20230888 Ver 1_Design/Maps/Site Plans Revised_20230825

SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
BAKER PARK
BAKER ROAD AND 1-74
HIGH POINT, NORTH CAROLINA
SUMMIT PROJECT NO. 2686.G0429.111
Prepared For:
Mr. Nate Bowman
Bowman Development Group
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Email: natebowman156D2mail.com
Prepared By:
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc. (SUMMIT)
3575 Centre Circle Drive
Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023
Mr. Nate Bowman
Bowman Development Group
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Email: [e-mail]
Subject: Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
Baker Road and 1-74
High Point, North Carolina
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Dear Mr. Bowman:
//IW
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc. (SUMMIT) has completed a geotechnical
subsurface exploration for the Baker Park site located off of Baker Road and 1-74 in High Point,
North Carolina. This subsurface exploration was performed in general accordance with our
Proposal No. 2686.G0429.R1 dated February 27, 2023, Change Order No. 2686.G0429.001 dated
March 3, 2023, and Change Order 2686.G0429.CO2 dated March 8, 2023. This report contains a
brief description of the project information provided to us, general site and subsurface conditions
revealed during our geotechnical subsurface exploration and our general recommendations
regarding foundation design and construction.
SUMMIT appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any
questions concerning the information presented herein or if we can be of further assistance,
please feel free to call us at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc.
Christian Payne
Assistant Project Manager
CAR04/�,��'
' SUMMIT '•
�_
m : Engineering, Laboratory : o
& Testing, Inc. ; ,`
No. F•1454
OF
114111tir���
C A R p'''%,,
SEAL
052284
2 c�
L. Brian Cantrell, P.E.
Geotechnical Dept. Manager

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................
1
1.1. Site and Project Description...................................................................................
1
1.2. Purpose of Subsurface Exploration.........................................................................
2
2.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES...............................................................................................
3
2.1. Field Exploration.....................................................................................................
3
3.0 AREA GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS...............................................................
4
3.1. Physiography and Area Geology.............................................................................
4
3.2. Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy.....................................................................
5
3.2.1. Surface Materials.......................................................................................
5
3.2.2. Alluvial Soils................................................................................................
6
3.2.3. Existing Fill Soils..........................................................................................
6
3.2.4. Residual Soils..............................................................................................
7
3.2.5. Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal ............................................
7
3.2.6. Groundwater Level Measurements...........................................................
8
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................10
4.1. General..................................................................................................................10
4.2. Shallow Foundation Recommendations...............................................................
10
Culvert Foundation Recommendations............................................................................
11
4.3. Retaining Wall Recommendations (if used).........................................................
12
4.4. Low to Moderate Plasticity Moisture Sensitive Soils (CL and MH).......................
13
4.5. Wet Weather Conditions......................................................................................
14
4.6. Floor Slabs.............................................................................................................
15
4.7. Pavements Subgrade Preparation........................................................................
16
4.8. Cut and Fill Slopes.................................................................................................
16
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS..................................................................................
18
5.1. Abandoned Utilities/Structures............................................................................
18
5.2. Site Preparation....................................................................................................
18
5.3. Difficult Excavation...............................................................................................
19
5.4. Temporary Excavation Stability............................................................................
21
5.5. Structural Fill.........................................................................................................
22
5.6. Suitability of Excavated Soils for Re-Use...............................................................
23
5.7. Engineering Services During Construction............................................................
24
6.0 RELIANCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF REPORT...................................................................
25
APPENDIX 1 - Figures
Site Vicinity Map (Figure 1)
Boring Location Plan (Figure 2 & 2A)
APPENDIX 2 - Boring Logs
ii

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
SUMMIT has completed a geotechnical subsurface exploration for the Baker Park project. The
purpose of this exploration was to obtain general information regarding the subsurface
conditions and to provide geotechnical recommendations regarding foundation support of the
proposed construction. This exploration consisted of eighteen (18) soil test borings (identified as
B-1 through B-11, SW-12 through SW-14, and C-1 through C-4). Boring B-2 was offset
approximately 75 feet south due to soft soils that were not passable by our drilling rig. An offset
boring was performed (identified as C-4A) due to early auger refusal. The approximate test
locations are shown on Figure 2 and 2A provided in Appendix 1. The following geotechnical
engineering information was obtained as a result of the soil test borings:
• Surface Materials — Surficial organic (topsoil) soils were observed at the existing ground
surface of the borings with estimated thicknesses ranging from approximately 2 to 4 inches.
• Alluvial Soils - Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface
materials in Boring C-3 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
When sampled, the alluvial soils generally consisted of silty sands (SM). The Standard
Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the alluvial soils ranged from 1 to 2 blows per foot
(bpf).
• Residual Soils - Residual (undisturbed) soils were encountered below the surface materials
and extended to either the maximum boring termination depth, partially weathered rock
(PWR), or auger refusal. These residual soils generally consisted of lean clays (CL), elastic silts
(MH), sandy silts (ML), clayey sands (SC), and silty sands (SM). The Standard Penetration
Resistances (SPT N-values) in the residual soils ranged from 4 to greater than 50 bpf.
• Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) and Auger Refusal — Partially weathered rock (PWR)
conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the Borings at approximate depths ranging
from 1.5 to 16 feet below the existing ground surface. Auger refusal conditions were
encountered in eleven (11) of the Borings at approximate depths ranging from 2 to 19.2 feet
below the existing ground surface.
• Groundwater Levels - At the time of drilling, groundwater was not observed in the borings.
After waiting more than 24-hours, groundwater was encountered in Boring SW-14 at an
approximate depth of 6.3 feet below the existing ground surface, groundwater was not
encountered in Borings SW-12 and SW-13.
• Foundation Support - Based on the results of our borings, the proposed building structures
can be adequately supported on shallow foundation systems provided site preparation and
compacted fill recommendation procedures outlined in this report are implemented
concerning unsuitable soils such as alluvial soils and soils with N-values less than 7 bpf. An
allowable net bearing pressure of up to 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) can be used for
design of the foundations bearing on approved undisturbed residual soils, or on structural fill
compacted to at least 95 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum dry density.
>; i

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
An allowable net bearing pressure of up to 6,000 psf can be used for the culvert borings (C-1
through C-4) where auger refusal was encountered.
• Special Construction Considerations: Special considerations are warranted concerning soils
with SPT N-values less than 7 bpf. Dependent on final grades, the contractor can anticipate
that some undercutting and/or foundation extension may be necessary through unsuitable
soils if encountered during grading and construction. Should unsuitable soils be encountered
during the grading and construction activities, these soils should be inspected in the field by
a Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee prior to remediation. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required in order to
further explore these soil conditions, depths and locations.
o Alluvial Soils: Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface
materials in Boring C-2 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground
surface. Alluvial soils are typically encountered in or near drainage features, pond
bottoms, creeks and in low-lying areas. Alluvial soils are generally loose and/or under -
compacted and, as such, are typically unsuitable for supporting the proposed
construction. Therefore, remediation may be required wherever alluvial soils are
encountered during grading activities.
o Soils with SPT N-values less than 7 bpf: Soils that exhibited SPT N-values less than 7 bpf
are considered not suitable for the direct support of the proposed construction. These
soil conditions were encountered in six (6) of the Borings at shallow or deeper depths.
Depending on the final design grades, if the lower consistency soils are present in the
near -surface (i.e., upper 1.5 to 3 feet), some undercutting, re -working or stabilization may
be required. Stabilization measures could potentially consist of using a geogrid and
subsequent layers of stone or using soil bridge lifts (in non-structural areas). Specific
stabilization recommendations can typically be developed at the time of construction
through routine field engineering decisions.
o Difficult Excavation: The results of the borings indicated that the excavation of residual
soils is possible with conventional excavating techniques. However, please note that
partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings
and auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings performed
for this exploration. Dependent on final grades and locations, the contractor should
anticipate the excavations of PWR and auger refusal conditions will require specialized
equipment and procedures.
Please note that the information provided in this executive summary is intended to be a brief
overview of project information and recommendations from the geotechnical report. The
information in the executive summary should not be used without first reading the geotechnical
report in its entirety and the recommendations described therein.
1V

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1. Site and Project Description
The Baker Park site is located off of Baker Road and 1-74 in High Point, North Carolina. A vicinity
map showing the project's general location is provided as Figure 1. The subject property is
approximately 70.1 acres comprised of Guilford County Tax Parcel ID Numbers 7719469867-000,
7719663974-000, 7719575523-000, 7719479385-000, and 7719475670-000. At the time of our
field exploration, the subject site was wooded and partially cleared, undeveloped land.
The Client (Bowman Development Group) provided SUMMIT a plan sheet titled "Bore Locations",
prepared by Timmons Group dated January 30,2023 that indicated the configurations of the
proposed construction planned for this project. Based on the provided information, we
understand the project is planned to include single-family residential building lots, roadways,
utilities and two best -management -practice (BMP) ponds.
At the time of report preparation, SUMMIT had not been provided structural details of the
planned construction indicating proposed loads, foundation bearing elevations, or finished floor
elevations. For this report, SUMMIT assumed the proposed structures will be supported on a
shallow foundation system consisting of spread, strip, and/or combined footings and that wall
loads will be on the order of 1 to 3 kips per foot. Also, grading plans were not available at the
time of this report and we have assumed that maximum cut/fill depths will be on the order of 1
to 3 feet over the existing ground surface.
1

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
1.2. Purpose of Subsurface Exploration
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The purpose of this exploration was to obtain general geotechnical information regarding the
subsurface conditions and to provide general preliminary recommendations regarding the
geotechnical aspects of site preparation and foundation design. This report contains the
following items:
• General subsurface conditions,
• Boring logs and an approximate "Boring Location Plan",
• Suitable foundation types,
• Allowable bearing pressures for design of shallow foundations,
• Anticipated excavation difficulties during site grading and/or utility installation,
• Remedial measures to correct unsatisfactory soil conditions during site development, as
needed,
• Drainage requirements around structures and under floor slabs, as needed,
• Construction considerations,
• Pavement subgrade support guidelines.
2

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
2.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
2.1. Field Exploration
SUMMIT visited the site on February 22nd through 241" and March 22nd of 2023 and performed a
subsurface exploration that consisted of eighteen (18) soil test borings (identified as B-1 through
B-11, SW-12 through SW-14, and C-1 through C-4). Boring B-2 was offset approximately 75 feet
south due to soft soils that were not passable by our drilling rig. An offset boring was performed
(identified as C-4A) due to early auger refusal. The approximate locations of the borings are
shown on the Figure 2 and 2A - "Boring Location Plan" provided in Appendix 1. The borings were
located by professionals from our office using the provided plan, recreation -grade handheld GPS,
existing topography, and aerial maps as reference. Since the boring locations were not surveyed,
the location of the borings should be considered approximate.
The soil test borings were performed using an ATV -mounted CME 550X drill rig and extended to
approximate depths of 2 to 19.2 feet below the existing ground surface. Hollow -stem, continuous
flight auger drilling techniques were used to advance the borings into the ground. Standard
Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed within the mechanical borings at designated intervals in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The SPT "N" value represents the number of blows
required to drive a split -barrel sampler 12 inches with a 140-pound hammer falling from a height
of 30 inches. When properly evaluated, the SPT results can be used as an index for estimating
soil strength and density. In conjunction with the penetration testing, representative soil samples
were obtained from each test location and returned to our laboratory for visual classification in
general accordance with ASTM D 2488 Water level measurements were attempted at the
termination of drilling. The results of these tests are presented on the individual boring logs
provided in Appendix 2 at the respective test depth.
3

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
3.0 AREA GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1. Physiography and Area Geology
The subject property is located in High Point, North Carolina, which is located in the south central
Piedmont Physiographic Province. The Piedmont Province generally consists of well-rounded hills
and ridges which are dissected by a well -developed system of draws and streams. The Piedmont
Province is predominantly underlain by metamorphic rock (formed by heat, pressure and/or
chemical action) and igneous rock (formed directly from molten material) which were initially
formed during the Precambrian and Paleozoic eras. The volcanic and sedimentary rocks
deposited in the Piedmont Province during the Precambrian era were the host of the
metamorphism and were generally changed to gneiss and schist. The more recent Paleozoic era
had periods of igneous emplacement, with episodes of regional metamorphism resulting in the
majority of the rock types seen today.
The topographic relief found throughout the Piedmont Province has developed from differential
weathering of theses igneous and metamorphic rock formations. Ridges developed along the
more easily weathered and erodible rock. Because of the continued chemical and physical
weathering, the rocks in the Piedmont Province are generally covered with a mantle of soil that
has weathered in -place from the parent bedrock below. These soils have variable thicknesses
and are referred to as residual soils, as they are the result of in -place weathering. Residual soils
are typically fine-grained and have a higher clay content near the ground surface because of the
advanced weathering. Similarly, residual soils typically become more coarse -grained with
increasing depth because of decreased weathering. As weathering decreases with depth, residual
soils generally retain the overall appearance, texture, gradation and foliations of their parent
rock.
4

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2. Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
General subsurface conditions observed during our geotechnical exploration are described
herein. For more detailed soil descriptions and stratifications at a particular field test location,
the respective "Boring Logs", provided in Appendix 2 should be reviewed. The horizontal
stratification lines designating the interface between various strata represents approximate
boundaries. Transitions between different strata in the field may be gradual in both the
horizontal and vertical directions. Therefore, subsurface stratigraphy between test locations may
vary.
3.2.1. Surface Materials
Surficial organic (topsoil) soils were observed at the existing ground surface with
thicknesses ranging from approximately 2 to 4 inches. The surficial organic soil depths
provided in this report and on the individual "Boring Logs" are based on observations of
field personnel and should be considered approximate. Please note that the thickness of
surface materials at the site should be expected to vary, and measurements necessary for
detailed quantity estimation were not performed for this report. For planning purposes,
we suggest considering a topsoil thickness of about 12 inches to account for existing
vegetation and shallow roots.
Surficial Organic Soil is typically a dark -colored soil material containing roots, fibrous
matter, and/or other organic components, and is generally unsuitable for engineering
purposes. SUMMIT has not performed any laboratory testing to determine the organic
content or other horticultural properties of the observed surficial organic soils. Therefore,
the phrase "surficial organic soil" is not intended to indicate suitability for landscaping
and/or other purposes.
61

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2.2. Alluvial Soils
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface materials in Boring
C-2 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground surface. When
sampled, the alluvial soils generally consisted of silty sands (SM). The Standard
Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the alluvial soils ranged from 1 to 2 blows per
foot (bpf).
Alluvial soils are typically encountered in or near drainage features, pond bottoms, creeks
and in low-lying areas. Alluvial soils are generally loose and/or under -compacted and, as
such, are typically unsuitable for supporting the proposed construction. Therefore,
remediation may be required wherever alluvial soils are encountered during grading
activities. The design team may want to consider evaluating the extent of the alluvial soils
prior to or during grading activities. The extent of the alluvial soils should be inspected in
the field by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record or and/or their designee. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required in order
to further explore these soil conditions.
3.2.3. Existing Fill Soils
Existing fill (disturbed) soils were not encountered in the borings performed for this
exploration. Even though fill soils were not encountered during this exploration, there is
a possibility of existing fill soils and deleterious inclusions within the in -place soils existing
on the site. Based on historical aerial photographs and our site observations, previous
grading activities have occurred on the property. As such, the contractor should anticipate
the presence of fill soils, active or abandoned utility lines, and/or construction debris even
though fill soils were not encountered in the borings performed for this exploration.
If fill soils are encountered at other locations in the field during construction, the fill soils
should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee, with
respect to the criteria outlined in Section 5.0 of this report.
M

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2.4. Residual Soils
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Residual (undisturbed) soils were encountered below the surface materials and extended
to either the maximum termination depth, partially weathered rock (PWR), or auger
refusal. These residual soils generally consisted of lean clays (CL), firm to very stiff elastic
silts (MH), soft to dense sandy silts (ML), loose clayey sands (SC), and loose to very dense
silty sands (SM). The Standard Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the residual soils
ranged from 4 to greater than 50 bpf.
3.2.5. Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal
Partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings
at approximate depths ranging from 1.5 to 16 feet below the existing ground surface.
PWR is defined as soil -like material exhibiting SPT N-values in excess of 100 bpf. When
sampled, the PWR generally breaks down into silty sands (SM) and sandy silts (ML) with
rock fragments.
Auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings at approximate
depths ranging from 2 to 19.2 feet below the existing ground surface. Auger refusal is
defined as material that could not be penetrated by the drilling equipment used during
our field exploration. Materials that might result in auger refusal include large boulders,
rock ledges, lenses, seams or the top of parent bedrock. Core drilling techniques would
be required to evaluate the character and continuity of the refusal material. However,
rock coring was beyond the scope of this exploration and not performed.
7

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The following table summarizes the approximate depths that PWR and auger refusal
conditions were encountered in the borings performed for this exploration.
Summary Table of Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal Depths
Boring No.
Partially Weathered Rock
Approx. Depth, (feet)'
Auger Refusal Approx. Depth,
(feet)'
B-1
5.5
6.1
B-4
12
19.2
B-5
---
6
B-6
8
---
B-10
8
13.7
B-11
12
19
SW-12
10
---
SW-13
16
16.7
SW-14
14
14.2
C-1
---
6
C-2
1.5
5.2
C-3
9
10.5
C-4
1.5
2
'Depths were measured from the existing ground surface at the time drilling was performed.
-- " When PWR or auger refusal conditions were not encountered in the borings.
3.2.6. Groundwater Level Measurements
At the time of drilling, groundwater was not observed in the borings performed during
this exploration. After waiting more than 24-hours, groundwater was observed in Boring
SW-14 at an approximate depth of 6.3 feet below the existing ground surface and
groundwater was not observed in Borings SW-12 and SW-13. However, the moisture
conditions of the soil samples were noted and the cave-in depths within each borehole
were measured at the time of drilling. Both moisture conditions within the soil and caving
soils may be an indication of the presence of groundwater.
8

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
It should be noted that groundwater levels tend to fluctuate with seasonal and climatic
variations, as well as with some types of construction operations. Therefore, water may
be encountered during construction at depths not indicated in the borings performed for
this exploration.

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1. General
Our preliminary evaluation and recommendations are based on the project information outlined
previously and on the data obtained from the field and laboratory testing program. If the
structural loading, geometry, or proposed building locations are changed or significantly differ
from those outlined, or if conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those
encountered by the borings, SUMMIT requests the opportunity to review our recommendations
based on the new information and make the necessary changes.
Grading plan information with proposed foundation bearing elevations was not available for our
review at the time of this report. Finish grade elevations of proposed construction in conjunction
with the proposed foundation bearing elevation can have a significant effect on design and
construction considerations. SUMMIT should be provided the opportunity to review the project
grading plans prior to their finalization with respect to the recommendations contained in this
report.
4.2. Shallow Foundation Recommendations
Based on the results of the soil test borings, and our assumptions regarding site grading and
assumed structural building loads, the proposed structures can be adequately supported on
shallow foundation systems provided site preparation and compacted fill recommendation
procedures outlined in this report are implemented concerning unsuitable soils such as alluvial
soils and soils with N-values less than 7 bpf. An allowable net bearing pressure of up to 2,500
pounds per square foot (psf) can be used for design of the foundations bearing on approved
undisturbed residual soils, or on approved structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of its
Standard Proctor maximum dry density. Please refer to section 5.0 of this report for more
information.
Provided the procedures and recommendations outlined in this report are implemented and
10

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
using the assumed loads, we have estimated a total settlement of less than 1 inch for footing
design pressures of 2,500 psf.
To avoid punching type bearing capacity failure, we recommend wall foundation widths of 18
inches or more. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be designed to
bear at least 12 inches below finished grade for frost protection. To reduce the effects of seasonal
moisture variations in the soils, for frost protection and for bearing capacity, it is recommended
that all foundations be embedded at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
All footing excavations and undercutting remediation operations should be inspected by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record or and/or their designee to confirm that suitable soils are
present at and below the proposed bearing elevation and that the backfill operations are
completed with the recommendations of this report. This evaluation may include hand -auger
and DCP testing. If DCP testing encounters lower penetration resistances than anticipated or
unsuitable materials are observed beneath the footing excavations, these bearing soils should be
corrected per the Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record's recommendations.
Culvert Foundation Recommendations
We understand that a specialty culvert contractor will provide foundation loading and bearing
capacities / engineering services based on the results of this field testing program. Unless
otherwise recommended by your specialty contractor, and provided that the recommendations
in this report are implemented, the soils encountered should be suitable for support of culvert
footings which are designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of up to 6,000 pounds per
square foot (psf) bearing on the shallow auger refusal (SPT blows of 50/0). Other options should
be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Based on the results of our soil test borings (Borings C-1 through C-4) and provided that the
recommendations in this report are implemented, the rock encountered at depths ranging from
5.2 to 8 feet below existing ground surface should be suitable for support of culvert footings
which are designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of up to 6,000 pounds per square foot

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
(psf).
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Any unsuitable soils encountered below proposed bearing elevation should be undercut and
replaced with lean concrete or "flowable fill". Also, since the proposed construction is adjacent
to an existing creek/ low lying area, groundwater control will likely be required priorto and during
construction of the culvert and head walls foundations.
All footing excavations and undercutting remediation operations should be inspected by the
geotechnical engineer or his/her designed representative to confirm that suitable soils are
present at and below the proposed bearing elevation and that the backfill operations are
completed with the recommendations of this report. If evaluation with DCP testing encounters
unsuitable materials in the footing excavations, they should be corrected per the
recommendations of the project geotechnical engineer.
4.3. Retaining Wall Recommendations (if used)
Design Parameters for backfill properties (i.e., friction angle, earth pressure coefficients) should
use the values in the table below. These parameters are based on suitable soils with a minimum
moist unit weight of 120 pcf. SUMMIT should be retained to test the actual soils used for
construction to verify these design assumptions. To reduce long term creep or deflections to the
wall system, desirable wall backfill soils should be used. These include non -plastic, granular soils
(sands and gravels). However, these soils may not be available on site.
Soil Parameters for Wall Backfill
Passive
Allowable
Modulus of
Active Earth
Earth
Coefficient of
Bearing
Friction
Subgrade
Pressure
Pressure
Earth
Capacity
Angle
Reaction
Coefficient
Coefficient
Pressure at
Slide
Backfill Type
(psf)
(deg)
(pci)
Ka
Kp
Rest Ko
Friction
Residuum
2,500
28'
200
0.361
2.77
0.531
0.4
Fill
2,500
240
150
0.421
2.37
0.593
0.4
Additional Testing is Required to verify these estimated designed parameters.
12

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
Soils classified as elastic silts (MH) and/or fat clays (CH) shall not be used for wall backfill or in the
retained zone as shown in Table 1610.1 of the 2018 IBC. If on -site soils are used as backfill within
the reinforced zone, the wall designer should address the need for wall drainage and the
possibility of long-term, time -dependent movement or creep in their design.
At the time of report preparation, we were not provided retaining wall plans or specifications.
Therefore, we request the opportunity to review the wall plans and specifications once they are
finalized and make any necessary changes to our recommendations. Also, we recommend an
external stability analysis (including global stability) of the proposed wall(s) be conducted once
the site layout and wall geometry is complete.
4.4. Low to Moderate Plasticity Moisture Sensitive Soils (CL and MH)
Low to moderate plasticity and moisture sensitive lean clay (CL) and elastic silt (MH) soils were
encountered in five (5) of the borings performed during this exploration. These fine-grained soils
are susceptible to moisture intrusion and can become soft when exposed to weather and/or
water infiltration. Consequently, some undercutting and/or reworking (drying) of the near -
surface soils may be required depending upon the site management practices and weather
conditions present during construction.
Should these materials be left in -place, special consideration should be given to providing
positive drainage away from the structure and discharging roof drains a minimum of 5 feet from
the foundations to reduce infiltration of surface water to the subgrade materials.
Note: Since Low to Moderate Plasticity and Moisture Sensitive Soils can become remolded (i.e.,
softened) under the weight of repeated construction traffic and changes in moisture conditions,
these soils should be evaluated and closely monitored by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record
or and/or their designee prior to and during fill placement. Additional testing and inspections of
moisture sensitive soils may be warranted such as laboratory testing, field density (compaction)
testing, hand auger borings with dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing and/or test pit
excavations.
13

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.5. Wet Weather Conditions
Contractors should be made aware of the moisture sensitivity of the near soils and potential
compaction difficulties. If construction is undertaken during wet weather conditions, the surficial
soils may become saturated, soft, and unworkable. The contractor can anticipate reworking
and/or recompacting soils may be needed when excessive moisture conditions occur.
Additionally, subgrade stabilization techniques, such as chemical (lime or lime -fly ash) treatment,
may be needed to provide a more weather -resistant working surface during construction.
Therefore, we recommend that consideration be given to construction during the dryer months.
Surface runoff should be drained away from excavations and not allowed to pond. Concrete for
foundations should be placed as soon as practical after the excavation is made. That is, the
exposed foundation soils should not be allowed to become excessively dry or wet before
placement of concrete. Bearing soils exposed to moisture variations may become highly
disturbed resulting in the need for undercutting prior to placement of concrete. If excavations
must remain open overnight, or if rainfall becomes imminent while the bearing soils are exposed,
we recommend that a 2- to 4-inch-thick "mud -mat" of lean (2000 psi) concrete be placed on the
bearing soils before work stops for the night.
SUMMIT recommends that special care be given to providing adequate drainage away from the
building areas to reduce infiltration of surface water to the base course and subgrade materials.
If these materials are allowed to become saturated during the life of the slab section, a strength
reduction of the materials may result causing a reduced life of the section.
14

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.6. Floor Slabs
Slab -on -grade floor systems may be supported on approved residual soils, or newly compacted
fill, provided the site preparation and fill placement procedures outlined in this report are
implemented. Depending upon the amount of cuts and/or fills, unsuitable soils such as areas
which deflect, rut or pump excessively during proof -rolling may require remediation as described
in Section 5.2.
The proposed slab -on -grade floor slab should be designed to withstand the planned dead and live
loads. Based on the use of granular fill material, soils encountered in our borings and our
experience, a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 125 pci can be used to design the floor slab
supported on the subgrade soils. A higher modules value may be available once the structural
soils and/or supporting soils has been identified. We recommend a minimum of 4-inch thickness
of crushed stone (NCDOT ABC stone gradation or equivalent) compacted to a minimum of 98
percent of the material's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) be placed as floor
slab base course.
Immediately prior to constructing a floor slab, the areas should be proof -rolled to detect any
softened, loosened or disturbed areas that may have been exposed to wet weather or
construction traffic. Areas that are found to be disturbed or indicate pumping action during the
proof -rolling should be undercut and replaced with adequately compacted structural fill. This
proof -rolling should be observed by a SUMMIT staff professional or a senior soils technician
under his/her direction. Proof -rolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation" section
of this report.
15

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.7. Pavements Subgrade Preparation
The pavement sections can be adequately supported on approved non -high plasticity residual
soils, or newly compacted fill, provided the site preparation and fill placement procedures
outlined in this report are implemented. Immediately priorto constructing the pavement section,
we recommend that the areas be proofrolled to detect any softened, loosened or disturbed areas
that may have been exposed to wet weather or construction traffic. Areas that are found to be
disturbed or indicate instability during the proofrolling should be undercut and replaced with
adequately compacted structural fill or repaired as recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer -
of -Record. This proofrolling should be observed by a SUMMIT professional or a senior soils
technician under his/her direction. Proofrolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation"
section of this report.
Due to the presence of near surface low to moderate plasticity lean clays (CL) and elastic silts
(MH), remediation of pavement subgrade soils may be recommended (as determined by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record during construction) including undercutting and replacement
with additional NCDOT ABC stone. Alternatively, lime stabilization of pavement subgrade may be
a more economical option and SUMMIT can provide lime stabilization mix design services if
requested. This may be more pronounced depending on the time of the year and seasonal
conditions at the time of pavement construction. We recommend contingency for some
remediation efforts for the subgrade soils be considered during the planning stage.
4.8. Cut and Fill Slopes
Permanent project slopes should be designed with geometry of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3H:1V)
or flatter. The tops and bases of all slopes should be located 10 feet or more from structural limits
and 5 feet or more from parking limits. Fill slopes should be constructed utilizing properly
compacted, structural fill according to the recommendations provided in this report. In addition,
fill slopes should be overbuilt and cut to finished grade during construction to achieve proper
compaction on the slope face. All slopes should be seeded, stabilized and maintained after
IFO

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
construction and adhere to local, state and federal municipal standards, if applicable.
Immediately prior to constructing the project slopes, the areas should be proof -rolled to detect
any softened, loosened or disturbed areas that may have been exposed to wet weather or
construction traffic. Areas that are found to be disturbed or indicate pumping action during the
proof -rolling should be undercut and replaced with adequately compacted structural fill. This
proof -rolling should be observed by a SUMMIT staff professional or a senior soils technician
under his/her direction. Proof -rolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation" section
of this report.
Structural fill should not be placed on a subgrade with a slope steeper than 5 horizontal to 1
vertical (5H:1V), unless the fill is confined by an opposing slope, such as in a ravine. Otherwise,
where steeper slopes exist, the subgrade should be benched to allow for fill placement on a
horizontal surface.
17

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1. Abandoned Utilities/Structures
SUMMIT recommends that any existing utility lines and foundations be removed from within
proposed building and pavement areas. The utility backfill and foundation material should be
removed and the subgrade in the excavations should be inspected by a geotechnical professional
prior to fill placement. The subgrade inspection should consist of visual observations, probing
with a steel rod and/or performing hand auger borings with Dynamic Cone Penetrometer tests
to explore their suitability of receiving structural fill. Once the excavations are inspected and
approved, they should be backfilled with adequately compacted structural fill. Excavation backfill
under proposed new foundations should consist of properly compacted structural fill, crushed
stone, flowable fill or lean concrete as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record.
5.2. Site Preparation
Based on the results of our borings, and dependent on final grades, the contractor can anticipate
that some undercutting and/or foundation extension through soils with N-values less than 7 bpf
may be required prior to building construction and/or fill placement. If these soils are
encountered during the grading activities, the extent of the undercut required should be
determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required to further explore
these soil conditions, depths and locations.
Topsoil, organic laden/stained soils, construction debris and other unsuitable materials should
be stripped/removed from the proposed construction limits. Stripping and clearing should
extend 10 feet or more beyond the planned construction limits. Upon completion of the stripping
operations, we recommend areas planned for support of foundations, floor slabs, parking areas,
slope areas and structural fill be proof -rolled with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic tired
vehicle (minimum loaded weight of 20 tons) under the observations of a staff professional. After
is

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
excavation of the site has been completed, the exposed subgrade in cut areas should also be
proof -rolled. The proof -rolling procedures should consist of four complete passes of the exposed
areas, with two of the passes being in a direction perpendicular to the proceeding ones. Any
areas which deflect, rut or pump excessively during proof -rolling or fail to "tighten up" after
successive passes should be undercut to suitable soils and replaced with compacted fill.
The extent of any undercut required should be determined in the field by a SUMMIT staff
professional or engineer while monitoring construction activity. After the proof -rolling operation
has been completed and approved, final site grading should proceed immediately. If construction
progresses during wet weather, the proof -rolling operation should be repeated after any
inclement weather event with at least one pass in each direction immediately prior to placing fill
material or aggregate base course stone. If unstable conditions are experienced during this
operation, then undercutting or reworking of the unstable soils may be required.
5.3. Difficult Excavation
Based on the results of our soil test borings and dependent on final grades, it appears that the
majority of general excavation for footings and utilities will be possible with conventional
excavating techniques. We anticipate that the residual soils can be excavated using pans,
scrapers, backhoes, and front end loaders. Depending on the location, excavations deeper than
approximately 6 to 16 feet may require specialized equipment and procedures.
Partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings and
auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings performed for this
exploration. The depth and thickness of partially weathered rock, boulders, and rock lenses or
seams can vary dramatically in short distances and between the boring locations; therefore,
soft/hard weathered rock, boulders or bedrock may be encountered during construction at
locations or depths, between the boring locations, not encountered during this exploration.
19

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The actual rippability of these in -place materials is however, dependent on many factors such as
the operator's skill level, equipment, and the techniques used during excavation, degree of
weathering within the formation, rock hardness, rock structure (i.e., foliations or bedding),
jointing and fracture spacing and necessary size or width of excavation. Rippability of weathered
rock is typically more difficult in confined excavations.
The table below may be used as a quick reference for rippability of in -place materials.
Summary of Rippability Based on SPT N-Values
N-Values as Shown
Description of N-Values
Anticipated Rippability
on Boring Logs
These materials may generally be excavated
60 > N-Value
N-values less than 60 bpf
with heavy-duty equipment such as a
Caterpillar D-8 with a single -shank ripper
N-values more than 60 bpf,
These materials are considered marginally
60 < N-Value < 50/3"
but less than 50 blows per 3
excavatable, even with heavy-duty
inches of penetration
equipment.
N-values more than 50 blows
Blasting and/or removal with impact
50/3" < N-Value
per 3 inches of penetration
hammers is typically required to excavate
these materials.
*This table is for general information only. Actual rippability is dependent upon many other factors as stated
above.
Care should be exercised during excavations for footings on rock to reduce disturbance to the
foundation elevation. The bottom of each footing should be approximately level. When blasting
is utilized for foundation excavation in rock, charges should be held above design grades. Actual
grades for setting charges should be selected by the contractor and he should be responsible for
any damage caused by the blasting. All loose rock should be carefully cleaned from the bottom
of the excavation prior to pouring concrete. Footing excavations in which the rock subgrade has
been loosened due to blasting should be deepened to an acceptable bearing elevation.
In our professional opinion, a clear and appropriate definition of rock should be included in the
project specifications to reduce the potential for misunderstandings. A sample definition of rock
for excavation specifications is provided below:
20

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
Rock is defined as any material that cannot be dislodged during mass grading by a Caterpillar
D-8 tractor, or equivalent, equipped with a hydraulically operated power ripper without the
use of drilling and blasting. For rock removal in confined excavations (e.g., utility excavations)
marginally excavatable materials (softer PWR 50/3"-50/6") may be accomplished using a
large trackhoe Caterpillar 325, or equivalent with rock teeth without the use of drilling and
blasting. However harder materials (PWR 50/0"-50/3") in confined excavations will not likely
be possible with conventional equipment and typically requires blasting. Boulders or masses
of rock exceeding 'z cubic yard in volume shall also be considered rock excavation. This
classification does not include materials such as loose rock, concrete, or other materials that
can be removed by means other than drilling and blasting, but which for any reason, such as
economic reasons, the Contractor chooses to remove by drilling and blasting.
5.4. Temporary Excavation Stability
Localized areas of soft or unsuitable soils not detected by our borings, or in unexplored areas,
may be encountered once grading operations begin. Vertical cuts in these soils may be unstable
and may present a significant hazard because they can fail without warning. Therefore,
temporary construction slopes greater than 5 feet in height should not be steeper than two
horizontal to one vertical (2H:1V), and excavated material should not be placed within 10 feet of
the crest of any excavated slope. In addition, runoff water should be diverted away from the crest
of the excavated slopes to prevent erosion and sloughing.
Should excavations extend below final grades, shoring and bracing or flattening (laying back) of
the slopes may be required to obtain a safe working environment. Excavation should be sloped
or shored in accordance with local, state and federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part
1926) excavation trench safety standards.
21

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
S.S. Structural Fill
Soil to be used as structural fill should be free of organic matter, roots or other deleterious
materials. Structural fill should have a plasticity index (PI) less than 25 and a liquid limit (LL) less
than 50 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. The structural fill should exhibit
a maximum dry density of at least 90 pounds per cubic foot, as determined by a Standard Proctor
compaction test (ASTM-D 698). Compacted structural fill should consist of materials classified as
either CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW, GC, GM, GP, or GW per ASTM D-2487 or as approved by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. Off -site borrow soil should also meet these same classification
requirements. Non -organic, low -plasticity on -site soils are expected to meet this criterion.
However, successful reuse of the excavated, on -site soils as compacted structural fill will depend
on the moisture content of the soils encountered during excavation. We anticipate that scarifying
and drying of portions of the on -site soils will be required before the recommended compaction
can be achieved. Drying of these soils will likely result in some delay.
All structural fill soils should be placed within the proposed structural pad and extending at least
5 feet beyond the perimeter of the pad and foundation limits. All structural fill soils should be
placed in thin (not greater than 8 inches) loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at/or near optimum moisture
content (±2 percent). The upper 2 feet of structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of
100 percent of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at/or near
optimum moisture content (±2 percent). Some manipulation of the moisture content (such as
wetting, drying) may be required during the filling operation to obtain the required degree of
compaction. The manipulation of the moisture content is highly dependent on weather
conditions and site drainage conditions. Therefore, the grading contractor should be prepared to
both dry and wet the fill materials to obtain the specified compaction during grading. Sufficient
density tests should be performed to confirm the required compaction of the fill material.
22

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.6. Suitability of Excavated Soils for Re -Use
Except for the alluvial soils, the soils encountered in the borings should be suitable to be used as
structural fill material provided the recommendations in this report are implemented. These soils
may be utilized as non-structural fill and backfill at landscaped or non -pavement areas of the
project. We recommend non-structural fill to be compacted to at least 92 percent of the soil's
Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density to reduce settlement of the fill soils particularly over
utility trenches.
However, if approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record, high plasticity soils encountered
during general site grading can be mixed/blended and/or mixed with lower plasticity soils and
used as structural fill. We recommend that mixed soils be used below the top five (5) feet at
deeper fill locations and adequate drainage be provided away from structural and pavement
areas. The top five (5) feet should consist of materials classified as either CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW,
GC, GM, GP or GW per ASTM D-2487 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. All
fill soils should be placed in thin (not greater than 8 inches) loose lifts and compacted to a
minimum of 95 percent of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at near
optimum moisture content (±2 percent).
We assumed that the limits of the excavation will be stripped of existing pavements, above and
below ground obstructions, stumps, root systems, and organic surface soils (topsoil) and
discarded. The thickness of organic surface soils (topsoil) encountered at soil test boring locations
are indicated on the soil test boring logs included in the Appendix of this report.
23

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.7. Engineering Services During Construction
As previously stated, the engineering recommendations provided in this report are based on the
project information outlined above and the data obtained from field and laboratory tests.
However, unlike other engineering materials like steel and concrete, the extent and properties
of geologic materials (soil) vary significantly. Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical
engineering exploration, there is always a possibility that conditions between borings will be
different from those at the boring locations, that conditions are not as anticipated by the
designers, or that the construction process has altered the subsurface conditions. This report
does not reflect variations that may occur between the boring locations. Therefore, conditions
on the site may vary between the discrete locations observed at the time of our subsurface
exploration.
The nature and extent of variations between the borings may not become evident until
construction is underway. To account for this variability, professional observation, testing and
monitoring of subsurface conditions during construction should be provided as an extension of
our engineering services. These services will help in evaluating the Contractor's conformance
with the plans and specifications. Because of our unique position to understand the intent of the
geotechnical engineering recommendations, retaining us for these services will also allow us to
provide consistent service through the project construction. Geotechnical engineering
construction observations should be performed under the supervision of the Geotechnical
Engineer -of -Record from our office who is familiar with the intent of the recommendations
presented herein. This observation is recommended to evaluate whether the conditions
anticipated in the design actually exist or whether the recommendations presented herein
should be modified where necessary. Observation and testing of compacted structural fill and
backfill should also be provided by our firm.
24

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
6.0 RELIANCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF REPORT
This geotechnical subsurface exploration has been provided for the sole use of Bowman
Development Group. This geotechnical subsurface exploration should not be relied upon by other
parties without the express written consent of SUMMIT and Bowman Development Group.
The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report were based, in part, on data
obtained from this exploration. If the above -described project conditions are incorrect or
changed after the issuing of this report, or subsurface conditions encountered during
construction are different from those reported, SUMMIT should be notified and these
recommendations should be re-evaluated based on the changed conditions to make appropriate
revisions. We have prepared this report according to generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice
included in this report.
25

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
APPENDIX 1— Figures

clutlons 9
;lae's Catering ,' 5ucln+ 'Ave
SpringfieldS
ITE
BantistChurch
19 David s whplesale
E Springfield did
tIS
Allen Jay Park
14R
Rockford Furniture
Furniture store
9
Figure 1
Site Location Plan
Allen Jay
Recreation Center
I
SAY 05
�I R
Bowie's Outdoor
Services, LLC
�'�l�tltlgfie{d Red
Baker Park
Baker Road & 1-74
High Point, North Carolina
311
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING - LABOR- - TESTING
SCALE: NTS
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429
A Uniwrml Engineering Sciences Company
3575 Centre Circle
Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
[phone]

_ . 4i r'/.r' _i' -__Jl� r, rr , •�/,, ,lip..
\ ,i1 '}' I i',� -�'•'�f,, . �%illy "-_ _ -_ __ /r r _ � ��o
`,1i',`I1111'li}11`4f11i`I'_�S; j•,.•°f�''---_'� — '- -�_ �C - �i�,
I Ii11 a'1'41\Ij II�'� I r/1�>,i�.r�•i%"ir i'iJ _"'" _ - 1`t � ` � 5, / �'\ - "� N
'r r�''1'i ±'riflr,if/rf""'�••'i%i 4 �g/ i ;-_ _'_ �^`�^ '� \a, m
-
,Ir,'1�
f i '�Ilri� irriSl'+ i Ifry%r'ril' _r' r'n7iy( _ -" ` \ ` f •� � b { � .
P OO J
1
i'rr
�9rii/rr,
'`�
A",
� 1
r I r�✓Itiiir �.___. .err ;;; i,+:. -: � i l `1 �. �\�1_ �� -
_ 1• _ ` _' Ijj r p'i'4`,A,�" 1 I /'O`.r ` t a � � - 1 +r 1 / $ � -
I � Z
*al
--I1 1 r
rl 1'1r ri', ` `I+�`�� =)i11 >,h'
XX� ' I'll Tr 1 ,}L f = ' r, ��.rf. ,/ r f °' -` rr • 1 ..
ray 1n le;ri. ���,-' •. jr , ,rrr ,, ��n° ��lo�l _ rr
_ �. ��\ r --` �-__ _ `T,,��^,,� 1 ' !r r', r� r'�- ii:��. y.��r , r� :y.. d .�l' I r' '��'�•�IY_ '�� �•
_ "_ `� Ir 'r� �a" - o��-`%.r��irr'""(�rlq •/,r' •',r ' _ � _-_rli/r r,l� } , 4 � i
r__ �, `\ nll �^�, -- �&� ,/,rr'i°Ilr/'rrrl/ r�S` '1 roil'. -__\!i I 1 i��i/ >\:-_-`` •l, /i "
soa r •1 r r ilr�rl lrr�ll J Ir i ors r.r r, �I _ hS(ii l' A$. �.'r
,. 4 °*v
za°'i
'-
��
Figure 2 Baker Park
Boring Location Plan Baker Road & 1-74 SUMMIT
High Point, North Carolina
Approx. Soil Test Boring Location aosa� ,y+anhs+«
3575 Centre Circle
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429 Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
SCALE: NTS ro 1 (803) SO4-171oa-1717

ill
10511� \
\ y
Ilk
1 1 1 \r` J lJ�t \}i J I ` %1 1 `�° IN �`�� '� \ \�I ; _ :1 1 \ \ \ � \ } 1 t X\� `
Ii lk
111} ilil/ }I \1}\1 1p \ 1`�\�° / \� k� \� \ �� tB,L\\ 9
1 I III \ l \\�
% I/illy 1 \}1' 11 , �_'\\ 1 95 /° \ \ \ il\f / \ ` ` . e
\I \� 1/J j'/ \ y 4 \
1 JlI1 11/f`rfl}IL1?\ \ ��111, rrtlf (\� 1 \�\\` \ 1 !1 S� 1`�_\
i793`\ 1\ ,�
� b \ c}\�`• t - �T\ 9�';�r
r Irc `rc r�(t 1 ��'�\\ `� `\lr t} \ �a�� ���, m �} \ 1f� •� \ 11 �
\S 1 ! `L\ \`\`\\`\ \\ \\\\�J\17(O a0 11 1\` Jr~ \ `\/Ii�� \ \
_\`\�\r^ \�� \\1j\�
\ \\\J \\1\11h�'► \~I � 1}II{ti`Il`1t
'9y�-
JII!!l�11`1r L-2
r l
A
\\69 � 70 f �` 1 ! r1� } � r r \ \ � � � + � I , l r � �, � ; \ � \ ` }�� 1 c 9\`1X
/J1\ r � \ \
t } r )IAk 1 ! rf 1
1�a \�llf1�! \`\If 41\�\\♦\\��t� / \
'f� i
✓/r/ ��T� /�/ rlr//J ! 11 ..moo1k
797 / //�1 f l 1 !!�r \�1 1It A
�� ✓ �!r �^ �lJ�)�%/�f/�/i,7�j/llrrll�`t 1 f4 \\
Figure 2A Baker Park Culvert Borings
Boring Location Plan Baker Road & 1-74J11+tIIT"
Approx. Soil Test Boring Location High Point, North Carolina .r
3575 Centre Circle
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429 FortMi(803) 04-171inaz971s
SCALE: NTS J [phone]

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
APPENDIX 2 — Boring Logs

SUMMIT ENGINEERING KEY TO SYMBOLS
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
LITHOLOGIC SYMBOLS
SAMPLER SYMBOLS
(Unified Soil Classification System)
Standard Penetration Test
ALLUVIAL
F]
TAUGER: Auger Probe
F-1 BLANK
® CL: USCS Low Plasticity Clay
® MH: USCS Elastic Silt
MLS: USCS Sandy Silt
SC: USCS Clayey Sand
WELL CONSTRUCTION SYMBOLS
Ell SM: USCS Silty Sand
1
.T. TOPSOIL: Topsoil
PWR: Partially Weathered Rock
ABBREVIATIONS
ILL - LIQUID LIMIT (%) TV - TORVANE
PI - PLASTIC INDEX (%) PID - PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR
W - MOISTURE CONTENT (%) UC -UNCONFINED COMPRESSION
DD - DRY DENSITY (PCF) ppm - PARTS PER MILLION
NP - NON PLASTIC Water Level at Time
-200 - PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE Drilling, or as Shown
PP - POCKET PENETROMETER (TSF) Water Level at End of
1
Drilling, or as Shown
Water Level After 24
- Hours, or as Shown

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
SUBSURFACE DIAGRAM
E] Topsoil
USCS Silty Sand
Partially Weathered Rock
21
IA�W
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
USCS Sandy Silt
USCS Elastic Silt
11111
SUMMIT
704-504,1717
xABowman
[e-mail]
USCS Clayey Sand
® USCS Low Plasticity Clay
CLIENT Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER
2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION
High Point, North Carolina
Auger Probe
B-1
B-2 B-3
B-4
B-5 B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9 B-10 B-11
SW-12
SW-13 SW-14 C-1
C-2 C-3
C-4 C-4A
Oft.
Oft. Oft.
Oft.
Oft. Oft.
Oft.
Oft.
Oft. Oft. Oft.
Oft.
Oft.
Oft. Oft.
Oft. Oft.
Oft. Oft.
0N-Value•
DeN-Value. DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value.
DeN-Value. DeN-Value.DeN-Value. DeN-Value•
DeN-Value• Depthtalue•
DeN-Value. DeN-Value. DeN-Value•.
DeN-Value Depth••0
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.17
0.25
0.25
0 2
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.33
1
1
1
5::
5:'.•
7
50/3"
50/11,4.,
6
7
16
7
7
41
14
7
4
26
7
101.5
1.5
2
..........
• ..............
.............
..............
..............
..............
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
2.
2..
..........
.............
2 ........
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
..3
3
3
7
11
12
:._
3
3
z>"
3
...............
50/3"
_
2 ft.
4
..........
,'
...............
'
...............:
..
..........
'
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
4
4
........
4
..........
..........
�
............
...............................
4
12
11
. 23
9
'.
7
. 57
'.
10
6
7
24
14
28
2
_
-3 ft.
A.
9
10
11
5.2
;"
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
5.5
-6
... Sym_"..:.............
6.1
:...............
'..............
.. •.............
6
..........
..........
..........
..........
..........
50/0'.
........................................
6
18
10
17
48
11
17
13
49
20
60
.
20
:
21
:
12
:..
7
5.2 ft.
CH.
8
6.1,ft
.............:
..............
6 ft.
....
........
........
6 ft :...............................
8
g
.8...........
8..............................
_;
8..
8..
8..
$.
8..
8..
8..
g.
8..
W
50/4"
50/4"
31
18
30
50/3"
9
21
7
18
8
20
27
44
-10
...........................
10
10
................9.8........
10'
1'0'
10'
_
10
50/3"
10.5
=
16
27
-9.8 ft.
�.�.ft:............ -loft
-
-12
............................
...........
_;,'12
................................................::..
12............
12..
1.2.. ......
,1
..........
_ "'12"
12.. .......
.....
....................................................................................................
-12
50/1"
-10.5 ft.
=
=
16
50/4"
-
50/2"
-
13.7 50/5"
�.
11.
14
14
21
33
14.2
15
15
15
15
33
-13.7 ft.
-16
...............................................................
..........................................................................................................................
.'
.............................
_
1.6....................................................................................................................
-16
50/2"
_
-15 ft.
-15 ft.
-15 ft.
=
15 It.
16.7
-18
...............................................................
:.6.ft:.....................................................................................................
-18
-16.7 ft.
50/2"
19.2
19
-20

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER B-1
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 4.7' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
w
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p
U
>- of
U w
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
'80
Q
O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
~ Lu
J CO
W ^
>�
~
O� Q
Lu `
J
a �
U -
m O >
0 20 40 60 100
�
()
2Z
U
UZ
w
<
Lu
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Loose Moist Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
2-2-4
1
(6)
2.5
. .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
....... ;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
SPT
4-6-6
2
(12)
4.7ft
5.0
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Olive
........:........:........:..... ..:........
Brown and Gray Silty SAND with Rock Fragments
SPT
........................................>>
50
Bottom of Boring at 6.1 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
3
50/1"
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-2
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 7.3' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
J CO
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Moist Brown and Gray Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with Organics
No Sample Recovered
SPT
3-3-4
............................................
1
(7)
2.5
..................................:........
(ML) Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
SPT
4-4-7
.... ... :........ :........ :........ :........
2
(11)
5.0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT
........:........:..........................
SPT
6-7-11
....... ......... :........ :........ :........
3
(18)
7.5
7.3ft
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT with
........ ........ ;........ ;........ ;........
Manganese Stains
SPT
10-9-12
4
(21)
1 O.O
Bottom of Boring at 10 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-3
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 6.9' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
-1
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
J CO
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
........................................
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Very Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
5-6-10
............................................
1
(16)
2.5
........�.......:........:........ :........
SPT
6-10-13
2
(23)
5.0
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
4-3-7
........ . ........ . .................
6.9ft -
3
(1 0)
............................................
7.5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
...........................................
SPT
3-3-4
....................................
4
(7)
Bottom of Boring at 10 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-4
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 11.8' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu`
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
JCO
o
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U-
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O>
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SC) RESIDUUM:
Loose Moist Light Brown Micaceous Clayey SAND
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
(SM) Loose Moist Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty
SAND
SPT
3-4-5
2
(9)
5.0
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and Brown Micaceous Silty
SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
5-7-10
3
(17)
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Brown and Brown Micaceous
Silty SAND
SPT
6-8-10
4
(18)
i o.o
.................... .............
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Light
Brown and Gray Silty SAND
................. ...... ......
>>
SPT
50
5
50/4"
15.o
'^
»
........:........:........:........:........
6
20-50
50/2"
Bottom of Boring at 19.2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
20.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-5
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
3575
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 2.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu`
W
U
O
J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
oU)
W
w
a. z
Q
In
8-1
� ^
> CCi
OU -
w
w
~ =
O Z) Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Firm Moist Light Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
2.5
2.9ft -
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
.. ...... ...... ...... .....
....... ;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
(ML) Firm Moist Light Brown, Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
Sandy SILT
SPT
2-3-4
2
(7)
5.0
Bottom of Boring at 6 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-6
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 7.3' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
J CO
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of Topsoil
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Dense Light Brown and White Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with
Rock Fragments
SPT
31-25-16
............................................
1
(41)
2.5
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(SM) Very Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
........ ............ .............:........
SPT
17-32-25
2
(57)
5.0
(SM) Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
14-21-27
3
(48)
7.5
7.3ft
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Brown
and Light Brown Silty SAND
SPT
r4
17-29-50
(50/4' )
>>
o.o
Bottom of Boring at 9.8 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-/
3575
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 10.4' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
Q O
Lu` J
W
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
a
W
w
a. z
Q
In
o
� ^
> CCi
OU -
w
U) w
~ =
O Z) Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
3-5-9
1
(14)
2.5
SPT
2-4-6
2
(1 0)
........
........ ........ ........ ........
5.0
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown and Light Brown Sandy SILT
SPT
4-5-6
...........................................
7.5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ —
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Light Brown Sandy SILT with
...
...... ...... ...... ......
............ �........ �.................
Manganese Stains
.......................................
SPT
3-4-4
4
(8)
..
10.0
10.4ft
............................................
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy SILT with
.......
;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
2.5
Manganese Stains
SPT
3-2-4
5
(6)
......
...... ...... ...... ......
15.0
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-8
3575
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 9.7' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
Q O
Lu` J
W
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
oU)
W
w
a. z
Q
In
8-1
� ^
> CCi
OU -
w
w
~ =
O Z) Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
2-3-4
1
(7)
2.5
.......:........:........:........:........
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Light Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy
SILT...........................................
%SPT
3-3-3
2
(6)
.. ...... ...... ...... ......
5.0
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
....... ;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
SPT
4-7-10
3
(17)
...........................................
7.5
..... ...... ...... ...... ......
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and White Silty SAND
SPT
8-10-10
4
(20)
10.0
9.7ft -
(ML) Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT with
2.5
Manganese Stains
Sp
4-5-6
:..
5
11
( )
15.0
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-9
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
3575
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 10' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
Q O
LU` J
W
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
a
W
w
a. z
Q
U)
o
� ^
> CCi
OU -
w
U) w
~ =
O Z) Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) Reddish Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Soft Reddish Brown and Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey
Sandy SILT
SPT
1
2-2-2
(4)
........
2.5
.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
................................:........
Sandy SILT
SPT
2-3-4
2
(7)
.. ...... ...... ...... ......
5.0
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
........;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
:.
Sandy SILT
SPT
5-5-8
3
(13)
............................................
7.5
.... .................. ...... ......
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(ML) Very Stiff Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Sandy SILT
........ ........ �........ �........ �........
SPT
10-12-15
4
(27)
........:.......:........:........:........
10.0 .•'•
........:........ :........ :........ :........
(SM) Medium Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
12.5
:.
SPT
16-1011
• ;:
5
(21)
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
1 5.0 :.
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER B-10
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
3575
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
•� �r--q��-+ CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 9.3' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
W
8-1
A SPT N VALUE A
p U
oU)
w
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
Q O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
w
� ^
> CCi
~ =
O Z) Q
Lu` J
OU -
m O Z
0 20 40 60 80 100
a. z
W
U)
Lu
W
❑ FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
...........................................
........ .. ..... ........ ........ ........
...........................................
........:........:........:........:.......
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Medium Dense Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
1
8-11-15
(26)
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
---Ha—rd G--ray S---andy S---ILT — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — (ML)
SPT
7-11-13
(24)
SPT
3
20-21-28
(49)
(ML) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Gray
and Brown Sandy SILT with Manganese Stains
9.3ft -
SPT
4
12-21-50
(50/4")
Bottom of Boring at 13.7 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
SPTI --I 50
5 (50/2

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-11
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 13' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu`
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
JCO
o
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U-
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O>
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(CL) RESIDUUM:
Light Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY
(SC) Loose Light Brown Micaceous Clayey SAND
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty
SAND
SPT
5-6-8
2
(14)
5.0
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Silty
SAND
SPT
5-7-13
3
(20)
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown, Gray, and White Micaceous
Silty SAND
SPT
9-19-25
4
(44)
i o.o
...................................:........
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Light
Brown, Gray, and White Micaceous Silty SAND
,?
13ft -
...... ...... ...... . .
>>
SPT
50
5
50/5"
...... ...... ........
15.o
Bottom of Boring at 19 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
20.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER C-1
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 2.9' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
J CO
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
O -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Stiff Moist Dark Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
3-5-5
1
(10)
2.5
NINE
2.9ft -
(SM) Medium Dense Brown and White Silty SAND with
Manganese Stains and Rock Fragments
SPT
3-7-21
2
(28)
5.0
No Sample Recovery
Bottom of Boring at 6 feet bgs, Auger Refusal SPT 50
3 (50/0")
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-2
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (c� 2.9' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
>- of
~ Lu
J CO
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
U -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SC) RESIDUUM:
Moist Gray and Olive Brown Clayey SAND with Organics
>>
SPT
1
13-50
(50/3")
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray and Olive Brown Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with
Manganese Stains and Rock Fragments
,z
2.5
- -
- 1 i
...... ...... ...... ...... ......
2.9ft -
z .
.
,>
SPT
2
50
50/3"
...... ...... ......
Bottom of Boring at 5.2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
1.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
3575
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
BORING NUMBER C-3
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 1 OF 1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429
PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a) 4.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu`
W
U
O
J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
oU)
W
w
a. z
Q
In
8-1
� ^
> CCi
OU -
w
w
~ =
O Z) Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SM)ALLUVIUM:
Very Loose Wet Gray Silty SAND
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
SPT
1
0-0-1
(1)
2.5
SPT
0-1-1
2
(2)
5.0
4.9ft
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Very Hard Gray Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
........:........:.......:........:........
SPT
12-22-38
3
(60)
7.5
........:........:........:.......
SPT
4
16-50
(50/3")
(ML) Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
Bottom of Boring at 10.5 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
1 2.5
1 5.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-4
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth NE
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
w
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p
U
>- of
U w
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
'80
Q
O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
~ Lu
J 2
W ^
>�
~
O� Q
Lu `
J
a �
O -
m O >
0 20 40 60 100
�
()
2Z
U
UZ
w
<
Lu
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
'
(SM) RESIDUUM: Moist Brown Silty SAND
0
SPT
9-50
1
(50/1")
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray and White Silty SAND with Rock Fragments
............................................
2.0
Bottom of Boring at 2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
3.0
4.0
5.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-4A
3575
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE 1 OF
1
SUMMIT 704,504,1717
CPAYNECaSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North
Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
---
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
W
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p
U
a
U) w
0 20 40 60 80
100
PL Mc LL
Q
O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
w
� ^
> CCi
~ =
O Z) Q
Lu`
J
OU -
m O Z
0 20 40 60 80
100
a. z
w
W
Q
El FINES CONTENT (%) El
In
0 20 40 60 80
100
Auger Probe
1.0
2.0
3.0
Bottom of Boring at 3 feet bgs, Auger Refusal, Offset 5' West
4.0
5.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-12
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING --- GW NE >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
w
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p U
of
U w
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
'80
Q O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
~ Lu
J 2
W ^
>�
~
O� Q
Lu ` J
a �
O -
m O >
0 20 40 60 100
� ()
2Z
U
UZ
w
<
Lu
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 3" of TOPSOIL
(SM) Loose Moist Brownish Yellow (10YR, 6/8) Slightly Clayey
Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
1-2-3-3
1
(5)
•' •'
(ML) Firm Moist Yellow (10YR, 7/8) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1)
2.5
"
Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
2-4-3-3
..........................
2
(7)
(SM) Loose Moist Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
with Manganese Stains
5.0
SPT
3-3-6-6
3
(9)
----------------------------
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Gray (10YR, 6/1), White (7.5YR,
9.5/1), and Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Silty SAND with Manganese
Stains
SPT
5-9-11-16
........ ........ :........ :........ :........
4
(20)
7.5
- - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -(7-5
(SM) Dense Moist Gray (10YR, 6/1), White (7.5YR, 9.5/1)—,a nd
........:...................................
Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
8-15-16-19
5
(31)
.......:........:........
10.0 .'
........:........:........:..... ..:........
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Moist
Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1) Slighty Clayey
SPT
19-37-50
Silty SAND
6
(50/3")
»
...... ...... ................... ....
(SM) Dense Moist Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White (7.5YR,
12.5 :
9.5/1) Slighty Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
6-11-22
7
(33)
1s.o
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-13
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING --- GW NE >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
of
~ Lu
J 2
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
O -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 3" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Loose Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
1
2-2-3-4
(5)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Medium Dense Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Pale
........ ;........ :........ :.................
Brown (2.5Y, 8/4) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
3-5-6-7
2
(11)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Loose Moist Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Pale Brown
........ ;........ :..........................
(2.5Y, 8/4) Silty SAND
5.0
T.
SPT
3
2-4-6-10
(10)
...... :........ ........ :........ :........
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6), Pale
...... .,........ ,........ ,........ ,........
T.
Brown (2.5Y, 8/4), and Dark Brown (10YR, 3/3) Silty SAND
SPT
6-9-12-13
4
(21)
----------------------------
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Pale Brown (T. Y-, 8/4), White (7.5YR,
........ ................. :........ :........
9.5/1), and Dark Brown (10YR, 3/3) Silty SAND with Manganese
Stains
SPT
7-9-9-11
..........................................
5
(18)
o.o
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White
(7.5YR, 9.5/1) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
6-7-9-15
....................................
6
(16)
......
3-6-10-13
SPT
7
(16)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Dense Moist Light Gray (10YR, 7/1) and White (7.5YR, 7/1)
...........................................
Silty SAND
SPT
8
6-17-16-35
(33)
.................................
»
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Moist
Light Gray (10YR, 7/1) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1) Silty SAND
SPT
9
20-50
50/2"
Bottom of Boring at 16.7 feet bgs, Auger Refusal

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-14
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
FORT MILL, SC 29715 PAGE 7 OF 1
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY Z. RODRIGUEZ TAT END OF DRILLING 6.30 ft GW 6.3 >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
Q
Lu `
�
w
U
O
J
()
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
of
~ Lu
J 2
a �
2Z
<
o
W ^
>�
O -
U
Lu
U w
~
O� Q
m O >
UZ
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
PL MC LL
0 20 40 60 '80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of Topsoil
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Medium Dense Moist Brown (10YR, 5/3) Yellow (10YR, 7/6), and
White (10YR, 8/1) Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
1
8-3-4-7
7
2.5
�:, ., •.::
SPT
11-7-5-6
(ML) Stiff Moist Brownish Yellow (10YR, 6/6) and Yellowish
2
(12)
Brown (10YR, 5/6) Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT with Manganese
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
Stains
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Stiff Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Brownish Yellow
.... ..................... :........ :........
(10YR, 6/8) Micaceous Sandy SILT
5.0
SPT
3
4-5-6-6
(11)
.......:...................................
6.3ft
SPT
5-5-7-9
(SM) Medium Dense Light Yellowish Brown (2.5, 5/6) and Very
4
(12)
7.5
Pale Brown (10YR, 8/2) Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
----------------------------
(SM) Dense Light Yellowish Brown (2.5, 5/6) and Very Pale
................. ,........ ,........ ,........
Brown (10YR, 8/2) Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
8-12-18-18
............ ..............................
5
(30)
10.01.
----------------------------
(SM) Dense Very Pale Brown (10YR, 8/4), Brown (10YR,4/3), and
White (2.5Y, 8/1) Micaceous Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
8-11-16-12
6
(27)
12.5
;:..;: `:
SPT
7
........ :........ :........ :........ ....>>
12-22-50
(50/1")
................. :........ :........ :...... .
»
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock when sampled becomes Light
SPT
50
Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) Silty SAND
8
50/2"
..........................:........:........
Bottom of Boring Terminated at 14.2' bgs
5o

U
a
a
M
0
04
fM
N
O
N
M
c
0
'o
0
0
IL
1
c
(3)
0
m
(0
Y
N
m
N
O
fM
V
O
U)
L
�\V
I
(
c,
ON
10
Ir
/0
/ SAN
f IN
- 10
M1 - - •� - _,
/
A79 _ _ C = 0.74 _ x C AC �r / ' sa6 /
/ / $n SA / VV— — ' ' �. = 0.76 A73 , / / / / g46A71 `
i
SP /� _-_-\ -_i Q 0.01AC 1---� /� --- - -sa
A141 Oro
554� i� 02 AC
Al 41
/ / \ /1Z// // e�4 ' ' A143
�_ \ ' C=0.35 o A6
952.70 to ` / \ �fA ' / i / ' ✓ / / / / / / / /�� - / / / / . / ' '
\ \ \ / / / / /- / i / S5 j j // 3 / INV 121N RCP _ _ w i / / !n / 1 J/ - - _ ' / / . 091 / / - - ' - ' / `829f-
7,126
co
849
2LI& // // / / / /T / 'ice/ ' /
_ ✓i _
y
7020
_ -
1'No
- -
i / / / // / / I / ��� / / / / / / / 11 \ 1 w1 ` r? \- i i ' ' � / � / •�, ` p,13a �7 — \ _ _ � / / � g31 i/ �— — — — — — 838- — / — — 39
135/
A135
,� I�/' '/ I 1 1 1 a3c
// I ' �"� 1 1( ,j�� \� C= 66 - _-/_
�OH�/ G / / / , / / I �/ Al21 // I ♦ ` / / ! // _ _ - - ' ' / ' _ _ - =L _
A119 � / _ - - A136
840—
s.
/ / ♦ \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / I / Cp 00 7,9,26'SF
` I / ♦ \ i��� \ v / i 0.36 AC \ A67 1 1 I I \ \
A135
/ 1 / ♦♦I r�� / ^ \\ //� / C=0.76 Ab% _ 0.21AC 1 I \
_ - y � - / / 0.07 C C - 0.52 ^ I 26 \ \
A123 , /�/ _� -�- a \ �� �T
/ 6g� / I I I \ \ I \ \ \ \ / I - - - -` - 18 \ k
/ / / / / / I \ / 7,oio\SF \ A65 I I
ZL Al
I I /�-\ I // 0.24AC /
It I \ \ \ I I I C=0.62 _ A133
` l ) \ / sal \' /_- \� r P A131
/ / / / ! I - / \ ' / / ♦ / \ / / 84 ` 7,020 SF \ N C = 0.68 =
A131
AA+00
0.19 AC �A129
I ♦ _ \ \ I 1 1
CA129
♦ 16 I = 0.77 A61 0.00 AC \
6,913 4 \ I 0.050. C = 0.93
� aT B43
0.39 AC
S � \pia ' �
( r '
C6,458SF \>a
\
52
_�_ V/ \\ 11,656SF
I I �- tiwo
/ / I III'\\ I_, _-�_\ I14 � �
/ / \� � I I / / \ \ ` _ _ // / 0 321AC ` 7�19
MALTC,h1�LI.NE/ SHE/vi 0-416 ,- _�� I ; ,,R \\ ;,-
641 C = 0.55 — C - 0.81 T
��I uuuulll� i =qi
\A CARO���''�.
'•Q, SEAL y�••� -
��4736 >--
CE'ER %%% 30 2023
CV E
CD O E
" CJ O
coN
N � �
U 0 c
z E E
LEGEND
W N
o � "o
�3�c
Q Lu L 3 U -Ej
573 MINOR CONTOURS
a LL �
CDo
a O Ln cn �
z
Lu LuN ko C Y
J
a
575 MAJOR CONTOURS
c
z
z
CU
V) O t6 i
C7 DROP INLET
� � � ^ - -0
a� a Q
U
w
ov6"u '�
p
00
0SLAB TOP INLET
U) -0 O � Luz
to i° `
o
_ a) w O
Qj
,
U)
0
0
0
0
❑8 CURB INLET
`O u
w
z
z
w o w
°C
z
z
E DOUBLE CURB INLET
J
,1 ly,l d
C�
C�
STORM PIPE
as
0° STORM MANHOLE
o
0
°W�
V)
W
FLARED END SECTION
co
z
W
uj a
OUTLET CONTROL
STRUCTURE
o m J
J z
w
o
N
0
N
u'z�
Rio
W U U)
C,
Z�-iw
OO
a � z
DATE
=
m
1112312022
DRAWN BY
C. KENNEDY
U)
DESIGNED BY
•
W.CHURCH
•
CHECKED BY
•
H
• o
K. BRADLEY
• • Lu W
SCALE
•
AS SHOWN
z
• O
U)
• >
O
i
1. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES
ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC. AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY TO THE
PUBLIC.
3. ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF HIGH POINT
UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS.
4. SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
CL
z
N O
Ln
110
n
U \ a
O / z Q
Lu O
m < Q
z Lu
Lu
U Q
J �zw
z1-4
z
a
J
° Q_(DQ
U
Lu
O
z Q
W
JOB NO.
53502
SHEET NO.
C-413

s
2
t
U
IL
M
0
N
fM
N
O
N
O
M
c
O
a
0 O
a
E
0
pi
75
°
-o
m
a
(o
Y
(o
op
N
O
to
fM
V
O
U)
L
Lv
MATCHLINE - SHEET C-741
N I I
/
A
!
,
`\ \
_
/ \ \ H5 1 1 \
�Al 15
839
/ / / / / / ' • / \ / / / _ / / ' / / 841
♦ /' / / /'/%'// / $��J ' gip �$ / — ' _ _ / { ` A93
iT
1-17
—836
--- - - - - -- - \\\\ \\ 1 � — � J _ � /'A113
853, - '---- --- - -- - -// '/ / / / \�\ \ �� ' ^\
C 0 39 ^ / _ /// ♦ ' / \ 6 _ 1 N \ \ — — - - - - - \ ` \ / / ' 828 - J 1 1 0
_ _ _ I f A93 / " - \ - - - \ 82s _ _ _
- - _ - - - - 0.61 AC \ I 1 5� \ _1 - \ \ -
C=0.58 I\� I \7.7 /�-�, l I I \ -r�M� - - - _ _
I � 13
�`
13
0000 ` 7,020 SF
hAl,wF7,021
0.4 AC
\\
001 ` S / A25 II -\ S?3 --\ --\ \ - J I \ \
) \ 0.15 AC A25 I / I - - - _ - - - - - \ \ / 0.68 AC 1 \ 1 1 \ 1
♦ \ / C = 0.35
/ _ / _ / y79rSF ) / \ / \ \ r - �\ _ H5 2' - - -
/ 1/ / / /
\ /\ / .I \ /� \ A87
7 F / / / / \ "° i i A89 0.06 AC
48' _ 0 1 _ \ 8 A89 0.05 AC C = 0.50
0.
'n Ar, A2 820 L, \ ij U — / /\ \ \ \I NI
/ `• 1 I j / I 1 1 I I / I I i / \ �\ �► _ 0.48 AC / 6 �- o A2g / A24 / 0.06 AC _ \ Z m
I - / , ' \ / / / 1l b 5z ( I l / - � / A91 / , /�'�. \�� ` / ro COMMON AREA
0.12 AC
1 � I l II � I\ C=0.79 \\ �D` � y \ �� \ � 5 A17 M03AJ
1
r I \ \ \ \ 1 T 3
F3 1 _- _
/i \
N ,I, / / / / / / 1 A35 // / - , / \ - I - / \ / / / % /�� / _ / $ GJ 820 A21 0\ q 20 \ \ A13 \ -
A3g • V '/ / / A33 /' /
A29 / / _ A95 _ r -f— \
� �. RM0.06
A31 -
\ i�o• \ I I ( I / / • -L / 1 835 ♦ - �� A95 / / / 820 — / 1 / ) \yc� - _ \ 0
+ A14 \ a - Al2
C 1 0.79 ' ' / �NNG�(►J / /'/ ' �� a 1 - -\ - - 0I
\ \ - \ 25
- \ C = 0.76 - - 822
go
40
0) / \ A32 f / / ' 1 l
0.05AC /5\$/\\ \ I I 1 A83
�0c=0.- r r, \r/ - / // / / / ►--- \-- / I H1\ ►{ - 0.06AC \
r I / r / s=�eT��'�"� / / / / 1 oti� / �'' -�^ I I ' f f yl�\ C=0.79-_' -
0.12ACZ'e( �C=0.79 _� 5, / ,� ,/ J I /� — _ _ / / I 1 1 I y\ y \A85
1
_815
l l A97 824 /' / — \ —
/ / // / ; / / /1 - r I ^ \ 1` -� \ I / \ / / ,//' / \ \� \ 1 \ l / y\ y �/� \ \ \ \ A83
/0 6 11F1 o --�o
A99
\
0/0 0
rl' �, / /1 y \ y •v- '� \\ \ \w- }ten,
011 o \
0 °0, °l / /� -- �0 \/ o o �" O fiowa rdS- -�1� \ h
-/ ---
°° �
-
_ �� -� /0 / // / / '\ _ / / O \ \ / \ \ O O- - _\ / g\0 0O O/ $05 y \ - - J \ \ - -
tjj
y 'V, ry / /--7 --_-822 ILL
/�\i - X0 —0 1y �_OV \ --
° O_/°-__ -- o/A j
i - 11 J\ /I \
<0i0O?/ -
!-—------ o� — — — — — — — — — — —e
\\ \ II,/// // // 1\/ \/ / _ _ 8— 0 0—0-4/\\ � \\ \\\\ \\ o Q O\\
0 \�D \ \/\ -�_\\ `� \ \ 1 / `►' -- ' ��` �1
- \\\\\\�\\\ \O\ \ \ \ -\,\\`� y 0 0 0 0\\
- \\ \ �O �� _ -0\ -
c \
O O
/-_f--oor \\ \
O \
10
\ III -� �- / - \ ------ - - \� \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ - \ ( o O\
\O
�0 _\\_"p\0O \\ (\ ylr \\\
8
-834. _ - \- - - - - - - - - - - \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ ' �\ \ \ \ 0
00
\Ob�
1 \ \ \ 1
//- / // / � ___-�-_ `__ 1\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \V I I I I I I I \ \ \ II I II I ) \)\
\\ / V
-'' / \\ 11 \ \I I I\eo2\\ L -'\ -\ \\ -\0 \
842`\---
(\ ' \ � \ \ \ \\ \ � \ �• \ \
837
l
_
�\A CAR0���''�.
o
- '•�� SEAL y�••�
��4736 >--
/�'��'•FNcINEF'�•'Ov
GE'E R � 06` 30 2023
CV >_
CD O E
" u O
co N U
U 0 c
zE E
LEGEND
w Ln
"
< Lu 3 U
573 MINOR CONTOURS
a LL �
CDo
a0LQ m
Z
LuWc�1� 0 Y
J
O
a
575 MAJOR CONTOURS
c
z
z
(n O t6 i
01 DROP INLET
0
a tt a E Q
U
w
ov�"u
p
00
SLAB TOP INLET
a.+
l000 i
z
U
v
a',f6 u
_ 0
rti z
�
cn
O
O
O
O
❑8 CURB INLET
w
z
z
w ^o a)
Z
Z
ae DOUBLE CURB INLET
Ui
.� w a
U
U
STORM PIPE
0° STORM MANHOLE
o
0
I
Z w
FLARED END SECTION
a co
W
W
d
OUTLET CONTROL
ao Do
STRUCTURE
Ui
i z
w
o
N
0
N
W U (n
Q
Z�w
o0
a � z
DATE
=
m
1112312022
DRAWN BY
C. KENNEDY
U)
DESIGNED BY
•
W.CHURCH
•
CHECKED BY
• 0�
•
o
K. BRADLEY
• •
Lu w
SCALE
•
AS SHOWN
•
z
O
>
O
r7
M
00
Q
z
SCALE 1 "=40'
0 40' 80'
sr�h 8�
Lr)
z
0
1. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
APPROPRIATE PARTIES AND ASSURING THAT EXISTING UTILITIES
ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. JOB NO.
2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
FLAG MEN, ETC. AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY TO THE 53502
PUBLIC.
3. ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF HIGH POINT SHEET NO.
UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS.
4. SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS C-410
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.

14. FOR SLOPE CONSTRUCTION 3:1 AND STEEPER THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH A
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER ON THE SUITABILITY OF
SOILS PLANNED FOR THESE SLOPES AND FOLLOW
RECOMMENDATIONS SET FORTH BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER FOR SLOPE
CONSTRUCTION. ALL SLOPES SHOULD BE TRACKED
TOP TO BOTTOM AND STABILIZED WITH NORTH
AMERICAN GREEN S150, OR APPROVED OTHER,
STAKED TO MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.
TOP SOIL PLACEMENT ON SLOPES SHALL BE
INSTALLED IN A BENCHED PATTERN.
15. BOTTOM OF WALL ELEVATIONS (NOTED AS BW)
REFERENCE THE BOTTOM OF WALL AT FINISHED
GRADE, TYPICAL IN ALL AREAS. REFER TO WALL
CONSTRUCTION PLANS BY OTHERS FOR TOP AND
BOTTOM OF FOOTING ELEVATIONS.
16. HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HDPE) STORM
DRAINAGE PIPE INSTALLED WITHIN EXISTING OR
PROPOSED PUBLIC STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY MUST BE
APPROVED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR PRIOR TO ANY
BACKFILL BEING PLACED. BACKFILL MATERIAL MUST
BE APPROVED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR PRIOR TO
PLACEMENT OF THE MATERIAL WITHIN THE PUBLIC
STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY.
17. PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY,
CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SEALED AS -BUILT SURVEY
OF DETENTION SYSTEM AS REQUIRED BY LAND
DEVELOPMENT.
18. PE SEALED SHOP DRAWINGS FOR RETAINING WALLS
MUST BE SUBMITTED TO CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION.
19. PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, PE SEALED SHOP DRAWINGS
FOR UNDERGROUND DETENTION SYSTEMS MUST BE
FURNISHED TO TOWN/COUNTY ENGINEERING FOR
APPROVAL.
20. THE PURPOSE OF THE STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT
(SDE) IS TO PROVIDE STORM WATER CONVEYANCE.
BUILDINGS ARE NOT PERMITTED IN THE EASEMENT
AREA. ANY OTHER OBJECTS WHICH IMPEDE STORM
WATER FLOW OR SYSTEM MAINTENANCE ARE ALSO
PROHIBITED.
21. "AS -BUILT" DRAWINGS AND PLANS OF THE STORM
DRAINAGE SYSTEM, INCLUDING DESIGNED DITCHES,
MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION FINAL
INSPECTION TO THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE.
22. AS-BUILTS FOR ALL APPLICABLE DETENTION
STRUCTURES AND SCM MEASURES ARE REQUIRED.
AS-BUILTS ARE TO INCLUDE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE
FOR CENTER OF MEASURE, AND INLETS AND OUTLETS
OF ALL STRUCTURES. ELEVATIONS ARE REQUIRED
FOR ALL MEASURES AS WELL AS DIMENSIONS OF ALL
MEASURES.
GRADING NOTES:
1. ON -SITE BURIAL PITS REQUIRE A PERMIT.
2. ANY GRADING BEYOND THE DENUDED LIMITS
INDICATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS IS A
VIOLATION AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE.
3. GRADING MORE THAN ONE ACRE WITHOUT AN
APPROVED EROSION CONTROL PLAN IS A VIOLATION
AND IS SUBJECT TO A FINE.
4. ALL FINAL CURB AND STREET GRADES AT
INTERSECTIONS SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH
INSPECTOR.
5. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION
TO GRADE ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES. WHEN FIELD
CONDITIONS WARRANT OFF -SITE GRADING,
PERMISSION MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE AFFECTED
PROPERTY OWNER(S).
6. IN ORDER TO ENSURE PROPER DRAINAGE,
CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 0.5%
SLOPE ON THE CURB.
7. SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE FACILITIES MAY BE REQUIRED
IN THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY IF DEEMED NECESSARY
BY THE INSPECTOR.
8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN EACH STREAM,
CREEK, OR BACKWASH CHANNEL IN AN
UNOBSTRUCTED CONDITION AND SHALL REMOVE
FROM THESE AREAS ALL DEBRIS, LOGS, TIMBER,
TRASH, JUNK AND OTHER ACCUMULATIONS.
9. ANY CONSTRUCTION OR USE WITHIN THE AREAS
DELINEATED AS FLOODWAY DISTRICT FRINGE
BOUNDARY LINE OR FLOODWAY DISTRICT
ENCROACHMENT BOUNDARY LINE IS SUBJECT TO THE
RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY FLOODWAY
REGULATIONS.
10. CITY OF HIGH POINT HAS NOT REVIEWED AND DOES
NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE STRUCTURAL
STABILITY OF ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED RETAINING
WALLS ON THE SITE.
11. NON-STANDARD ITEMS (IE: PAVERS, IRRIGATION
SYSTEMS, ETC.) IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIRE A
LOCAL OR STATE ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT PRIOR
TO INSTALLATION.
12. ALL SIDEWALKS SHALL SLOPE TOWARD ROAD AT 2.0%
MAXIMUM.
13. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT INSPECTOR 48 HOURS
BEFORE CONSTRUCTION.
23. ALL DISTURBED AREAS MUST BE SEEDED AND
MULCHED WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS.
24. SLOPES SHALL BE GRADED NO STEEPER THAN 2:1. FILL
SLOPES GREATER THAN 10' REQUIRE ADEQUATE
TERRACING.
25. A GRADING PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED FOR ANY LOT
GRADING EXCEEDING ONE ACRE THAT WAS NOT
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
26. COORDINATE ALL CURB AND STREET GRADES IN
INTERSECTION WITH INSPECTOR.
27. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING
POSITIVE DRAINAGE ACROSS INTERSECTIONS.
CONTRACTOR SHALL ALERT ENGINEER PRIOR TO
PAVING IF IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT POSITIVE DRAINAGE
CANNOT BE MAINTAINED.
28. A MINIMUM OF 12-INCHES OF SOIL COVER IS REQUIRED TO
PROOF RILL DIRECTLY OVER CLASS IV RCP. IN AREAS WHERE
LESS THAN 12-INCHES OF SOIL COVER IS PROVIDED,
BACKFILL SHALL CONSIST OF ABC STONE RATHER THAN
SOIL TO ACHIEVE SUBGRADE. IN AREAS WHERE LESS THAN
12-INCHES OF ABC STONE WILL BE PLACES, INCLUDING THE
ABC STONE REQUIRED BENEATH THE CURB, PLACE TENSAR
BX1200 GEOGRID AT THE SUBGRADE LEVEL PRIOR TO
PLACING AND COMPACTING THE FINAL 6-INCH LAYER OF
ABC STONE. THE GEOGRID SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 3
FEET BEYOND OUTSIDE EDGE OF PIPE. WHERE THIS
CONDITION EXISTS,; PROOF ROLLING SHOULD NOT BE
PERFORMED AT THE SUBGRADE LEVEL WHERE PIPE
COVERAGE IS LESS THAN 12-INCHES. INSTEAD, PROOF
ROLLING SHOULD BE PERFORMED AT THE FINISHED ABC
STONE LEVEL PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF CURB.
RETAINING WALL NOTES:
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RETAINING THE SERVICES OF A
QUALIFIED ENGINEER TO COMPLETE THE DESIGN OF ALL PROPOSED SEGMENTAL
CONCRETE BLOCK RETAINING WALLS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. THE DESIGN OF ALL
RETAINING WALLS IS TO BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NORTH CAROLINA
BUILDING CODE, SECTION 1610.3. DETAILED RETAINING WALL DESIGN DRAWINGS,
SEALED BY A NORTH CAROLINA LICENSED ENGINEER, SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE
LOCAL PLAN REVIEW AUTHORITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. A NORTH CAROLINA
LICENSED ENGINEER MUST PERFORM CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION, VERIFYING IN A
SEALED LETTER TO THE LOCAL INSPECTION AUTHORITY THAT THE RETAINING WALLS
WERE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED ENGINEERED DRAWINGS,
IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 1610.3 OF THE NORTH CAROLINA BUILDING CODE.
2. ALL RETAINING WALLS REQUIRING SPECIAL INSPECTIONS (GREATER THAN 5' IN HEIGHT)
SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AS DETAILED PER THE
CITY OF HIGH POINT SPECIAL INSPECTIONS PROCESS.
3. RETAINING WALLS GREATER THAN 4' (RESIDENTIAL) OR 5' (COMMERCIAL) IN HEIGHT
REQUIRE A PERMIT FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE
ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THE RETAINING WALL(S) MUST CERTIFY THAT THE WALL(S)
IS(ARE) CONSTRUCTED TO SPECIFICATIONS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF C.O.
4. RETAINING WALLS INVOLVING A CULVERT OR LOCATED WITHIN THE INFLUENCE OF A
ROAD MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY LAND DEVELOPMENT. CULVERTS MUST
HAVE HEADWALLS OR BE COLLARED.
5. CONSTRUCTION OF WALL CANNOT BEGIN UNTIL ALL NECESSARY PERMITS ARE
ACQUIRED.
6. THE CITY OF HIGH POINT HAS NOT REVIEWED THE STRUCTURAL STABILITY OF ANY
RETAINING WALLS ON THE SITE AND DOES NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEM.
7. NO PORTION OF APPURTENANCE OF ANY RETAINING WALL IS TO BE LOCATED WITHIN
PUBLIC R/W.
STORM DRAINAGE NOTES:
1. ALL PIPE TO BE INSTALLED AND BEDDED PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.
2. NO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC SHALL BE ALLOWED ACROSS PIPES UNTIL A MINIMUM OF 2' OF
COMPACTED COVER HAS BEEN INSTALLED.
3. ALL PIPES AND STRUCTURES IN STATE MAINTAINED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS TO MEET
NCDOT STANDARDS. ALL PIPE TO BE RCP IN STATE MAINTAINED PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
4. ALL CONSTRUCTION TO MEET OR EXCEED NCDOT AND LOCAL STANDARDS.
5. ALL CURB INLET TOP ELEVATIONS ARE AT EDGE OF PAVEMENT.
LEGEND
573 MINOR CONTOURS
575 MAJOR CONTOURS
0 DROP INLET
❑❑ SLAB TOP INLET
0 CURB INLET
❑❑ DOUBLE CURB INLET
STORM PIPE
@° STORM MANHOLE
PAD: 575.48 PAD ELEVATION
FLARED END SECTION
X.
\ \ ! \\ _ /// / / /��/ \ \ \\\ \ \ \�• // 1V/ / vo
r \ OUTLET CONTROL
/ / I / \[ \r/'///� v u\� ) )\ter( //- STRUCTURE
<<
\\`
_� \ Z
/ \�\ I , ,j--\\ t \I\11l_/-� Il��� ! \\ /�, , \ /�/// �� mot• / _ \\�\ \\\\\\\ _- \ \ \\\\\
\\\\\�\\\\ \\\ \ _ -mil I \ ( \ I I I ) \
\ 1 1 It
/�I / / ��// / / -�\�\\\\\\�\\\
l(/ / J I
\ \ \ I I )) I r \ _ \ \ \ �\ !� C \ / / "' Il ^ _ - ^ //% / 1 \ \ 1 ) )p _ ` \\ \ \ \ \\\ \\�\\
/ /
l/ v
\ \ ^ \ I I%//- () 1 \\\\ \\ \ \ =\\< //`\\� �/ i/ �'\ - 26 II 27 / \ \ 111 IIIII
j��j/\/I I
%'�!( /r \\ // (\ � \\•,�-^ \`-,iJll J � ' � l ' '/ // / ) I I / \ I � �1 � 9 III � _ �� � \sr, / I I
If
\\\\\ \ \ \52 \
J A\ I!l
(I(v11\� \
\\
\
1 l 1 \ \ \ \\ \ \
` 1 - i✓ O 1 _ / / ' / / / , - _ - , - /' _ \ ` II(11(I`1 \l\\\
4 (J \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ = \\
) \\\\1 \ \\\ \\ \
ll') I
1 I I t) \ (I<ti i1\ \ 1l T \ 04 �\ �{Il 1 �� � \� I \I /\/� I \\
/ !�/--_ \-- _11 / ✓/�/ / / ////////�/ j 1\\/i�- �I (/ 111 �\1 ( \T)\yli,\`�`\���\\\\III1r\\\�\\\\\�
•/=/_=�\"If
�_IIII,/�_ I- \\ / / ' ' r//� //// / / :- - < � - - -= y - -- � 105 � l \/ \\�\ 1 I1111111►�\0 \ \ �\\�\
/
\ � -..�/ /� �- �[ / /r/ ,J1 /
r ..r✓ _ ^\ rl���t
((/jr //� I \ 8 I 42 43\\-
\ _` r'1 /! I �/ /l 7 �40 41
I ► /� JI r ► - - \ 57 44
l 39
/ J
I If
74
\
1 I I\L\� /��� / -/ //� /i / /�/ - _ _ / //� / 1 , / J /•.-'•.•: \ _ % 8 �9 160 161 I 72 �3
164 65 69 �0 71 ` 1 \ 7 / / / / ��1 / ►� // /r
1 I /)� 1 ) \ /� // J J1 41-
I Zy / // // /// ,/// ////�/// /// .1'.'•• fr// - \ - - - J Jf,�111 1 I /
�Jl� J��/%/0
83
�'% i / i /' / 1'i / //// / / %//i J�//l!1/!//< = - � / .ram �� _ = \ \ 1 I�, �• •% / ) I
4/6
/
\ \\ I.
Rg!R-N
// If1 \\\=�__� \
Aff
1110 Z.
7 'Ilk
/ \ / \\ \\\
M
co
�z
SCALE 1"-150'
% \ \ 1j �\ \ 1\\/�`\\pll\I ' \ 11,E
�lJl// / J \ 1 \ \ \\\ 1 \ / ! / / / ///// //ii
/ / I / / ) ) I \ \ \ \ \`� \ I 1 I I (t /�i/\\�\\ 1\�0 \ I lr / // / / / / / / - - = / ^ _ 0 150' 300'
\\o \ (III► 'y',�//
plot JII►J)J/IIZ \ 1 > � ��'//'/
,011/ II I I / / - _ /\ \ 1 I 1\ \ \I 1\ \\\\t\\\\\\r��lll �l( 411
/ <<\ Ilo/-
�\\III II / , 1 / / / 1\� 11 0 \ \\\\\\ \11II\ \ \ S I �� I toII
!� I / .-.) J\ 1 \1 / , ) III \ I
I /
/rlllllllll\\\O \\� I,\IIII q/I//IIII/II11
1 1 dt \ /
r
i/ 1 \\\ 11I11 r✓//, I I �lll
\°
IIIIII\
"I �\ \ \ 1111
1. CONTRACTOR IS FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING
\ I 111 \\ \ \ \\\\ \\ APPROPRIATECONSTRUCTION.ASSURINGTHAT EXISTING UTILITIES
, 1 ) II`\r^(" // i \ > r r ` - .p\ \ \\ \\\ \\\\ \ \\ \\\ \ \\\ \\\ \\ \ \ \\ \ ARE LOCATED PRIOR TO
l \ I I I I . �) \ / I I Ir \\ 1 \ \ \\ \\Q\\ \ \� \ \\ \\\\ \ \ I
/ \ \\\\\\ \II/II\\_�� \ \\Oa \ \ \\) c q a\\ \\\\ \ 2. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLACING BARRICADES USING
1, \ I I1 rl I 1 I (� ( �i - ! \ \ Ip` \ �\ \\ \ I \ \ FLAG MEN, ETC. AS NECESSARY TO INSURE SAFETY TO THE
\\ PUBLIC.
<)(1 P //// /// / / j J l ! / J i/ s _ _ i _ ` \ \ \\ ; �O) \, \ \\ \\`\; I b\ ` , \\\ ` \ �)> 3. ALL PAVEMENT CUTS, CONCRETE OR ASPHALT, ARE TO BE
I / /// �f - / \ \ > » REPLACED ACCORDING TO STANDARDS OF THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CITY OF HIGH POINT
UTILITIES SPECIFICATIONS.
4. SHORING WILL BE ACCORDING TO OSHA TRENCHING STANDARDS
PART 1926 SUBPART P, OR AS AMENDED.
\A C ARO�'''''�.
•� SEAL =
'`1i4�GE1 ER'll"I1 /23/2022
fV E
0 0
N U
00 vi
N C
0
U
U0
E
�
E
o
E
LuN
= a-+ In
E
Q Lu U
Lu
CIf LL p z
a 0 ul
z
N
LuN W N
H M
L
n
O
ate., V
m"-j
U)
a
z0(f)o^fo
U
Q Q O
¢
.Fu
V u w U
w
w
Ui _0 O
u
z
f6 kD L
2 N 00 0
fa
+
O
'
~ rA z
O
V)
o
w
2
u
Lj o
O _j
f1
w
a
O 00
w CD
U 00
Z aV (
Lu � z
O C° Lu
-j
J z _J w
Lu I-
GU p
Ln
Z H
Q r,-) z
3
m 1112312022
DRAWN BY
:7
0�1
DATE
C. KENNEDY
DESIGNED BY
W. CHURCH
CHECKED BY
K. BRADLEY
SCALE
AS SHOWN
LPi
t1O
z
U Q
O J
Lu oC0(D
VQQz
z U I --I
Lu Q
U_
J 0
Q w
z J
J a J
0
v Co = \w
O
DC
O
JOB NO.
53502
SHEET NO.
C-400
L_

Yax6 g2gZ� 848 ` 1 opt �a b
� saa�83 fJll gA�
g5O--- g5o
—4.t 0%
%56\ Wit, $ya1�
Baker Park Site " �a
±62-acres
Cc
ro 4h O
1 ya
b
41b/�� ,Zy
/bog L3 bh lb �b
A
a3b
. a
836�S30
Sir
—84, \_-----842 840 11! 1l/I
Bs��Byo �, eye s
�S
0`
coo l a QO e
2
So
�8
Baker Park Site
Scale: Not to Scale
Source: Guilford County, INC GIS (2022)
Disclaimer: The information depicted on this figure is for
informational purposes only and was not prepared for, and
is not suitable for legal or engineering purposes.
64%
84A 84b ool 836 332 q�
m -b
6�0 v \tea a 820.
�a 8,t4
p�c 870 a
b
82i 890 N�
830 8°d
8Al0 \� to842 E W v o a a 800
p �? �0
O Oh d'
A N `8j 8 828
d 8 `ti 824 ro eP�O c\
ro a 70
82 \
S `870 829 0
836 1
83h h$ a
0 G3V
_
824 8 826
2
818 O
820 4b
0 b
\\ 8Oq 814 $fib
ti '° Y.�C �BOR �84
<-�e8 7 7
�798 8OZ
8�0, 82Q
870
� !ea
8� '-
Legend of Jurisdictional Features
Intermittent Stream r
Perennial Stream
Wetland
DU Data Points
Iym v
80 06 p p
a m
�6 808
gip ' 801,E°� /X
788 794
760
�82 bb
7
s 772 �10
a
] j� '90—"
0
bb
v �
7.7�' gbh
764
1 /
ate Wf tlt Cai�lin}�(J q sri, HERE 0in7IPTCRE T pt�LG�A, USG`.
Wetland and Stream Features
Wetland WA: ±0.20-acre
Wetland WB: ±0.10-acre
Wetland WC/WD: ±0.85-acre
Wetland WE: ±0.03-acre
Wetland WIG: ±0.08-acre
Wetland WH: ±0.05-acre
Wetland WJ: ±0.05-acre
r Stream SA: ±2,400 LF (±0.275-acre)
Stream SB: ±80 LF (±0.004-acre)
Stream SC: ±100 LF (±0.005-acre)
Stream SD: ±1,100 LF (±0.010-ac)
Stream SE: ±600 LF (±0.028-acre)

SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
BAKER PARK
BAKER ROAD AND 1-74
HIGH POINT, NORTH CAROLINA
SUMMIT PROJECT NO. 2686.G0429.111
Prepared For:
Mr. Nate Bowman
Bowman Development Group
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Email: natebowmanl5(cDRmail.com
Prepared By:
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc. (SUMMIT)
3575 Centre Circle Drive
Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
March 24, 2023

March 24, 2023
Mr. Nate Bowman
Bowman Development Group
13815 Cinnabar Place
Huntersville, NC 28078
Email: [e-mail]
Subject: Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
Baker Road and 1-74
High Point, North Carolina
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Dear Mr. Bowman:
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc. (SUMMIT) has completed a geotechnical
subsurface exploration for the Baker Park site located off of Baker Road and 1-74 in High Point,
North Carolina. This subsurface exploration was performed in general accordance with our
Proposal No. 2686.G0429.R1 dated February 27, 2023, Change Order No. 2686.G0429.001 dated
March 3, 2023, and Change Order 2686.G0429.CO2 dated March 8, 2023. This report contains a
brief description of the project information provided to us, general site and subsurface conditions
revealed during our geotechnical subsurface exploration and our general recommendations
regarding foundation design and construction.
SUMMIT appreciates the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any
questions concerning the information presented herein or if we can be of further assistance,
please feel free to call us at [phone].
Sincerely yours,
SUMMIT Engineering, Laboratory & Testing, Inc.
S Fr -
Christian Payne
Assistant Project Manager
CARig
' SUMMIT '•
:_
m Engineering, Laboratory ; oz
:� -• & Testing, Inc.
No. F-1454
OF N
' "I11111111\\\` .
C A RO
ESS/p�;..
SEAL
052284
L. Brian Cantrell, P.E.
Geotechnical Dept. Manager

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 1
1.1. Site and Project Description................................................................................... 1
1.2. Purpose of Subsurface Exploration......................................................................... 2
2.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES............................................................................................... 3
2.1. Field Exploration..................................................................................................... 3
3.0 AREA GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS............................................................... 4
3.1. Physiography and Area Geology............................................................................. 4
3.2. Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy..................................................................... 5
3.2.1. Surface Materials....................................................................................... 5
3.2.2. Alluvial Soils................................................................................................ 6
3.2.3. Existing Fill Soils.......................................................................................... 6
3.2.4. Residual Soils.............................................................................................. 7
3.2.5. Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal ............................................ 7
3.2.6. Groundwater Level Measurements........................................................... 8
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................10
4.1.
General..................................................................................................................10
4.2.
Shallow Foundation Recommendations...............................................................
10
Culvert
Foundation Recommendations............................................................................
11
4.3.
Retaining Wall Recommendations (if used).........................................................
12
4.4.
Low to Moderate Plasticity Moisture Sensitive Soils (CL and MH).......................
13
4.5.
Wet Weather Conditions......................................................................................
14
4.6.
Floor Slabs.............................................................................................................
15
4.7.
Pavements Subgrade Preparation........................................................................
16
4.8.
Cut and Fill Slopes.................................................................................................
16
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS..................................................................................
18
5.1.
Abandoned Utilities/Structures............................................................................
18
5.2.
Site Preparation....................................................................................................
18
5.3.
Difficult Excavation...............................................................................................
19
5.4.
Temporary Excavation Stability............................................................................
21
5.5.
Structural Fill.........................................................................................................
22
5.6.
Suitability of Excavated Soils for Re-Use...............................................................
23
5.7.
Engineering Services During Construction............................................................
24
6.0 RELIANCE
AND QUALIFICATIONS OF REPORT...................................................................
25
APPENDIX 1
- Figures
Site Vicinity
Map (Figure 1)
Boring
Location Plan (Figure 2 & 2A)
APPENDIX 2 - Boring Logs

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SUMMIT has completed a geotechnical subsurface exploration for the Baker Park project. The
purpose of this exploration was to obtain general information regarding the subsurface
conditions and to provide geotechnical recommendations regarding foundation support of the
proposed construction. This exploration consisted of eighteen (18) soil test borings (identified as
B-1 through B-11, SW-12 through SW-14, and C-1 through C-4). Boring B-2 was offset
approximately 75 feet south due to soft soils that were not passable by our drilling rig. An offset
boring was performed (identified as C-4A) due to early auger refusal. The approximate test
locations are shown on Figure 2 and 2A provided in Appendix 1. The following geotechnical
engineering information was obtained as a result of the soil test borings:
• Surface Materials — Surficial organic (topsoil) soils were observed at the existing ground
surface of the borings with estimated thicknesses ranging from approximately 2 to 4 inches.
• Alluvial Soils - Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface
materials in Boring C-3 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground surface.
When sampled, the alluvial soils generally consisted of silty sands (SM). The Standard
Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the alluvial soils ranged from 1 to 2 blows per foot
(bpf).
• Residual Soils - Residual (undisturbed) soils were encountered below the surface materials
and extended to either the maximum boring termination depth, partially weathered rock
(PWR), or auger refusal. These residual soils generally consisted of lean clays (CL), elastic silts
(MI-11), sandy silts (ML), clayey sands (SC), and silty sands (SM). The Standard Penetration
Resistances (SPT N-values) in the residual soils ranged from 4 to greater than 50 bpf.
• Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) and Auger Refusal — Partially weathered rock (PWR)
conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the Borings at approximate depths ranging
from 1.5 to 16 feet below the existing ground surface. Auger refusal conditions were
encountered in eleven (11) of the Borings at approximate depths ranging from 2 to 19.2 feet
below the existing ground surface.
• Groundwater Levels - At the time of drilling, groundwater was not observed in the borings.
After waiting more than 24-hours, groundwater was encountered in Boring SW-14 at an
approximate depth of 6.3 feet below the existing ground surface, groundwater was not
encountered in Borings SW-12 and SW-13.
• Foundation Support - Based on the results of our borings, the proposed building structures
can be adequately supported on shallow foundation systems provided site preparation and
compacted fill recommendation procedures outlined in this report are implemented
concerning unsuitable soils such as alluvial soils and soils with N-values less than 7 bpf. An
allowable net bearing pressure of up to 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) can be used for
design of the foundations bearing on approved undisturbed residual soils, or on structural fill
compacted to at least 95 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum dry density.
iii

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
An allowable net bearing pressure of up to 6,000 psf can be used for the culvert borings (C-1
through C-4) where auger refusal was encountered.
• Special Construction Considerations: Special considerations are warranted concerning soils
with SPT N-values less than 7 bpf. Dependent on final grades, the contractor can anticipate
that some undercutting and/or foundation extension may be necessary through unsuitable
soils if encountered during grading and construction. Should unsuitable soils be encountered
during the grading and construction activities, these soils should be inspected in the field by
a Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee prior to remediation. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required in order to
further explore these soil conditions, depths and locations.
o Alluvial Soils: Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface
materials in Boring C-2 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground
surface. Alluvial soils are typically encountered in or near drainage features, pond
bottoms, creeks and in low-lying areas. Alluvial soils are generally loose and/or under -
compacted and, as such, are typically unsuitable for supporting the proposed
construction. Therefore, remediation may be required wherever alluvial soils are
encountered during grading activities.
o Soils with SPT N-values less than 7 bpf: Soils that exhibited SPT N-values less than 7 bpf
are considered not suitable for the direct support of the proposed construction. These
soil conditions were encountered in six (6) of the Borings at shallow or deeper depths.
Depending on the final design grades, if the lower consistency soils are present in the
near -surface (i.e., upper 1.5 to 3 feet), some undercutting, re -working or stabilization may
be required. Stabilization measures could potentially consist of using a geogrid and
subsequent layers of stone or using soil bridge lifts (in non-structural areas). Specific
stabilization recommendations can typically be developed at the time of construction
through routine field engineering decisions.
o Difficult Excavation: The results of the borings indicated that the excavation of residual
soils is possible with conventional excavating techniques. However, please note that
partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings
and auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings performed
for this exploration. Dependent on final grades and locations, the contractor should
anticipate the excavations of PWR and auger refusal conditions will require specialized
equipment and procedures.
Please note that the information provided in this executive summary is intended to be a brief
overview of project information and recommendations from the geotechnical report. The
information in the executive summary should not be used without first reading the geotechnical
report in its entirety and the recommendations described therein.
IMA

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1. Site and Project Description
The Baker Park site is located off of Baker Road and 1-74 in High Point, North Carolina. A vicinity
map showing the project's general location is provided as Figure 1. The subject property is
approximately 70.1 acres comprised of Guilford County Tax Parcel ID Numbers 7719469867-000,
7719663974-000, 7719575523-000, 7719479385-000, and 7719475670-000. At the time of our
field exploration, the subject site was wooded and partially cleared, undeveloped land.
The Client (Bowman Development Group) provided SUMMIT a plan sheet titled "Bore Locations",
prepared by Timmons Group dated January 30,2023 that indicated the configurations of the
proposed construction planned for this project. Based on the provided information, we
understand the project is planned to include single-family residential building lots, roadways,
utilities and two best -management -practice (BMP) ponds.
At the time of report preparation, SUMMIT had not been provided structural details of the
planned construction indicating proposed loads, foundation bearing elevations, or finished floor
elevations. For this report, SUMMIT assumed the proposed structures will be supported on a
shallow foundation system consisting of spread, strip, and/or combined footings and that wall
loads will be on the order of 1 to 3 kips per foot. Also, grading plans were not available at the
time of this report and we have assumed that maximum cut/fill depths will be on the order of 1
to 3 feet over the existing ground surface.
1

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
1.2. Purpose of Subsurface Exploration
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The purpose of this exploration was to obtain general geotechnical information regarding the
subsurface conditions and to provide general preliminary recommendations regarding the
geotechnical aspects of site preparation and foundation design. This report contains the
following items:
• General subsurface conditions,
• Boring logs and an approximate "Boring Location Plan",
• Suitable foundation types,
• Allowable bearing pressures for design of shallow foundations,
• Anticipated excavation difficulties during site grading and/or utility installation,
• Remedial measures to correct unsatisfactory soil conditions during site development, as
needed,
• Drainage requirements around structures and under floor slabs, as needed,
• Construction considerations,
• Pavement subgrade support guidelines.
0

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
2.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
2.1. Field Exploration
SUMMIT visited the site on February 22nd through 241h and March 22nd of 2023 and performed a
subsurface exploration that consisted of eighteen (18) soil test borings (identified as B-1 through
B-11, SW-12 through SW-14, and C-1 through C-4). Boring B-2 was offset approximately 75 feet
south due to soft soils that were not passable by our drilling rig. An offset boring was performed
(identified as C-4A) due to early auger refusal. The approximate locations of the borings are
shown on the Figure 2 and 2A - "Boring Location Plan" provided in Appendix 1. The borings were
located by professionals from our office using the provided plan, recreation -grade handheld GPS,
existing topography, and aerial maps as reference. Since the boring locations were not surveyed,
the location of the borings should be considered approximate.
The soil test borings were performed using an ATV -mounted CME 550X drill rig and extended to
approximate depths of 2 to 19.2 feet below the existing ground surface. Hollow -stem, continuous
flight auger drilling techniques were used to advance the borings into the ground. Standard
Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed within the mechanical borings at designated intervals in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586. The SPT "N" value represents the number of blows
required to drive a split -barrel sampler 12 inches with a 140-pound hammer falling from a height
of 30 inches. When properly evaluated, the SPT results can be used as an index for estimating
soil strength and density. In conjunction with the penetration testing, representative soil samples
were obtained from each test location and returned to our laboratory for visual classification in
general accordance with ASTM D 2488 Water level measurements were attempted at the
termination of drilling. The results of these tests are presented on the individual boring logs
provided in Appendix 2 at the respective test depth.
3

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
3.0 AREA GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1. Physiography and Area Geology
The subject property is located in High Point, North Carolina, which is located in the south central
Piedmont Physiographic Province. The Piedmont Province generally consists of well-rounded hills
and ridges which are dissected by a well -developed system of draws and streams. The Piedmont
Province is predominantly underlain by metamorphic rock (formed by heat, pressure and/or
chemical action) and igneous rock (formed directly from molten material) which were initially
formed during the Precambrian and Paleozoic eras. The volcanic and sedimentary rocks
deposited in the Piedmont Province during the Precambrian era were the host of the
metamorphism and were generally changed to gneiss and schist. The more recent Paleozoic era
had periods of igneous emplacement, with episodes of regional metamorphism resulting in the
majority of the rock types seen today.
The topographic relief found throughout the Piedmont Province has developed from differential
weathering of theses igneous and metamorphic rock formations. Ridges developed along the
more easily weathered and erodible rock. Because of the continued chemical and physical
weathering, the rocks in the Piedmont Province are generally covered with a mantle of soil that
has weathered in -place from the parent bedrock below. These soils have variable thicknesses
and are referred to as residual soils, as they are the result of in -place weathering. Residual soils
are typically fine-grained and have a higher clay content near the ground surface because of the
advanced weathering. Similarly, residual soils typically become more coarse -grained with
increasing depth because of decreased weathering. As weathering decreases with depth, residual
soils generally retain the overall appearance, texture, gradation and foliations of their parent
rock.
4

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2. Generalized Subsurface Stratigraphy
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
General subsurface conditions observed during our geotechnical exploration are described
herein. For more detailed soil descriptions and stratifications at a particular field test location,
the respective "Boring Logs", provided in Appendix 2 should be reviewed. The horizontal
stratification lines designating the interface between various strata represents approximate
boundaries. Transitions between different strata in the field may be gradual in both the
horizontal and vertical directions. Therefore, subsurface stratigraphy between test locations may
va ry.
3.2.1. Surface Materials
Surficial organic (topsoil) soils were observed at the existing ground surface with
thicknesses ranging from approximately 2 to 4 inches. The surficial organic soil depths
provided in this report and on the individual "Boring Logs" are based on observations of
field personnel and should be considered approximate. Please note that the thickness of
surface materials at the site should be expected to vary, and measurements necessary for
detailed quantity estimation were not performed for this report. For planning purposes,
we suggest considering a topsoil thickness of about 12 inches to account for existing
vegetation and shallow roots.
Surficial Organic Soil is typically a dark -colored soil material containing roots, fibrous
matter, and/or other organic components, and is generally unsuitable for engineering
purposes. SUMMIT has not performed any laboratory testing to determine the organic
content or other horticultural properties of the observed surficial organic soils. Therefore,
the phrase "surficial organic soil" is not intended to indicate suitability for landscaping
and/or other purposes.
5

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2.2. Alluvial Soils
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Alluvial (water -deposited) soils were encountered beneath the surface materials in Boring
C-2 to an approximate depth of 5.5 feet below the existing ground surface. When
sampled, the alluvial soils generally consisted of silty sands (SM). The Standard
Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the alluvial soils ranged from 1 to 2 blows per
foot (bpf).
Alluvial soils are typically encountered in or near drainage features, pond bottoms, creeks
and in low-lying areas. Alluvial soils are generally loose and/or under -compacted and, as
such, are typically unsuitable for supporting the proposed construction. Therefore,
remediation may be required wherever alluvial soils are encountered during grading
activities. The design team may want to consider evaluating the extent of the alluvial soils
prior to or during grading activities. The extent of the alluvial soils should be inspected in
the field by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record or and/or their designee. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required in order
to further explore these soil conditions.
3.2.3. Existing Fill Soils
Existing fill (disturbed) soils were not encountered in the borings performed for this
exploration. Even though fill soils were not encountered during this exploration, there is
a possibility of existing fill soils and deleterious inclusions within the in -place soils existing
on the site. Based on historical aerial photographs and our site observations, previous
grading activities have occurred on the property. As such, the contractor should anticipate
the presence of fill soils, active or abandoned utility lines, and/or construction debris even
though fill soils were not encountered in the borings performed for this exploration.
If fill soils are encountered at other locations in the field during construction, the fill soils
should be inspected by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee, with
respect to the criteria outlined in Section 5.0 of this report.
r

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
3.2.4. Residual Soils
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Residual (undisturbed) soils were encountered below the surface materials and extended
to either the maximum termination depth, partially weathered rock (PWR), or auger
refusal. These residual soils generally consisted of lean clays (CL), firm to very stiff elastic
silts (MH), soft to dense sandy silts (ML), loose clayey sands (SC), and loose to very dense
silty sands (SM). The Standard Penetration Resistances (SPT N-values) in the residual soils
ranged from 4 to greater than 50 bpf.
3.2.5. Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal
Partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings
at approximate depths ranging from 1.5 to 16 feet below the existing ground surface.
PWR is defined as soil -like material exhibiting SPT N-values in excess of 100 bpf. When
sampled, the PWR generally breaks down into silty sands (SM) and sandy silts (ML) with
rock fragments.
Auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings at approximate
depths ranging from 2 to 19.2 feet below the existing ground surface. Auger refusal is
defined as material that could not be penetrated by the drilling equipment used during
our field exploration. Materials that might result in auger refusal include large boulders,
rock ledges, lenses, seams or the top of parent bedrock. Core drilling techniques would
be required to evaluate the character and continuity of the refusal material. However,
rock coring was beyond the scope of this exploration and not performed.
7

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The following table summarizes the approximate depths that PWR and auger refusal
conditions were encountered in the borings performed for this exploration.
Summary Table of Partially Weathered Rock and Auger Refusal Depths
Boring No.
Partially Weathered Rock
Approx. Depth, (feetll
Auger Refusal Approx. Depth,
(feet)'
B-1
5.5
6.1
B-4
12
19.2
B-5
---
6
B-6
8
---
B-10
8
13.7
B-11
12
19
SW-12
10
---
SW-13
16
16.7
SW-14
14
14.2
C-1
---
6
C-2
1.5
5.2
C-3
9
10.5
C-4
1.5
2
'Depths were measured from the existing ground surface at the time drilling was performed.
" --" When PWR or auger refusal conditions were not encountered in the borings.
3.2.6. Groundwater Level Measurements
At the time of drilling, groundwater was not observed in the borings performed during
this exploration. After waiting more than 24-hours, groundwater was observed in Boring
SW-14 at an approximate depth of 6.3 feet below the existing ground surface and
groundwater was not observed in Borings SW-12 and SW-13. However, the moisture
conditions of the soil samples were noted and the cave-in depths within each borehole
were measured at the time of drilling. Both moisture conditions within the soil and caving
soils may be an indication of the presence of groundwater.
8

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
It should be noted that groundwater levels tend to fluctuate with seasonal and climatic
variations, as well as with some types of construction operations. Therefore, water may
be encountered during construction at depths not indicated in the borings performed for
this exploration.

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.0 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1. General
Our preliminary evaluation and recommendations are based on the project information outlined
previously and on the data obtained from the field and laboratory testing program. If the
structural loading, geometry, or proposed building locations are changed or significantly differ
from those outlined, or if conditions are encountered during construction that differ from those
encountered by the borings, SUMMIT requests the opportunity to review our recommendations
based on the new information and make the necessary changes.
Grading plan information with proposed foundation bearing elevations was not available for our
review at the time of this report. Finish grade elevations of proposed construction in conjunction
with the proposed foundation bearing elevation can have a significant effect on design and
construction considerations. SUMMIT should be provided the opportunity to review the project
grading plans prior to their finalization with respect to the recommendations contained in this
report.
4.2. Shallow Foundation Recommendations
Based on the results of the soil test borings, and our assumptions regarding site grading and
assumed structural building loads, the proposed structures can be adequately supported on
shallow foundation systems provided site preparation and compacted fill recommendation
procedures outlined in this report are implemented concerning unsuitable soils such as alluvial
soils and soils with N-values less than 7 bpf. An allowable net bearing pressure of up to 2,500
pounds per square foot (psf) can be used for design of the foundations bearing on approved
undisturbed residual soils, or on approved structural fill compacted to at least 95 percent of its
Standard Proctor maximum dry density. Please refer to section 5.0 of this report for more
information.
Provided the procedures and recommendations outlined in this report are implemented and
H

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
using the assumed loads, we have estimated a total settlement of less than 1 inch for footing
design pressures of 2,500 psf.
To avoid punching type bearing capacity failure, we recommend wall foundation widths of 18
inches or more. Exterior foundations and foundations in unheated areas should be designed to
bear at least 12 inches below finished grade for frost protection. To reduce the effects of seasonal
moisture variations in the soils, for frost protection and for bearing capacity, it is recommended
that all foundations be embedded at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade.
All footing excavations and undercutting remediation operations should be inspected by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record or and/or their designee to confirm that suitable soils are
present at and below the proposed bearing elevation and that the backfill operations are
completed with the recommendations of this report. This evaluation may include hand -auger
and DCP testing. If DCP testing encounters lower penetration resistances than anticipated or
unsuitable materials are observed beneath the footing excavations, these bearing soils should be
corrected per the Geotechnical Engineer-of-Record's recommendations.
Culvert Foundation Recommendations
We understand that a specialty culvert contractor will provide foundation loading and bearing
capacities / engineering services based on the results of this field testing program. Unless
otherwise recommended by your specialty contractor, and provided that the recommendations
in this report are implemented, the soils encountered should be suitable for support of culvert
footings which are designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of up to 6,000 pounds per
square foot (psf) bearing on the shallow auger refusal (SPT blows of 50/0). Other options should
be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Based on the results of our soil test borings (Borings C-1 through C-4) and provided that the
recommendations in this report are implemented, the rock encountered at depths ranging from
5.2 to 8 feet below existing ground surface should be suitable for support of culvert footings
which are designed for a net allowable bearing pressure of up to 6,000 pounds per square foot

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
(psf).
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Any unsuitable soils encountered below proposed bearing elevation should be undercut and
replaced with lean concrete or "flowable fill". Also, since the proposed construction is adjacent
to an existing creek/ low lying area, groundwater control will likely be required priorto and during
construction of the culvert and head walls foundations.
All footing excavations and undercutting remediation operations should be inspected by the
geotechnical engineer or his/her designed representative to confirm that suitable soils are
present at and below the proposed bearing elevation and that the backfill operations are
completed with the recommendations of this report. If evaluation with DCP testing encounters
unsuitable materials in the footing excavations, they should be corrected per the
recommendations of the project geotechnical engineer.
4.3. Retaining Wall Recommendations (if used)
Design Parameters for backfill properties (i.e., friction angle, earth pressure coefficients) should
use the values in the table below. These parameters are based on suitable soils with a minimum
moist unit weight of 120 pcf. SUMMIT should be retained to test the actual soils used for
construction to verify these design assumptions. To reduce long term creep or deflections to the
wall system, desirable wall backfill soils should be used. These include non -plastic, granular soils
(sands and gravels). However, these soils may not be available on site.
Soil Parameters for Wall Backfill
Passive
Allowable
Modulus of
Active Earth
Earth
Coefficient of
Bearing
Friction
Subgrade
Pressure
Pressure
Earth
Capacity
Angle
Reaction
Coefficient
Coefficient
Pressure at
Slide
Backfill Type
(psf)
(deg)
(pci)
Ka
Kp
Rest Ko
Friction
Residuum
2,500
28°
200
0.361
2.77
0.531
0.4
Fill
2,500i
240
150
i
0.421
i
2.37
0.593
i
0.4
Additional Testing is Required to verify these estimated designed parameters.
12

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
Soils classified as elastic silts (MH) and/or fat clays (CH) shall not be used for wall backfill or in the
retained zone as shown in Table 1610.1 of the 2018 IBC. If on -site soils are used as backfill within
the reinforced zone, the wall designer should address the need for wall drainage and the
possibility of long-term, time -dependent movement or creep in their design.
At the time of report preparation, we were not provided retaining wall plans or specifications.
Therefore, we request the opportunity to review the wall plans and specifications once they are
finalized and make any necessary changes to our recommendations. Also, we recommend an
external stability analysis (including global stability) of the proposed wall(s) be conducted once
the site layout and wall geometry is complete.
4.4. Low to Moderate Plasticity Moisture Sensitive Soils (CL and MH)
Low to moderate plasticity and moisture sensitive lean clay (CL) and elastic silt (MH) soils were
encountered in five (5) of the borings performed during this exploration. These fine-grained soils
are susceptible to moisture intrusion and can become soft when exposed to weather and/or
water infiltration. Consequently, some undercutting and/or reworking (drying) of the near -
surface soils may be required depending upon the site management practices and weather
conditions present during construction.
Should these materials be left in -place, special consideration should be given to providing
positive drainage away from the structure and discharging roof drains a minimum of 5 feet from
the foundations to reduce infiltration of surface water to the subgrade materials.
Note: Since Low to Moderate Plasticity and Moisture Sensitive Soils can become remolded (i.e.,
softened) under the weight of repeated construction traffic and changes in moisture conditions,
these soils should be evaluated and closely monitored by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record
or and/or their designee prior to and during fill placement. Additional testing and inspections of
moisture sensitive soils may be warranted such as laboratory testing, field density (compaction)
testing, hand auger borings with dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing and/or test pit
excavations.
13

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.5. Wet Weather Conditions
Contractors should be made aware of the moisture sensitivity of the near soils and potential
compaction difficulties. If construction is undertaken during wet weather conditions, the surficial
soils may become saturated, soft, and unworkable. The contractor can anticipate reworking
and/or recompacting soils may be needed when excessive moisture conditions occur.
Additionally, subgrade stabilization techniques, such as chemical (lime or lime -fly ash) treatment,
may be needed to provide a more weather -resistant working surface during construction.
Therefore, we recommend that consideration be given to construction during the dryer months.
Surface runoff should be drained away from excavations and not allowed to pond. Concrete for
foundations should be placed as soon as practical after the excavation is made. That is, the
exposed foundation soils should not be allowed to become excessively dry or wet before
placement of concrete. Bearing soils exposed to moisture variations may become highly
disturbed resulting in the need for undercutting prior to placement of concrete. If excavations
must remain open overnight, or if rainfall becomes imminent while the bearing soils are exposed,
we recommend that a 2- to 4-inch-thick "mud -mat" of lean (2000 psi) concrete be placed on the
bearing soils before work stops for the night.
SUMMIT recommends that special care be given to providing adequate drainage away from the
building areas to reduce infiltration of surface water to the base course and subgrade materials.
If these materials are allowed to become saturated during the life of the slab section, a strength
reduction of the materials may result causing a reduced life of the section.
14

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.6. Floor Slabs
Slab -on -grade floor systems may be supported on approved residual soils, or newly compacted
fill, provided the site preparation and fill placement procedures outlined in this report are
implemented. Depending upon the amount of cuts and/or fills, unsuitable soils such as areas
which deflect, rut or pump excessively during proof -rolling may require remediation as described
in Section 5.2.
The proposed slab -on -grade floor slab should be designed to withstand the planned dead and live
loads. Based on the use of granular fill material, soils encountered in our borings and our
experience, a modulus of subgrade reaction (k) of 125 pci can be used to design the floor slab
supported on the subgrade soils. A higher modules value may be available once the structural
soils and/or supporting soils has been identified. We recommend a minimum of 4-inch thickness
of crushed stone (NCDOT ABC stone gradation or equivalent) compacted to a minimum of 98
percent of the material's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) be placed as floor
slab base course.
Immediately prior to constructing a floor slab, the areas should be proof -rolled to detect any
softened, loosened or disturbed areas that may have been exposed to wet weather or
construction traffic. Areas that are found to be disturbed or indicate pumping action during the
proof -rolling should be undercut and replaced with adequately compacted structural fill. This
proof -rolling should be observed by a SUMMIT staff professional or a senior soils technician
under his/her direction. Proof -rolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation" section
of this report.
15

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
4.7. Pavements Subgrade Preparation
The pavement sections can be adequately supported on approved non -high plasticity residual
soils, or newly compacted fill, provided the site preparation and fill placement procedures
outlined in this report are implemented. Immediately prior to constructing the pavement section,
we recommend that the areas be proofrolled to detect any softened, loosened or disturbed areas
that may have been exposed to wet weather or construction traffic. Areas that are found to be
disturbed or indicate instability during the proofrolling should be undercut and replaced with
adequately compacted structural fill or repaired as recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer -
of -Record. This proofrolling should be observed by a SUMMIT professional or a senior soils
technician under his/her direction. Proofrolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation"
section of this report.
Due to the presence of near surface low to moderate plasticity lean clays (CL) and elastic silts
(MH), remediation of pavement subgrade soils may be recommended (as determined by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record during construction) including undercutting and replacement
with additional NCDOT ABC stone. Alternatively, lime stabilization of pavement subgrade may be
a more economical option and SUMMIT can provide lime stabilization mix design services if
requested. This may be more pronounced depending on the time of the year and seasonal
conditions at the time of pavement construction. We recommend contingency for some
remediation efforts for the subgrade soils be considered during the planning stage.
4.8. Cut and Fill Slopes
Permanent project slopes should be designed with geometry of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical (3H:1V)
or flatter. The tops and bases of all slopes should be located 10 feet or more from structural limits
and 5 feet or more from parking limits. Fill slopes should be constructed utilizing properly
compacted, structural fill according to the recommendations provided in this report. In addition,
fill slopes should be overbuilt and cut to finished grade during construction to achieve proper
compaction on the slope face. All slopes should be seeded, stabilized and maintained after
16

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
construction and adhere to local, state and federal municipal standards, if applicable.
Immediately prior to constructing the project slopes, the areas should be proof -rolled to detect
any softened, loosened or disturbed areas that may have been exposed to wet weather or
construction traffic. Areas that are found to be disturbed or indicate pumping action during the
proof -rolling should be undercut and replaced with adequately compacted structural fill. This
proof -rolling should be observed by a SUMMIT staff professional or a senior soils technician
under his/her direction. Proof -rolling procedures are outlined in the "Site Preparation" section
of this report.
Structural fill should not be placed on a subgrade with a slope steeper than 5 horizontal to 1
vertical (5H:1V), unless the fill is confined by an opposing slope, such as in a ravine. Otherwise,
where steeper slopes exist, the subgrade should be benched to allow for fill placement on a
horizontal surface.
17

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.0 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.1. Abandoned Utilities/Structures
SUMMIT recommends that any existing utility lines and foundations be removed from within
proposed building and pavement areas. The utility backfill and foundation material should be
removed and the subgrade in the excavations should be inspected by a geotechnical professional
prior to fill placement. The subgrade inspection should consist of visual observations, probing
with a steel rod and/or performing hand auger borings with Dynamic Cone Penetrometer tests
to explore their suitability of receiving structural fill. Once the excavations are inspected and
approved, they should be backfilled with adequately compacted structural fill. Excavation backfill
under proposed new foundations should consist of properly compacted structural fill, crushed
stone, flowable fill or lean concrete as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record.
5.2. Site Preparation
Based on the results of our borings, and dependent on final grades, the contractor can anticipate
that some undercutting and/or foundation extension through soils with N-values less than 7 bpf
may be required prior to building construction and/or fill placement. If these soils are
encountered during the grading activities, the extent of the undercut required should be
determined in the field by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record and/or their designee. Additional
testing such as test pit excavations and/or hand auger borings may be required to further explore
these soil conditions, depths and locations.
Topsoil, organic laden/stained soils, construction debris and other unsuitable materials should
be stripped/removed from the proposed construction limits. Stripping and clearing should
extend 10 feet or more beyond the planned construction limits. Upon completion of the stripping
operations, we recommend areas planned for support of foundations, floor slabs, parking areas,
slope areas and structural fill be proof -rolled with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic tired
vehicle (minimum loaded weight of 20 tons) under the observations of a staff professional. After
18

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
excavation of the site has been completed, the exposed subgrade in cut areas should also be
proof -rolled. The proof -rolling procedures should consist of four complete passes of the exposed
areas, with two of the passes being in a direction perpendicular to the proceeding ones. Any
areas which deflect, rut or pump excessively during proof -rolling or fail to "tighten up" after
successive passes should be undercut to suitable soils and replaced with compacted fill.
The extent of any undercut required should be determined in the field by a SUMMIT staff
professional or engineer while monitoring construction activity. After the proof -rolling operation
has been completed and approved, final site grading should proceed immediately. If construction
progresses during wet weather, the proof -rolling operation should be repeated after any
inclement weather event with at least one pass in each direction immediately prior to placing fill
material or aggregate base course stone. If unstable conditions are experienced during this
operation, then undercutting or reworking of the unstable soils may be required.
5.3. Difficult Excavation
Based on the results of our soil test borings and dependent on final grades, it appears that the
majority of general excavation for footings and utilities will be possible with conventional
excavating techniques. We anticipate that the residual soils can be excavated using pans,
scrapers, backhoes, and front end loaders. Depending on the location, excavations deeper than
approximately 6 to 16 feet may require specialized equipment and procedures.
Partially weathered rock (PWR) conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings and
auger refusal conditions were encountered in eleven (11) of the borings performed for this
exploration. The depth and thickness of partially weathered rock, boulders, and rock lenses or
seams can vary dramatically in short distances and between the boring locations; therefore,
soft/hard weathered rock, boulders or bedrock may be encountered during construction at
locations or depths, between the boring locations, not encountered during this exploration.
19

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
The actual rippability of these in -place materials is however, dependent on many factors such as
the operator's skill level, equipment, and the techniques used during excavation, degree of
weathering within the formation, rock hardness, rock structure (i.e., foliations or bedding),
jointing and fracture spacing and necessary size or width of excavation. Rippability of weathered
rock is typically more difficult in confined excavations.
The table below may be used as a quick reference for rippability of in -place materials.
Summary of Rippability Based on SPT N-Values
N-Values as Shown
Description of N-Values
Anticipated Rippability
on Boring Logs
These materials may generally be excavated
60 > N-Value
N-values less than 60 bpf
with heavy-duty equipment such as a
Caterpillar D-8 with a single -shank ripper
N-values more than 60 bpf,
These materials are considered marginally
60 < N-Value < 50/3"
but less than 50 blows per 3
excavatable, even with heavy-duty
inches of penetration
equipment.
N-values more than 50 blows
Blasting and/or removal with impact
50/3" < N-Value
per 3 inches of penetration
hammers is typically required to excavate
these materials.
*This table is for general information only. Actual rippability is dependent upon many other factors as stated
above.
Care should be exercised during excavations for footings on rock to reduce disturbance to the
foundation elevation. The bottom of each footing should be approximately level. When blasting
is utilized for foundation excavation in rock, charges should be held above design grades. Actual
grades for setting charges should be selected by the contractor and he should be responsible for
any damage caused by the blasting. All loose rock should be carefully cleaned from the bottom
of the excavation prior to pouring concrete. Footing excavations in which the rock subgrade has
been loosened due to blasting should be deepened to an acceptable bearing elevation.
In our professional opinion, a clear and appropriate definition of rock should be included in the
project specifications to reduce the potential for misunderstandings. A sample definition of rock
for excavation specifications is provided below:
20

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
Rock is defined as any material that cannot be dislodged during mass grading by a Caterpillar
D-8 tractor, or equivalent, equipped with a hydraulically operated power ripper without the
use of drilling and blasting. For rock removal in confined excavations (e.g., utility excavations)
marginally excavatable materials (softer PWR 50/3"-50/6") may be accomplished using a
large trackhoe Caterpillar 325, or equivalent with rock teeth without the use of drilling and
blasting. However harder materials (PWR 50/0"-50/3") in confined excavations will not likely
be possible with conventional equipment and typically requires blasting. Boulders or masses
of rock exceeding 'z cubic yard in volume shall also be considered rock excavation. This
classification does not include materials such as loose rock, concrete, or other materials that
can be removed by means other than drilling and blasting, but which for any reason, such as
economic reasons, the Contractor chooses to remove by drilling and blasting.
5.4. Temporary Excavation Stability
Localized areas of soft or unsuitable soils not detected by our borings, or in unexplored areas,
may be encountered once grading operations begin. Vertical cuts in these soils may be unstable
and may present a significant hazard because they can fail without warning. Therefore,
temporary construction slopes greater than 5 feet in height should not be steeper than two
horizontal to one vertical (2H:1V), and excavated material should not be placed within 10 feet of
the crest of any excavated slope. In addition, runoff water should be diverted away from the crest
of the excavated slopes to prevent erosion and sloughing.
Should excavations extend below final grades, shoring and bracing or flattening (laying back) of
the slopes may be required to obtain a safe working environment. Excavation should be sloped
or shored in accordance with local, state and federal regulations, including OSHA (29 CFR Part
1926) excavation trench safety standards.
21

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.5. Structural Fill
Soil to be used as structural fill should be free of organic matter, roots or other deleterious
materials. Structural fill should have a plasticity index (PI) less than 25 and a liquid limit (ILL) less
than 50 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. The structural fill should exhibit
a maximum dry density of at least 90 pounds per cubic foot, as determined by a Standard Proctor
compaction test (ASTM-D 698). Compacted structural fill should consist of materials classified as
either CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW, GC, GM, GP, or GW per ASTM D-2487 or as approved by the
Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. Off -site borrow soil should also meet these same classification
requirements. Non -organic, low -plasticity on -site soils are expected to meet this criterion.
However, successful reuse of the excavated, on -site soils as compacted structural fill will depend
on the moisture content of the soils encountered during excavation. We anticipate that scarifying
and drying of portions of the on -site soils will be required before the recommended compaction
can be achieved. Drying of these soils will likely result in some delay.
All structural fill soils should be placed within the proposed structural pad and extending at least
5 feet beyond the perimeter of the pad and foundation limits. All structural fill soils should be
placed in thin (not greater than 8 inches) loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at/or near optimum moisture
content (±2 percent). The upper 2 feet of structural fill should be compacted to a minimum of
100 percent of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at/or near
optimum moisture content (±2 percent). Some manipulation of the moisture content (such as
wetting, drying) may be required during the filling operation to obtain the required degree of
compaction. The manipulation of the moisture content is highly dependent on weather
conditions and site drainage conditions. Therefore, the grading contractor should be prepared to
both dry and wet the fill materials to obtain the specified compaction during grading. Sufficient
density tests should be performed to confirm the required compaction of the fill material.
22

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.6. Suitability of Excavated Soils for Re -Use
Except for the alluvial soils, the soils encountered in the borings should be suitable to be used as
structural fill material provided the recommendations in this report are implemented. These soils
may be utilized as non-structural fill and backfill at landscaped or non -pavement areas of the
project. We recommend non-structural fill to be compacted to at least 92 percent of the soil's
Standard Proctor Maximum Dry Density to reduce settlement of the fill soils particularly over
utility trenches.
However, if approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record, high plasticity soils encountered
during general site grading can be mixed/blended and/or mixed with lower plasticity soils and
used as structural fill. We recommend that mixed soils be used below the top five (5) feet at
deeper fill locations and adequate drainage be provided away from structural and pavement
areas. The top five (5) feet should consist of materials classified as either CL, ML, SC, SM, SP, SW,
GC, GM, GP or GW per ASTM D-2487 or as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer -of -Record. All
fill soils should be placed in thin (not greater than 8 inches) loose lifts and compacted to a
minimum of 95 percent of the soil's Standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698) at near
optimum moisture content (±2 percent).
We assumed that the limits of the excavation will be stripped of existing pavements, above and
below ground obstructions, stumps, root systems, and organic surface soils (topsoil) and
discarded. The thickness of organic surface soils (topsoil) encountered at soil test boring locations
are indicated on the soil test boring logs included in the Appendix of this report.
23

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
Baker Park March 24, 2023
5.7. Engineering Services During Construction
As previously stated, the engineering recommendations provided in this report are based on the
project information outlined above and the data obtained from field and laboratory tests.
However, unlike other engineering materials like steel and concrete, the extent and properties
of geologic materials (soil) vary significantly. Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical
engineering exploration, there is always a possibility that conditions between borings will be
different from those at the boring locations, that conditions are not as anticipated by the
designers, or that the construction process has altered the subsurface conditions. This report
does not reflect variations that may occur between the boring locations. Therefore, conditions
on the site may vary between the discrete locations observed at the time of our subsurface
exploration.
The nature and extent of variations between the borings may not become evident until
construction is underway. To account for this variability, professional observation, testing and
monitoring of subsurface conditions during construction should be provided as an extension of
our engineering services. These services will help in evaluating the Contractor's conformance
with the plans and specifications. Because of our unique position to understand the intent of the
geotechnical engineering recommendations, retaining us for these services will also allow us to
provide consistent service through the project construction. Geotechnical engineering
construction observations should be performed under the supervision of the Geotechnical
Engineer -of -Record from our office who is familiar with the intent of the recommendations
presented herein. This observation is recommended to evaluate whether the conditions
anticipated in the design actually exist or whether the recommendations presented herein
should be modified where necessary. Observation and testing of compacted structural fill and
backfill should also be provided by our firm.
24

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
6.0 RELIANCE AND QUALIFICATIONS OF REPORT
This geotechnical subsurface exploration has been provided for the sole use of Bowman
Development Group. This geotechnical subsurface exploration should not be relied upon by other
parties without the express written consent of SUMMIT and Bowman Development Group.
The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report were based, in part, on data
obtained from this exploration. If the above -described project conditions are incorrect or
changed after the issuing of this report, or subsurface conditions encountered during
construction are different from those reported, SUMMIT should be notified and these
recommendations should be re-evaluated based on the changed conditions to make appropriate
revisions. We have prepared this report according to generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the professional advice
included in this report.
25

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
APPENDIX 1— Figures

Tyr
olutions'
Aae's Catering VtiLs
SpringfieldS
ITE
Bacti t Church
4? David s wl-:_ -sale
E Springfield Rd
Allen Jay Park
Rockford Furniture
Furniture start
19
Figure 1
Site Location Plan
Allen Jay
Recreation Center
F-i
Bowie's Outdoor
Services, LLC
1?
E S'ori►aq f�erd
Baker Park
Baker Road & 1-74
High Point, North Carolina
a�
SUMRMIT
SCALE: NTS
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
3575 Centre Circle
Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
[phone]

f
{ ,
- B-SVV-14
�= r
r
I
`ice I' �__
ED
Figure 2 Baker Park
Boring Location Plan Baker Road & 1-74 SUMMIT
High Point, North Carolina c�mm �„ . n .T�r
Approx. Soil Test Boring Location
3575 Centre Circle
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429 Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
SCALE: NTS ro J [phone]

N.
N.
Ni
\
\ N.
f
°moo \ \�\\��\\ �' ��\�\\��\ N.k
1 1►\ 1 1 } I } 4 yl 1 1 0` Q�Q \ i,`�\\
I I y l 11 I}I;1;/ JII \1}} \ 1 \ 0 1 1`\�\•E,�v/ •� may• J'
�V
`I1 9� \ } �\\1 y yl 141 r
� � ` 1 ���' � � � ` •C� \a � ` � � ♦�-'� � � - L� ` 1
\ 1 y �
176 1 \
i�-�
T4-I �`,
q19
°t\yr�\
\tiI I#\\ \\\ 1�1 )Ill
I11`
9
Ind \ �} �J 1 41 11 4 \�\ \ 1 l 11�1 ` 1 I / � • . \ '9" � � ��~
�I! }I e-2 \
17/2
ll
1>' b
I+
V I / RQ`
Irill�,;��,/ I I 1 \\ 1\ \
- r 1 rl1 \\ 1\1 1
� _
\�
Figure 2A Baker Park Culvert Borings
Boring Location Plan Baker Road & 1-74
Approx. Soil Test Boring Location High Point, North Carolina SUMMIT
3575 Centre Circle
SUMMIT Project No.: 2686.G0429 Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715
SCALE: NTS ro J (803) s04-17oa-1717

Report of Geotechnical Subsurface Exploration
Baker Park
SUMMIT Project No. 2686.G0429.R1
March 24, 2023
SUMMIT
ENGINEERING • LABORATORY • TESTING
A Universal Engineering Sciences Company
APPENDIX 2 — Boring Logs

SUMMIT ENGINEERING KEY TO SYMBOLS
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
'ANK FORT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
CPAYNECSUMMIT-COMPANIES.COM
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
LITHOLOGIC SYMBOLS
SAMPLER SYMBOLS
(Unified Soil Classification System)
Standard Penetration Test
ALLUVIAL
F]
TAUGER: Auger Probe
F-1 BLANK
® CL: USCS Low Plasticity Clay
® MH: USCS Elastic Silt
MLS: USCS Sandy Silt
SC: USCS Clayey Sand
WELL CONSTRUCTION SYMBOLS
Ell SM: USCS Silty Sand
1
.T,;. TOPSOIL: Topsoil
PWR: Partially Weathered Rock
ABBREVIATIONS
LL -LIQUID LIMIT (%) TV -TORVANE
PI - PLASTIC INDEX (%) PID - PHOTOIONIZATION DETECTOR
W - MOISTURE CONTENT (%) UC -UNCONFINED COMPRESSION
DD - DRY DENSITY (PCF) ppm - PARTS PER MILLION
NP - NON PLASTIC Water Level at Time
-200 - PERCENT PASSING NO. 200 SIEVE Drilling, or as Shown
PP - POCKET PENETROMETER (TSF) Water Level at End of
1
Drilling, or as Shown
Water Level After 24
Hours, or as Shown

u
z w
3 ,
z
w z
w
u 0
K, 00 yp
U) m IL r,
2
O
44,
00
to
.. .. ... .. .. ...
.
R
F9
(4) UO!IeAG13

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER B-1
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715
PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 4.7' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
w
o
A SPT N VALUE A
0
U
W
}
U) w
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
I.- —
IL O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
w
W M
W^
j C1
��
0 Z Q
w
� J
O-
m O Z
0 20 40 60 80 100
(L z
w
Q
w
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Loose Moist Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
2-2-4
1
(6)
2.5
. .. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
....... ;........ ;..........................
SPT
4-6-6
2
(12)
4.7ft -
5.0
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Olive
Brown and Gray Silty SAND with Rock Fragments
».
50
Bottom of Boring at 6.1 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
3
5011.
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-2
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 7.3' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- —
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Moist Brown and Gray Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with Organics
No Sample Recovered
SPT
3-3-4
............................................
1
(7)
2.5
..................................:........
(ML) Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
SPT
4-4-7
.... ... :........ :........ :........ :........
2
(11)
5.0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT
........:........:..........................
SPT
6-7-11
....... ......... :........ :........ :........
3
(18)
7.5
7.3ft
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT with
........ ........ ;........ ;........ ;........
Manganese Stains
SPT
10-9-12
4
(21)
i o.o
Bottom of Boring at 10 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-J
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 6.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
_
Q $
>
w
U
a 0
Q J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
a- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H-
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
`
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
........................................
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Very Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
5-6-10
............................................
1
(16)
2.5
...........................................
SPT
6-10-13
2
(23)
5.0
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
4-3-7
6.9ft -
3
(10)
............................................
7.5
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
....... ;........ ;........ ;........ ;....... .
SPT
3-3-4
4
(7)
10.0
Bottom of Boring at 10 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-4
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.130429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 11.8' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- —
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SC) RESIDUUM:
Loose Moist Light Brown Micaceous Clayey SAND
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
........ :........:........:........ :........
(SM) Loose Moist Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty
SAND
SPT3-4-5
....... :........ :..........................
2
(9)
5.0
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and Brown Micaceous Silty
SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
5-7-10
3
(17)
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Brown and Brown Micaceous
Silty SAND
SPIT
6-8-10
4
(18)
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Light
Brown and Gray Silty SAND
>>
SPT
50
5
50/4„
........
»
........:........:........:................
SPT
6
20-50
50/2"
Bottom of Boring at 19.2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
20.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-5
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 2.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
_
Q $
>
w
U
a 0
Q J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
o- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H-
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Firm Moist Light Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
2.5
2.9ft -
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
....... ;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
(ML) Firm Moist Light Brown, Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
Sandy SILT
SPT
2-3-4
2
(7)
5.0
Bottom of Boring at 6 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-V
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 7.3' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- —
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of Topsoil
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Dense Light Brown and White Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with
Rock Fragments
SPT
31-25-16
............................................
T.
1
(41)
2.5
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(SM) Very Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
........ ............ .............:........
SPT
17-32-25
2
(57)
5.0
(SM) Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
14-21-27
3
(48)
7.5
..
7.3ft
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Brown
and Light Brown Silty SAND
SPT
r4
17-29-50
(50/4' )
»
o.o
Bottom of Boring at 9.8 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-/
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth C� 10.4' bgs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
_
Q $ a 0
> Q J
w
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
o- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H-
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
........ :........ :........
Stiff Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
3-5-9
1
(14)
2.5
SPT
2-4-6
2
(1 0)
........
........ ........ ........ ........
5.0
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown and Light Brown Sandy SILT
SPT
4-5-6
...........................................
7.5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Light Brown Sandy SILT with
...
...... ...... ...... ......
.... ,........ ,........ ,.................
Manganese Stains
.......................................
SPT
3-4-4
4
(8)
..
10.0
10.4ft
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy SILT with
.......
;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
12.5
Manganese Stains
'
:........ :........ :........ :........
�....'
SPT
3-2-4
5
(6)
......
...... ...... ...... ......
15.0
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-8
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 9.7' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
_
Q $ a 0
> Q J
w
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
o- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H—
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
........ :........ :........
Firm Reddish Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
2-3-4
1
(7)
2.5
.......:........:........:........:........
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown and Light Brown Slightly Clayey Sandy
:..
SILT
...........................................
SPT
3-3-3
2
(6)
.. ...... ...... ...... ......
5.0
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
.......;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
SPT
4-7-10
3
(17)
...........................................
7.5
..... ...... ...... ...... ......
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and White Silty SAND
SPT
8-10-10
........ ........ :........ :........ :........
4
(20)
o.o
9.7ft -
(ML) Stiff Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Sandy SILT with
2.5
Manganese Stains
SPT
4-5 6
:..
5
11
( )
15.0
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-9
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/23/23 COMPLETED 2/23/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 10' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p U
_
Q $ a 0
> Q J
w
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
o- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H-
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) Reddish Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Soft Reddish Brown and Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey
Sandy SILT
SPT
1
2-2-2
(4)
....................................
2.5
.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(ML) Firm Reddish Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
................................:........
:.
Sandy SILT
SPT
2-3-4
2
(7)
.. ...... ...... ...... ......
5.0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(ML) Stiff Reddish Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Slightly Clayey
........;........;........;........;........
:.
Sandy SILT
SPT5-5-8
......... ......... ......... :........
3
(13)
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
7.5
.... ...... ...... ...... ......
_
(ML) Very Stiff Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Sandy SILT
...........................................
SPT
10-12-15
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
4
(27)
........:.......:........:........:........
10.0 .• ••
10ft
(SM) Medium Dense Brown, Light Brown, and Gray Silty SAND
12.5
:.
SPT
16-10-11
• ;:
5
(21)
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
15.0 :.
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER B-10
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�
� FoRT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE l OF
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
awe. �m [e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 9.3' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
W
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p U
W
>-
U) w
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
_
Q $ a 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
H W
-i g
W ^
>
H—
0 Q
> Q J
o- �
O �
m 0 >
0 20 40 60 80 100
w
z
0
U z
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
.
...........................................
........ .. ..... ........ ........ ........
........ :........ ..... .......... :........
........ :........ :........:........ :.......
>>
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Medium Dense Light Brown and Gray Silty SAND
SPT
1
8-11-15
(26)
(ML) Very Stiff Light Brown and Gray Sandy SILT
----------------------------
(ML) Hard Gray Sandy SILT
SPT
7-11-13
(24)
:•..
SPT
3
20-21-28
(49)
(ML) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Gray
and Brown Sandy SILT with Manganese Stains
9.3ft -
SPT
4
12-21-50
(50/4")
Bottom of Boring at 13.7 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
SPT I --I 50
5 (50/�

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER B-11
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 13' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- —
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of TOPSOIL
(CL) RESIDUUM:
Light Brown Sandy LEAN CLAY
(SC) Loose Light Brown Micaceous Clayey SAND
SPT
3-3-4
1
(7)
.... ... :........:........:........ :........
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty
SAND
SPT5-6-8
....... :.................................. .
2
(14)
5.0
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown and Gray Micaceous Silty
SAND
SPT
5-7-13
3
(20)
(SM) Medium Dense Light Brown, Gray, and White Micaceous
Silty SAND
SPT
9-19-25
4
(44)
...................................:........
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Light
Brown, Gray, and White Micaceous Silty SAND
13ft -
...... ...... ...... ..
>>
SPT
50
5
50/5„
Bottom of Boring at 19 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
20.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER C-1
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 2.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne AT END OF DRILLING ---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- -
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(MH) RESIDUUM:
Stiff Moist Dark Brown and Brown Sandy Elastic SILT
SPT
3-5-5
1
(10)
2.5
NINE
2.9ft -
(SM) Medium Dense Brown and White Silty SAND with
Manganese Stains and Rock Fragments
SPT
3-7-21
2
(28)
5.0
No Sample Recovery
Bottom of Boring at 6 feet bgs, Auger Refusal SPT 50
3 (50/0")
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-2
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715
PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (aD_ 2.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
0
I.- -
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SC) RESIDUUM:
Moist Gray and Olive Brown Clayey SAND with Organics
SPT
1
13-50
(50/3")
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray and Olive Brown Slightly Clayey Silty SAND with
Manganese Stains and Rock Fragments
,z
2.5
- -
...... ...... ...... ...... ......
2.9ft -
,?
».
Tj SPT
2
50
50/3"
...... ...... ......
Bottom of Boring at 5.2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
7.5

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-J
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�
� FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
PAGE l OF
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth (a)_ 4.9' bqs
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
p
_
Q $
>
w
U
a 0
Q J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
H W
-i g
o- �
z
o
>-
W ^
>
O �
0
U) w
H-
0 Q
m 0 >
U z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
"
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
(SM) ALLUVIUM:
Very Loose Wet Gray Silty SAND
........:........:........:........:........
SPT
1
0-0-1
(1)
2.5
SPT
0-1-1
l
2
(2)
5.0
4.9ft -
(ML) RESIDUUM:
Very Hard Gray Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
........:........:.......:........:........
SPT
12-22-38
3
(60)
7.5
........:........:........:.......
SPT
4
16-50
(5013")
=•,
(ML) Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
Bottom of Boring at 10.5 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
1 2.5
15.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-4
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715
PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504.1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
--- GW NE ATD / Caved in Depth NE
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
W
o
A SPT N VALUE A
0
U
W
}
U) w
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
I.- -
IL O
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
HW
W M
W^
W C1
H�
0 Z Q
W
� J
O-
m O Z
0 20 40 60 80 100
(L z
W
Q
W
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 4" of TOPSOIL
••\A •�i.
'
(SM) RESIDUUM: Moist Brown Silty SAND
0
...................................
SPT
9-50
1
(50/1 ")
>>
Partially Weathered Rock (PWR) when sampled becomes
Gray and White Silty SAND with Rock Fragments
2.0
Bottom of Boring at 2 feet bgs, Auger Refusal
3.0
4.0
5.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING
BORING NUMBER C-4/'"'►
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�
� FoRT MILL, SC 29715
PAGE l OF
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group
PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429
PROJECT LOCATION High
Point, North
Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23
GROUND ELEVATION
HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT
GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger
AT TIME OF DRILLING
---
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY C. Payne
AT END OF DRILLING
---
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location
AFTER DRILLING ---
W
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p
U
W
>-
U) w
0 20 40 60 80
100
P1MC ��L
_
Q $
a 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
H W
-i g
W ^
>
H-
0 Q
>
Q J
o- �
O �
m 0 >
0 20 40 60 80
100
w
z
0
U z
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80
100
Auger Probe
1.0
2.0
3.0
Bottom of Boring at 3 feet bgs, Auger Refusal, Offset 5' West
4.0
5.0

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-12
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
�PAGE l OF � FoRT MILL, SC 29715
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/22/23 COMPLETED 2/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING --- GW NE >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 'Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
W
o
A SPT N VALUE A
p U
W
>-
U) w
0 20 40 60 80 100
P1MC ��L
_
Q $ a 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
H W
-i g
W ^
>
H-
0 Q
> Q J
o- �
O �
m 0 >
0 20 40 60 80 100
w
z
0
U z
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 3" of TOPSOIL
(SM) Loose Moist Brownish Yellow (10YR, 6/8) Slightly Clayey
Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
1-2-3-3
.............. ...... ...... ......
1
(5)
(ML) Firm Moist Yellow (10YR, 7/8) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1)
2.5
Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT
SPT
2-4-3-3
.................:........
2
(7)
(SM) Loose Moist Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
with Manganese Stains
5.0
SPT
3-3-6-6
3
(9)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Gray (10YR, 6/1), White (7.5YR,
........ ;........ ;........ ;........ ;........
9.5/1), and Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Silty SAND with Manganese
Stains
SPT
5-9-11-16
4
(20)
7.5 '
— — — — — — o — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Dense Moist Gray (10YR, 6/1), White (7.5YR, 9.5/1), and
........,........,........,........,........
Yellow (10YR, 7/8) Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
8-15-16-19
5
(31)
10.O .'
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Moist
Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1) Slighty Clayey
SPT
19-37-50
Silty SAND
6
(50/3")
»
(SM) Dense Moist Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White (7.5YR,
2.5
9.5/1) Slighty Clayey Silty SAND
:.
..........................................
SP
113)22
...... ...... ...... ...... ......
Bottom of Boring at 15 feet bgs, Boring Terminated

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-13
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 2/24/23 COMPLETED 2/24/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY N. Sacks AT END OF DRILLING --- GW NE >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
I.- —
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
>-
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 3" of TOPSOIL
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Loose Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
1
2-2-3-4
(5)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Medium Dense Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Pale
........ ;........ :........ :.................
Brown (2.5Y, 8/4) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
3-5-6-7
2
(11)
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Loose Moist Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Pale Brown
........ ;........ :..........................
(2.5Y, 8/4) Silty SAND
5.0
SPT
3
2-4-6-10
(10)
......:...................................
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6), Pale
.......,...................................
Brown (2.5Y, 8/4), and Dark Brown (10YR, 3/3) Silty SAND
SPT
6-9-12-13
4
(21)
----------------------------
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Pale Brown (2.5Y, 8/4), White (7.5YR,
........ ........ :........ :........ :........
9.5/1), and Dark Brown (10YR, 3/3) Silty SAND with Manganese
Stains
SPT
7-9-9-11
5
(18)
o.o
----------------------------
(SM) Medium Dense Moist Pale Brown (10YR, 6/3) and White
(7.5YR, 9.5/1) Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
6-7-9-15
....................................
6
(16)
......
3-6-10-13
SPT
7
(16)
----------------------------
(SM) Dense Moist Light Gray (10YR, 7/1) and White (7.5YR, 7/1)
Silty SAND
SPT
8
6-17-16-35
(33)
.................................
»
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock When Sampled Becomes Moist
Light Gray (10YR, 7/1) and White (7.5YR, 9.5/1) Silty SAND
SPT
9
20-50
50/2"
Bottom of Boring at 16.7 feet bgs, Auger Refusal

SUMMIT ENGINEERING BORING NUMBER SW-14
3575 CENTRE CIRCLE
Foxr MILL, SC 29715 PAGE l �F l
SUMMIT 704-504,1717
[e-mail]
CLIENT Bowman Development Group PROJECT NAME Baker Park
PROJECT NUMBER 2686.G0429 PROJECT LOCATION High Point, North Carolina
DATE STARTED 3/22/23 COMPLETED 3/22/23 GROUND ELEVATION HOLE SIZE 6 inches
DRILLING CONTRACTOR SUMMIT GROUND WATER/CAVE-IN:
DRILLING METHOD Hollow Stem Auger AT TIME OF DRILLING --- GW NE ATD
LOGGED BY J. Davis CHECKED BY Z. RODRIGUEZ TAT END OF DRILLING 6.30 ft GW 6.3 >24 hrs
NOTES See Figure 2 "Boring Location Plan" for Approx. Boring Location AFTER DRILLING ---
p
_
Q
W
W
U
IL O
� J
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
W
W
HW
W M
(L z
Q
o
}
W^
W C1
O-
W
U) w
H�
0 Z Q
m O Z
A SPT N VALUE A
0 20 40 60 80 100
'� MC '
0 20 40 60 80 100
El FINES CONTENT (%) ❑
0 20 40 60 80 100
Approx. 2" of Topsoil
(SM) RESIDUUM:
Medium Dense Moist Brown (10YR, 5/3) Yellow (10YR, 7/6), and
White (10YR, 8/1) Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
1
8-3-4-7
7
2.5
�:, ., •.::
SPT
11-7-5-6
(ML) Stiff Moist Brownish Yellow (10YR, 6/6) and Yellowish
2
(12)
Brown (10YR, 5/6) Slightly Clayey Sandy SILT with Manganese
........ :........ :........ :........ :........
Stains
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
(ML) Stiff Light Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) and Brownish Yellow
.... ..................... :........ :........
(10YR, 6/8) Micaceous Sandy SILT
5.o
SPT
3
4-5-6-6
(11)
.......:...................................
6.3ft -
SPT
5-5-7-9
(SM) Medium Dense Light Yellowish Brown (2.5, 5/6) and Very
4
(12)
7.5
Pale Brown (10YR, 8/2) Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
----------------------------
(SM) Dense Light Yellowish Brown (2.5, 5/6) and Very Pale
................. ,........ ,.................
Brown (10YR, 8/2) Micaceous Slightly Clayey Silty SAND
SPT
8-12-18-18
5
(30)
10.0
:.
----------------------------
(SM) Dense Very Pale Brown (10YR, 8/4), Brown (10YR,4/3), and
White (2.5Y, 8/1) Micaceous Silty SAND with Manganese Stains
SPT
8-11-16-12
........... .... :........ :.................
6
(27)
12.5
:�.:::`:
SPT
7
........ :........ :........ :........ ....>.>
12-22-50
(50/1 ")
................. :........ :........ :........
„
(SM) Partially Weathered Rock when sampled becomes Light
SPT
50
Olive Brown (2.5Y, 5/6) Silty SAND
8
50/2"
........................... ........ : ........
Bottom of Boring Terminated at 14.2' bgs
5.o

LEGEND
573 MINOR CONTOURS
AVEN
UE 575 MAJOR CONTOURS
SUMMEY
LIC RIW) � DROP INLET
a SLAB TOP INLET
CURB INLET
STREAM CENTERLINE (TYP.) 88 DOUBLE CURB INLET
o I STORM PIPE
O0 STORM MANHOLE
O
C311111 FLARED END SECTION
8 w 8" WATER LINE
\ \
snN� SEWER MAIN
WETLAND IMPACT 1
(SEE SHEET 2 AND 3) I ,II 2 III It01,
/
\ \ \ O SEWER MANHOLE
o
oo ON \\ TOWNSEND AVENUE
\ o\ % ` STREAM CROSSING
T / �� - _ \LU - \ - 1 ♦\\ 1 c (SEE SHEETS 4 AND 5)
Z
,vs \ III 6 I r 0 \
Aso, pUO AVFN 4 1 I
\ ev�RwF`\
\
4
� � — � I � �- :��•. �' � — � � I I I III �� \ /�' 2 � �� �\�
0
.. I
0 \ ...
158 15 1 0 161 I I
.ab I I I I 2 31 .41651661 — /� $ / 6 •
WETLAND (TYP.) ° o 169 I %0 9�
WETLAND IMPACT 2 o ,° 0
(SEE SHEET 4)
\ � \\ SCM #1 SCM #2
o 0
W o 0-0v 0 0
0 0 0
\ \ - --- ----- - ° _
`o 0 0 0 \ o 0o
STREAM AND WETLAND IMPACTS - OVERALL SCALE1"=200' �.••0 a
0 BAKER PARK -August 25, 2023 200' 400' TIMMONS GROUP'
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 - Wetland & Stream Impact\53502C- Wetland & Stream Imp Overall.dwg I Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:14 PM I by Christian Kennedy

LEGEND
'
—
MINOR CONTOURS
i
—
MAJOR CONTOURS
/1
II]
DROP INLET
L
0
SLAB TOP INLET
I -
a
CURB INLET
❑❑
DOUBLE CURB INLET
®
STORM PIPE
/
QQ
STORM MANHOLE
PAD ELEVATION
/
0
FLARED END SECTION
OUTLET CONTROL /
STRUCTURE
V
1 \ \ 1 PROISOSEDi
CIMITS_Or 7,020-Sr
fURBPcNCE- /
co
PI(OPOSE 933tSF
/ (b.0 4 AP) 9F
/ WEVLAN MPP(CT �3?-
/(WE Ay IWU) 1
/ I 1
/ 1
/ D NA E/
/ REA� 0(
ASS PIP9:
/ .44 4C, -
/20' PIA�TECTEB-
/ DRI INAGE /
/ EASEMENT -
1
:.0
60
�
855
g41
850
46 A 196L/ (� �
6 /RIP
I �BGFF.ER/ 845
-r�0'JZONEl2
t ��—RIP/ARA 1N'
BUFTE
/
i
835
E)41STING-STRE-AM-
Z CENPERLINE_
PROPUS€D53 L1=01F_�
S AM T6AI=A6J,(O.�OO�AC)_
� EdMBF�-
— 636 -
PROPOSED GRADE
EXISTING
GRADE
18 IN
H RCP
EXTENTS OF WETLAND
cy00
cow
�N
860 855
855 850
850 845
845 840
840 835
835 830
-0+50 0+00 1 +00 1 +50
WETLAND IMPACT 1 CROSS-SECTION A -A
rn
E S EET 19 00
\ FO PIPE �920 SF
I. D GN - '
��-o
7,020 SFco
�
\ co\ 7,0�0 SF � \
TOTAL WETLAND IMPACT 0.044 AC
TOTAL STREAM IMPACT 53.353 LF (0.005 AC)
V
25
r24 1 7,942 0
11,373 SF 0 60
i PROFILE SCALE
STREAM AND WETLAND IMPACT-1
BAKER PARK SUBDIVISION -August 25, 2023
IR00
-3cP1,QN1t_,1 840
A LID,
I co
0
PROPOSED GRADE
EXISTING GRADE
18 INCH RC
STREAM CENTERLINE
p
rn �
rn �
rn
855
850
845
840
835
830
-0+50 0+00 1+00 2+00
STREAM IMPACT 1GROSS-SECTION B-B
SCALE 1 "=60' f 0 * 0�
f �'
0 60' 120' TIMMONS GROUP'
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 -Wetland &Stream Impact\53502C-Wetland &Stream Imp.dwg Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:23 PM I by Christian Kennedy

IMPACT-1
i
t841
846 —
23 r�--
7,118SF
/ 22 / / 1 /r — — 338
TO
SF
/ a00y/
CID
S W U',
/7,020 SF r — — — — -
0b 00
E3
/ t,
/ QRAI E wiz Q
AREA T j1: I 1 _ � E5-
00
/ / E1 d 920SF
/ l tr
/ p
F co
25
7,020 S
/ I — /� r- � a4 1 7,942
Z 11,373 SF
/ J f
7 SF
CID
m /
�� i17�1\�
IMPACT-1 BYPASS PIPE DESIGN
BAKER PARK SUBDIVISION - August 25, 2023
855
850
845
840
835
830
0 60
PROFILE SCALE
W
�
cV W
W
W oD
�00
Cp�M t`>
N�� 4
O� I— 00
� H
C) N 00
C:
Z 0
N 00
Q a
�0> >
Q�� � W
MHO
0 cnHZ Z
W(nFz z N
N�j
N�j
C1000
��0�
wrn�?
PROPOSED
PROPOSED
RETAINING
GRADE
WALL
DESIGNED
8" SSWR
BY OTHERS
3.41'
E2
6 OF
2.24' 22.58' OF
1\3
, �GP
15" RCP
1
3ejo
@ 1.00%
E6
15 inch RCP
80.65' OF
EXISTING
15" RCP
GRADE
@ 4.00%
L
rn
~
-t
M
L6
e0
0
�
0
CD
0
00
-0+50 0+00 1+00 2+00
STORM E
855
850
845
840
835
830
3+00
SCALE 1"=60' f *0
f'
0 60' 120' TIMMONS GROUP'
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 - Wetland & Stream Impact\53502C-Wetland & Stream Imp.dwg I Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:23 PM I by Christian Kennedy

IMPACT-2
(0.42,
WETIAND
(WETLAND
/ _ o PR49bStD I
oti -LIMIT6 OF i
I
ISTUI�Brk\N-
�/� \ 1A0A1 0 TR2 ANF61
/ \-CEWF-KL'll
I J/
I FLO�ODPL>4� LYNL \ \ \ b \ \ �\ \ \ \ �\ \ 1 )`!\\ W `�
\\! of�� \
TOTAL WETLAND IMPACT 0.424 AC
WETLAND IMPACT-2
BAKER PARK SUBDIVISION - August 25, 2023
830
825
\� 820
71, 815
1
\ \ 810
�,7,0
PROPOSED
GRADE
A J�
24 INCH RCP
PROPOSED
8" WM
PROPOSED 8" SSWR
EXISTING
EXTENTS OF
GRADE
WETLAND
c,r-
co(Z)
�LO
�0
�00
830
825
820
815
810
-0+50 0+00 1+00 2+00
WETLAND IMPACT 2 CROSS-SECTION C-C
1 Cr1CAll1
— —
MINOR CONTOURS
MAJOR CONTOURS
—
❑❑
DROP INLET
®
SLAB TOP INLET
❑O
CURB INLET
0o
DOUBLE CURB INLET
®
STORM PIPE
oQ
STORM MANHOLE
PAD ELEVATION
0
FLARED END SECTION
®
OUTLET CONTROL
STRUCTURE
X
0 60
PROFILE SCALE
SCALE 1 "=60' a 0
0 60' 120' TIMMONS GROUP
6 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 - Wetland & Stream Impact\53502C-Wetland & Stream Imp.dwg I Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:10 PM I by Christian Kennedy

810
810
PROPOSED
RETAINING
PROPOSED
GRADE
WALL
DESIGNED BY
OTHERS
805
805
PROPOSED
6.75'
RETAINING
7.9
WALL
PROPOSED 8"
DESIGNED
WATERLINE
BY OTHERS
800
800
PROPOSED
8" SSWR
6.22'
3.96'
795
795
R.O.W.
�
r �
O.W.
790
790
EXISTING
1:1
GRADE
INV:
789.40
BURY
DEPTH 2.0'
785
785
INV: 783.15
BURY
DEPTH 2.0'
780
780
O
O
M
O
N
—0+50 0+00
1+00
2+00
ARCH PROFILE
6
0
0 60
PROFILE SCALE
TOWNSEND AVENUE STREAM CROSSING
BAKER PARK SUBDIVISION - August 25, 2023
O
0.g14_�,C�R�S
I \ ��80 IRECT IMP,ACT\� �
o w
07 lu,�
i
.• •' . ,A
�n /I"
oil
l
•
Im
�� ♦ .1 �� D
• -, VIA i
TOWNSEND AVENUE STREAMR• 61
SCALE 1 "=60' 00*0000 •0
0 60' 120' TIMMONS GROUP'
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 - Wetland & Stream Impact\53502C-Wetland & Stream Imp.dwg I Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:09 PM I by Christian Kennedy

FLOW
COB.. ........ Rm
©© O O O O O
O O O O O O© O©
O O
CRt -55 PCS. a 201.75• LG.
ttPE VI LROWN �t3"
LDLATE WRERE GRDwN
J
�/UZ3
1111 1111 �I(�//
/
I2�TMKr:'
:: �15�% i
O O O O O O O
O O O O O
O O O O
O 0 0<
''/�
CORNERS PNNIFD RF°
'II I(CJA1`O`�\`
UP(I}")
BOTTOM CEMERUNE IFNGTN - a+•
OVERALL LDVGiN - 81'�T-
DEVELOPED PLAN --- OUTSIDE VIEW
mr°r Rae°eLEvnn°u-eoes,a
GENERAL NOTES:
SEWER
>a:'�"r• eat ea. abs.. nr.. w ,a 2sw ;sn a.m�y. ssen.�m
2�.
ti
a"�
1.
Ne
g.
.°NaR°� RNPU]E
1filN�t ::I d
L
1-V=E NNE ,5,.
asp
N° °FRa°.]I�ISN "
INET ouncr THE snN�cluaE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH
a..,,,anc.o�°
-P6N7 OTIbfA Nd.
E 36N
slaw so so - 23'-0"—
sP.w-
aw:R.o
7'-6'
R�tNw
ao
°w.an xa
° ° •_p"
745004-010-ALSP-CON-A
C NTECH
w� �u,r rwu
i II!•!
ALUMINUM
STRUCTURAL PLATE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH
'
oio 3282023
xYHJEM
....��•..-r���+.>••.".
►
ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC
aSi rY�
STRUCTURAL PLATE
ALSP SRA 23'-0" SPAN X 7'-6"
RISE
K
^ °
"_
www.c—hES.—
,w ie�M1 On Mwaer, Icvap3Bf
BAKER PARK
CONTRACT
O
HIGH POINT, NC
&1/2023
REV FOUNDATION 55!EB REINFORCING
FLS
]� Bve.WB58]4C�8 SFN(
3
DATE
REVISION DESCRIPTION
BY
ARCH DETAIL (SEE SHEET C-709 FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS)
NTS
TOWNSEND AVENUE STREAM CROSSING
BAKER PARK SUBDIVISION - August 25, 2023
815 815
810 PROPOSED GRADE 810
805 805
PROPOSED
800 800
795 795
BUFFER
790 790
785 785
780 780
33+50 34+00 35+00 36+00 36+50
TOWNSEND AVENUE STREAM CROSSING - PROFILE
8"
WATER
MAIN
0 60
PROFILE SCALE
TIMMONS GROUP
YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS.
S:\104\53502-Baker Road Residential (Bowman)\DWG\Sheet\Exhibit\2023\04.14 - Wetland & Stream Impact\53502C-Wetland & Stream Imp.dwg I Plotted on 8/25/2023 3:05 PM I by Christian Kennedy

ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE
I -I/
NEUTRAL AXIS
n.ae,�s
—1-
9' PITCH
CORRUGATION PROFILE
INLET OUTLET TYPE STRUCTURE SINGLE RADIUS
SIZE 36N
SXEW 90 90 SPAN — 23'-0"
BEVEL 0 0 RISE - 7'-6"
LENGTH O CL 81'- 0'•
TN tlesign antl inlormalion shown on this tlrawing is prowtletl
c. tote. pm,e<I unn.i. •nµnr,r ,lnY c•nitActer tar
Cv�ata=n F;npin.er.,l SeWq.s LIC Inaan4w'i NiAn.t pu.
arn..�e, w, var vort umed..-+.y oe 1•.eu r.nvo..m or
CensNnyee" inany ma nner comwitdo IM1e al thpoorwtl consentof
Facture to piy i, s Done e user's own risk a
Conl.ch e.pressly tlisclaims any IiebiM1ty or responsibil,ly to,
n .+STMP .•bsr•na [1,..vdpa Lver Wl vpft—.1,
m 1 6/1/2023 REV FOUNDATION SIZE & REINFORCING
eri plete or tSh.~ Cnm
sing, incom
to vox., m11CgRK DATE I REVISION DESCRIPTION
FLOW
CORNERS PAINTED RED
DEVELOPED PLAN --- OUTSIDE VIEW
APPROX. AREA- 123.e SO. FT.
PLATE MAKE UP: 2 @ 1ON
TOTAL= 35N
NOTES:
1 ALL DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE INSIDE CORRUGATION,
UNLESS NOTED.
2 ALL DIMENSIONS ARE SUBJECT TO MANUFACTURING
TOLERANCES
C�uo NTECH®
ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC
www.ContechES.com
700 Tech Drive, Winchester, KY 40391
859-744-3339 859-744-9665 FAX
BN PLATE
250 THK
1 - 55 PCS. x 201-75" LG.
aE VI CROWN @18"
;ATE WHERE SHOWN
V PLATE
iO THK
TOP OF ROAD ELEVATION - 606 673'
SEWER
CLEARANCE BETWEEN TOP OF ARCH AND SEWER - 1 561' TOP OF THE ARCH ELEVATION - 796 545'
2W REINFORCING
r_R16 (AS REO'D)
I
INVERT OF ARCH ELEVATION - 789, 045'
w���%uerelwu•
74 OF NO
STRUCTURAL PLATE
CONTRACT
DRAWING
:. '.
X'N4 L $ p�0�4 tip`
�rr�r it] I I t0�
GENERAL NOTES:
1. Confirmation of cover — This structure Is within the minimum and maximum
allowable height of cover, for the designated loading, as follows:
Loading; HL-93, Minimum cover (FT) 20 , Maximum cover (FT) 18.0
2. For proper bolt size usage, refer to following:
Plnt�pnly 2 elate lap ,plate lap 4 plate lap
0.100" '- 0.125' thk. ptete 1-1/4' 1-1/4' 1-1,(4"-
0.1W' -- 0.200" thk. plate 1-1/4' 1-112' 2
0.225' — 0.250' Shk. plate 1-1/2" 2 N/A
0.100 — 0.17 thk. pl a 1-1 4" 1-112' 2" 2'
0.200' — 0.250' thk. plat. 1--1/2- 2 2' 2'
•Occurs with full inverts only which have 0.100" thick plates.
3. Nuts may be located on structure's interior or exterior to allow conventional
aceess during assembly and torquing. Only one side of nut has a curved
surface and it should be in direct contact with plate valley.
4. All plate laps and reinforcing ribs must be properly mated In a tangent
fashion using proper alignment techniques and held in alignment by
fasteners (finger tightened only). Before backfilling commences, all fasteners
must be torqued for adequate component contact. Good component fit is
better than high torque.
5. Fastener torque requirements: 0.100" thick plate at 90-115 foot—pounds.
For all thicker plates and reinforcing ribs, torque at 115-135 foot—pounds.
Torque levels are for Installation, not residual, in—service requirements. Since
torquing may loosen previously tightened fasteners, multiple passes may be
necessary. When seam sealant tape is used, fasteners should be torqued
again after 24 hours.
6. AJI aluminum structural plate material is manufactured in accordance with
ASHTO M219, ASTM 8746 and ASTM 8864 specifications.
7. See ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS shipped with material in fastener container. Also
refer to specific product catalog for additional product information.
THE ASSEMBLY BOLTS AND NUTS ARE SPECIALLY DESIGNED WITH ROUNDED
OR SPHERICAL THROATS FOR FITTING EITHER THE CREST OR VALLEY OF THE
CORRUGATIONS, PROVIDING MAXIMUM BEARING CONTACT AREA WITH THE
PLATES WITI POUT THE USE OF WASHERS NOTE THAT THE BOLTS AND NUTS
Sl IOULD BE FNSTALLED SUCH THAT THE ROUNDED PORTION IS IN
CON TACT WITH THE PLATES
aRuvna f
745004-010-ALSP-CON-A
:PROJECT No
ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH 1 745004
ALSP SRA 23'-0" SPAN X 7'-6" RISE
BAKER PARK
HIGH POINT, NC
NO:
PLANT ORDER NO.
SALES ORDER NO.
SEO No: DATE
010 3/28/2023
DRAWN:
JEM
APPROVED:
1 OF 3

TRENCH
CONDITION
BACKFILL WIDTH
SEE NOTE #1
TRENCH
WALL
NATURAL
UNDISTURBED
EMBANKMENT
MINIMUM LIMITS OF COMPACTED SELECT
GRANULAR STRUCTURAL BACKFILL
FILL MATERIAL ABOVE
MIN. COVER LEVEL
MIN. COVER
ALSP
SINGLE w
RADIUS T
ARCH 1
7 4�-
REINFORCED CONCRETE
FOOTING SPAN —
CONCRETE INVERT SECTION
(OPTIONAL)
SELECT GRANULAR STRUCTURAL BACKFILL LIMITS.
®
INITIAL LIFTS OVER THE CROWN OF STRUCTURE AS INDICATED BY
SHADED AREA TO BE COMPACTED TO REQUIRED DENSITY WITH
HAND OPERATED EQUIPMENT OR WITH SMALL LIGHTWEIGHT (D-0
OR LIGHTER) EQUIPMENT.
NOTES:
1, TRENCH WIDTH AND/OR SELECT BACKFILL WIDTH SHALL BE
DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER DEPENDING ON SITE
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS, TYPICAL BACKFILL WIDTH IS 4 FEET
FOR STRUCTURE SPANS 14 FEET AND LESS, AND 6 FEET FOR
STRUCTURE SPANS GREATER THAN 14 FEET.
2- ALL SELECT GRANULAR BACKFILL TO BE PLACED IN A
BALANCED FASHION IN THIN LIFTS (8" LOOSE TYPICALLY) AND
COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT DENSITY PER AASHTO T-180.
3" COMPLETE AND REGULAR MONITORING OF THE SINGLE
RADIUS ARCH STRUCTURE IS NECESSARY DURING THE
BACKFILL PROCESS TO AT LEAST THE MINIMUM COVER
LEVEL,
4. PREVENT DISTORTION OF SHAPE AS NECESSARY BY
VARYING COMPACTION METHODS AND EQUIPMENT,
5, PLACE SELECT GRANULAR BACKFILL IN RADIAL LIFTS AT
APPROXIMATELY 75% OF THE RISE OF THE SINGLE RADIUS
ARCH STRUCTURE.
`EMBANKMENT
CONDITION
1CKFILL WIDTH
SEE NOTE #1
SEE NOTE #5
8" LOOSE LIFTS
ADDITIONAL SELECT GRANULAR STRUCTURAL BACKFILL NOTES:
SATISFACTORY BACKFILL MATERIAL, PROPER PLACEMENT, AND COMPACTION ARE KEY FACTORS IN
OBTAINING MAXIMUM STRENGTH AND STABILITY
THE BACKFILL MATERIAL SHOULD BE FREE OF ROCKS, FROZEN LUMPS, AND FOREIGN MATERIAL
THAT COULD CAUSE HARD SPOTS OR DECOMPOSE TO CREATE VOIDS, BACKFILL MATERIAL SHOULD
BE WELL GRADED GRANULAR MATERIAL THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF AASHTO M-145 FOR
SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5 OR A-3 MODIFIED- RECYCLED CONCRETE/SLAG ARE NOT
RECOMMENDED FOR STRUCTURAL BACKFILL MATERIAL
SEE THE STRUCTURAL PLATE BACKFILL GROUP CLASSIFICATION TABLE ON THIS SHEET. BACKFILL
MUST BE PLACED SYMMETRICALLY ON EACH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE IN 8" LOOSE LIFTS, EACH
LIFT IS TO BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 90 % DENSITY PER AASHTO T-180
A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF SILT OR FINE SAND IN THE NATIVE SOILS SUGGESTS THE NEED FORA
WELL GRADED GRANULAR BACKFILL MATERIAL TO PREVENT SOIL MIGRATION, IF THE PROPOSED
BACKFILL IS NOT A WELL GRADED GRANULAR MATERIAL, A NON -WOVEN GEOTEXTILE FILTER
FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED BETWEEN THE SELECT BACKFILL AND THE IN SITU MATERIAL
DURING BACKFILL, ONLY LIGHTWEIGHT TRACKED VEHICLES (D-4 OR LIGHTER) SHOULD BE NEAR
THE STRUCTURE AS FILL PROGRESSES ABOVE THE CROWN AND TO THE FINISHED GRADE THE
ENGINEER AND CONTRACTOR ARE CAUTIONED THAT THE MINIMUM COVER MAY NEED TO BE
INCREASED TO HANDLE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLE LOADS (HEAVIER THAN D-0}
:STRUCTURAL PLATE BACKFILL GROUP CLASSIFICATION, REFERENCE AASHTO M-145
GROUP CLASSIFICATION I A-1-a I A-1-b A-24 I A-2-5 A-3
:Sieve Analysis Percent Passing
No W(2000mm)
50 max
---
---
--
--
IVo 40 (0.425 mm)
30...
50 maz.
_..
....
51 max•
IVo 200 (0 075 mm)
15 max.
1 25 max.
35 maz.
1 35 max
10 max
Allerberg Limits for Fraction Passing No 40 t0 425 mm)
Liquid Limits
_..
..-.
40...
41 min
--
Plaslicity Index
6 max
I 1 maz
10 max.
1 10 maz.
Non Plastic
Vsud Matwrila
Stone Fragmenl,
Gravel and Sand
51sy a Crayay
Grovel and Sand
Coara¢
Sand
-Ni from HA m I V M-14n-
Fine beach sands, windblown sands, stream deposited sands, etc-, exhibiting fine, rounded panicles and typically
classified by AASHTO M-145 as A-3 Materials should not be used
Reference the most current version of ASTM D2487, Standard Practice for Classification of Sails for Engineering
Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), for comparable soil groups-
1 0 STANDARDS AND DEFINITIONS 3 0
1-1
STANDARDS - All standards refer to the current ASTMIAASHTO
edilion unfasa omervrieo noted
1,1,1
ASTM B746 "Corrugated Aluminum Alloy for Structural Plate
for Field -Bolted Pipe, Pipe -Arches, and Arches."
(AASHTO Designation M-219)-
1.1,2
AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges - Section 12
Division I - Design, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
Section 12.
1-1.3
AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges - Section 26
Division II - Construction, AASHTO LRFD Bridge Construction
Specifications - Section 26 ASTM B789, Standard Praclice for
Installing Corrugated Aluminum Structural Plate Pipe.
1.2 DEFINITIONS
1.21
Owner - In these specifications the word "Owner" shall mean
TIMMONS GROUP
1.22
Engineer- In these specifrcaltons the word "Engineer' shall
mean the Engineer of Record or Owners designated engineering
representative
1,2,3
Manufacturer- In these specifications the word "Manufacturer'
shall mean CONTECH ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS 800-338-1122
PATRICK IMHOF_
1.2-4
Contractor- In these specifications the word "Contractor'shall
mean the firm or corporation undertaking the execution of any
installation work under the terms of these specifications
1.25
Approved - In these specifications the word "approved" shall
refer to the approval of the Engineer or his designated
representative
1.26
As Directed - In these specifications the words "as directed"
shall refer to [he directions to the Contractor from the Owner
or his designated representaliva
2,0 GENERAL CONDITIONS
2.1
Any installation guidance provided herein shall be endorsed by the
Engineer; discrepancies herein are governed by the Engineer's plans
and specifications,
22
The Contractor shall furnish all labor, material and equipment and
perform all work and services except those set out and furnished by the
Owner, necessary to complete in a satisfactory manner the site
preparation, excavation, filling, compaction, grading as shown on the
plans and as described Ihereim This work shall consist of all mobilization
clearing and grading, grubbing, stripping, removal of existing material
unless otherwise slated, preparation of the land to be filled, filling of the
land, spreading and compaction of the fill, and all subsidiary work
necessary to complete the grading of the cut and fill areas to conform
with the lines, grades, slopes, and specifications. This work is to be
accomplished under the observation of the Owner or his designated
representative.
23
Prior to bidding the work, the Contractor shall examine, investigate and
inspect the construction site as to the nature and location of the work,
and the general and local conditions at the construction site, including
without limitation, the character of surface or subsurface conditions and
ebstacfes to 6e uncpamprod on and amend the construction site and
shall make such additional investigation as he may deem necessary for I
he planning and proper execution of the work.
If conditions other than those indicated are discovered by the Contractor.
the Owner shall be notified immediately. The material which the
Contractor believes to be a changed condition shall not be disturbed so
that the owner can investigate the condition
2.4
The construction shall be performed under the direction of the Engineer.
25
All aspects of the structure design and site layout including foundations,
backfill, and treatments and necessary scour consideration shall be
performed by the Engineer
ASSEMBLYAND INSTALLATION
31 Bolts and nuts shall conform to the requirements of ASTM A307 and/or ASTM A449-
The single radius arch structure shall be assembled in accordance with the plate
layout drawings provided by the Manufacturer and per the Manufacturer's
recommendations
Bolls shall be lightened using an applied torque of between 100 and 150 It -lbs.
3.2 The single radius arch structure shall be installed in accordance with the plans and
specifications, the Manufacturer's recommendations, and AASHTO Standard
Specification for Highway Bridges - Section 26 Division II - ConstructionlAASHTO
LRFD Bridge Construction Specifications - Section 26-
3.3 Trench excavation shall be made in embankment material that is structurally adequate.
The trench width shall be shown on the plans. Poor quality in situ embankment
material must be removed and replaced with suitable backfill as directed by the Engineer.
34 Bedding preparalion is critical to both structure performance and service life
The bed should be contracted to uniform line and grade to avoid distortions that may
create undesirable stresses in the structure and/or rapid deterioration of the roadway -
The bed should be free of rock formations, protruding stones, frozen lumps, roots,
and other foreign matter that may cause unequal settlement.
35 The structure shall be assembled in accordance with [he Manufacturer's instructions.
All platen aha8 be umiaziaAd and hapolod with roasaneblo caro- Plii sha8 not be rdtiod
or dragged over gravel rack and shall be prevented from striking rock or other hard
objects during placement in trench or on bedding.
36 The structure shall be backfilled using clean well graded granular material that meets
the requirements for soil classifications A-1, A-2-4, A-2-5 m A-3 modified per AASHTO
M-145. See the structural plate backrill group classification [able on this sheet
Backfill must be placed symmetrically on each side of the structure in 8 inch
loose lifts. Each lift shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent density per
AASHTO T-180
3,7 If temporary conslmction vehicles are required to cross the structure, it is the
Contractors responsibility to contact the Engineer to determine the amount of
additional minimum cover necessary to handle the specific loading condition
Normal highway traffic is not allowed to cross the sbucture until the structure has
been backfilled and paved. If the road is unpaved, cover allowance to accommodate
rutting shall be as directed by the Engineer-
3-8 If an aluminum headwall and/or wingirall system is specified, the select granular
structural backfill limits shall extend past the deadman anchor system. Contact the
Engineer if stiff material or rock is encountered where the wingwalls and deadmen are
to be installed.
CA
Q4� �
J{
�
,SEAL f•.
042252 "
Ill li
THE ASSEMBLY BOLTS AND NUTS ARE SPECIALLY DESIGNED WITH ROUNDED
OR SPHERICAL -THROATS FOR FITTING EITHERTHE CREST OR VALLEY OF THE
CORRUGATIONS, PROVIDING MAXIMUM BEARING CONTACT AREA WITH TI IF
PLATES WITHOUT THE USE OF WASHERS, NOTE THAT THE BOLTS AND NUTS
SHOULD BF INSTALLED SUCH TEAT THE ROUNDED PORTION IS IN
CONTACT WITH THE PLATES
INLET
OUTLET
TYPE STRUCTURE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH
SIZE 36N
pLwr OROER Na.
SKEW
90
90
SPAN 23'-0"
RISE 7CL
° e�- SALES OROER NO.
1
am
0
0
LENGTH O 81'—{)"
745004-010—ALSP—CON—A
T1w ¢rage zrq xrfgm¢aen W" m Vxx duw.n0 uarw,e•a
w, x.a w Ibe prvixr ownnr..zaxo•r ar,e cardr.crar o
'•an�n,pwwl5¢u�etlpf�Al
m.
���
NTECH
I�V�%��Tewu•
ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH
PROJECT No :
745004
SEO No :
010
DATE:
3/28/2023
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
.�.,ap npr��
• u.e u• x•�y wnar.rlwnvl rlw W� wrHl¢n ew.minl a
����
I �/ ■ ■ ��
:Dorsch Failureloprnmtr•rtlsnrklrl»w.+•wn•�rkxpd
STRUCTURAL PLATE
ALSP SRA 23'-0" SPAN X 7'-6" RISE
JEM
:enlepne.preaalYsan..nk•.r .awrya r•.paun+lr
ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC
fur n use
Ird,ecrepanc,ee between the supplied in formation upon which
www.ContechES.com
BAKER PARK
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
he arawng.a baaea and aavat r,em rpnmuon: are ennoumeree
s site work progresses, these discrepancies must be reported
o
700 Tech Drive, Winchester, KY 40391
CONTRACT
6/1/2023
REV FOUNDATION SIZE & REINFORCING
FCS
659-744-3339 859-744-9665 FAX
SHEET NO :
2 OF 3
epnteph imm¢diarely rpr recvaruaken�e deetgn contact,1
ccepls no liability for designs based on 'r missing, incomplete or
DRAWING
HIGH POINT 1 NC
MARK
DATE
REVISION DESCRIPTION
BY
e fnraenatmn supytiea by amain

GENERAL NOTES:
1. THIS BRIDGE HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS.
THE PROJECT ENGINEER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
STRUCTURE'S SUITABILITY TO THE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS AND
FOR THE HYDRAULIC EVALUATION -- INCLUDING SCOUR AND
CONFIRMATION OF SOIL CONDITIONS.
2. PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, CONTRACTOR MUST VERIFY ALL
ELEVATIONS SHOWN THROUGH THE ENGINEER.
DESIGN LOADING: HL-93
DESIGN FILL HEIGHT: 18.00' MAX.
DESIGN METHOD: LOAD FACTOR DESIGN PER AASHTO SPECIFICATION
ASSUMED ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY: 6,000 PSF"
"IT IS THE PROJECT ENGINEER'S, OWNER'S AND/OR THE CONTRACTOR'S
RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY THAT THE ACTUAL SITE CONDITIONS AT THE
TIME OF CONSTRUCTION ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE ASSUMED
ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING PRESSURE WITH A GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION FROM A QUALIFIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.
SCOUR HAS NOT BEEN ANALYZED BY CONTECH. N
5'-2%2"
ALSP SRA
23'-0" SPAN X T-6" RISE
-3Yz'
I� — 7�-61 — i
23'-0" SPAN — —
ALSP 23'-0" SPAN X 7'-6" RISE DETAIL
7'-6
w
U)
io
5'-2)2'
ih
N
(16) - #5 BARS CONTINUOUS
TOP & BOTTOM 111 i
!` %1111 .�
— : Q SEAL p
w 042252
4l•INGIs•1E�¢
7BENT BARS 11" O.C.
III SAoo�`�
INLET
OUTLET
TYPE STRUCTURE SINGLE RADIUS ARCH
slzE 36N
PLANT ORDER NO
mew
90
90
SPA" - 23'-0"
FOOTING DETAIL
RISE - 7CL
u°ewr u f: SALES ORDER NO.
sm
O
o
LENGTH O $1'—Q'•
[745004-010—ALSP—CON—A
I> q.cpn .nd mlann••m .mwn gnnm Ar. ,..,—.
i" pgi.[I awt•.r..g an.[wY.cW V,
o Whegm••,• Sa��Av".I1CCcOrdwni Nld .M,
r,n .nr wn lnnra.t. mq n..o.ea. nnodur.e nr
011(-
C.N TE C
A��Ii��fTCAIJ'
I I � 'ram
Y �
ALUMINUM STRUCTURAL PLATE I
PROJECT N.:
745004
SEQ No:
010
DATE:
3/28/2023
DESIGNED:
DRAWN:
JEM
y n.m.r wwwur ue prow wines Wnnnivi
"•µ•es::::.r"•ew�aruu+rn"
� �� ��>��
STRUCTURAL PLATE
ALSP SRA 23'-0" SPAN X 7'-6" RISE
ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS LLC
eM •..
q.a.p•m�.. e.r:.." In...uon.d wem.� .�...nKn
www.ContechES.com
BAKER PARK
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
h awrrnp n bw.d rtl aduN •r.cawem r.."ewrear.0
•.ww.wo �v.sesirw�w•—ueq. and
1
6/1/2023
REV FOUNDATION SIZE&REINFORCING
FCS
700 Tech Drive, Winchester, KY 40391
CONTRACT
859-744-3339 859-744-9665 FAX
SHEET NO:
'3 OF
mev.erea nmesrmys<. rear.wx�e we..p�. cq�nn
�""inp1rq�in�n�e ewuwn"�•.,�dww"w
DRAWING
POINT,
MARK
DATE
REVISION DESCRIPTION
BY