgrass,>75%= [(15.473 * 39) + (2.012 * 61) + (2.651 * 74)+(3.661 * 80)]/23.797 = 51
A curve number of 98 is constant for all impervious surfaces such as paved parking lots,
concrete, roofs, etc. in all four hydrologic soil groups. Therefore, no adjustment was
required for curve numbers for the proposed paved parking lot, roofs, and concrete
surfaces. Pervious and impervious offsite drainage subareas were entered separately
for each hydrologic soil group in "Post Dev. DA to SCM" node, 2S, just like in the "Total
Pre-Development DA" node, 1 S, since there are no proposed land use changes to the
offsite drainage areas.
PEAK FLOW SUMMARY
The proposed stormwater wetland was sized and designed to attenuate peak storm
water discharge from the 1, 5, 10, and 25-year 24-hour storms to the pre-development
levels. Table below summarizes pre-development and post-development peak flows at
the project site.

Peak Flow SummaryResults for Stormwater Wetland
24- Total Pre- Post- Post- Post- Total Post-
Hour Development Development Development Development Development
Storm Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow Peak Flow
Event (Pre- (Bypassing (Post- (Post-
Attenuation for Stormwater Attenuation for Attenuation for
Stormwater Wetland) Stormwater Stormwater
Wetland) Wetland) Wetland &
Bypass)
1- ear 7.60 cfs 26.06 cfs 1.44 cfs 1.37 cfs 1.82 cfs
5-year 24.76 cfs 54.64 cfs 4.81 cfs 12.66 cfs 15.84 cfs
10- ear 35.65 cfs 70.33 cfs 6.93 cfs 21.69 cfs 26.58 cfs
25- ear 51.32 cfs 90.57 cfs 9.95 cfs 1 34.97 cfs 42.80 cfs
CONCLUSION
The impacts to the downstream drainage structures will be mitigated by the proposed
stormwater wetland that attenuates post-development peak flow from the 1-year
through 25-year 24-hour storm event to less than the pre-development peak flow,
satisfying City of Greenville attenuation requirements. The nitrogen and phosphorus
export rates will be reduced to 4.00 Ib/ac/year and 0.40 Ib/ac/year, respectively, through
a combination of a one-time nutrient buydown offset payment and the installation of
proposed stormwater wetland in order to meet City of Greenville's Stormwater
Management and Control Ordinance. This project meets Minimum Design Criteria
(MDC).

Tar-Pamlico Stormwater Rule 15A NCAC 2B.0258 Last Modified 5/4/2023
Coastal Plain of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin:
Includes Greenville and Washington as well as Pitt and Beaufort Counties
Total Nitrogen and Total Phosphorus Loading Calculation Worksheet (Automated)
Project Name: The Charles
Date: 412512023
By: Igor Palyvoda Checked By:
Directions(same for pre-development and post-development tables):
>Enter the acres of each type of land cover in the green boxes. The spreadsheet will calculate all of the values in light blue.
>Compare total areas of development in pre-and post-tables for consistency(bottom of column(2)),and also for consistency with
the site plans. If all of these values are not the same,there is an error that must be corrected.
>Unless drainage onto the development from offsite is diverted around or through the site,offsite catchment area draining in must be
included in the acreage values and treated.
Pre-development.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Type of Land Cover Area S.M.Formula Average EMC Column Average EMC Column
acres 0.51+9.11) of TN m 2 (3)- 4 of TP m ) 2 3 6
Transportation impervious 0.56 2.60 0.09 0.19 0.01
Roof impervious 0.56 1.95 0.09 0.11 0.01
Managed pervious
(lawn/landscaped) 0.56 1.42 1.40 0.28 0.28
Managed pervious
(cropland) 0.56 4.23 50.79 1.23 14.77
Managed pervious
(pasture) 0.56 2.04 0.00 0.62 0.00
Wooded pervious 0.56 0.95 1.95 0.14 0.29
Fraction Impervious(I)= 0.01 TN Loading 54.32 TP Loading 15.34
(lb/yr)_ (Ib/yr)_
Total Area of Development= 27.00 TN Exp.Coeff. 2.01 TP Exp.Coeff. 0.57
(lb/ac/yr)_ (lb/ac/yr)_
Post-development:
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Type of Land Cover Area S.M.Formula Average EMC Column Average EMC Column
acres 0.51+9.11). of TN m 2 3 4 of TP 2 • 3 6
Transportation impervious 4.65 2.60 91.66 0.19 6.70
Roof impervious 4.65 1.95 42.76 0.11 2.41
Managed pervious 4.65 1.42 90.94 0.28 17.93
Wooded pervious 4.65 0.94 4.12 0.14 0.61
Fraction Impervious(1)= 0.46 TN Loading 229.48 TP Loading 27.66
Ib/ r y )=
Total Area of Development= 27.00 TN Exp.Coeff. 8.50 TP Exp.Coeff. 1.02
(lb/ac/yr)_ (lb/ac/yr)_
Note: The nutrient loading goals are 4.0 lb/ac/yr for TN and 0.4 Ib/ac/yr for TP. If the post-development nutrient
loading is below these levels,then no BMP is necessary. Otherwise,the next worksheet calculates
post-development TN and TP loadings after BMPs are installed.

Tar-Pamlico Stormwater Rule 15A NCAC 28.0258 Last Modified 5 23 03
Coastal Plain of the Tar-Pamlico River Basin:
Includes Greenville and Washington as well as Pitt and Beaufort Counties
BMP Removal Calculation Worksheet(Automated)
Project Name: The Charles
Date:4/25/2023
By:Igor Palyvoda Checked By:
Directions:
>It may be advantageous to split the development into separate catchments to be handled by separate BMPs. The tables below allow
the development to be split into as many as three catchments,and can be copied for greater than three. NOTE:Unless runoff Flowing
onto the development from offsite is routed separately around or through the site,the offsite catchment area draining in must be
included in the acreage values of the appropriate land use(s)and treated.
>Above each table:Enter the catchment acreage in the top green blank. Based on a comparison of the post-development TN and TP
export coefficients you calculated above to the rule requirements of 4.0 lb/ac/yr TN and 0.4 Ib/ac/yr TP,select BMP(s)from the list for
treating the catchment runoff. Enter the chosen BMP(s)nutrient removal rates in the green blanks. If more than one BMP is to be
used in series,the combined removal rates will be calculated automatically in the blue blanks.
>Catchment Tables:Enter the acres of each type of land cover in the green boxes. The spreadsheet will calculate all of the light blue
boxes. NOTE:Compare the Total Catchment Acreage for the Development(final table)to the value you established in the pre-BMP
worksheet tables,and also to the site plans,for consistency. All of these values need to be the same
TN TP Design Standard
BMP Wet Detention Pond 25 40 NC BMP Manual
Nutrient Stormwater Wetland 40 35 NC BMP Manual
Removal Sand Filter 35 45 NC BMP Manual
Rates Bioretention 35 45 NC BMP Manual
Grass Swales 20 20 NC BMP Manual
Vegetated Filter Strip w/
20 35 NC BMP Manual
Level Spreader
Dry Detention 10 10 NC BMP Manual
Catchment 1:
Total acreage of catchment I= ac
First BMP's TN removal rate= % First BMP's TP removal rate= %
Second BMP's TN removal rate= % Second BMPs TP removal rate= %
Third BMP's TN removal rate= % Third BMP's TP removal rate= %
TOTAL TN REMOVAL RATE= 44 % TOTAL TP REMOVAL RATE= 40 %
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Type of Land Cover Catchment S.M.Formula Average EMC of Column Average EMC of Column
Acrea a 0.51+9.11) TN(m (T •(3)• 4) TP(m ) (2)•(3)•(6)
Transportation impervious 5.18 2.60 94.71 0.19 6.92
Roof impervious 5.18 1.95 45.26 0.11 2.55
Managed pervious 5.18 1.42 7356 0.28 1450
Wooded pervious 5.18 0.94 0.00 0.14 0.00
Area taken up by BMP 5.18 1.95 9.39 0.11 0.53
Fraction Impervious I 0.51 Pre-BMP TN Pre-BMP TP
P () Load(lb/yr)= 222.92 Load(lb/yr)= 2451
Total Area of Development= 22.45 Pre-BMP TN 9.93 Pre-BMP TP 1.09
Export(lb/ac/yr) Export(lb/ae/yr)
Post-BMP TN 124.83 Post-BMP TP 14.71
Load(lb/yr)= Load(Ib/yr)_
Post-BMP TN Post-BMP TP
Export(lb/adyr) 5 S6 Export(Ib/adyr) 0.65

Tar-Pamlico Stormwater Rule 15A NCAC 2t3.0258 Last Modified 5/23/03
Catchment 2:
Total acreage of catchment 2= ac
First BMP's TN removal rate= % First BMP's TP removal rate= %
Second BMP's TN removal rate= % Second BMP's TP removal rate= %
Third BMP's TN removal rate= % Third BMP's TP removal rate= %
TOTAL TN REMOVAL RATE= 0 % TOTAL TP REMOVAL RATE= 0 %
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Type of Land Cover Catchment S.M.Formula Average EMC of Column Average EMC of Column
Acrea a (OSl+9.11) TN m (2)*(3)*(4) TP m (2)•(3 •(6)
Transportation impervious 2.06 2.60 2.90 0.19 0.21
Roof impervious 2.06 1.95 0.93 0.11 0.05
Managed pervious 2.06 1.42 8.27 0.28 1.63
Wooded pervious 2.06 0.94 1.82 0.14 0.27
Area taken up by BMP 2.)6 1.95 0.00 0.11 0.00
Fraction Impervious I 0.17 Pre-BMP TN Pre-BMP TP
P ()- Load(lb/yr)= 13.92 Load(lb/yr)= 2.17
Total Area of Development= 4.55 Pre-BMP TN 3.06 Pre-BMP TP 0.48
Export(lb/adyr) Export(lb/ac/yr)
Post-BMP TN Post-BMP TP
Load(lb/yr)= 13.92 Load(lb/yr)= 2.17
Post-BMP TN Post-BMP TP
Export(lb/adyr) 3.06 Export(lb/adyr) 0.48
Catchment 3:
Total acreage of catchment 3=
First BMP's TN removal rate=Mac
% First BMP's TP removal rate= %
Second BMP's TN removal rate= % Second BMP's TP removal rate= %
Third BMP's TN removal rate= % Third BMP's TP removal rate= %
TOTAL TN REMOVAL RATE= 0 % TOTAL TP REMOVAL RATE= 0 %
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Type of Land Cover Catchment S.M.Formula Average EMC of Column Average EMC of Column
Acrea a OSl+9.1 I) TN m ) (2 •(3 •(4) TP(m 2 •Q)• 6)
Transportation impervious 2.60 0.19
Roof impervious 1.95 0.11
Managed pervious 1.42 0.28
Wooded pervious 0.94 0.14
Area taken up by BMP 1.95 0.11
Fraction Impervious(I)= Pre-BMP TN Pre-BMP TP
Load(lb/yr)= Load(lb/yr)_
Total Area of Development= Pre-BMP TN Pre-BMP TP
Export(lb/adyr) Export(lb/adyr)
Post-BMP TN Post-BMP TP
Load(lb/yr)= Load(lb/yr)_
Post-BMP TN Post-BMP TP
Export(lb/adyr) Export(Ib/adyr)

Tar-Pamlico Stormwater Rule 15A NCAC 28.0258 Last Modified 5/23/03
Weighted Average of Nutrient Loadings from the Catchments:
Catchment Post-BMP Post-BMP
Acreage TN Loading TP Loading
(lb/ac/ r) (lb/ac/ r)
Catchment 1 22A5 5.56 0.65
Catchment 2 4.55 3.06 0.48
Catchment 3 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL FOR DEVELOPMENT 27.00 5.14 0.62
Note: The nutrient loading goals are 4.0 Ib/ac/yr for TN and 0.4 Ib/ac/yr for TP. If the post-development nutrient
loading is below these levels,then the BMPs planned are adequate. Otherwise,additional BMPs and/or
modifications in development plans are required.

Baldwin Design Consultants, PA JOB The Charles
Ba dwin DesignA Engineering,Surveying&Planning SHEET NO 1 OF 1
n 1700-D East Arlington Boulevard CALCULATED BY IF-DATE 25-Apr-23
Consultats r Greenville,NC 27858 CHECKED BY ATE
ENGINEERING•SURVEYING•PLANNING [phone] SCALE
NUTRIENT BUYDOWN CALCULATIONS
RIVER BASIN TAR-PAMLICO
PROJECT AREA 27.00 AC
NITROGEN
TOTAL NITROGEN LEAVING SITE(PRE-DEVELOPMENT) 2.01 LBS/AC/YEAR
TOTAL NITROGEN LEAVING SITE(POST-DEVELOPMENT) 5.14 LBS/AC/YEAR
ALLOWABLE NITROGEN(GREATER OF PRE-DEVELOPMENT OR 4.00 LB/AC/YR) 4.00 LBS/AC/YEAR
POST-DEVELOPMENT-ALLOWABLE 1.14 LBS/AC/YEAR
TOTAL NITROGEN TO BE OFFSET VIA BUYDOWN PAYMENT
NUMBER OF YEARS = 30
NITROGEN OFFSET =EXCESS LB/AC/YR X ACRES X YEARS
= 1.14 27.00 30
a 923.26 LB
PHOSPHORUS
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LEAVING SITE(PRE-DEVELOPMENT) 0.57 LBS/AC/YEAR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS LEAVING SITE(POST-DEVELOPMENT) 0.62 LBS/AC/YEAR
ALLOWABLE PHOSPHORUS(GREATER OF PRE-DEVELOPMENT OR 0.40 LB/AC/' 0.57 LBS/AC/YEAR
POST-DEVELOPMENT-ALLOWABLE 0.05 LBS/AC/YEAR
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS TO BE OFFSET VIA BUYDOWN PAYMENT
NUMBER OF YEARS = 30
PHOSPHORUS OFFSET =EXCESS LB/AC/YR X ACRES X YEARS
0.05 27.00 30
40.49 LB

Baldwin Design Consultants,PA JOB The Charles
Design,Land Planning 8 Surveying SHEET NO. 1 OF 1
1700-D East Arlington Boulevard CALCULATED BY IF, DATE 4/25/2023
Greenville,NC 27858 CHECKED BY DATE
[phone] SCALE
Stormwater Wetland Surface Area Sizing
Total Property Area= 26.996 Acres (Area Considered In Calculations)
h Property Area Impervious= 45.53
Runoff Storage Volume Requirements
Runoff volume from 1.0 inch storm
Rv=0.05+.009(I) I= 45.53
Rv = 0.46 inches/inches
Volume = (Design rainfall)(Rv)(Drainage Area)=(1.0 inches)(0.46 intm)(26.996 acres)
Volume = 1.03 ac-ft
= 45,055 cf
Actual Volume= 45,557 cf OK (cumulative volume provided at the temporary pool elevation)
Stormwater Wetland Surface Area Requirements
Total Required Surface Area=Runoff Volume/Depth of Temporary Pool
Depth of Temporary Pool= 1.25 it
Total Required Surface Area = 45,055 cf/1.25 it
= 36,044 sf
Surface Area provided = 40,500 SF OK (at the temporary pool elevation)
Size Outlet Device for Control Structure
Invert elevation = 56.75 feet msl
Estimated orifice center elevation = 56.92 feet msl
Proposed water surface elevation = 58.00 feet msl
Available head (h)_ = 0.36 feet 1/3 head
Discharge(d) = = 6.16 cis 1-year pre-development flow-bypass
Coefficient of discharge= = 0.6 7.60 cfs-1.44 cis=6.16 cis
Orifice equation
Q=CA 2gh 1.65 inches
SAY 4 inches
O of orifice = 0.25 CIS
Orifice will drain temporary storage in 2.1 days (Temporary Volume/Discharge)
Depth Distribution of Permanent Pool to Meet Stormwater Wetland Criteria
Permanent Pool Elevation(PPE) = 56.75
Temporary Pool Elevation(TPE) = 58.00
Total Wetland Area(at TPE) = 40,500 SF
Required Depth Distribution Surface Areas
Shallow Land(15'depth) = 30% = 12,150 SF from PPE to 58.00 Temporary Inundation Zone
Shallow Water(9'depth) = 45% = 18,225 SF from PPE to 56.00
Deep Pools(24'depth) = 25% = 10,125 SF from PPE to 54.00
Non-Forebay = 15% = 6,075 SF from PPE to 54.00
Forebay = 10% = 4,050 SF from PPE to 54.00
Provided Depth Distribution Surface Areas
Provided
Shallow Land(15'depth) = 30% = 12,150 SF from PPE to 58.00 Temporary Inundation Zone
Shallow Water(9'depth) = 45% = 18,225 SF from TPE to 56.00
Deep Pools(24'depth) = 25% = 10,125 SF from PPE to 54.00
Non-Forebay = 15% 6,075 SF from PPE to 54.00
Forebay = 10% 4,050 SF from PPE to 54.00
Number of plants required:
Shallow Land(15'depth) 3,050 Swamp Milkweed,Cardinal Flower,Joe Pye Weed,Scarlet Rose Mallow,Ironweed
Shallow Water(9'depth) 4,600 Sweefflag,Arrow Arum,Duck Potato,Pickerelweed,Wool grass
A minimum of 10 different species,total of which 5 are emergent species with no more than 30%of a single species.

C
E J
J
_0 c
O
pp a- Cl)
Ln 41 `m
0
CL i- � !n
Cd Q
�LU O
H co
L A�
4 W T
E N
/.I.-
p
co
� � °'
�m o
CD
3 CZN
O c Q
i O
O C T
� �fLJ11
Q
U
0
CY) _
C
C CD
CL
co
U) QU U) Q �
N 0 CY p C/) c
N }' >
p �
p
0 CO
d 0o
c
E
U
RS
Q �
0
U) Q
r p p
aD
IL
0
I—

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 sln 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 1S: Total Pre-Development DA
Hydrograph
e ■Runoff
T.80 ch
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr
' Rainfall=3.10"
6- Runoff Area=26.996 ac
Runoff Volume=1.155 of
y 5 Runoff Depth=0.51 "
0 4 Tc=34.46 m i n
U. CN=64
3-
2-
0 4_. 5 .5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 1S: Total Pre-Development DA
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details (Detail #682.02) using formula below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.3851/128 where
L= Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(45^3/0.5)^0.385]/128 = 1.66 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow= 1.0 x [(289^3/2.3)^0.385]/128 = 3.94 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(704^3/5.8)^0.385]/128 = 7.72 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290^3/6.1)^0.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 1.66 + 3.94 + 7.72 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 34.46 min.
Runoff = 7.60 cfs Q 12.59 hrs, Volume= 1.155 af, Depth= 0.51"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
15.473 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
2.012 77 Legumes, straight row, Poor, HSG B
2.651 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
3.661 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
26.996 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
34.46 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
H droCAD® 10.00-20 sJn 09193 ©2017 H droCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Hydrograph
28: ❑Runoff
26.06 cls
26. NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr
24 Rainfall=3.10"
22-
20= Runoff Area=22.451 ac
18_ Runoff Volume=2.026 of
16- Runoff Depth=1.08"
0 14- Tc=13.91 min
LL 12- CN=76
10`
8-
6-
4-
2-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr Si 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(107^3/1.0)^0.385]/128 = 3.45 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(238^3/1.8)^0.385]/128 = 3.46 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(191^3/1.72)^0.385]/128 = 2.73 min
Tc, pipe flow FES#4 to FES#3 = 4.05 min (See Storm Drainage Calculations)
Tc, pipe flow O.C.S to FES#1 = 0.2 x [(95.75^3/2.39)^0.385]/128 = 0.22 min
Tc, total = 3.45 + 3.46 + 2.73 + 4.05 + 0.22 = 13.91 min.
Runoff = 26.06 cfs Q 12.16 hrs, Volume= 2.026 af, Depth= 1.08"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Area (ac) CN Description
6.972 98 Paved parking, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.396 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
7.884 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
22.451 76 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
13.91 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
H droCADO 10.00-20 s'n 09193 ©2017 H droCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Hydrograph
❑Runoff
1.4/Gs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr
Rainfall=3.10"
Runoff Area=4.545 ac
Runoff Volume=0.194 of
Runoff Depth=0.51 "
3 Tc=25.39 m i n
0
CN=64
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L= Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(41^3/1.93)^0.385]/128 = 0.88 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(203^3/1.2)^0.385]/128 = 3.37 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)^0.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 0.88 + 3.37 + 15.25 + 5.89 =25.39 min.
Runoff = 1.44 cfs Q 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.194 af, Depth= 0.51"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.171 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, & C
0.231 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
" 2.680 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.942 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
0.371 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.150 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.545 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
25.39 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 sin 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Hydrograph
❑Inflow
28� 26 06 cis ❑Primary
26= Inflow Area=22.451 ac
24 Peak Elev=58.22'
22
20 Storage=54,687 cf
18-
16
3 14
0
U. 12
10-
8=
6-
4-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Inflow Area = 22.451 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.08" for 1-yr event
Inflow = 26.06 cfs @ 12.16 hrs, Volume= 2.026 of
Outflow = 1.37 cfs @ 14.78 hrs, Volume= 1.133 af, Atten= 95%, Lag= 157.4 min
Primary = 1.37 cfs @ 14.78 hrs, Volume= 1.133 of
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 58.22' @ 14.78 hrs Surf.Area= 41,154 sf Storage= 54,687 cf
Flood Elev= 64.00' Surf.Area= 58,859 sf Storage= 342,714 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 426.4 min calculated for 1.133 of (56% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 306.1 min ( 1,163.2 - 857.1 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 56.75' 342,714 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc)
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
56.75 28,350 0 0
57.00 34,821 7,896 7,896
58.00 40,500 37,661 45,557
59.00 43,424 41,962 87,519
60.00 46,405 44,915 132,433
61.00 49,442 47,924 180,357
62.00 52,536 50,989 231,346
63.00 55,671 54,104 285,449
64.00 58,859 57,265 342,714
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 56.63' 42.00" Round 90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50%
L= 95.7' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/Outlet Invert= 56.63' / 54.24' S= 0.0250 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.025 Corrugated PE, corrugated interior, Flow Area= 9.62 sf
#2 Device 1 56.75' 4.00" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
#3 Device 1 58.00' 3.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
#4 Device 1 62.50' 24.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
Primary OutFlow Max=1.36 cfs @ 14.78 hrs HW=58.22' TW=53.75' (Fixed TW Elev= 53.75')
t1=90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50% (Passes 1.36 cfs of 18.29 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.48 cfs @ 5.50 fps)
3=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 0.88 cfs @ 1.31 fps)
=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Hydrograph
❑Inflow
1.82 cis ❑Primary
1..82®'s Inflow Area=26.996 ac
N
Cl
3 �
O
LL
0 -. ....,. .� .,.... ....
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 1-yr Rainfall=3.10"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Inflow Area = 26.996 ac, Inflow Depth > 0.59" for 1-yr event
Inflow = 1.82 cfs Q 12.44 hrs, Volume= 1.327 of
Primary = 1.82 cfs Q 12.44 hrs, Volume= 1.327 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S15-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCAD® 10.00-20 s,n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Hydrograph
26- ❑Runoff
2476 cls
24 NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr
22= Rainfall=4.86"
20- Runoff Area=26.996 ac
18- Runoff Volume=3.353 of
y 167Runoff Depth=1.49"
3 14
0 Tc=34.46 min
LL 12:
CN=64
10-
8
6
4-
2-
0 .. .... .... ...
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details (Detail #682.02) using formula below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L= Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow= 2.0 x [(45^3/0.5)^0.385]/128 = 1.66 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(289^3/2.3)^0.385]/128 = 3.94 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(704^3/5.8)^0.385]/128 = 7.72 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)AO.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 1.66 + 3.94 + 7.72 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 34.46 min.
Runoff = 24.76 cfs Q 12.49 hrs, Volume= 3.353 af, Depth= 1.49"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
15.473 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
2.012 77 Legumes, straight row, Poor, HSG B
2.651 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
3.661 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
26.996 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
34.46 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Hydrograph
607 ❑Runoff
54.64 cls
55- NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr
50= Rainfall=4.86"
45- Runoff Area=22.451 ac
40_ Runoff Volume=4.529 of
N 35- Runoff Depth=2.42"
U
g 30-: Tc=13.91 min
U. 25_ CN=76
20-
15-
10-
5
0 ,. . ,...
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H =Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow= 2.0 x [(107^3/1.0)^0.385]/128 = 3.45 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(238^3/1.8)^0.385]/128 = 3.46 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(191^3/1.72)^0.385]/128 =2.73 min
Tc, pipe flow FES#4 to FES#3 = 4.05 min (See Storm Drainage Calculations)
Tc, pipe flow O.C.S to FES#1 = 0.2 x [(95.75^3/2.39)^0.385]/128 = 0.22 min
Tc, total = 3.45 + 3.46 +2.73 + 4.05 + 0.22 = 13.91 min.
Runoff = 54.64 cfs Q 12.15 hrs, Volume= 4.529 af, Depth= 2.42"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Area (ac) CN Description
6.972 98 Paved parking, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.396 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
7.884 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
22.451 76 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
13.91 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HVdroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Hydrograph
❑Runoff
5 4.61 ds
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr
Rainfall=4.86"
4 Runoff Area=4.545 ac
Runoff Volume=0.564 of
w 3 Runoff Depth=1.49"
Tc=25.39 m i n
0
LL CN=64
2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(41^3/1.93)^0.385]/128 = 0.88 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(203^3/1.2)^0.385]/128 = 3.37 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)AO.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 0.88 + 3.37 + 15.25 + 5.89 =25.39 min.
Runoff = 4.81 cfs Q 12.35 hrs, Volume= 0.564 af, Depth= 1.49"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.171 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, & C
0.231 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
2.680 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.942 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
0.371 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.150 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.545 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
25.39 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Hydrograph
60 ❑inflow
54,64cts ❑Primary
55- Inflow Area=22.451 ac
50- Peak Elev=59.16'
45- Storage=94,480 cf
40-
m 35.
u
30-
0
U. 25
20-
15- 12.66 ch
10
5-
0-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Inflow Area = 22.451 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.42" for 5-yr event
Inflow = 54.64 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 4.529 of
Outflow = 12.66 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 3.580 af, Atten= 77%, Lag= 34.6 min
Primary = 12.66 cfs @ 12.73 hrs, Volume= 3.580 of
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 59.16' @ 12.73 hrs Surf.Area= 43,899 sf Storage= 94,480 cf
Flood Elev= 64.00' Surf.Area= 58,859 sf Storage= 342,714 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 233.8 min calculated for 3.579 of (79% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 148.5 min ( 990.9 - 842.4 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 56.75' 342,714 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc)
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
56.75 28,350 0 0
57.00 34,821 7,896 7,896
58.00 40,500 37,661 45,557
59.00 43,424 41,962 87,519
60.00 46,405 44,915 132,433
61.00 49,442 47,924 180,357
62.00 52,536 50,989 231,346
63.00 55,671 54,104 285,449
64.00 58,859 57,265 342,714
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 56.63' 42.00" Round 90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50%
L= 95.7' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/Outlet Invert= 56.63'/54.24' S= 0.0250 T Cc= 0.900
n= 0.025 Corrugated PE, corrugated interior, Flow Area= 9.62 sf
#2 Device 1 56.75' 4.00" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
#3 Device 1 58.00' 3.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
#4 Device 1 62.50' 24.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
Primary OutFlow Max=12.66 cfs @ 12.73 hrs HW=59.16' TW=54.65' (Fixed TW Elev= 54.65')
L1=90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50% (Passes 12.66 cfs of 39.94 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.63 cfs @ 7.21 fps)
3=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 12.03 cfs @ 3.46 fps)
=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Hydrograph
❑Inflow
17 i5 e4 cis ❑Primary
16-
,584 cis Inflow Area=26.996 ac
15-
14
13.
12-
11-
m 10:
u
9:
LL 8
7=
6=
5=
4:
3.
2-
1=
0 .. ., . .............
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 5-yr Rainfall=4.86"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Inflow Area = 26.996 ac, Inflow Depth > 1.84" for 5-yr event
Inflow = 15.84 cfs @ 12.67 hrs, Volume= 4.144 of
Primary = 15.84 cfs Q 12.67 hrs, Volume= 4.144 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow= Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
H droCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 H droCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Hydrograph
38 ;;Runoff
35.65 cts
3a- NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr
32 Rainfall=5.81 "
M Runoff Area=26.996 ac
26 Runoff Volume=4.789 of
22- Runoff Depth=2.13"
20� Tc=34.46 m i n
° 18-
" 16. CN=64
14
12-
10-
8.
6-
4=
2--
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 277237724 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details (Detail #682.02) using formula below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow=2.0 x [(45^3/0.5)^0.385]/128 = 1.66 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(289^3/2.3)^0.385]/128 = 3.94 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(704^3/5.8)^0.385]/128 = 7.72 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290^3/6.1)^0.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 1.66 + 3.94 + 7.72 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 34.46 min.
Runoff = 35.65 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 4.789 af, Depth= 2.13"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
15.473 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
2.012 77 Legumes, straight row, Poor, HSG B
2.651 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
3.661 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
26.996 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
34.46 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCAD® 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Hydrograph
75= Runoff
70 33 cis
707NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr
65 Rainfall=5.81 "
60:
Runoff Area=22.451 ac
55=
50- Runoff Volume=6.018 of
y 45- Runoff Depth=3.22"
U
a 40- Tc=13.91 min
35 CN=76
30
25-
20-
15
10
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L= Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(107^3/1.0)^0.385]/128 = 3.45 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(238^3/1.8)^0.385]/128 = 3.46 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(191^3/1.72)^0.385]/128 = 2.73 min
Tc, pipe flow FES#4 to FES#3 =4.05 min (See Storm Drainage Calculations)
Tc, pipe flow O.C.S to FES#1 = 0.2 x [(95.75^3/2.39)^0.385]/128 = 0.22 min
Tc, total = 3.45 + 3.46 + 2.73 + 4.05 + 0.22 = 13.91 min.
Runoff = 70.33 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 6.018 af, Depth= 3.22"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Area (ac) CN Description
6.972 98 Paved parking, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.396 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
7.884 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
22.451 76 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
13.91 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Hydrograph
❑Runoff
6 93 cfs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr
s-
Rainfall=5.81 "
Runoff Area=4.545 ac
5 Runoff Volume=0.806 of
y Runoff Depth=2.13"
3 4 Tc=25.39 m i n
0
U. CN=64
3-
2-
0-
i
.. .
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26, 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.3851/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(41^3/1.93)^0.385]/128 = 0.88 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(203^3/1.2)^0.385]/128 = 3.37 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)AO.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 0.88 + 3.37 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 25.39 min.
Runoff = 6.93 cfs Q 12.33 hrs, Volume= 0.806 af, Depth= 2.13"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.171 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, & C
0.231 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
2.680 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.942 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
0.371 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.150 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.545 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
25.39 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Hydrograph
❑Inflow
75-
70.33 cfs 11 Inflow Area=22.451 ac Primary
70:
65 Peak Elev=59.65'
60=
55= Storage=116,327 cf
50-
w 45-
u
40
3
35
30-
25" 21.69 tfs
20-
15
10-
5:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Inflow Area = 22.451 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.22" for 10-yr event
Inflow = 70.33 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 6.018 of
Outflow = 21.69 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 5.054 af, Atten= 69%, Lag= 30.6 min
Primary = 21.69 cfs @ 12.66 hrs, Volume= 5.054 of
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 59.65' @ 12.66 hrs Surf.Area= 45,359 sf Storage= 116,327 cf
Flood Elev= 64.00' Surf.Area= 58,859 sf Storage= 342,714 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 195.1 min calculated for 5.054 of (84% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 123.0 min ( 959.1 - 836.1 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 56.75' 342,714 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc)
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
56.75 28,350 0 0
57.00 34,821 7,896 7,896
58.00 40,500 37,661 45,557
59.00 43,424 41,962 87,519
60.00 46,405 44,915 132,433
61.00 49,442 47,924 180,357
62.00 52,536 50,989 231,346
63.00 55,671 54,104 285,449
64.00 58,859 57,265 342,714
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 56.63' 42.00" Round 90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50%
L= 95.7' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/Outlet Invert= 56.63' /54.24' S= 0.0250 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.025 Corrugated PE, corrugated interior, Flow Area= 9.62 sf
#2 Device 1 56.75' 4.00" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
#3 Device 1 58.00' 3.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
#4 Device 1 62.50' 24.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
Primary OutFlow Max=21.69 cfs @ 12.66 hrs HW=59.65' TW=55.70' (Fixed TW Elev= 55.70')
L1=90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50% (Passes 21.69 cfs of 52.09 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.69 cfs @ 7.96 fps)
3=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 20.99 cfs @ 4.24 fps)
=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Hydrograph
p Inflow
2658cls ❑Primary
26 2656c,s
26 Inflow Area=26.996 ac
24
22-
20
18=
N
u 16-
0 14-
LL
12=
10-
8
6
4'
2-
0 .., .. ..... . . ,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 10-yr Rainfall=5.81"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Inflow Area = 26.996 ac, Inflow Depth > 2.60" for 10-yr event
Inflow = 26.58 cfs Q 12.60 hrs, Volume= 5.860 of
Primary = 26.58 cfs Q 12.60 hrs, Volume= 5.860 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Hydrograph
55- ❑Runoff
51.32 cfs
50' NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr
45- Rainfall=7.23"
Runoff Area=26.996 ac
40=
Runoff Volume=7.148 of
35- Runoff Depth=3.18"
N
30 Tc=34.46 min
O
LL 25 CN=64
20-
15
10-
5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 1 S: Total Pre-Development DA
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details (Detail #682.02) using formula below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L= Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow = 2.0 x [(45^3/0.5)^0.385]/128 = 1.66 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(289^3/2.3)^0.385]/128 = 3.94 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(704^3/5.8)^0.385]/128 = 7.72 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)^0.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 1.66 + 3.94 + 7.72 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 34.46 min.
Runoff = 51.32 cfs Q 12.45 hrs, Volume= 7.148 af, Depth= 3.18"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
15.473 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
2.012 77 Legumes, straight row, Poor, HSG B
2.651 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
3.661 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
26.996 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
34.46 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Hydrograph
100
95_ ❑Runoff
90.57 cls
90- NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr
85,80 Rainfall=7.23"
-
75 Runoff Area=22.451 ac
70= Runoff Volume=8.349 of
65=
60 Runoff Depth=4.46"
N
55- Tc=13.91 min
3 50=
45; CN=76
40-
35
30-
25-
20.
15-
10-
5;
0-0.. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post-Dev. DA Draining to SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow= 2.0 x [(107^3/1.0)^0.385]/128 = 3.45 min
Tc, shallow concentrated flow = 1.0 x [(238^3/1.8)^0.385]/128 = 3.46 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(191^3/1.72)^0.385]/128 = 2.73 min
Tc, pipe flow FES#4 to FES#3 = 4.05 min (See Storm Drainage Calculations)
Tc, pipe flow O.C.S to FES#1 = 0.2 x [(95.75^3/2.39)^0.385]/128 = 0.22 min
Tc, total = 3.45 + 3.46 + 2.73 + 4.05 + 0.22 = 13.91 min.
Runoff = 90.57 cfs Q 12.15 hrs, Volume= 8.349 af, Depth= 4.46"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Area (ac) CN Description
6.972 98 Paved parking, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.396 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
7.884 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.023 98 Roofs, HSG A
0.063 98 Roofs, HSG B
0.063 96 Gravel surface, HSG B
0.827 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A
0.927 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
1.124 58 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG A
0.107 72 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG B
0.065 81 Legumes, straight row, Good, HSG C
22.451 76 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
13.91 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCAD® 10.00-20 sln 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Hydrograph
11 D Runoff
9.95 cis
10- NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr
9- Rainfall=7.23"
8 Runoff Area=4.545 ac
7 Runoff Volume=1.203 of
N Runoff Depth=3.18"
u 6-
Tc=25.39 min
5 CN=64
4-
3-
2-
0
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Subcatchment 3S: Post-Dev. DA Bypassing SCM
Greenville, NC OF curves are based on rainfall data from NOAA.
Time of concentration, Tc, was obtained by Kirpich Method per City of Greenville Manual of Standard
Designs and Details using relevant formulas below.
Tc =Travel Factor x [(L^3/H)^0.385]/128 where
L = Hydraulic length
H = Vertical relief
Tc, overland sheet flow= 2.0 x [(41^3/1.93)^0.385]/128 = 0.88 min
Tc, ditch flow 1 = 1.0 x [(203^3/1.2)^0.385]/128 = 3.37 min
Tc, ditch flow 2 = 1.0 x [(1290A3/6.1)AO.385]/128 = 15.25 min
Tc, ditch flow 3 = 1.0 x [(397^3/2.1)^0.385]/128 = 5.89 min
Tc, total = 0.88 + 3.37 + 15.25 + 5.89 = 25.39 min.
Runoff = 9.95 cfs @ 12.33 hrs, Volume= 1.203 af, Depth= 3.18"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Area (ac) CN Description
0.171 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, & C
0.231 98 Roofs, HSG A, B, C, & D
2.680 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.942 77 Woods, Good, HSG D
0.371 98 Paved roads w/curbs & sewers, HSG A, B, C, & D
0.150 51 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A, B, C, & D
4.545 64 Weighted Average
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
25.39 Direct Entry, Kirpich Method

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S1 25 yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
H droCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 H droCAD Software Solutions LLC
Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Hydrograph
100 ❑Inflow
95
9�57cis Inflow Area=22.451 ac ❑Primary
'Or
80- Peak Elev=60.28'
75-
70 Storage=145,447 cf
65
60
Y1
55'
50-
1i 45-1
40: 34.97 cis
35'
30'
25=
20
15-
10:
5=
0-
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 .9. i ..,
0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Pond 4P: Stormwater Wetland
Inflow Area = 22.451 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.46" for 25-yr event
Inflow = 90.57 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 8.349 of
Outflow = 34.97 cfs @ 12.59 hrs, Volume= 7.366 af, Atten= 61%, Lag= 26.4 min
Primary = 34.97 cfs @ 12.59 hrs, Volume= 7.366 of
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs
Peak Elev= 60.28' @ 12.59 hrs Surf.Area= 47,249 sf Storage= 145,447 cf
Flood Elev= 64.00' Surf.Area= 58,859 sf Storage= 342,714 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 162.9 min calculated for 7.364 of (88% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 104.7 min ( 935.1 - 830.5 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 56.75' 342,714 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic) Listed below (Recalc)
Elevation Surf.Area Inc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet)
56.75 28,350 0 0
57.00 34,821 7,896 7,896
58.00 40,500 37,661 45,557
59.00 43,424 41,962 87,519
60.00 46,405 44,915 132,433
61.00 49,442 47,924 180,357
62.00 52,536 50,989 231,346
63.00 55,671 54,104 285,449
64.00 58,859 57,265 342,714
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 56.63' 42.00" Round 90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50%
L= 95.7' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/Outlet Invert= 56.63'/ 54.24' S= 0.0250 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.025 Corrugated PE, corrugated interior, Flow Area= 9.62 sf
#2 Device 1 56.75' 4.00" Vert. Orifice/Grate C= 0.600
#3 Device 1 58.00' 3.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
#4 Device 1 62.50' 24.0' long x 0.7' breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80 2.00
2.50
Coef. (English) 2.76 2.82 2.93 3.09 3.18 3.22 3.27 3.30 3.32
3.31 3.32
Primary OutFlow Max=34.97 cfs @ 12.59 hrs HW=60.28' TW=56.40' (Fixed TW Elev= 56.40')
L1=90 LF 42" CPP W/FES @ 2.50% (Passes 34.97 cfs of 63.82 cfs potential flow)
2=Orifice/Grate (Orifice Controls 0.77 cfs @ 8.83 fps)
3=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 34.19 cfs @ 5.00 fps)
=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCAD®10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Hydrograph
❑Inflow
46 42.80 cfs ❑Primary
44; 42.e0cfs Inflow Area=26.996 ac
42:
40-
38'
36:
34-'
32
30=
a 28
u 26.
3 24
O 22-
LL 20-
18=
16-
14-
12:
10;
8:
6-
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 i6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Time (hours)

The Charles NC-Greenville 24-hr S125-yr Rainfall=7.23"
Prepared by Baldwin Design Consultants, PA
HydroCADO 10.00-20 s/n 09193 ©2017 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Summary for Link 5L: Total Post-Development DA
Inflow Area = 26.996 ac, Inflow Depth > 3.81" for 25-yr event
Inflow = 42.80 cfs Q 12.49 hrs, Volume= 8.570 of
Primary = 42.80 cfs Q 12.49 hrs, Volume= 8.570 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow= Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.01 hrs

RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERS/
TABLE IA2-1
COVER HYDROLOGIC
TYPE LAND USE AND TREATMENT CONDITION A CN a CN C CN D CN
1 FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS(Veg Est)
2 Open space Lawns, parks,etc.
3 Poor condition; grass cover<50% 68 79 86 89
4 Fair condition; grass cover 50%to 75% 49 69 79 84
5 Good condition; grass cover>75% 39 61 74 80
6
7 Impervious Areas:
8 Paved parking lots, roofs,driveways 98 98 98 98
9
10 Streets and roads:
11 Paved; curbs and storm sewers 98 98 98 98
12 Paved; open ditches(w/right-of-way) 83 89 92 93
13 Gravel w/right-of-way) 76 85 89 91
14 Dirt w/right-of-way) 72 82 87 89
15
16 Urban Districts Avg%Impery
17 Commercial&business 85 89 92 94 95
18 Industrial 72 81 88 91 93
19
20 Residential districts(by average lot size) Avg % Impery
21 1/8 acre(town houses) 65 77 85 90 92
22 1/4 acre 38 61 75 83 87
23 1/3 acre 30 57 72 81 86
24 1/2 acre 25 54 70 80 85
25 1 acre 20 51 68 79 84
26 2 acre 12 46 65 77 82
27
28 Western Desert Urban Areas
29 Natural desert(pervious areas only) 63 77 85 88
30 Artificial desert landscaping 96 96 96 96
31
32 User defined urban(Click button to define) Custom CN
33 % Impervious Area:
34 %Unconnected Impervious Area:
35 Pervious Curve Number:
36
37 DEVELOPING URBAN AREA(NO VEGETATION)
38 Newly graded area (pervious only) 77 86 91 94
39
40 CULTIVATED AGRICULTURAL LANDS
41 Fallow Bare soil 77 86 91 94
42 Fallow Crop residue CRpoor 76 85 90 93
43 Fallow Crop residue CRgood 74 83 88 90
44
45 Row crop Straight row SRpoor 72 81 88 91
46 Straight row SRgood 67 78 85 89
47 SR+Crop residue poor 71 80 87 90
48 SR+Crop residue good 64 75 82 85
49 Contoured Cpoor 70 79 84 88
50 Contoured Cgood 65 75 82 86
51 C+ Crop residue poor 69 78 83 87
52 C+ Crop residue good 64 74 81 85
53 Cont&terraced C&T) poor 66 74 80 82
54 Cont&terraced C&T) good 62 71 78 81
55 C&T+Crop residue poor 65 73 79 81
56 C&T+Crop residue good 61 70 77 80
57
58 Small grain Straight row SRpoor 65 76 84 88
59 Straight row SRgood 63 75 83 87
60
IA2-91(10)
NEH, Part 650, (EFH), Amend. IA50, Nov. 2007

RUNOFF CURVE NUMBERSI�
TABLE IA2-1
COVER HYDROLOGIC
TYPE LAND USE AND TREATMENTv CONDITION31 A CN B CN C CN D CN
61 SR+Crop residue poor 64 75 83 86
62 SR+Crop residue good 60 72 80 84
63 Contoured(C) poor 63 74 82 85
64 Contoured(C) good 1 61 1 73 1 81 1 84
65 C+Crop residue poor 62 73 81 84
66 C+Crop residue good 60 72 80 83
67 Cont&terraced(C&T) poor 61 72 79 82
68 Cont&terraced(C&T) good 59 70 78 81
69 C&T+Crop residue poor 60 71 78 81
70 C&T+Crop residue good 58 69 77 80
71
72 Close-seeded Straight Row poor 66 77 85 89
73 legumes or Straight Row good 58 72 81 85
74 rotation Contoured poor 64 75 83 85
75 meadow Contoured good 55 69 78 83
76 Cont&terraced poor 63 1 73 80 83
77 Cont&terraced good 51 67 76 80
78
79 OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS
80 Pasture,grassland or range poor 68 79 86 89
81 Pasture,grassland or range fair 49 69 79 84
82 Pasture,grassland or range good 39 61 74 80
83
84 Meadow-cont.grass(non grazed) 30 58 71 78
85
86 Brush-brush,weed,grass mix poor 48 67 77 83
87 Brush-brush,weed,grass mix fair 35 56 1 70 77
88 Brush-brush,weed,grass mix good 30 48 65 73
89
90 Woods-grass combination poor 57 73 82 86
91 Woods-grass combination fair 43 65 76 82
92 Woods-grass combination good 32 58 72 79
93
94 Woods poor 45 1 66 77 83
95 Woods fair 36 60 73 79
96 Woods good 30 55 70 77
97
98 Farmsteads 59 74 82 86
99 Feedlots
100 Earthen 90 90 90 90
101 Paved 98 98 98 98
" Average runoff condition,and 1a=0.2s.
n Crop residue cover applies only if residue is on at least 5%of the surface throughout the year
" Hydrologic condition is based on combinations of factors that affect infiltration and runoff,including(a)density and canopy of vegetative areas,(b)amount of
year-round cover,(c)amount of grass or close-seeded legumes,(d)percent of residue cover on the land surface(good>20%),and(e)degree of surface
toughness
Poor: factors impair infiltration and tend to increase runoff.
Good: Factors encourage average and better than average infiltration and tend to decrease runoff.
For conservation tillage poor hydrologic condition,5 to 20%of the surface is covered with residue(less than 750 pounds per acre for row crops or 300 pounds
per acre for small grain).
For conservation tillage good hydrologic condition,more than 20%of the surface is covered with residue(greater than 750 pounds per acre for row crops or 300
pounds per acre for small grain)
v Poor: <50%ground cover or heavily grazed with no mulch.
Fair 50 to 75%ground cover and not heavily grazed.
Good: >75%ground cover and lightly or only occasionally grazed
s Poor: <50%ground cover.
Fair: 50 to 75%ground cover.
Good: >75%ground cover.
01 If actual curve number is less than 30,use CN=30 for runoff computation
71 CNs shown were computed for areas with 50%woods and 50%grass(pasture)cover Other combinations of conditions may be computed from the CNs for
woods and pasture.
B1 Poor: Forest litter,small trees,and brush are destroyed by heavy grazing or regular burning.
Fair: Woods are grazed,but not burned,and some forest litter covers the soil.
Good: Woods are protected from grazing,and letter and brush adequately cover the soil.
IA2-91(11)
NEH, Part 650, (EFH), Amend. IA50, Nov. 2007

USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource
Department of Cooperative Soil Survey,
_ Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for
NRCS
States Department of
Agriculture and other Pitt
County,
Federal agencies, State
Natural agencies including the
Resources Agricultural Experiment North Carolina
Conservation Stations, and local
Service participants
0 800 ft
May 5, 2023

Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https-.//offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist(http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at(202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or(202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3

Contents
Preface 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made.... ... .... ...... .... .... ..... _._...... 5
Soil Map _ _ _. .
SoilMap. . .. ....._............... _._ .. ...... .. _ _ _. _..._.... 9
Legend... _. ._ .10
Map Unit Legend—, ........ ........ .... 11
Map Unit Descriptions ..... . ... _ .. .. ......1.11
Pitt County, North Carolina... ... _ 13
Co—Coxville fine sandy loam...... ....._ . . . ._ . . .. ... ... ..... ... 13
ExA—Exum fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes _... 14
Ly—Lynchburg fine sandy loam. 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods......... ... . .. .. _..... _. ................ ........ .. . . .......... . .... . ......15
NrA—Norfolk sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes 16
OcB—Ocilla loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes...... .. ...... .. ... .. ... 17
Ra—Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods......... ..... ... .......... ... ....................... ................ ............... ..18
References... ........ ... ......_. ............................... _ .21
4

How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5

Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
6

Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8

'�'y►t�R��-ii>?h..l
• 0
• E
x -
W {
.. :>: COMM 0 OPLMM

cn
m o °([pp;; E 3 a�
7 ca N .�. ` N N m N 'O
_ m 0 N a) a)r m m CD I C O
O O O O. f.1 S U O �j of N N Q C
cmi `�° m `mo E m G)'a -0 N o cm
a 7 N cn •- N a N -Y a)
m �') o poi o r (D 2(D :3 " E > v°,a o
O N LOD
m
Lm o CN U 2
4TNO)E LNN
MI) Y L a c) -0 m O 'O E
O = m >
a O
•a E L L
/9 N N
N O:2
cc '25 c ° CD
> ` ° t z - nE° 1 o ` T o N E
- c > ac ELL m CD o NZ 2Yo t 2 =-9moa c N wccaE)
ai ja — ON -Sp O, " . m 0$ > m m
1 2m0 CA o �o a tLE :3
m c N c ON Q °E n a) a n c m
E n � on
m Z� c �'E rnH ca
C - N Uam)a o�
2 i) O a N m mmE O'O T7
°c c m 0 u 0 f
m o 0 dmc ov o mEH o mE nmEc�m: a>)
mE ) 8 N O- m OO Q a O m 0
N ) Oc T cm
- N
Ct
U) E E w m 5no (D : N« Zo cvc" macm o� o wn f o oc! C
c - co
w a E nU a-0Q m o nn cn E
N
O
n
aD
m
U
7
O
to
N
� d w
E W C cc O_
L
O c� m t a
N _ coy v 0 N m g
7 W p T C N O 9
a C « O L
U < T fn m E 9 'o c ° a
c
U cc w Q_' O l0 cc
a 0 y 'AC c7 N A C
U cn > O cn 2 cn ° c 5 :3 9
Q cc c
9 h m
W
J
IL .. _ QQ
Q O T C C N )
d H O. 'O a E �j1 C 'ppd
C pp pp N
0 _ O. 0_ O. W d d >. Q N O O. 1 T VI
cc m m 7 C (n
O m T � t °p� Y V y Y •p
N O O O C O N ° O W N N O C N N c0 N C O
a Cl) N cn ^O m m U v c7 C9 J J 2 2 g a w N con cn in rn cn
IL
c m
a 0

Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AO
Co Coxville fine sandy loam 2.3 6.0%
ExA Exum fine sandy loam,0 to 1 3.0 7.9%
percent slopes
Ly Lynchburg fine sandy loam,0 to 0.2 0.7%
2 percent slopes,Atlantic
Coast Flatwoods
NrA Norfolk sandy loam,0 to 1 2.9 7 7%
percent slopes
OcB Ocilla loamy fine sand,0 to 4 25.4 66.8%
percent slopes
Ra Rains fine sandy loam,0 to 2 4.2 11.1%
percent slopes,Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Totals for Area of Interest 38.0 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
11

Custom Soil Resource Report
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
12

Custom Soil Resource Report
Pitt County, North Carolina
Co—Coxville fine sandy loam
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 3typ
Elevation: 80 to 330 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 38 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 210 to 265 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Coxville, drained, and similar soils: 85 percent
Coxville, undrained, and similar soils: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Coxville, Drained
Setting
Landform: Carolina bays, depressions
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Clayey marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 9 inches: loam
Eg- 9 to 11 inches: loam
Btg- 11 to 72 inches: sandy clay
Cg- 72 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Description of Coxville, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Carolina bays, depressions
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Down-slope shape: Concave
13

Custom Soil Resource Report
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Clayey marine deposits
Typical profile
A - 0 to 9 inches: loam
Eg- 9 to 11 inches: loam
Btg- 11 to 72 inches: sandy clay
Cg- 72 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
ExA—Exum fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 3tyv
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Exum and similar soils: 80 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Exum
Setting
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy and silty marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 8 inches: very fine sandy loam
14

Custom Soil Resource Report
E- 8 to 12 inches: silt loam
Bt- 12 to 70 inches: clay loam
C- 70 to 100 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature. More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Ly—Lynchburg fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx8k
Elevation: 0 to 100 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 64 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 310 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained
Map Unit Composition
Lynchburg and similar soils: 82 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Lynchburg
Setting
Landform: Marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 6 inches: fine sandy loam
E- 6 to 13 inches: fine sandy loam
Bt- 13 to 21 inches: sandy clay loam
Btg-21 to 45 inches: sandy clay loam
15

Custom Soil Resource Report
BCg-45 to 63 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 6 to 18 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rains, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces,
carolina bays on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Rains, drained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Broad interstream divides on marine terraces, flats on marine terraces,
carolina bays on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
NrA—Norfolk sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. 3tz6
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period. 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Norfolk and similar soils: 90 percent
16

Custom Soil Resource Report
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Norfolk
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine terraces
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 9 inches: sandy loam
E- 9 to 15 inches: sandy loam
Bt1 - 15 to 19 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt2- 19 to 100 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 40 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 6.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 1
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
OcB—Ocilla loamy fine sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol. 3tz9
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Ocilla and similar soils: 90 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Ocilla
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces
Down-slope shape: Linear
17

Custom Soil Resource Report
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy and sandy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 4 inches: loamy fine sand
E1 - 4 to 15 inches: loamy fine sand
E2- 15 to 28 inches: loamy fine sand
Bt1 - 28 to 49 inches: sandy loam
Bt2- 49 to 59 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt3- 59 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Very high
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 12 to 30 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A/D
Hydric soil rating: No
Ra—Rains fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, Atlantic Coast
Flatwoods
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tn9g
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 55 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 59 to 70 degrees F
Frost-free period: 200 to 280 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained
Map Unit Composition
Rains, undrained, and similar soils: 70 percent
Rains, drained, and similar soils: 16 percent
Minor components: 6 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rains, Undrained
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine terraces,
carolina bays on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
18

Custom Soil Resource Report
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material. Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam
Eg- 7 to 16 inches: fine sandy loam
Btg- 16 to 41 inches: sandy clay loam
BCg-41 to 66 inches: sandy clay loam
Cg- 66 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches
Frequency of flooding. None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Description of Rains, Drained
Setting
Landform: Flats on marine terraces, broad interstream divides on marine terraces,
carolina bays on marine terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Dip, talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy marine deposits
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam
Eg- 7 to 16 inches: fine sandy loam
Btg- 16 to 41 inches: sandy clay loam
BCg-41 to 66 inches: sandy clay loam
Cg- 66 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.20 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 24 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.6 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
19

Custom Soil Resource Report
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Minor Components
Pantego, ponded
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Broad interstream divides, flats
Landform position (three-dimensional): Talf
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
20

References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. hftp://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nresl42p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nresl 42p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
21

Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nresl42p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nresl42p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE—DOCUMENTS/nrcsl42p2_052290.pdf
22