SW1240604_Design Calculations_20240813

STORMWATER CALCULATIONS
FOR
Workforce Outdoor Training Site
1684 Jones Cove Road
Clyde, NC 28721
PIN 8636-08-8403
CDC project No. 22414
OWNER
Haywood Community College, TRS
185 Freed/ander Drive
Clyde,NC 28721
Contact: Brek Lanning, A.I.A
[phone]
\\\\,H IIii,„,
_06 '.R-0 °c;i/;•.0W
.a EAL r _
= 13 02 °
di
°/PcIN6R:0 ��
tiq
ENGINEER
D. Harry Luzius Jr., PE
C
Design
Coivilnepts,PA
168 Patton Avenue,Asheville,NC 28801
828-252-5388
NCBELS License#: C-2184

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM/DESCRIPTION
1 Narrative
2 SCM Drainage Area Map
3 Impervious Calculations
4 Water Quality Calculations
5. HydroCAD Report
6. Outlet Protection
7. Figures
7.1 USGS Quadrangle
7.2 NRCS Soil Report
7.3 NOAA Rainfall Data
7.4 FEMA FIRM Map
7.5 Geotechnical Report
8. Deed

NARRATIVE

STORMWATER NARRATIVE
General
The proposed project involves the development of an outdoor training site, Haywood Community
College, at the location 1684 Jones Cove Road, Clyde NC 28721. The proposed project site is
adjacent to Haywood Community College. The site is currently partially developed and
consists of gravel roads, sheds, abandoned residence, wooded areas, and an open grass covered field.
The proposed project development includes a new building, new driveway and parking facilities, new
CDL Training Facility, and associated utility infrastructure including stormwater, sanitary sewer, and
water. Stormwater runoff on this site drains from the Southeast to the Northwest. No portion of the
project area lies within the 100-yr FEMA floodplain. Soils on this site are classified predominantly as
hydrologic soil group B. Please refer to the project plans for more information on the existing
conditions and proposed improvements.
Stormwater
Stormwater runoff from the proposed development will be captured by permanent drainage ditches,
and catch basins, including curb inlets, trench drain inlet, grate inlets, and open throat inlets, and
conveyed through a permanent HDPE storm pipe network to an onsite Sand Filter system. Permanent
drainage ditches above the cut slopes convey runoff from undisturbed portions of the site to an HDPE
storm pipe system which bypasses the sand filters and discharges onsite in the direction of existing
streams.
The rules require treatment of the runoff generated from a one-inch rainfall event over the net increase
in impervious surface. The Sand Filter system have been designed to treat the runoff generated from the
1" storm event over an area greater than the net increase in impervious surface for water quality volume
in accordance with the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality(NCDEQ) stormwater
design manual, and to; 1) route 100% of the 1-year required storm volume through the slow release
outlet, and 2) convey the 50-year storm without overtopping the Sand Filter. Detention of the 1-year
storm controls the sizing of the sand filters. All calculations presented for the Sand Filter system are
representative of the maximum impervious surface allowable within their drainage areas while still
meeting 1" storm treatment and 50-year storm conveyance requirements.

Table: Stormwater Control Summary
WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE
SAND FILTER
Feature Required Provided
Separation from SHWT 2 ft min 4.25 ft
Design Volume * 0.75 5,896 CF 13,211 CF
Two Chamber Volumes Approx 50/50 8,308 / 8,935 CF
Water Quality Depth 3.72 3.75
Design Surface Area 1,572 SF 1,745 SF
Ponding Depth 6 FT max to Overflow 4.75 FT
Media Depth 18 inches min 18 inches
Media Flow Rate 2 in/hr min 2 in/hr
Freeboard 1 ft min 1.51 ft
Berm Width 10 ft min 10 ft

SCM DRAINAGE AREA MAP

W O W tND M 03 C 0
M M W A v
Z c0� � F_c0 yO�u1
N ��''pA� I I�nr.fin` I Z N N
°°°°°° ,IIILis pp p�
°°°°°°°°°_ III III IpI il VviihIII r J W a.II
x W m S
°°°° Iu�Q1011 �oRa ��d
�� � ,/,:Z �� PROPOSED SAND FILTER 'A ° ° 3
°°°°°° ° °
//�!h °°°°° °°°°°� NOpTN
Cq
�Z °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°,n /,°°°°°°°°°°°°°\ // I �� '� ?L J�` / \Q °o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o oc- / °^°°° n n°°°°°° 1 N:e:„.. s(L.
°° '2222 CI �� .. `� � �- �15Pn°nnn°n°n°n°n°n /n°n°n°n) U) 2
�j it.?
t/?,i _ 5 77.--—_\;r �I PROPOSED SAND FILTER V) 1 1 -----............„ J.3.3 0..3 .3, .3 /‘
'+/g� , l ' ��--�� �� DRAINAGE AREA > y O 3
' , \.)
0
:,l-i,'r1'i
,Af b-4(.i(f/iir,I/0 0/1 Ar:I/1:,,,,'
f-r___r)i/itf%
//7/
/,//1 //.//
•s‘V
/ 1/ _ � .// ,/
ill _ �v` \° — a
1 ♦+ ro
//////:////1//\////'/////,/////'I,,i/-//,////////,/(,i 5//0//).)//'D 1/,/,i.
y)'//'/m///11,
,:,*.A2''A4X SN\\1"A)•:'AN—,A:A,I\:.',A\'',kt);t,.)\X.`.0,'%4
a)
i / / R /�// l � .4 . .A. �•j / a / / /, ,; o / X. PROPOSED BYPASS AREA w
:t W
:4$• i441',0N1• 4ii• ..4N0t.i,4,4414144*444s,4-t4.Vk'14*t,4i44r;10114F"*4*.:*f4*44ke*.\,4 4**16W‘N*-44444o:4.4 1,*4..'4".***t\7-:#."1*;,X1*1ik':."I-f*N:.;'':.:t0.f-\:8.S.,.''*s;:..-\_.1'-'i\.\.v':N:\\•,:\'\\.A'.-.\•N:.'\4'.-AA7N7S\,'-"\:X.'
6 //// //i . N k .\.: ... \\
/ f I 74/////////
/� t�� 'p .��1�\,�?i. �`l .�j� . i/1+�j`� sesV N
/ ° \- \: G: -'-�_— _r / / doe. 1./1 ( �, '�•��2 ��i� v. +�,h ��j+ 1.
, ..,,...A. . •. .714kt• , ••.- :' -•A N' VN,•04 A 0. N AN, ,,-- --,..----
/ / rr / -ice .\s..ekt t N �:. .t,14. . -,; * W
LI
btevc:te;,..,..x.,i >i,, ...,,,,,,AL.N ‘,7•14744,,,.-.4,44:14..4-N,"_. -,,,_-1---
1 M5 ��, // )/ r� /// �-/ ° �� p - -° _ _ isc _ 4ftV\d4MAV ►y *Ott t :* : '� . - O
3 l ) h
0 0 g
III
111 Ill ���� r \ \ \\ / . � y= �•,,; �- = — - Q
111 l 111/IIIII/I III " ''''',51\‘%,2 L'' ‘1"4,N V'S'eltiVISi A4,041 VS'it14).4 i VAA.V0..4,4,bier,,.------------- —__
I( ° °���a�� �2 o.� s°' ,f-\�/ r/� 6 A/,A A °. � '"ep�,y••' \S , 40+ v��-4"r t, . 4,4�. .. -- _ ` O W
��\\1,)TH�1)/)f jlf�I/I//4,,,/ // i ° ° �Q � . '•' �� Q v (� N)1)1l(rftlril /J /41//// r-7_ / ,,, . , ���� I
LL O M

IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS

WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE
CDC Project No.: 22414
CDC Civil
Design
Concepts,PA
PRE-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS
TOTAL SITE
Area Type Pre-Development
(SF)
Grass, Woods 479,695
Total Pervious: 479,695
Buildings/Lots 1,926
Streets 2,767
Parking
Sidewalks
Other
Total Impervious: 4,693
% Impervious: 1.0%
Total Area: 484,388
Issued 6/12/2024

WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE
CDC Project No.: 22414
CDC Civil
Design
Concepts,PA
POST-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS
BASIN INFO SAND FILTER BYPASS TOTAL
Total Drainage Area(sf) 193,581 290,807 484,388
On-site Drainage Area(sf) 193,581 290,807 484,388
Off-site Drainage Area(sf) 0 0 0
_ Proposed Impervious Area(sf) 119,552 4,693 124,245
% Impervious Area 61.8% 1.6% 25.6%
Total Proposed Impervious Area (sf) 124,245
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA (sf) SAND FILTER BYPASS TOTAL
On-site Buildings/Lots 943 0 943
On-site Streets 0 0 0
On-site Parking 117,536 4,693 122,229
On-site Sidewalks 1,073 0 1,073
Other on-site 0 0 0
Future 0 0 0
Off-site 0 0 0
Existing BUA 0 0 0
Total 119,552 4,693 124,245
Issued 6/12/2024

WATER QUALITY CALCULATIONS

2Si <2SP>
Post Dev A P st Dev A
6L
Total Req.
SubCat Reach 'On. MI Routing Diagram for 22414 SAND FILTER-WQV
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts, Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD®10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC

22414 SAND FILTER - WQV Type II 24-hr 1 in Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2
Summary for Subcatchment 2Si: Post Dev A
Runoff = 3.62 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 7,861 cf, Depth= 0.79"
Routed to Link 6L : Total Req.
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1 in Rainfall=1.00"
Area (sf) CN Description
119,267 98 Impervious, HSG B
119,267 100.00% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 2Si: Post Dev A
Hydrograph
4 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I ■Runoff
13.62 cfs l 1 1 I I 1 I I I I
1 1 I I 1 I I I I Type II 24-hr
- - T 1 7 - � 7 11-in,Rlainfa1 1,b0�'
3 I 1 ' Runloff Are�1a=119,267 tf
I I I I I I I I I I I � I I
1 I RunofflVolume=7,861 of
I 1 ltu;ngfflDepth=r0 179��
IS
2 I I I I 1 1 I 1 Tc=5.0 mill
LL
QN98
1
1
/
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 SAND FILTER - WQV Type II 24-hr 1 in Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4
Summary for Subcatchment 2Sp: Post Dev A
Runoff = 0.00 cfs @ 0.00 hrs, Volume= 0 cf, Depth= 0.00"
Routed to Link 6L : Total Req.
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 1 in Rainfall=1.00"
Area (sf) CN Description
70,916 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
3,398 55 Woods, Good, HSG B
74,314 61 Weighted Average
74,314 100.00% Pervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 2Sp: Post Dev A
Hydrograph
` I I I
1 I I I I I I I I ❑Runoff
I I I I I
I I Type II 241-hr
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 I 1 in Ralinfal1=1 .001'
unQf A;re;a=74, 14 sllf
N RonOfi Volume=O c'f
Ri nbff Depth=0.90''
LL I I Tc=5.0
I I I I I
I I CN=61
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 SAND FILTER - WQV Type 1124-hr 1 in Rainfall=1.00"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6
Summary for Link 6L: Total Req.
Inflow Area = 193,581 sf, 61.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.49" for 1 in event
Inflow = 3.62 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 7,861 cf
Primary = 3.62 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 7,861 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Link 6L: Total Req.
Hydrograph
H — I— — —I — H — —I— — — — I— — — — H — —I— H — — I— H — —
❑ Inflow
4— 3.62 cfs I El Primary
13.62 cfs r Inflow Area=193,581 sf
3
N
2
T.
/ I I
� I
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)
In accordance with NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual, in section titled C-6,
Sand Filter. The design volume criteria states that "sand filters are designed
to treat 0.75 times the design volume". Therefore, the design volume is as
follows:
7,861 cf X 0.75 = 5,896 cf

HYDROCAD REPORT

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 1 yr. Rainfall=2.49"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5
Summary for Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Inflow Area = 4.444 ac, 61.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.11" for 1 yr. event
Inflow = 8.88 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.410 af
Outflow = 0.08 cfs @ 11.40 hrs, Volume= 0.410 af, Atten= 99%, Lag= 0.0 min
Primary = 0.08 cfs @ 11.40 hrs, Volume= 0.410 af
Routed to Link 4L : Total
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 2,628.31'@ 24.03 hrs Surf.Area= 5,791 sf Storage= 14,031 cf
Plug-Flow detention time= 1,659.3 min calculated for 0.410 af(100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time= 1,659.6 min ( 2,497.1 - 837.5 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 2,624.25' 8,308 cf SEDIMENT CHAMBER (Irregular.isted below(Recalc)
#2 2,624.25' 942 cf RIP RAP (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
2,356 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
#3 2,622.75' 8,935 cf SAND CHAMBER (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
#4 2,629.00' 15,653 cf PEAK ATTENUATION (Irregular)isted below(Recalc)
33,838 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 615 116.3 0 0 615
2,625.00 897 135.9 564 564 1,020
2,626.00 1,410 171.7 1,144 1,708 1,909
2,627.00 1,869 188.1 1,634 3,342 2,412
2,628.00 2,472 214.2 2,163 5,505 3,272
2,629.00 3,147 235.7 2,803 8,308 4,073
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 515 97.8 0 0 515
2,625.00 577 97.8 409 409 588
2,626.00 595 97.8 586 995 686
2,627.00 543 97.8 569 1,564 784
2,628.00 417 97.8 479 2,043 882
2,629.00 220 97.8 313 2,356 980
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,622.75 615 124.1 0.0 0 0 615
2,622.76 615 124.1 40.0 2 2 616
2,624.24 615 124.1 40.0 364 367 800
2,624.25 615 124.1 100.0 6 373 801
2,625.00 926 150.2 100.0 574 947 1,380
2,626.00 1,409 171.6 100.0 1,159 2,106 1,951
2,627.00 1,956 193.0 100.0 1,675 3,781 2,598
2,628.00 2,568 214.4 100.0 2,255 6,036 3,321
2,629.00 3,243 235.8 100.0 2,899 8,935 4,120

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 1 yr. Rainfall=2.49"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,629.00 6,611 393.8 0 0 6,611
2,630.00 7,820 412.7 7,207 7,207 7,889
2,631.00 9,087 431.5 8,446 15,653 9,221
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 2,622.25' 24.0" Round Culvert
L= 54.5' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 2,622.25'/2,618.03' S= 0.0774 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.012, Flow Area= 3.14 sf
#2 Device 1 2,622.75' 6.0" Vert. Underdrain C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#3 Device 2 2,622.75' 2.000 in/hr Sand Filter over Surface area from 2,622.00' - 2,624.25'
Excluded Surface area = 0 sf
#4 Device 1 2,629.00' 72.0" x 72.0" Horiz. Open Top C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
#5 Primary 2,629.70' Emergency Spillway, Cv= 2.62 (C= 3.28)
Head (feet) 0.00 1.50
Width (feet) 16.00 22.00
Primary OutFlow Max=0.08 cfs @ 11.40 hrs HW=2,624.27' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 0.08 cfs of 15.29 cfs potential flow)
2=Underdrain (Passes 0.08 cfs of 1.07 cfs potential flow)
4-3=Sand Filter (Exfiltration Controls 0.08 cfs)
4=Open Top ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
—5=Emergency Spillway ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Hydrograph
/ 1 1 1 1 I ■Inflow
18.88 cfs I I I I I I I I I I I I ❑Primary 1
9- I L I I I I 1 I 1 I I Inflow l ea=4.444 ac
8- ` 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I (Peak 1E1ev=2�6218.31'
7- _11_ 1_ _I _ 11_ _L _11 _ _ _1 _1I_ 1_ _� _ 11_ LSto ageF114,03111cf_
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 1 1— -1 + 1 F 4 1 1— — 1 + 1 F 4 1 + 1 T
N :
U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I
3 5 / —1— 1- 1 - I- -r -1 - 1 rt -1- 1- -I - I- T -1 - I- rt -I- fi -I - 1
u 4_ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I
_ /— —I— 1— T — I— T —I — T 7 T I I— T —1 I— T —
3- 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I
: /— 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1
2- 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1
_
IL/ ol
ID 08 cfs z
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 1 yr. Rainfall=2.49"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 5/1/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Stage-Area-Storage for Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Elevation Surface Storage Elevation Surface Storage
(feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet) (feet) (sq-ft) (cubic-feet)
2,622.75 615 0 2,627.95 5,398 12,099
2,622.85 615 25 2,628.05 5,509 12,620
2,622.95 615 49 2,628.15 5,616 13,152
2,623.05 615 74 2,628.25 5,724 13,697
2,623.15 615 98 2,628.35 5,835 14,254
2,623.25 615 123 2,628.45 5,948 14,823
2,623.35 615 148 2,628.55 6,064 15,405
2,623.45 615 172 2,628.65 6,181 16,000
2,623.55 615 197 2,628.75 6,301 16,608
2,623.65 615 221 2,628.85 6,423 17,229
2,623.75 615 246 2,628.95 6,547 17,863
2,623.85 615 271 2,629.05 13,279 18,517
2,623.95 615 295 2,629.15 13,396 19,190
2,624.05 615 320 2,629.25 13,514 19,874
2,624.15 615 344 2,629.35 13,633 20,571
2,624.25 1,745 373 2,629.45 13,752 21,279
2,624.35 1,825 520 2,629.55 13,873 21,999
2,624.45 1,908 675 2,629.65 13,995 22,731
2,624.55 1,993 838 2,629.75 14,118 23,476
2,624.65 2,079 1,009 2,629.85 14,242 24,233
2,624.75 2,168 1,188 2,629.95 14,367 25,003
2,624.85 2,259 1,376 2,630.05 14,491 25,785
2,624.95 2,353 1,572 2,630.15 14,614 26,579
2,625.05 2,446 1,778 2,630.25 14,738 27,385
2,625.15 2,538 1,992 2,630.35 14,863 28,204
2,625.25 2,633 2,216 2,630.45 14,988 29,036
2,625.35 2,730 2,449 2,630.55 15,115 29,880
2,625.45 2,829 2,692 2,630.65 15,243 30,737
2,625.55 2,931 2,945 2,630.75 15,371 31,607
2,625.65 3,034 3,208 2,630.85 15,501 32,489
2,625.75 3,140 3,481 2,630.95 15,631 33,385
2,625.85 3,248 3,765 2,631.05 15,697 33,838
2,625.95 3,358 4,060 2,631.15 15,697 33,838
2,626.05 3,458 4,365
2,626.15 3,547 4,680
2,626.25 3,638 5,004
2,626.35 3,730 5,338
2,626.45 3,824 5,681
2,626.55 3,919 6,034
2,626.65 4,016 6,397
2,626.75 4,115 6,770
2,626.85 4,215 7,154
2,626.95 4,317 7,547
2,627.05 4,418 7,951
2,627.15 4,520 8,367
2,627.25 4,623 8,793
2,627.35 4,728 9,230
2,627.45 4,835 9,679
2,627.55 4,944 10,139
2,627.65 5,055 10,611
2,627.75 5,168 11,095
2,627.85 5,282 11,591

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 25 yr. Rainfall=4.92"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post Dev A
Runoff = 24.91 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 1.184 af, Depth= 3.20"
Routed to Pond 1 P : Sand Filter A
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 25 yr. Rainfall=4.92"
Area (ac) CN Description
2.738 98 Paved parking, HSG B
1.628 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
0.078 55 Woods, Good, HSG B
4.444 84 Weighted Average
1.706 38.39% Pervious Area
2.738 61.61% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 2S: Post Dev A
Hydrograph
11 I I I I I I I I I I I I
- -4 - 1- -k 1- - - 1- 4 -1 + -1- + -1 - - 1 -k -1- + 1 - ■Runoff
26 /124.91 cfs I I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
24 / 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 ITypellTr 24Thr -
rt 1 fi r 1 rt fi 1 r 5 r r �ai if 1 II 4.�2r'
22� IY f /��, l p aye T 11 -
20� 1 1 1 1 1 _mu 1 nbff A1ea 4_.444 sad
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I II I I I
18 / - I- 4 -1- + 1 - - 1- 4 -1 + -Runaff-Vohnneql.1-84-af
3 14 / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q 0
o - - r -1- -r r 1- r r -1- r T&-510 lllln
LL 12t/
L _I_ L _I _ L J _ I_ L -1_ L _I_ L _I _ L J _ 1- L 1_/+L _I - L -
10 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 CNg84
8� 1 1 1 1 I I I I -
- 1- 4 1 - - 1- 4 -1- + -1- + - - - 1- + -1- + -1 - �
6� 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I
1- 0 1 1 1 1
21/
0 (;„, ff(/Si/�/ (/ /�,f(�,/ff//f/, ff( ff( ffifl/ (/S // //,/ f/,/f(/,/ff(,/ f(/ fff(
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 25 yr. Rainfall=4.92"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 17
Summary for Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Inflow Area = 4.444 ac, 61.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.20" for 25 yr. event
Inflow = 24.91 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 1.184 af
Outflow = 19.58 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 1.184 af, Atten= 21%, Lag= 4.0 min
Primary = 19.58 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 1.184 af
Routed to Link 4L : Total
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 2,629.41'@ 12.02 hrs Surf.Area= 13,705 sf Storage= 20,996 cf
Plug-Flow detention time=932.7 min calculated for 1.184 of(100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time=933.3 min ( 1,740.5 - 807.2 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 2,624.25' 8,308 cf SEDIMENT CHAMBER (Irregular.isted below(Recalc)
#2 2,624.25' 942 cf RIP RAP (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
2,356 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
#3 2,622.75' 8,935 cf SAND CHAMBER (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
#4 2,629.00' 15,653 cf PEAK ATTENUATION (Irregular)isted below(Recalc)
33,838 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 615 116.3 0 0 615
2,625.00 897 135.9 564 564 1,020
2,626.00 1,410 171.7 1,144 1,708 1,909
2,627.00 1,869 188.1 1,634 3,342 2,412
2,628.00 2,472 214.2 2,163 5,505 3,272
2,629.00 3,147 235.7 2,803 8,308 4,073
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 515 97.8 0 0 515
2,625.00 577 97.8 409 409 588
2,626.00 595 97.8 586 995 686
2,627.00 543 97.8 569 1,564 784
2,628.00 417 97.8 479 2,043 882
2,629.00 220 97.8 313 2,356 980
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,622.75 615 124.1 0.0 0 0 615
2,622.76 615 124.1 40.0 2 2 616
2,624.24 615 124.1 40.0 364 367 800
2,624.25 615 124.1 100.0 6 373 801
2,625.00 926 150.2 100.0 574 947 1,380
2,626.00 1,409 171.6 100.0 1,159 2,106 1,951
2,627.00 1,956 193.0 100.0 1,675 3,781 2,598
2,628.00 2,568 214.4 100.0 2,255 6,036 3,321
2,629.00 3,243 235.8 100.0 2,899 8,935 4,120

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 25 yr. Rainfall=4.92"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 18
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,629.00 6,611 393.8 0 0 6,611
2,630.00 7,820 412.7 7,207 7,207 7,889
2,631.00 9,087 431.5 8,446 15,653 9,221
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 2,622.25' 24.0" Round Culvert
L= 54.5' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 2,622.25'/2,618.03' S= 0.0774 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.012, Flow Area= 3.14 sf
#2 Device 1 2,622.75' 6.0" Vert. Underdrain C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#3 Device 2 2,622.75' 2.000 in/hr Sand Filter over Surface area from 2,622.00' - 2,624.25'
Excluded Surface area = 0 sf
#4 Device 1 2,629.00' 72.0" x 72.0" Horiz. Open Top C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
#5 Primary 2,629.70' Emergency Spillway, Cv= 2.62 (C= 3.28)
Head (feet) 0.00 1.50
Width (feet) 16.00 22.00
Primary OutFlow Max=17.19 cfs @ 12.02 hrs HW=2,629.36' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 17.19 cfs of 37.40 cfs potential flow)
2=Underdrain (Passes 0.08 cfs of 2.38 cfs potential flow)
4-3=Sand Filter (Exfiltration Controls 0.08 cfs)
4=Open Top (Weir Controls 17.10 cfs © 1.97 fps)
—5=Emergency Spillway ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Hydrograph
/ 1 1 i 1 1 i 1 I I I I I
1 1 1 + -I 1 1 I ■Inflow `
124.91 cfs 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 ❑Primary
26 1 I 1 1 I 1 I of I olw l Area=4.i44 1 ac
24 ) - 4 -11- I- -I - 11- + -11 - -P-eakEle - 62119.41'
22 � )
'_ /.ae cfs l I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 (Sto I. rage=20,996 cf
181 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
,-7,- 167 1- - -1 I- 4 -1- I- - - I- + -1 - I- - -I- H- -1 - 1- + - 1- -I - - -
0 I I I I I I I I I
0 14_ / ' I 1 I II I I I I I I I I I I I
u_ 12= I- 7 -17 r 7 - 17 T 717 7 7 -17 7 71717 7 - 1 - 7
107 / I- 4 -1- 1 - I- + -I - I- -[ -I- -I - I- + - I I
I 1 II I I I I I I I I I I 1
8-
6- / / I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I
4- / -1- H -1 - I- 4 -1- i- H - 1- + 1 - I- 4 -1- H4 - 1- 4 - -
2-: /7 (/
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190' 200' 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 50 yr. Rainfall=5.51"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 20
Summary for Subcatchment 2S: Post Dev A
Runoff = 28.91 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 1.385 af, Depth= 3.74"
Routed to Pond 1 P : Sand Filter A
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted-CN, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type II 24-hr 50 yr. Rainfall=5.51"
Area (ac) CN Description
2.738 98 Paved parking, HSG B
1.628 61 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG B
0.078 55 Woods, Good, HSG B
4.444 84 Weighted Average
1.706 38.39% Pervious Area
2.738 61.61% Impervious Area
Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs)
5.0 Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 2S: Post Dev A
Hydrograph
H I + —I— H I 7 —I + —I— + 1 1 + —I- 1- 1 + -
32� H — 1— 1 —I— L —1 — H — I— 1 —1— L _I— L —1 — H — 1— 1 _I— L —1 — L _ ■Runoff
30�128.91 cfs 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 1
28 TYPe III 24-hr
264-/ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 �/rI
I— 7 —I— f I — —I I— 7 —I T —I 7 -par IJ• T mai -au-A 1p —
24
— —I— t —I — H H — I— —I— —I— 1 Min Vff Afrea=4.444-ad
22� — I— HILHHHIHLILHHHHILHH -
20 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Runoff VDIum1eg1.385af -
,� 184- I I I I I I I I I I I I I �_ I__ 11Dp1 67w6„ -
16i/
7 17 —I T 1 7 —1 H 1 Tc�510 mint
LT- 144r
k r - I— + —1— -h —1 — + H — 1— + —1— —1— + —1 — H — 1— + —1—/+w'-1 — H
12� 1 LJ1- 7 -1L —I— L -1LA11ICI_q_84 -
10�
8 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
6yI I I I I I I I I I I I I
—1 — I— 7 —1— T —1— 7 —1 — I I —1— T —I — —
4� k — I— H — — — I — H H I— 7 —1 + I— + —1 — H — I— + — 1 H —
o
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 50 yr. Rainfall=5.51"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 23
Summary for Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Inflow Area = 4.444 ac, 61.61% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.74" for 50 yr. event
Inflow = 28.91 cfs @ 11.95 hrs, Volume= 1.385 af
Outflow = 26.66 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 1.385 af, Atten= 8%, Lag= 3.0 min
Primary = 26.66 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 1.385 af
Routed to Link 4L : Total
Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-240.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Peak Elev= 2,629.49'@ 12.00 hrs Surf.Area= 13,795 sf Storage= 21,531 cf
Plug-Flow detention time=801.5 min calculated for 1.385 af(100% of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det. time=801.2 min ( 1,603.9 - 802.7 )
Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description
#1 2,624.25' 8,308 cf SEDIMENT CHAMBER (Irregulariisted below(Recalc)
#2 2,624.25' 942 cf RIP RAP (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
2,356 cf Overall x 40.0% Voids
#3 2,622.75' 8,935 cf SAND CHAMBER (Irregular)Listed below(Recalc)
#4 2,629.00' 15,653 cf PEAK ATTENUATION (Irregular)isted below(Recalc)
33,838 cf Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 615 116.3 0 0 615
2,625.00 897 135.9 564 564 1,020
2,626.00 1,410 171.7 1,144 1,708 1,909
2,627.00 1,869 188.1 1,634 3,342 2,412
2,628.00 2,472 214.2 2,163 5,505 3,272
2,629.00 3,147 235.7 2,803 8,308 4,073
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) _(feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,624.25 515 97.8 0 0 515
2,625.00 577 97.8 409 409 588
2,626.00 595 97.8 586 995 686
2,627.00 543 97.8 569 1,564 784
2,628.00 417 97.8 479 2,043 882
2,629.00 220 97.8 313 2,356 980
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (%) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,622.75 615 124.1 0.0 0 0 615
2,622.76 615 124.1 40.0 2 2 616
2,624.24 615 124.1 40.0 364 367 800
2,624.25 615 124.1 100.0 6 373 801
2,625.00 926 150.2 100.0 574 947 1,380
2,626.00 1,409 171.6 100.0 1,159 2,106 1,951
2,627.00 1,956 193.0 100.0 1,675 3,781 2,598
2,628.00 2,568 214.4 100.0 2,255 6,036 3,321
2,629.00 3,243 235.8 100.0 2,899 8,935 4,120

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 50 yr. Rainfall=5.51"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 24
Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area
(feet) (sq-ft) (feet) (cubic-feet) (cubic-feet) (sq-ft)
2,629.00 6,611 393.8 0 0 6,611
2,630.00 7,820 412.7 7,207 7,207 7,889
2,631.00 9,087 431.5 8,446 15,653 9,221
Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices
#1 Primary 2,622.25' 24.0" Round Culvert
L= 54.5' CPP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500
Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 2,622.25'/2,618.03' S= 0.0774 '/' Cc= 0.900
n= 0.012, Flow Area= 3.14 sf
#2 Device 1 2,622.75' 6.0" Vert. Underdrain C= 0.600 Limited to weir flow at low heads
#3 Device 2 2,622.75' 2.000 in/hr Sand Filter over Surface area from 2,622.00' - 2,624.25'
Excluded Surface area = 0 sf
#4 Device 1 2,629.00' 72.0" x 72.0" Horiz. Open Top C= 0.600
Limited to weir flow at low heads
#5 Primary 2,629.70' Emergency Spillway, Cv= 2.62 (C= 3.28)
Head (feet) 0.00 1.50
Width (feet) 16.00 22.00
Primary OutFlow Max=25.92 cfs @ 12.00 hrs HW=2,629.48' (Free Discharge)
L1=Culvert (Passes 25.92 cfs of 37.75 cfs potential flow)
2=Underdrain (Passes 0.08 cfs of 2.41 cfs potential flow)
L3=Sand Filter (Exfiltration Controls 0.08 cfs)
4=Open Top (Weir Controls 25.84 cfs © 2.26 fps)
—5=Emergency Spillway ( Controls 0.00 cfs)
Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Hydrograph
I H -I- 1- -I - I- H -I- I- H - I- t -I - I- - - I- 4 -I - H H -
4 -I- -I - I- 4 -1- I- 4 - I- -k -I - I- 4 I I - I- 4 -1 - I- -I - ■Inflow
32_ z 28.91 ILI IIL L III _ ILI 1 1 IL L ❑Primary 1
30 / / I I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 InfIowArea=4,14441a�
28 -126.66ds I I I I I I I 11 1 1., 1
26= 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 k I Geer -b-iv.� a'
24_ I- f -11 - I- H -11- I H - 11- + -11 - 11- HS orage, 1 5 ef- -
22 -' ,
/ * -1 - I- 4 -I- {- H - I- + -I - I- - - - H -
20=
I- _L -I- 1- _1 - I- 1 -I - I_ _1 1 1 1 _ I-
2 18 I I I I I I I
3 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
0
u_ 14- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1
12_ / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1
10_ z I- T 1 1 7 1 F T I T I I 71 1 T - 1 T I T T
8: / -'-
H -1 - 1- H -1- L -I - 1- T 1 - I- -I 1- L4 1- 4 _ I -I - , -
H -I - I- 4 -I- I- 4 - I- -k -I - - 4 -I- H -I - I- - I- -
6
L L _ 1_ T I _ I_ _I 1_ L _I 1_ 1
4=
0 4! U6UUVi6U6UV
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240
Time (hours)

22414 WORKFORCE OUTDOOR TRAINING SITE Type 1124-hr 50 yr. Rainfall=5.51"
Prepared by Civil Design Concepts Printed 4/30/2024
HydroCAD® 10.20-2f s/n 04679 ©2022 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC
Hydrograph for Pond 1 P: Sand Filter A
Time Inflow Storage Elevation Primary
(hours) (cfs) (cubic-feet) (feet) (cfs)
0.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
5.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
10.00 0.40 1,548 2,624.94 0.08
15.00 0.68 18,373 2,629.03 0.70
20.00 0.30 18,264 2,629.01 0.30
25.00 0.00 17,960 2,628.97 0.08
30.00 0.00 16,506 2,628.73 0.08
35.00 0.00 15,052 2,628.49 0.08
40.00 0.00 13,598 2,628.23 0.08
45.00 0.00 12,144 2,627.96 0.08
50.00 0.00 10,690 2,627.67 0.08
55.00 0.00 9,235 2,627.35 0.08
60.00 0.00 7,781 2,627.01 0.08
65.00 0.00 6,327 2,626.63 0.08
70.00 0.00 4,873 2,626.21 0.08
75.00 0.00 3,419 2,625.73 0.08
80.00 0.00 1,965 2,625.14 0.08
85.00 0.00 510 2,624.34 0.08
90.00 0.00 2 2,622.76 0.00
95.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
100.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
105.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
110.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
115.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
120.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
125.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
130.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
135.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
140.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
145.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
150.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
155.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
160.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
165.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
170.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
175.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
180.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
185.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
190.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
195.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
200.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
205.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
210.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
215.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
220.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
225.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
230.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
235.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00
240.00 0.00 0 2,622.75 0.00

FIGURES

OUTLET PROTECTION

Appendices
3 , ,:. I It I I,'.
I l 11 I .II.
Outlet W = Do + La 90. : • • iiil II 1 III
i; u01 uul I
pipe jlllll�lllll�l o
I 1, nlllull l� p I!I
diameter (Do) 80 , i11111 ii`M I �n!'soui'I
La —14 1- -i- _ +. 11111111111 ., !I,!I1Sr.1 i
i _ __ IIun1111u f,!d.n1111'1
T it ii___ < 0.5Do - -,.-- _ -_- - _ -. I.-- -- IIInu11 N 1=rnlr
I - - ___ - I_ 1111111 daii:Igli' s'1
no ,, /l'Al!111' ' 1
al ''l) 7C — I Ii111;11'fli II
APRON DEPTH IS 1.5 TIMES THE STONE °r •,'iPill%CII� .d 11—_� _ - - _-- - - SSIISIII►.Idl' !III.DIAMETER(18"MINIMUM DEPTH) Q — . ._ _—_-._,_. _ -_��
P 60 1 riVflllll%11% I OHM
�g§r° -- +t, 'll�illil%�1. ,"1 •Iliii
v 5 -_-___ :MEI
_-_-- 4 II Illi 111111■
cc\ t1 6 ....1 M11/11111111111
cc' 9-_ _ _ - 1 ', / I/11411111111111111
-- ,� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
a NIP
-� - oo1111.11111111111111111111
H. 1. -41 111111111111111111 1111111R,i
41 . � . 111111111111111 ,iii/1
I S'I i=►5•���M1�uuuulm Pr.I.,IIWII 4
F j ii � mil '� �u,un/u
1 - -- 4 _I- - '�� mmilu J Aius1u71
I �I�•.�,:I minim iimiLnip1►irk
F' . �r 111111111111r1111J1.A�1 I
�. 11 1. ' I
��i noon Irnr �m nil.•
PIPI— 1 .'0' �11�ISu1r',Inwl
20 �5 i:� l : 1 rnii111//Milir Iu,i1r,1 I
�I���III — , ��-ram'! •— --- nnOv::11'11 ti'4i i 3
111111111=111111111I . Z //. /i /U'ii dlllr• eJ �'
10 FT / 10 . I1irl!aI,-1!"-1IM1lliil11li1ii
r _ -- 4- -i.i[,'t _I .P /�I''i 1. 1111%1". 1 w
/_l:ii 1 - • —I- - ,
4'. 1�"111?III! P
_"
---I eO1p.4,0--_
(MIN.LENGTH) _ _i -�---- ---- " d11S111111,„
1 / / r'11111!illl%11:11i11�i • N
0 ==== � —-_ = I- Zi! 1111;111U.11111511! 2
—p - Or " 0iiiIIIIId irI;-4 �� U)
t - —1 — / s III'::"'A:11:11!..711111m
wi _ ri _1irIIV'111%1!111111111,111■ .
I ,' IIP:11i1411%IIIIIIIIIIIIIU
11 l V= :—/ /'dll:dllllllllllllllllllm
-E 1 -- - ,t (tl_. :.iiIii �linOnuu1111unnu1110 oC
11111111111111111111111111111111' \`'i j14 /%� �= 11111 I l 1 i iiill E 1
I �� wl I' 1 I 0.50 FT
/(MIN.d50)
y=5�� ' .ram
•;:1 li 0
3 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000
Discharge(ft3/sec)
Curves may not be extrapolated.
Figure 8.06a Design of outlet protection protection from a round pipe flowing full,minimum tailwater condition(TA,<0.5 diameter).
STRUCTURE: AO LENGTH: 16 ft
DISCHARGE: 24.91 WIDTH: 18ft
PIPE DIA. (D) 24 in d50: 0.5 ft
DEPTH: 1.5 ft
Rev.12/93 8.06.3
Rip rap dimensions provided on the plan sheet are greater than the minimum required
calculations on this sheet.

Appendices
3 o , ,:. 111 I I,'.
I l ''• I I .�I.
Outlet W = Do + La 90� in IIn 1 I ���
i; •umuw l
pipe j11111�11111�1 o
I, nmun 1� i' II
diameter (Do) 80 • " ' - iiiiii:I:::ii I N.n!:oul'
La —'►I 1 i- _ +. 11111111111 ., !1;!Ir:LIr
1 _ IIun111111 f,!d.n1101
T ilii___ < 0.5Do - _,. - _ 1.-- -- 111111111 61=rnlr r
-i-------- - --- - I- 1111111 ',iirl°11:IIr �'1
no , 4tlSr'Iil111' ' 1
al`�) 7C — 1 4:)rlslrfv a
�. 1 •.ii11Ai r1 1'
APRON DEPTH IS 1.5 TIMES THE STONE °r� •,'iPill%CII� .d 11
DIAMETER(18"MINIMUM DEPTH) Q - . ._ _—_-._,_ _ _-b
P 60 1 Aii:IIl1;1%11% I OM
R` 11111
�e 1-�_ �� r y a :'ii s 11u1■
v 5 - ------ --' 4� II MI IIII11■
�1 6 '// 111i111111111111111
�(n x__ _ 1 / 1111111111111111111
*r I_ +402 ra rlifpmlumuIHUII i
-- `h ,gyp M JIIlhllllll mu uu ■
I a t 1
111111111111111111 1111111.,,
. IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1II!i/r 4
40 +- ! ii►�+—+i-111111111111 Pr'.,,mI1
I Oumu , Almon!
���`` u1m 111 11inurnul,►ir
.%I —. AIr 11I111I11111r111L1n:-,1111 1
1.
�. 1 -111 �: �ri noon Irnn'in1lnl�l.•
�1�� 1 _� I- fd '1 I�' '1 ,IIIIII Ir.ulill'l■r
I .1 nib■ ./. . A�•
.'
20 �5 i:� l : I r Ilillum�;ilir lu,illrl I
immoommou mom10 -I��/mil I i r
10 FT �I�iw!i�� I .P /ag1''i VI' IIII%n'.n: I w
(MIN.LENGTH) MI=DIOrsiillEMIam= -�---- —--- �/ Ij°'d11,11rlllrl a)
.'lllll!illPilgoIi11�i N
0 MI -� IN I — IIII;IIIII.O1idr11! • 2
omi
Ariiiiii:imoin::,, no
is mil — El r •
' _ ALF ' I,:I!1, 5( ll.: IIII• c�
�� �/=r;lll 111%t IIIIIIIIIiIII■
I %�i11 IIII,Ir%1111111111 111�
1 V= �—il /'dhI:d111111IIIIIII11111U -
—1 — - -It 1,1_}vn,' , �.i---RI�idimnnnlnnumuuun r
iiiiiiiiiimmiumum
u. �I � llI .,..r '�
riin1 / 0.50 FT
- I i v=1oa� � - iordilur ... mom iniiiiiimpune
MIN.d50)
. •. 11'- 1: - � • • it ,
V-5 • III:II 0
3 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000
Discharge(ft3/sec)
Curves may not be extrapolated.
Figure 8.06a Design of outlet protection protection from a round pipe flowing full,minimum tailwater condition(Tw<0.5 diameter).
STRUCTURE: BO LENGTH: 10 ft
DISCHARGE: 19.58 WIDTH: 12 ft
PIPE DIA. (D) 24 in d50: .50 ft
DEPTH: 1.50 ft
Rev.12/93 8.06.3
Rip rap dimensions provided on the plan sheet are greater than the minimum required
calculations on this sheet.

USGS QUADRANGLE

USGSU.S.DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The National Mem CLYDE QUADRANGLE
Ju U.S.GEOLOGICAL SURVEY I IQ Tn IS NORTH CAROLINA-HAYWOOD COUNTY
science fors changing world 11J �,/no fir 7.5-MINUTE SERIES
-83.0000° .82.8750°
35.6250° '19°0°7E 20 _ 21 _ 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 35.6250'_
.44.00mN , Church a Iv Schoolhouse Rich Top,\ J o ( l
• c Ur� '1 � � I i kizt r I.. t,°¢. Gap �� vie L e\ M[n
v \ J I & °° \G([Knob \ 'am 1
v
oa„� 1 Riverside-d- e` aaV �.._ IIJ�
c"Ryc m \ PISGAH NATIONAL: \ o �° J -I
EM1Ne ix Al Al FOREST:- \ / \ „� 8
• \ \ Vim/ e` ( ,Q ee _ f Rs 43
g
e 4 L°mil ``�nni�pp \ ...
LsOm
•
J
2Q e ° err°". 1 \
BROW°" 0 o \ 2/
Seaq\M'tn I\ /� MesserMm�00o \rc D.
z�' /l ! Upper c e s
a r� 8 o0 1� commN'vc �_ aEcx RD 42
Miller Gap 3o0D —� 18
42Ia
�-a"° y\ 1•
\ - UPPER 7.d-r cr .\-
r" �
r
or
e To Hu P \\`� J °
nr,/.v 7 .
../ Jay Gap <'o- \ RD ?!z I
e1°'
_D D t , —1 41
411%0 � '11 �� o J t'�...ap<J NOB°� ANT'oxpcR I \ W
1 1C�,y Dawn peelers r� p 6m
999 ) £ r Garden Cem A`il mrP N1• Z..-\. I°c n �.seao
a x w Mary Gray,Kn b
zx CanU`au Top v - .. o %•
% ��
CANSADIE N7 a0� �....� V \ l 44 P 5
°ALE RD \ qb \I Y' I $ \\ B C
a — ar 8\<a 1 a°cE Mill Mtn �w /
1ç(iiI
440
e� 1p ,40 \\t P /srE x i 8 �1 /3aro'1 v/a"t a13- R/ackYGKI 7, /n/o /I, Pl \ �R�= \ QQ / s?°tiy� Smi[hGap� �\
/ •sts' .� Piney Knob J 3��/ YRID
�Caleman Gap, 1 a W°9�' m,o"1 , cro aw"�wpoDr°,� F
/ -I. o,\� � I�ron\\ ,- .''^�yo,N BRna.RD a 7. - v 39
s �,w NUJ'/i ode ,
39 •
P° °°S L° ttcv_It .1
7.
oW<a`w 77 -°Rc• oo/ o° y �/ 9.m c Jump Of�Gap
'\f
_—_ wP�� 8 / \ t ` \ °e,\ Jump Off 3�
$ �� m Q w4r\a 'Pe'� Wolf Pen Gap
sam 1 \ + ° �.. a i N\ c 4 R m dP �) 38
g_ $I x \1/ w0 �I/
f�,\ �.� � (`Ltr Marion-TdP aw
38 o _i_
Davis Top V o ¢ • c�v, LONGBRANCH RD \g I
8
\p / c°,w�v�` +� - $ Chambers M t
TJms,T.P ,8 � / e rr,e l��C o v-e �-, Ut< �� ��� PcOR Q �` NWEap woK-
T /L • ?�N Fid'IIv.TOP '® y ED"N oc'`
S"W: yp� ,00
a U)I J-/ a� w .Do 1 O„``� R 37
37 /J a 9, / H y d e r M t n-� w �, \P o au,
m J
dfo�B. S l
7
Snakeden Tpp _, 4 e '' \
\/ yEp9 .,t, \ N d
1..
H,`yh�To p ,/ A g t,, g ERRELL R° i. e to Cj� °
Idl •
y McClure cem �LO�
•
36 UtalMtn �-�g ° _ n NCC` U / 36
E �zaro 7 wa
StillhOuse co ERD xeyz nD' u
8/,8 10:!\ )
ow DR Grassy-Gap- Gap WpJSE e .NIIII
rr' °"' 3000 J i lia
-a wos` ,09 .--r (a NO��ro S J - / �
Qo o qN0¢ plrnEs�/ ner M I r: R �/y r\RD,� `�
Si3\uckl?Knob \ I o9 /7 ..5,_ 1 10.1,D� 9 - \ 7 c0 F� 35
J \�// �J • � '"e P9� /ii o °iENWOaD-114 �<jO' /� .� \, \ BURN FARM
)1 1 Full sn C��n ...VVV,.���\�x"p0 v1� " ,& �(_. j: °P R°cE c \ RiI"" �I aPo\
LittlelMuckle Knob \\ �' o Ir'py3� , ( -
\`p P� F AF LN 9O♦ --erond ern eafse-ex I £ _ C \ A
r, ._-e 8 \__,• ---1.�e/��'�� \� >t w `�� �i� F 6 i \ Leo. c
j co��R Su sir Ggp_3wD\ 8 p,�W✓ g • - 1) it W - q ��° —
L" 11s� J I �� J�` ^' /r_` _" 34 S R a6 MOUzoxq° V ey
;\P t pD 18 V. `PEL Da Q ' W 000 P ��i EP`� OIe+Bon A
34 'i�� o ;/ � `�V a t'd3 l�k <Q t �Lr°ER° °� ����! � k` DE'° _ a it
Ve lure Cem
\ P 1' o . �` - ® ` 2 x H Y"Cem
1 D / cLake ° a ow ,/ pr° r��Cl3.ydI :11 ¢£ 4 \ danela3ka _ r �J,r � ^ °N48 �iqDIvyHills' ` e. ` _—__ nt Rc\ `' ° E"' iY t J� f�I— \����—� A ,o� .MLL R°.Hieil cem \ Crra Memo zlt F f 4,,0 .rErpOS[> - ` 1E - , 't W REPs„,, - / careen:/g r a16,,,,"''''
oke rr / 1 nR/ �_. Y a N `� �" Ju nah3.Aa /tt,`p0 °o+°" \�HayGoGB 8 ��' A 30�/r� pl,derson.Mrn 33
-_�` , (-\a /£ © community j1,, _ A— Illege33 R'd3e ,���a°aa -ra � e�,,�, �10- . Reeves P ,� < PROJECT AREA
I , Park
Bm ° UT
�,W M
eP y1 Ne Fairway Hills lois 1 x0,,,.-"` �,/ so
� • 7°\s* w 111 ke 32 14 TopNip o / ,, d91lip
STASES COVE $ ...� �:
o
&) y aw �,� _ �. O S81eERr pD P_p.l, I \ , , t
_� 9T carrea- • • • ( `a pti F - V Clyde GaP � x ♦ 8 " "31...N
31 ,g--Ao I.� o Memor,a\var� b�-blidcresttig• ��5 p £I a 9<— r,�,,,. 3,a
�R'�4-00.
�,/��„.I W �� 7� ) F' �� _r V"\
WAYNESVIL'LE £� G°w $xJ 23 3 e 7y(�oW' �°°w xOwE''C.„,., j i g=_ /1• W� _ owe cem�F d Y Mao yo u ��EL p �p N Pressley Mtn P Ns v_BR 30m
s .V/ too 3. o e ) s R
�,p ./ �a *o �8 / RE _o sea
35.5000° 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1291.11E
35.5000°
-83.0000° -82.8750°
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
Produced by the United States Geological Survey SCALE 1.24 000 Expressway Local connector -
rth American Datum of 19831NAD81) • �/ Secondary Hwy Local Road
World Geodetic System of 19841WG5841.Projection and 1 0.5 0 KILOMETERS 1 2 "{' NOMx Ramp 4WD p
1 000-meter grie:Universal Transverse Mercator,Zone 175 1000 500 u 0•
METERS 1000 2000CAROLINA
This map is not a legal document.Boundaries may be .Interstate Route US Route O State Route p
in government 114 MILS 1 0.5 0 1 "Cih'
reservations maynot he shown Obt iinperrmission before zo wLa ILES B FY Primary Rouce Passenger FS Migh Mto
en eprivate lands. 1000 0 1000 3000 3000 4000 M .0 .0 7000 8000 9000 10000 anouxere rocnnox Route Clearance Route
enter.
Imagery.. .................. ..................NAIP,October 2 Bureau,
a October 2016 �..... ~~ ~~ FEET ~~ ~J Check with local Forest Service unit o 0
Roads....within
..err U.S. Census Bureau, Data
w
..... ................ urx aRlo AOOawa MAGXETIe xoa7x for current navel<onemion:ane restrictions. �^m
p
Roads witM1in US Forest Service Lands—................GNISTopo Data oecuxAnoxnT eexTeaoF sxEET 2Cvve Creek Gap
with limited Forest Service updates,not Available 1 2 3 2 Fines Creek <�
CONTOUR INTERVAL 40 FEET =0 2
Names............................................................................GN15.1980-2022 U.e.xeumelena 35andYmusM1
Contours
...............................Na tonal National
rapny Elevation
t aset 2021 NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1908
t se, ,00,wp-m sax.re 1p 4 5 4Dellwpoe
Contours.................. . .................Nanonal Elevation Dataset, 2023 n LL
Boundaries Multiple sources; see metaama me son - zor This map was produced mconmrm with the 5 Canton CLYDE, NC rc
�!S co National eeospaoal Program US ropo Product Standard. 6 Hazelwood
Wetland:................ National Wetlands Inventory Not Available 6 7 8 7 Waynesville 2022 �'�'i
cne m. ADJOINING QUADRANGLES x aDso —�

NRCS SOILS REPORT

USDA United States A product of the National Custom Soil Resource
Department of Cooperative Soil Survey,
Agriculture a joint effort of the United Report for
States Department of
RCS Agriculture and other Haywood County
Federal agencies, State
Natural agencies including the Area, North
Resources Agricultural Experiment
Conservation Stations, and local
Service participants Carolina
. 4E. ....„. . g
_ ......... , __,. 1..,.... : ..,„ .. ..
.. . .,„ .
At , . •- _ • .- •I ••„, `ems i
-. r ,
Y ' ' -- A t - - - n' „,•.•, .,
„:4t,„ bi.i.p,,,,.._ . ,
F
444 -1_,„0171011° -, , r , •
r 4 • \41 1
1 `
n •�i
7
•, i - - i
rC -
0 600 ft w % *,.f
April 11, 2024

Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs)or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist(http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2

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

Contents
Preface 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made 5
Soil Map 8
Soil Map 9
Legend 10
Map Unit Legend 11
Map Unit Descriptions 11
Haywood County Area, North Carolina 13
EvE—Evard-Cowee complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes 13
ExD—Evard-Cowee-Urban land complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes 15
FnE2—Fannin loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded 17
HaC2—Hayesville clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded 18
HaD2—Hayesville clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded 20
ScB—Saunook loam, basin, 2 to 8 percent slopes 21
SdC—Saunook loam, basin, 8 to 15 percent slopes, stony 23
References 25
4

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

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

Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
7

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

Custom Soil Resource Report
N Soil Map N
En En
N N
W W
324740 324800 324860 324920 324980 325040 325100 325160 325220 325280 325340
35°31'28"N -1 35°31'28"N
.J -
S.G B limy 17.
E f
/- HaD2 _.y_ 1 ! 4ilki-
0, •
Niii
4
EvE
: HaD2 0
,,AN ScB `
4,
a ,�
d
._ it• .,'fit ►�+: x . � f_ +i
w� s s• ..% `1it �
�, r FnE2 • • � .� �t :439-a 0
FnE2 • r. 9'r• *-- '1Y
SdC ,As. ,,- tsoletit+it : Ha D2
. .: , , . -/f,.
HaD2
-,.a 7 i ,
x,100 Gawp ni ��� eijUoc1 ate aG�oo��a0�° fit" t
35°31'14"N 35°31'14"N
324740 324800 324860 324920 324980 325040 325100 325160 325220 325280 325340
3 3
EnMap Scale:1:2,900 if printed on A landscape(11"x 8.5")sheet.
Meters
N 0 40 80 160 240 m
Feet
0 100 200 400 600
Map projection:Web Mercator Corner coordinates:WGS84 Edge tics:UTM Zone 17N WGS84
9

Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest(AOI) 14 Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
Area of Interest(AOI) 1:12,000.
Q Stony Spot
Soilsit Very Stony Spot
0 Soil Map Unit Polygons Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
tl Wet Spot
,..,. Soil Map Unit Lines Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
p Other misunderstandingof the detail of mapping and accuracyof soil
p Soil Map Unit Points pp g
.� Special Line Features line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of
Special Point Features contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Blowout Water Features scale.
-_- Streams and Canals
kg Borrow Pit
Transportation Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
* clay Spot 1.44 Rails measurements.
0 Closed Depression
pu/ Interstate Highways
Gravel Pit Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
ti US Routes Web Soil Survey URL:
Gravelly Spot Major Roads Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857)
® Landfill Local Roads Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
• Lava Flow Background projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the
46 Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more
It Mine or Quarry accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
4 Miscellaneous Water This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
O Perennial Water of the version date(s)listed below.
v Rock Outcrop Soil Survey Area: Haywood County Area, North Carolina
+ Saline Spot Survey Area Data: Version 25,Sep 13,2023
Sandy Spot Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales
Severely Eroded Spot 1:50,000 or larger.
• Sinkhole Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Apr 1,2022—May 9,
31 Slide or Slip 2022
oa Sodic Spot The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
10

Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
EvE Evard-Cowee complex,30 to 50 6.8 15.5%
percent slopes
ExD Evard-Cowee-Urban land 0.4 0.9%
complex, 15 to 30 percent
slopes
FnE2 Fannin loam,30 to 50 percent 3.5 7.9%
slopes,eroded
HaC2 Hayesville clay loam,8 to 15 13.3 30.3%
percent slopes,eroded
HaD2 Hayesville clay loam, 15 to 30 9.5 21.6%
percent slopes,eroded
ScB Saunook loam,basin,2 to 8 8.4 19.2%
percent slopes
SdC Saunook loam,basin,8 to 15 2.0 4.7%
percent slopes,stony
Totals for Area of Interest 44.0 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
11

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

Custom Soil Resource Report
Haywood County Area, North Carolina
EvE—Evard-Cowee complex, 30 to 50 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx26
Elevation: 1,680 to 4,880 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 37 to 82 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 140 to 203 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Evard and similar soils: 50 percent
Cowee and similar soils: 26 percent
Minor components: 24 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Evard
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across-slope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from biotite gneiss and/or amphibolite that
is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A -0 to 5 inches: gravelly loam
Bt- 5 to 29 inches: sandy clay loam
BC-29 to 37 inches: sandy loam
C-37 to 80 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
13

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Cowee
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope, crest
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Residuum weathered from biotite gneiss and/or amphibolite that
is affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A -0 to 5 inches: loam
Bt- 5 to 27 inches: clay loam
Cr-27 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat):Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low(about 3.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Edneyville, stony
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Saunook, stony
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform:Toes on drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, upper third of
mountainflank, base slope, head slope
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
14

Custom Soil Resource Report
Trimont, stony
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform: Hillslopes, mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope, head slope
Down-slope shape: Concave, linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Chestnut, stony
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down-slope shape: Convex, linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
ExD—Evard-Cowee-Urban land complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: Ibyt
Elevation: 1,720 to 3,570 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 50 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Evard and similar soils:40 percent
Cowee, stony, and similar soils: 25 percent
Urban land: 20 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Evard
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from hornblende gneiss and/or amphibolite
Typical profile
A -0 to 5 inches: clay loam
Bt- 5 to 29 inches: sandy clay loam
15

Custom Soil Resource Report
BC-29 to 37 inches: sandy loam
C-37 to 80 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Cowee, Stony
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from hornblende gneiss and/or amphibolite
Typical profile
A -0 to 5 inches: clay loam
Bt- 5 to 27 inches: gravelly sandy clay loam
Cr-27 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat):Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low(about 4.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
16

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Urban Land
Setting
Parent material: Streets, parking lots, buildings, and other structures
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Udorthents
Percent of map unit: 9 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Linear, convex
Across-slope shape: Linear, convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Thurmont
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Drainageways
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
FnE2—Fannin loam, 30 to 50 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: I byv
Elevation: 1,690 to 2,600 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 80 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Fannin and similar soils: 80 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Fannin
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope
17

Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, side slope
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material:Affected by soil creep in the upper solum over residuum
weathered from mica schist and/or micaceous gneiss and/or other micaceous
metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A -0 to 7 inches: fine sandy loam
Bt- 7 to 26 inches: clay loam
BC-26 to 33 inches: loam
C-33 to 80 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 30 to 50 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 7.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
HaC2—Hayesville clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: Ibyx
Elevation: 1,790 to 2,280 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 50 to 58 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Hayesville, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Hayesville, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
18

Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Residuum weathered from hornblende gneiss and/or amphibolite
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 6 inches: clay loam
Bt- 6 to 33 inches: clay loam
BC-33 to 45 inches: loam
C-45 to 80 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY007WV- Low Mountain Mesic Residuum
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Cowee, stony
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Fannin
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Urban land
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
19

Custom Soil Resource Report
HaD2—Hayesville clay loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes, eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: I byy
Elevation: 1,790 to 2,280 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 50 to 58 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Hayesville, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 80 percent
Minor components: 20 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Hayesville, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Residuum weathered from hornblende gneiss and/or amphibolite
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 6 inches: clay loam
Bt- 6 to 33 inches: clay loam
BC-33 to 45 inches: loam
C-45 to 80 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 9.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY007WV- Low Mountain Mesic Residuum
Hydric soil rating: No
20

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Cowee, stony
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Landform: Hillslopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Fannin
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Landform: Hillslopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, interfluve
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Urban land
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
ScB—Saunook loam, basin, 2 to 8 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx4x
Elevation: 1,530 to 4,340 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 39 to 56 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 141 to 197 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Saunook, basin, and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Saunook, Basin
Setting
Landform: Fans, coves, drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across-slope shape: Linear, concave
Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
21

Custom Soil Resource Report
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 9 inches: loam
Bt1 -9 to 28 inches: loam
Bt2-28 to 34 inches: cobbly loam
BC-34 to 80 inches: cobbly sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Dillsboro, basin
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Coves, stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Concave, convex
Across-slope shape: Concave, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Cullowhee, basin, frequently flooded
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Nikwasi, basin, frequently flooded
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform: Flood plains, depressions
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise, dip
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
22

Custom Soil Resource Report
SdC—Saunook loam, basin, 8 to 15 percent slopes, stony
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx4y
Elevation: 2,270 to 5,200 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 42 to 56 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost-free period: 141 to 197 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Saunook, basin, stony, and similar soils: 79 percent
Minor components: 21 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Saunook, Basin, Stony
Setting
Landform: Fans, coves, drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across-slope shape: Linear, concave
Parent material: Colluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap- 0 to 9 inches: loam
Bt1 -9 to 28 inches: loam
Bt2-28 to 34 inches: cobbly loam
BC-34 to 80 inches: cobbly sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 0.1 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water(Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Moderate (about 8.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Ecological site: F130BY004WV- Mesic Residuum Warm Aspect
Hydric soil rating: No
23

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Braddock, basin, eroded
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Fans, stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope, tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Dillsboro, basin
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Coves, stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainbase, base slope
Down-slope shape: Concave, convex
Across-slope shape: Concave, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Cullowhee, basin, frequently flooded
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Nikwasi, basin, frequently flooded
Percent of map unit:4 percent
Landform: Flood plains, depressions
Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise, dip
Down-slope shape: Linear, concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: Yes
24

References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres 142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
25

Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nres142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nres142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
26

NOAA RAINFALL DATA

NOAA Atlas 14,Volume 2,Version 3
°' \ Location name:Clyde,North Carolina,USA* ,,,,,u",.w
Latitude:35.5229°,Longitude: -82.9319° e none
,., 0. Elevation:2628 ft**
��� 'source:ESRI Maps w,�
"'" **source:USGS ""
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
G.M.Bonnin,D.Martin,B.Lin,T.Parzybok,M.Yekta,and D.Riley
NOAA,National Weather Service,Silver Spring,Maryland
PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches)1
Average recurrence interval(years)
Duration
1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000
0.338 0.400 0.482 0.545 I 0.626 0.688 0.750 I 0.811 0.889 0.951
5-min (0.305-0.375) (0.361-0.445) (0.435-0.536) (0.491-0.605)1(0.560-0.695) (0.612-0.764) (0.663-0.834)i(0.712-0.905) (0.772-0.998) (0.818-1.07)
0.540 0.640 0.772 0.872 0.998 1.10 1.19 1.28 1.41 1.50
10-min
(0.487-0.600) (0.578-0.711) (0.696-0.858) (0.785-0.968) (0.893-1.11) (0.974-1.22) (1.05-1.33) (1.13-1.43) (1.22-1.58) (1.29-1.69)
0.675 0.804 0.976 1.10 1.26 1.39 1.50 1.62 1.77 1.88
1 5-min (0.608-0.749) (0.726-0.894) (0.881-1.08) (0.993-1.22) (1.13-1.40) (1.23-1.54) (1.33-1.68) I (1.42-1.81) (1.54-1.99) (1.62-2.12)
30-min 0.925 1.11 1.39 1.60 1.87 2.09 2.31 I 2.52 2.82 3.04
(0.834-1.03) (1.00-1.24) (1.25-1.54) (1.44-1.78) (1.68-2.08) (1.86-2.32) (2.04-2.57) (2.22-2.82) (2.45-3.16) (2.62-3.43)
60-min 1.15 1.39 1.78 2.08 2.50 2.83 3.18 3.54 4.04 4.44
(1.04-1.28) (1.26-1.55) (1.60-1.98) (1.87-2.31) (2.23-2.77) (2.52-3.14) (2.81-3.54) 1 (3.11-3.95) (3.51-4.54) (3.82-5.01)
2-hr 1.33 1.61 2.04 2.38 2.87 3.26 3.66 4.09 4.67 I 5.13
(1.21-1.48) (1.46-1.78) (1.84-2.25) (2.15-2.63) (2.57-3.16) (2.90-3.59) (3.23-4.05) (3.58-4.53) (4.04-5.21) (4.40-5.76)
3-hr 1.41 1.69 2.12 2.48 3.00 3.43 3.88 4.36 5.04 5.58
(1.28-1.57) (1.53-1.87) (1.92-2.35) (2.24-2.74) (2.69-3.31) (3.05-3.78) (3.43-4.29) (3.81-4.83) (4.33-5.62) (4.74-6.26)
6-hr 1.71 2.02 2.49 2.90 3.49 3.98 4.51 5.07 5.86 6.48
(1.57-1.88) (1.84-2.22) (2.27-2.73) (2.64-3.17) (3.15-3.81) (3.57-4.35) (4.00-4.93) (4.46-5.56) (5.07-6.46) I (5.54-7.19)
12-hr 2.12 2.50 3.06 3.52 4.15 4.65 5.15 5.65 6.31 6.77
(1.96-2.31) (2.30-2.73) (2.81-3.33) (3.23-3.83) (3.79-4.50) (4.24-5.05) (4.67-5.60) (5.10-6.16) (5.65-6.91) (6.03-7.45)
24-hr 2.49 2.98 3.65 4.19 4.92 5.51 6.10 6.70 7.48 8.07
(2.33-2.67) 1 (2.79-3.19)J (3.42-3.91) (3.91-4.48) (4.59-5.25) (5.12-5.86) (5.66-6.48) 1 (6.19-7.12) (6.89-7.94) (7.40-8.56)
2-day 2.96 3.53 4.28 4.88 5.70 6.35 7.01 7.66 8.52 9.15
(2.78-3.15) (3.32-3.76) (4.02-4.56) (4.58-5.20) (5.34-6.06) (5.93-6.74) (6.52-7.43) (7.11-8.13) (7.86-9.03) (8.42-9.70)
3-day 3.18 3.78 4.54 5.16 5.98 6.62 7.27 7.90 8.72 9.32
(3.00-3.37) (3.56-4.02) (4.28-4.83) (4.86-5.47) (5.62-6.34) (6.21-7.02) (6.80-7.70) (7.37-8.37) (8.10-9.23) (8.64-9.86)
4-day 3.39 4.02 4.81 5.43 6.26 6.90 7.53 8.14 8.93 9.49
(3.20-3.59) (3.81-4.27) (4.55-5.10) (5.13-5.74) (5.90-6.62) (6.49-7.29) (7.07-7.96) (7.63-8.60) (8.35-9.43) (8.85-10.0)
7-day 4.02 4.76 5.68 6.42 7.41 8.19 8.97 9.74 10.7 11.5
(3.81-4.25) (4.51-5.04) (5.38-6.00) (6.07-6.78) (7.00-7.82) (7.71-8.63) (8.42-9.46) (9.12-10.3) (10.0-11.3) (10.7-12.1)
10-day 4.62 5.45 6.45 7.25 8.32 9.15 9.98 10.8 11.9 12.6
(4.37-4.89) (5.16-5.78) (6.10-6.84) (6.85-7.67) (7.84-8.80) (8.61-9.68) (9.37-10.6) (10.1-11.4) (11.1-12.6) (11.7-13.4)
20-day 6.36 7.47 8.66 9.59 10.8 11.7 12.6 13.4 14.4 1 15.2
(6.06-6.69) I (7.11-7.87) (8.24-9.12) (9.12-10.1) (10.2-11.4) (11.1-12.3) (11.9-13.2) (12.6-14.1) (13.6-15.2) (14.2-16.0)
7.86 9.19 10.5 11.5 12.7 13.6 14.5 15.3 16.2 16.9
30-day (7.51-8.21) (8.80-9.62) (10.0-11.0) (11.0-12.0) (12.2-13.3) (13.0-14.3) (13.8-15.2) (14.5-16.0) (15.4-17.0) (16.0-17.7)
-
10.0 11.7 13.1 14.2 15.5 16.4 17.2 17.9 18.7 19.2
45-day (9.61-10.4) (11.2-12.2) (12.6-13.7) (13.6-14.8) (14.8-16.1) (15.7-17.0) (16.4-17.9) (17.1-18.6) (17.8-19.4) (18.3-20.0)
-
60-day 12.1 14.0 15.7 16.8 I 18.2 19.2 20.0 20.7 21.5 22.0
(11.6-12.6) (13.5-14.6) (15.1-16.3) (16.2-17.5) 1 (17.5-18.9) (18.4-19.9) (19.2-20.8) 1 (19.9-21.6) (20.6-22.4) 1 (21.1-22.9)
1 Precipitation frequency(PF)estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series(PDS).
Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90%confidence interval.The probability that precipitation frequency estimates
(for a given duration and average recurrence interval)will be greater than the upper bound(or less than the lower bound)is 5%.Estimates at upper bounds
are not checked against probable maximum precipitation(PMP)estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.

NOAA Atlas 14,Volume 2,Version 3
°' \ Location name:Clyde,North Carolina,USA* ,,,,u",,,w
A Latitude:35.5229°,Longitude: -82.9317° e none
�, a. Elevation:2631 ft**
��� 'source:ESRI Maps '
"'" **source:USGSkillt
""
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
G.M.Bonnin,D.Martin,B.Lin,T.Parzybok,M.Yekta,and D.Riley
NOAA,National Weather Service,Silver Spring,Maryland
PF tabular I PF graphical I Maps & aerials
PF tabular
PDS-based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence intervals (in inches/hour)1
Average recurrence interval(years)
Duration
1 2 5 10 25 50 100 200 500 1000
4.06 4.80 5.78 6.54 7.51 8.26 9.00 9.73 I 10.7 I 11.4
5-min (3.66-4.50) (4.33-5.34) (5.22-6.43) (5.89-7.26) (6.72-8.34) (7.34-9.17) 1 (7.96-10.0) (8.54-10.9) 1 (9.26-12.0) (9.82-12.9)
3.24 3.84 4.63 5.23 5.99 6.57 7.15 7.71 8.44 8.98
10-min (2.92-3.60) (3.47-4.27) (4.18-5.15) (4.71-5.81) (5.36-6.65) (5.84-7.30) (6.32-7.96) (6.77-8.60) (7.33-9.47) �(7.73-10.1)
2.70 3.22 3.90 4.41 5.06 5.55 6.02 6.48 7.08 7.52
1 5-min (2.43-3.00) (2.90-3.58) (3.52-4.34) (3.97-4.90) (4.53-5.62) (4.94-6.16) (5.33-6.70) (5.69-7.24) (6.15-7.95) 1 (6.47-8.48)
30-min 1.85 2.22 2.77 3.19 3.75 4.18 4.61 5.05 5.63 6.09
(1.67-2.05) (2.01-2.47) (2.50-3.08) (2.88-3.55) (3.35-4.16) (3.72-4.64) 1 (4.08-5.13) (4.43-5.63) (4.89-6.32) (5.24-6.87)
60-min 1.15 1.39 1.78 2.08 2.50 2.83 3.18 3.54 4.04 4.44
(1.04-1.28) (1.26-1.55) (1.60-1.98) (1.87-2.31) (2.23-2.77) (2.52-3.14) I (2.81-3.54) (3.11-3.95) (3.51-4.54) (3.82-5.01)
0.666 0.803 1.02 1.19 1.43 1.63 1.83 2.04 2.34 2.56
2-hr (0.603-0.738) (0.728-0.888) (0.920-1.12) (1.07-1.32) (1.28-1.58) (1.45-1.80) (1.62-2.03) (1.79-2.26) (2.02-2.60) (2.20-2.88)
3-hr 0.469 0.561 0.706 0.826 0.999 1.14 1.29 1.45 1.68 1.86
(0.426-0.521) (0.509-0.621) (0.640-0.781) (0.746-0.911) (0.895-1.10) (1.02-1.26) (1.14-1.43) (1.27-1.61) (1.44-1.87) (1.58-2.08)
6-hr 0.285 0.336 0.415 0.484 0.582 0.664 0.752 0.846 0.978 1.08
(0.261-0.314) (0.307-0.369) (0.379-0.456) (0.440-0.529) (0.526-0.636) (0.596-0.726) (0.668-0.823) (0.744-0.928) (0.846-1.08) (0.925-1.20)
12-hr 0.176 0.207 0.253 0.291 0.344 0.385 0.427 0.469 0.523 I 0.562
(0.162-0.192) (0.191-0.226) (0.233-0.276) (0.268-0.317) (0.314-0.373) (0.351-0.418) (0.387-0.464) (0.423-0.510) (0.468-0.573) (0.500-0.618)
24-hr 0.103 0.124 0.152 0.174 0.205 0.229 0.254 I 0.279 0.311 0.336
(0.097-0.111) (0.116-0.133) (0.142-0.162) (0.162-0.186) (0.191-0.218) (0.213-0.244) (0.235-0.270) (0.258-0.296) (0.287-0.330)1(0.308-0.356)
2-day 0.061 0.073 0.089 0.101 0.118 0.132 0.145 0.159 0.177 0.190
(0.058-0.065) (0.069-0.078) (0.083-0.095) (0.095-0.108) (0.111-0.126) (0.123-0.140) (0.135-0.154) (0.148-0.169) (0.163-0.188) (0.175-0.201)
3-day 0.044 0.052 0.063 0.071 0.083 0.092 0.100 0.109 0.121 0.129
(0.041-0.046) (0.049-0.055) (0.059-0.067) (0.067-0.075) (0.078-0.088) (0.086-0.097) (0.094-0.106) (0.102-0.116) (0.112-0.128) (0.119-0.136)
4-day 0.035 0.041 0.050 0.056 0.065 0.071 0.078 0.084 0.093 0.098
(0.033-0.037) (0.039-0.044) (0.047-0.053) (0.053-0.059) (0.061-0.068) (0.067-0.075) (0.073-0.082) (0.079-0.089) (0.086-0.098) (0.092-0.104)
7-day ' 0.023 0.028 0.033 0.038 0.044 0.048 0.053 0.057 0.063 0.068
(0.022-0.025) (0.026-0.029) (0.032-0.035) (0.036-0.040) (0.041-0.046) (0.045-0.051) (0.050-0.056) (0.054-0.061) (0.059-0.067) (0.063-0.072)
10-day 0.019 0.022 0.026 0.030 0.034 0.038 0.041 0.045 0.049 I 0.052
(0.018-0.020) (0.021-0.024) (0.025-0.028) (0.028-0.031) (0.032-0.036) (0.035-0.040) (0.039-0.044) (0.042-0.047) (0.046-0.052) (0.048-0.055)
20-day 0.013 0.015 0.018 0.019 0.022 ' 0.024 1 0.026 0.027 0.030 0.031
(0.012-0.013) (0.014-0.016) (0.017-0.019) (0.018-0.021) (0.021-0.023) (0.023-0.025)i(0.024-0.027) (0.026-0.029) (0.028-0.031) (0.029-0.033)
30-day 0.010 0.012 0.014 0.015 0.017 0.018 0.020 0.021 0.022 0.023
(0.010-0.011) (0.012-0.013) (0.013-0.015) (0.015-0.016) (0.016-0.018) (0.018-0.019) (0.019-0.021) (0.020-0.022) (0.021-0.023) (0.022-0.024)
45-day 0.009 0.010 0.012 0.013 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.017 0.017
(0.008-0.009) (0.010-0.011) (0.011-0.012) (0.012-0.013) (0.013-0.014) (0.014-0.015) (0.015-0.016) (0.015-0.017) (0.016-0.017) (0.016-0.018)
60-day 0.008 0.009 0.010 0.011 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.015
(0.008-0.008) (0.009-0.010) (0.010-0.011) (0.011-0.012) (0.012-0.013) (0.012-0.013) (0.013-0.014) (0.013-0.014) (0.014-0.015) (0.014-0.015)
1 Precipitation frequency(PF)estimates in this table are based on frequency analysis of partial duration series(PDS).
Numbers in parenthesis are PF estimates at lower and upper bounds of the 90%confidence interval.The probability that precipitation frequency estimates(for
a given duration and average recurrence interval)will be greater than the upper bound(or less than the lower bound)is 5%.Estimates at upper bounds are not
checked against probable maximum precipitation(PMP)estimates and may be higher than currently valid PMP values.
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more information.

FEMA FIRM MAPS

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette - FEMA _Legend
82°56'13"W 35°31'37"N SEE FIS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT
• '� %. ' +
t f el Without Base Flood Elevation(BFE)
• •,
• • �, Ili A - _ A tiliirN SPECIAL FLOOD
r —.air
or Depth Zone AE,AO,AH,VE,AR
r ~' HAZARD AREAS Regulatory Floodway
Iv '
t - - ' 0.2%Annual Chance Flood Hazard,Areas
~ �t ~ ' of 1%annual chance flood with average
/ • �� : .4 depth less than one foot or with drainage
r ' ' r• areas of less than one square mile zonex
• • '� 46
^ �' Future Conditions 1%Annual
'? r� \ A. • as '1 OF r LYDDETJ
it Chance Flood Hazard zonex
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
�'� ♦ I 370122 '� i + OTHER AREAS OF �" Levee.See Notes.zone x
• Saila . w.l • r FLOOD HAZARD �� Area with Flood Risk due to LeveezoneD
lip,-� _ NO SCREEN Area of Minimal Flood Hazard zonex
1 * "'a Effective LOMRs
` . ` Arap OTHER AREAS Area of Undetermined Flood Hazard Zone
f111411511r
Ili ' f GENERAL - - Channel,Culvert,or Storm Sewer
1�� a Air
4,....
� ilkliq STRUCTURES I I I I I I I Levee,Dike,or Floodwall
-
* - 1 \ - 0 20.2 Cross Sections with 1%Annual Chance
•
• AR-A OF MINIMAL FLOOD HAZARD •
- . de t''S Water Surface Elevation
e- - - Coastal Transect
Iy a ! t r It
- 1: ••••••513— Base Flood Elevation Line(BFE)
_ II 0 - '� ' Limit of Study
flip 'kbrVIIIII Jurisdiction Boundary
_ - ,-11 `, s�M f `� ------ Coastal Transect Baseline
37 1 1 . .- I • ,r ' . OTHER - — Profile Baseline
k 37�2�1 HAYWOOD COUNTY ►„•--2012 y . Af. ` FEATURES Hydrographic Feature
- eff.4/3/2012 3701,20 • �! •
_ s • Not•.- ' may/ Digital Data Available N
•
�� • �^ _IP t No Digital Data Available
_ , • �, • �► • , .-r' M MAP PANELS Unmapped
H
! 9� - )4 , • •- 'r The pin displayed on the map is an approximate
• point selected by the user and does not represent
111 Ill• * , 1� � `i111. ♦ an authoritative property location.
Ilk
Pii•• ie.
liltr ~ This mapcomplies with FEMA's standards for the use of
. b
l • ,� f + • p
.•
t • 4it ` ' , +� digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
' • r The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap
• _L' •
. / ��. ♦ r ` • accuracy standards
•+ V i tU •. ` • The flood hazard information is derived directly from the
k r ��. •► �0 , authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA.This map
4 . .•• : ♦ • •
4! �+ t• . was exported on 4/4/2024 at 2:43 PM and does not
_ _Pa { • y ♦ ♦ reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
• 114110 . time.The NFHL and effective information may change or
-i r t ` • • ,
#1 I , become superseded by new data over time.
` ..+' . likk This map image is void if the one or more of the following map
- r ` r elements do not appear:basemap imagery,flood zone labels,
i legend,scale bar,map creation date,community identifiers,
- _ •' FIRM panel number,and FIRM effective date.Map images for
Feet 1 6 82°55'36"W 35°31'8"N unmapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
0 250 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 '000 regulatory purposes.
Basemap Imagery Source:USGS National Map 2023

GEOTECHNICAL REPORT

REPORT OF PRELIMINARY
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
HAYWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE,
1684 JONES COVE ROAD,
CLYDE, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared For:
Mr. Brek W. Lanning, AIA
Haywood Community College
185 Freelander Drive
Clyde, North Carolina 28721
BLE Project Number J24-22245-01
March 5,2024
II I
BUNNELL
• LAMMONS
ENGINEERING
30 Park Ridge Drive, Fletcher, NC 28732
1,828.277,0100 B 828,277,0110 Minfo@blecorp,com
BLECORP.COM

'I ' '• BUNNELLLAMMONS�
ENGINEERING
March 5, 2024
Mr. Brek W. Lanning,AIA
Director of Campus Development/Campus Architect
Haywood Community College
185 Freelander Drive
Clyde,North Carolina 28721
Subject: REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION
1684 Jones Cove Road
Clyde,Haywood County,North Carolina
BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
Dear Mr. Lanning,
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Incorporated (BLE) is pleased to present this report of preliminary
geotechnical exploration for above-mentioned property in Clyde, North Carolina. This exploration was
performed generally as described in Bunnell-Lammons Engineering (BLE) Proposal No. P24-0135 dated
January 26, 2024. The exploration was authorized on January 31, 2024, by the signature of Mr. Brek W.
Lanning on our Proposal Acceptance Sheet.
Sincerely,
BUNNELL LAMMONS ENGINEERING INC.
NC FIRM REGISTRATION#C-1538
CAtrq 1 - 9/ 6 -. -1 -
Claire Hill,E.I.T. Colm O'Dofierty,P.E.
Staff Professional Project Engineer
NC Registration#050976
\001I I I I I11%,/i
�.‘ C A R pf'4
..... 0 ...c,e
.4Q SE ` 24. 2
6 4�C
Seiffspt itt** \,'
NC kLg,+ds00.3614
30 Pork Ridge Drive, Fletcher, NC 28732 828.277.0100 828.277.0110 [e-mail]
BLECORP.COM

111.1:
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5, 2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 AUTHORIZATION 1
2.0 SCOPE OF EXPLORATION 1
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1
4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION 1
5.0 SITE GEOLOGY 2
6.0 SITE CONDITIONS 2
7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2
8.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 4
9.0 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 4
9.1 Foundations 5
9.2 Seismic Site Classification 5
9.3 Grade Slabs 6
9.4 Pavement 6
9.5 Secondary Design Considerations 7
10.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS 8
10.1 Clearing and Grubbing 8
10.2 Drainage 8
10.3 Proofrolling 8
10.4 Excavation 8
10.5 Engineered Fill 9
10.6 Fill Placement over Sloping Ground 9
10.7 Subgrade Protection During Construction 9
10.8 Assessment of Onsite Material for use as a Structural Fill 10
10.9 Slopes 10
11.0 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW 11
12.0 BASIS OF RECOMMENDATIONS 11
Appendix
Appendix A Figures
Appendix B Field Exploration Procedures
Appendix C Boring Logs
Appendix D A Key to Soil Classifications
Appendix E Laboratory Test Results
Appendix F Important Information about This Geotechnical Engineering Report
i of i

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
1.0 AUTHORIZATION
A preliminary geotechnical exploration has been requested for the proposed development of 1684 Jones
Cove Road in Clyde,North Carolina. This exploration was performed generally as described in Bunnell-
Lammons Engineering (BLE) Proposal No. P24-0135 dated January 26, 2024. The exploration was
authorized on January 31, 2024, by the signature of Mr. Brek W. Lanning on our Proposal Acceptance
Sheet.
2.0 SCOPE OF EXPLORATION
This report details the findings of the preliminary geotechnical exploration performed at 1684 Jones Cove
Road in Clyde,North Carolina (reference Figure 1 in Appendix A). The intent of this exploration was to
evaluate the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site and provide preliminary geotechnical
recommendations for site design. We have also included a discussion of secondary design considerations
and provided geotechnical related construction recommendations.
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
The following project information was obtained from an email request for proposal from Mr. Gregory
Hoffman of Civil Design Concepts, P.A. (CDC) to BLE's Mr. Tim Woodcock on January 12, 2024. BLE
also received a conceptual grading plan titled"1684 Jones Cove Rd Bulletin,"dated December 2023.
Planning activities are currently underway for the development of the 10.76-acre parcel located at 1684
Jones Cove Road in Clyde, North Carolina. This parcel, herein referred to as the "Site," is identified by
Haywood County PIN# 8636-08-8403. The property is owned by Haywood Community College, and we
understand it will be primarily used for Commercial Driver's License courses.
Based on the provided"Bulletin,"we understand that the Site will be developed as a large parking lot for
Commercial Driver's License training courses. Additionally, the Bulletin shows an unspecified structure
and retention pond on the northern side of the parking lot, and deep cut sections near the eastern edge of
the developed area. The soil obtained from these cut sections is intended to be used as structural fill on
other sites.
Based on the provided'Cut/Fill Summary,"maximum cut and fill depths will be on the order of 30 feet and
5 feet, respectively. The Site grading will result in a net cut volume of over 45,000 cubic yards, which is
tended to be used as engineered fill on other project sites. No structural information had been provided at
the time the proposal was written. BLE have assumed that individual column loads will be on the order of
50 kips or less and load bearing wall footings will be 2 kips per foot or less.
4.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
The site was explored by drilling eight (8) soil test borings (ASTM D1586) at the approximate locations
shown on the attached Boring Location Plan(reference Figure 1 in Appendix A). Boring Logs are presented
as Appendix C. The borings were located in the field by BLE representative Claire Hill E.I.T,by referencing
the provided site plan,identifiable site landmarks,and cellular GPS-tracking. The boring locations shown in
Appendix A should be considered approximate. A description of our field procedures is also included as
Appendix B.
1 of 11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
5.0 SITE GEOLOGY
The project site is in the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province. The bedrock in this region is a complex
crystalline formation that has been faulted and contorted by past tectonic movements. The rock has
weathered to residual soils which form the mantle for the hillsides and hilltops. The typical residual soil
profile in areas not disturbed by erosion or human activities consists of silty and/or clayey soils near the
surface where weathering is more advanced,underlain by sandy silts and silty sands.
The boundary between soil and rock is not sharply defined, and there often is a transitional zone, termed
"partially weathered rock," overlying the parent bedrock. Partially weathered rock is defined, for
engineering purposes,as residual material with standard penetration resistances in excess of 100 blows per
foot (bpf). Weathering is facilitated by fractures, joints, and the presence of less resistant rock types.
Consequently,the profile of the partially weathered rock and hard rock is quite irregular and erratic, even
over short horizontal distances.Also,it is relatively common to find lenses and boulders of hard rock and/or
zones of partially weathered rock within the soil mantle,well above the general bedrock level.
Areas near drainage features and in valleys often contain alluvial, or water-deposited, soils that have been
deposited over geologic time by streams, past floods, and gradual erosion from higher elevations. In
mountainous areas, colluvial, or gravity-deposited, materials are commonly found on the sides and at the
base of steep slopes, in swales, and along drainage features from past landslides and erosion.
6.0 SITE CONDITIONS
Based on our site reconnaissance and review of publicly available aerial imagery, the Site is currently
occupied with one residential structure and two small barns/sheds. Historical images show at least two
additional structures existing on the Site before 2015. Both structures have since been demolished.
Around the existing residence,which is located in the southwest corner of the property,the terrain is gently
sloped and grassy. The eastern half of the property is steeper and wooded, sloping upwards towards the
eastern property boundary. In the center of the grassy area is a large brush pile. There is a stream running
through the northwestern property corner.
7.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Surface Cover
The surface cover across the site generally consisted of a 2-inch-thick root mat. There were deeper deposits
of organic material in soil test borings B-6 and B-7 where the organics extended to depths of 2.5 feet. It
should be noted that surface cover may vary across the site.
Fill
Soil interpreted as fill was encountered in soil test borings B-1,B-3,B-6,and B-7.The fill material extended
to depths of between 2.5 and 7.5 feet below the ground's surface. The sampled fill material consisted of
sandy or clayey silts.As previously mentioned,the fill material in test borings B-2,B-6,and B-7,contained
organics such as roots and topsoil. The Standard Penetration Test(SPT)values ranged from 4 to 15 blows
per foot(bpf).
Alluvium
Soil interpreted as alluvium was encountered in soil test borings B-1 and B-3. Alluvium is soil that was
transported to its current location by water,perhaps by flooding. Alluvial soils are typically soft, wet, and
2of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
compressible having never been subject to loads in excess of their current overburden pressure. Both of
these soil test borings were located nearest the existing stream, which may be the source of the alluvium.
The sampled soil consisted of silty sands (SM) or sandy silts (MLS) and some high-plasticity clay (CH).
Quartz fragments, indicative of a cobble layer,were encountered in soil test boring B-3 at a depth of 13.5
feet. SPT values for the alluvium varied between 3 to 6 bpf.
Residuum
Residual soil typical of the Blue Ridge Physiographic Province was encountered in all soil test borings.The
residual soils were observed directly at the ground surface in some soil test borings, and at depths of up to
15 feet below the ground surface in others. The residual material predominantly consisted of sandy silts
(MLS) and silty sands (SM)with varying amounts of clay,mica, and traces of gravel, rock fragments and
quartz. SPT N-values ranged from 4 to 36 bpf,typically becoming firmer with depth.
Partially Weathered Rock(PWR)
PWR was encountered in borings B-7 and B-8 at depths of 5.0 and 35.0 feet, respectively. PWR is a
transitional, intermediate material between the residual soil and rock, and is defined for engineering
purposes as residual material having an SPT resistance value greater than 50 blows per 6 inches, or 100
bpf.
Auger Refusal
Auger refusal occurred in soil boring B-7 at a depth of 10 feet. Auger refusal is typically interpreted as the
top of relatively massive rock, but the refusal could also be due to an isolated rock layer. Rock varies
erratically in this area and can vary significantly in depth and consistency over short lateral distances.
Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at the times and elevations noted in table 1.
Table 1: Groundwater Depths
Soil Test Boring Groundwater Level at Groundwater Level After
Time of Boring 24 Hours
B-1 10.5ft 5ft
B-2 Dry Dry
B-3 Dry 5 ft
B-4 Dry Dry
B-5 33.5 ft 31(a)
B-6 29 ft Not taken
B-7 6.5 ft Note taken
B-8 Dry Dry
It should be noted that groundwater levels may fluctuate several feet with seasonal and rainfall variations
and with changes in the water level in adjacent drainage features.Normally,the highest groundwater levels
occur in late winter and spring and the lowest levels occur in late summer and fall. It should be noted that
the geotechnical investigation was carried out after a prolonged period of dry weather.
The above descriptions provide a general summary of the subsurface conditions encountered. The letters
in parentheses represent a visual classification of the soils in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System. A key to symbols and classification is included as Appendix D. The Boring Logs included as
Appendix C contain detailed information recorded at each boring location. The Boring Logs represent our
interpretation of the field logs based on engineering examination of the field samples. The lines designating
3 of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College-Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
the interfaces between various strata represent approximate boundaries and the transition between strata
may be gradual. It should be noted that the soil conditions will vary between boring locations.
8.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Soil samples processed for laboratory testing were obtained from cuttings from soil test borings B-2, B-5,
B-6, and B-8. These soil test borings were located within the deepest proposed cut sections. One bulk
sample(BK)was collected from each boring from the soil cuttings brought to the surface by the mechanical
augers. See Table 2 for the depths where the bulk samples were collected and for a summary of the
laboratory test results. A Standard Proctor test(ASTM D-698)was run on each bulk sample to determine
the maximum dry density of the soil as well as the optimum moisture content (ASTM D-2216). Natural
moisture content tests were run also run at regular intervals along the depth of the boring. See Appendix E
for the laboratory test data.
Table 2: Laboratory Test Results
Sample Depth Maximum Optimum Natural
Sample No. (feet) Dry Density Moisture Moisture
(pcf) Content(%) Content(%)
6.0-7.5 -- -- 11.9
B 2 10.0-15.0(BK) 116.1 13.0 14.0
23.5-25.0 -- -- 13.9
33.5-35.0 -- -- 20.8
1.0-2.5 -- -- 38.32
B-5 13.5-15.0 -- -- 13.3
28.5-30.0 -- -- 21.1
35.0-40.0 (BK) 103.9 17.1 39.5
3.5-5.0 -- -- 24.1 _
B 6 13.5-15.0 -- -- 33.8
25.0-30.0 (BK) 115.3 12.8 14.2
33.5-35.0 -- -- 20.7
3.5-5.0 -- -- 20.2
B 8 13.5-15.0 -- -- 12.8
20.0-25.0 (BK) 109.7 15.3 14.7
33.5-35.0 -- -- 22.5
The bulk samples were found to have natural moisture content ranging from 2.5 percent dry to 22.4 percent
wet of the optimum moisture content (OMC), as determined by the laboratory test results. The maximum
dry density(MDD)of the bulk samples tested ranged from 103.9 to 116.1 pounds per cubic foot(pcf).
9.0 ANALYSIS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
According to our conversations with CDC, the eastern section of the site is intended as a borrow source for
engineered fill. We understand that the intention is to export approximately 45,000 CY of soil for use as
engineered fill. Laboratory testing carried out on the onsite residual soil samples were found to have a natural
moisture content between 2.5 percent dry to 22.4 percent wet of the optimum moisture content (OMC).
Extensive drying of these soils may be required before using it as structural fill. It should be noted that
moisture contents on a large grading project will be dictated to some degree by the prevailing weather at the
time of construction.The maximum dry density(MDD)of the bulk samples tested ranged from 103.9 to 116.1
4 of 11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
pcf which are all above the recommended minimum dry unit weight of 90 pcf. Fill and alluvial soils were
encountered in the lower elevation sections of the site.Based on the collected boring data and our experience
with similar soil types,the on-site existing fill and alluvial soils would not be suitable for use as structural fill.
This material varied widely in soil type and consistency and is expected to have a high-water content.
Based on the provided"1684 Jones Cove Road Bulletin"from CDC,there is a small structure in the northern
portion of the site.The encountered conditions at the soil boring locations indicate the site is adaptable to the
proposed construction. Shallow foundations appear to be a feasible approach to building support,provided all
footings bear in the firm or better undisturbed residual soil or well compacted structural fill.In the event that
the subsurface conditions vary from those identified in the soil test borings,or if there are modifications to the
building drawn in the"Bulletin,"BLE should be contacted to review the foundation recommendations.
9.1 Foundations
As drawn in the "Bulletin," there is a small building in the northern portion of the site. Provided that the
subsurface conditions are consistent with those encountered in the soil test borings, and that the foundations
for this building bear in the undisturbed residual soil or placed and compacted structural fill,we recommend
an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf be utilized when designing foundations. We recommend that the
minimum widths for individual column and continuous wall footings be 24 and 18 inches,respectively. The
minimum widths are considered advisable to provide a margin of safety against a local or punching shear
failure of the foundation soils. Exterior/perimeter footings should bear at least 30 inches below final exterior
grade for embedment needed to develop the recommended allowable design bearing pressure range and to
provide frost protection.
The same protective embedment recommended for the interior and exterior footings should be used for the
thickened perimeter and interior portions of a monolithic foundation slab, if such a slab is used in lieu of
individual strip and spread footing foundations.
Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the foundation bearing level if the foundation
excavations remain open for long periods of time. Therefore, we recommend that once each foundation
excavation is extended to final grade, the foundation be constructed as soon as possible to minimize the
potential damage to bearing soils. The foundation bearing area should be level or benched and free of loose
soil,ponded water and debris. Foundation concrete should not be placed on soils that have been disturbed by
seepage. If the bearing soils are softened by surface water intrusion or exposure, the softened soils must be
removed from the foundation excavation bottom prior to placement of concrete.If the excavation 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" (2,000 psi) concrete be placed on the bearing soils for protection before
the placement of reinforcing steel.
To observe that the soils encountered in footing excavations are similar to those encountered by the soil test
borings, we recommend that foundation excavations be examined. Part of this examination should include
checking the bearing soils with a dynamic cone penetrometer performed by an experienced engineering
technician working under the direction of the geotechnical engineer.
9.2 Seismic Site Classification
Geotechnical seismic design requirements are detailed in the International Building Code (IBC). The site
class is determined based on the average soil/rock properties within the upper 100 feet. It was beyond the
scope of this project to extend borings to a depth of 100. However,based on our knowledge of the area and
5of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
the conditions encountered in the borings,we recommend that the structures be designed for a Seismic Site
Class D.
9.3 Grade Slabs
Grade slabs may be soil-supported provided that the site is prepared in accordance with the recommendations
in this report. BLE recommends that the slabs-on-grade be uniformly supported on a layer of aggregate base
course, as specified in the North Carolina Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Roads
and Structures,2018 Edition. The aggregate base course layer should have a minimum thickness of at least 6
inches and be compacted to at least 98 percent of its standard Proctor maximum dry density.Based on previous
experience with similar soils, a maximum modulus of subgrade reaction(k) equal to 100 pounds per cubic
inch should be used for design of slabs on properly prepared subgrades supported by an adequate depth of
base coarse. A vapor barrier should be included below the slab if vapor penetration is not acceptable. The
need for a vapor barrier is also dependent on the floor covering type. Floor slabs supported on grade which
will be carpeted, tiled,painted or receive some other covering or sealant should incorporate a vapor barrier.
The vapor barrier should be installed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.
Completed slabs should be protected from excessive surface moisture prior to and during periods of
prolonged,below-freezing temperatures to prevent subgrade freezing and resulting heave.The slab subgrade
area should be evaluated by BLE prior to placement of crushed stone.
The grade slab should be jointed around columns and along footing-supported walls so that the slab and
foundations can settle differentially without damage.This jointing is not required when slabs and foundations
are cast as a single unit(i.e.thickened edge foundations). If slab thickness permits,joints containing dowels
or keys may be used in the slab to permit movement between parts of the slab without cracking or sharp
vertical displacements.
9.4 Pavement
A site-specific pavement design requires detailed information about projected traffic frequency and intensity,
acceptable service limits, life expectancy and other factors which are not currently available. In addition,
truck traffic such as that proposed is often approximated by empty trucks which have their own load basis,
mostly unrelated to published ESAL's. It also requires site specific laboratory testing which was not part of
the scope of this exploration. However,Table 3 shows typical pavement sections based on our experience on
similar projects in this region. These pavement sections have demonstrated acceptable performance with
subsurface conditions similar to this site.
Table 3: Typical Pavement Sections
Pavement Thickness(Inches)
Layers Material
Type Light-Duty Medium Duty
Flexible a. Asphaltic concrete surface course 2.5 3
b. Aggregate base course 8 10
Rigid a. Concrete 6 6
The asphalt surface course should conform to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT)
Standard Specification, Section 610, for Type S-9.5 Superpave mixture. The base course material should be
Aggregate Base Course conforming to NCDOT Standard Specification, Section 520, for Type B aggregate.
The base course should be compacted to 100 percent of the standard Proctor(ASTM D-698)maximum dry
6of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
density. All materials and workmanship should meet the North Carolina Department of Transportation
Standard Specifications for Roads and Structures, current edition.
The concrete for rigid pavement should be air-entrained and have a minimum flexural strength (third point
loading)of 550 psi which could likely be achieved by a concrete mix having a compressive strength of at least
4,000 psi at 28 days. Recommended air contents from the Portland Cement Association(PCA)are as follows:
Maximum Aggregate Size Percent Air
11/2 inches 5 percent plus or minus 11/2 percent
3/4 to 1-inch 6 percent plus or minus 11/2 percent
In addition,we recommend a maximum slump of 4 inches.
Joint spacing for this concrete thickness should be on the order of 12 to 15 feet. Control joints should be
sawed as soon as the cut can be made,without raveling(aggregate pulling out of the concrete matrix)or cracks
forming ahead of the saw blade. Joints should be sawed consecutively so that the joints commence working
together. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO)suggests that
transverse contraction joints should be one quarter of the slab thickness and longitudinal joints should be one
third of the slab thickness. All joints should be filled with flexible joint filler.
Curing of the concrete slab should begin as soon as the slab has been finished and the joints sawed. Moist
curing by fog spray nozzles or wet burlap is the most dependable curing procedure. Other methods of curing
could consist of spray applied curing compounds or covering the slab with waterproof paper or heavy plastic.
If paper or plastic is used for curing, the edges of the cover should be anchored and joints between sheets
should be taped or sealed.
Related civil design factors such as subgrade drainage, shoulder support, cross-sectional configurations,
surface elevations,and environmental factors which will significantly affect the service life must be included
in the preparation of the construction drawings and specifications. Normal periodic maintenance will be
required.
9.5 Secondary Design Considerations
The following items are presented for your consideration. These items are known to generally enhance
performance of structural and pavement systems.
• Roof drainage should be collected by a system of gutters and downspouts and directed away from
all structures.
• Sidewalks should be sloped so that water drains away from the structures.
• Site grading and paving should result in positive drainage away from the structures. Water
should not be allowed to pond around the structures or in such locations that would lead to
saturation of pavement subgrade materials. A minimum slope of approximately 1/4 to 1/2-inch per
foot should provide adequate drainage.
• Backfill for utility lines should be placed in accordance with the requirements for engineered fill
to minimize the potential for differential settlement.
7 of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
10.0 CONSTRUCTION RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1 Clearing and Grubbing
Site preparation should include the removal of all unsuitable surface materials (topsoil, vegetation, surface
soils containing organic matter or other deleterious materials) from within the proposed building and
pavement areas. Deleterious materials should be disposed of offsite or in areas of the site that will not be
developed. Topsoil and organic soils may be stockpiled for later use in areas to be landscaped. Any debris
arising from the demolition of onsite structures should be disposed of offsite.
10.2 Drainage
Groundwater was encountered at depths and times noted in Table 1. Some of these groundwater readings may
be above the proposed excavation levels,particularly in the areas of the site requiring fill. It should be noted
that groundwater levels may fluctuate several feet with seasonal and rainfall variations and with changes in
the water level in adjacent drainage features. Normally,the highest groundwater levels occur in late winter
and spring and the lowest levels occur in late summer and fall. It also should be noted that this exploration
was performed after a prolonged period of dry weather so that it's plausible that groundwater levels may
be higher than that recorded in the soil test borings.
The potential for groundwater control should be expected,particularly in the deeper cut sections of the site
that encounter rock.The contractor should be prepared to promptly remove any surface water or groundwater
from the construction area if encountered. This has been done effectively on past jobs by means of gravity
ditches and pumping from filtered sumps.
10.3 Proofrolling
After stripping and rough excavation grading, we recommend that areas to provide support for the
foundations, floor slab, engineered fill and pavement be carefully inspected for soft surficial soils and
proofrolled with a 25 to 35-ton, four-wheeled, rubber-tired roller or similar approved equipment. The
proofroller should make at least four passes over each location,with the last two passes perpendicular to the
first two where practical.
Any areas which wave,rut,or deflect excessively and continue to do so after several passes of the proofroller
should be excavated to firmer soils. The proofrolling and excavating operations should be carefully monitored
by an experienced engineering technician working under the direction of the geotechnical engineer.
Proofrolling should not be performed when the ground is frozen or wet from recent precipitation.
10.4 Excavation
Based on information available at the time of this report's preparation and the boring data collected, it is
assumed that excavation will mostly extend through moderate consistency fill,alluvial and residual soils.The
fill,alluvial and residual soils should be excavatable using conventional earth moving equipment.
However,boring B-7 encountered refusal at a depth of 10 feet.There,rock excavation by mechanical means,
or blasting,may be required for some sections of this site. Based on the provided grading bulletin,rock may
be encountered near the depth of excavation. Auger refusal is typically interpreted as the top of relatively
massive rock,but the refusal could also be due to an isolated rock layer. Rock varies erratically in this area
8of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
and can vary significantly in depth and consistency over short lateral distances. This material is likely to be
very difficult and expensive to excavate for construction.
We recommend that the requirement for blasting be defined in terms of equipment performance. For general
excavation,we recommend that rock be defined as material that cannot be excavated with a single tooth-ripper
drawn by a Caterpillar D-8K or equivalent bulldozer. For trench excavation, we recommend that rock be
defined as material that cannot be excavated by a Caterpillar 325 or equivalent backhoe.If blasting is utilized,
the excavation of the rock should be done in accordance with 29 CFR Part 1926 Subpart U,Blasting and the
Use of Explosives, prepared by the United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration(OSHA).
In areas where excavation difficulty is expected, it would be worthwhile to consider mass excavating below
the design subgrade level to the bottom level of utilities and foundations. This is because boulders,rock lenses
and massive rock can be more easily and more economically removed in a mass form than by local excavation.
Also,depending upon the construction schedule,there may be a time advantage to completing most all local
excavation of rock during mass grading. The over-excavated part can be backfilled with compacted soil or
crushed aggregate for support of utility lines and slabs-on-grade.
10.5 Engineered Fill
All fill used for raising site grade should be uniformly compacted in 8-inch loose lifts to at least 95 percent of
the standard Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D 698). Beneath floor slabs and on-grade parking, the
compaction requirement should be raised to 98 percent in the upper 12 inches. The soils to be used in the
engineered fill should contain no more than 3 percent organic matter by weight and should be free of roots,
limbs, other deleterious material and should generally preclude rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter. In
addition,the moisture content of the compacted soil fill should be maintained to within plus or minus 3 percent
of the optimum moisture content as determined from the standard Proctor compaction test during placement
and compaction. This provision may require the contractor to dry soils during periods of wet weather or to
wet soils during dry periods. The fill soils should have a Plasticity Index(PI)of less than 30, and a standard
Proctor maximum dry density of no less than 95 pounds per cubic foot(pcf).
10.6 Fill Placement over Sloping Ground
Where the existing ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal to vertical),newly placed fill should be tied into the
existing ground to reduce the potential for a preferential shearing plane at the fill/ground surface interface.
This can be accomplished by benching or stepping into the natural ground. The height of each bench should
not exceed 2 feet,and all fill should be compacted on a level plane.
10.7 Subgrade Protection During Construction
The surface of compacted subgrade soils can deteriorate and lose its support capabilities when exposed to
environmental changes and construction activity. Deterioration can occur in the form of freezing,formation
of erosion gullies, extreme drying, exposure for a long period of time or rutting by construction traffic. We
recommend that the surfaces of floor slab subgrades that have deteriorated or softened be recompacted prior
to construction of the floor slab. Additionally, any excavations through the subgrade soils (such as utility
trenches) should be properly backfilled in compacted lifts. Recompaction of subgrade surfaces and
compaction of backfill should be checked with a sufficient number of density tests to determine if adequate
compaction is being achieved.
9of11

Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
10.8 Assessment of Onsite Material for use as a Structural Fill
Existing Fill/Alluvial Soils
This excavation for this project may extend through existing fill and alluvial soils.Based on the collected boring
data and our experience with similar soil types,the on-site existing fill and alluvial soils would not be suitable
for use as structural fill.This material varied widely in soil type and consistency and is expected to have a high-
water content.
Onsite Residual Soils
Laboratory testing carried out on the onsite residual soil samples were found to have a natural moisture content
between 2.5 percent dry to 22.4 percent wet of the optimum moisture content(OMC). Extensive drying of
these soils may be required before using it as structural fill. It should be noted that moisture contents on a
large grading project will be dictated to some degree by the prevailing weather at the time of construction.
The maximum dry density(MDD) of the bulk samples tested ranged from 103.9 to 116.1 pcf which are all
above the recommended minimum dry unit weight of 90 pcf.
Use of Partially Weathered Rock
Partially weathered rock and rock may be used for structural fill provided it can be broken down by the
excavation and compaction equipment into sizes with a maximum dimension of six inches. Sufficient
quantities of soil should be mixed with the partially weathered rock or rock such that voids do not result and
the fill meets the compaction requirements for engineered fill.
10.9 Slopes
Fill slopes should initially be constructed beyond the design slope edge due to the difficulty of compacting
the edge of slopes. The fill could then be cut back leaving the exposed face well compacted. Fill slopes
should be adequately compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Fill embankment
slopes have been designed to have an inclination of 2H:1 V (horizontal to vertical). Typically, we suggest
that fill slopes be constructed at 2.5:1, (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. As such, these steeper slopes will
be more susceptible to erosion and shallow sloughing than those built at a flatter inclination.Nevertheless,
either inclination is considered stable at this site. We recommend that the face of slopes and embankments
be protected by establishing vegetation as soon as practical after grading.
Any disturbed soils located on the existing slope faces should be removed. Once removed and prior to fill
placement, the exposed subgrade should be inspected for soft soils. Fill material should be constructed in
horizontal stages starting at the base of the existing slope. Prior to each stage of fill placement, the sloped
area should be benched into the existing soils with a level pad. The level pad will allow for better
compaction of the fill materials. The resulting series of level benches will also serve to break the potential
slip plane between the compacted fill layers.
Cut slopes made in residual soil should generally remain stable at inclinations made no steeper than 2:1
(Horizontal: Vertical). To reduce repairs and maintenance and to make the establishment of vegetation
easier,flatter inclinations should be considered where practical. Steeper inclinations of up to 1.5:1 are often
used for cut slopes,but the risk of slope instability increases as the steepness increases beyond 2:1. Steeper
slopes should only be considered in areas that can tolerate occasional sloughing of material from the slope
face, and where a potential failure of that slope would not impact buildings or other critical facilities. The
surface of cut slopes should be vegetated to control erosion. Slopes that are over 30 feet in height should
have a bench at 20 to 30—foot height intervals to help slow the flow of water down the face of the slope.
The benches should be sloped slightly to drain water.
10 of 11

1_1_1i
Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Exploration March 5,2024
1684 Jones Cove Road,Haywood Community College—Clyde,NC BLE Project No.J24-22245-01
11.0 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW
It is recommended that Bunnell-Lammons Engineering be retained to make a general review of the foundation
and earthwork plans and specifications prepared from the recommendations presented in this report. We
would then suggest any modifications so that our recommendations are properly interpreted and implemented.
12.0 BASIS OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Our evaluation of foundation support conditions has been based on our understanding of the project
information and data obtained in our exploration as well as our experience on similar projects. The general
subsurface conditions utilized in our foundation evaluation have been based on interpolation of the subsurface
data between the widely spaced borings. Subsurface conditions between the borings may differ. If the project
information is incorrect or the structure location(horizontal or vertical)and/or dimensions are changed,please
contact us so that our recommendations can be reviewed. The discovery of any site or subsurface conditions
during construction which deviate from the data obtained in this exploration should be reported to us for our
evaluation. The assessment of site environmental conditions for presence of pollutants in the soil,rock and
groundwater of the site was beyond the scope of this exploration. Soil cuttings used as backfill in boreholes
will settle over time resulting in a depression at the surface. It is beyond the scope of our services to return to
the site to repair boreholes that have exhibited settlement of the backfill soils.
11of11

APPENDIX A
Figures

r .i '• is m- " f' r' ! \ #.
f • - :.r ,fir. - / 1OP - ,.
/ $ '
, t'f,.
'1'4 ' -,-- ' ' '01001 ,
y t
" B1
V
1
r <.0
_ X B-4 ' " •'
w I.
/ ' , �x 1.
F'. -MSM +t ,...
, V f . , , ,,
_ r ti yyg��f _
'
ti i ,+r ,' = , av o-
4 � � �5R �ti
r , W8 t , r
4. .. ..„..\ _ , % ........... . ...,. .., . ,.. _, . „„..,: .:...., , ....."...... ,.., ,: .,. .„ 4:4 ‘ --'-''...." . .0..‘1..
ilask
. .
r•
,l
LEGEND
Soil Borings
`� ,C� ,_ S. t - Site
100 50 0 100 200 :', _.,,
REFERENCE:
I— I I I I I 2023 AERIAL IMAGE-NCONEMAP.GOV
APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET
�: ,.
DRAWN BY: KLC DATE: 2 2O 24 SOIL BORING LOCATION MAP FIGURE
CHECKED BY: FILE: 11 I 11 BUNCANNONS NELL N
R NG 684JONESICAL COVE ROAD,CLYCDE
CFH BLP.MXD
APPROVED BY:CFH JOB No 124 22245 01 HAYWOOD COUNTY,NORTH CAROLINA

APPENDIX B
Field Exploration Procedures

II IM I: BUNNELL
LAMMONS
ENGINEERING
Field Exploration Procedures
The borings were made by mechanically twisting a continuous flight steel auger into the soil. Soil
sampling and penetration testing were performed in general accordance with ASTM D 1586. At
assigned intervals, soil samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch I.D.,2-inch O.D., split-tube
sampler. The sampler was first seated 6 inches to penetrate any loose cuttings, and then driven an
additional 12 inches with blows of a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer
blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches was recorded and is designated the"standard
penetration resistance." The penetration resistance, when properly evaluated, is an index to the
strength of the soil and foundation supporting capability.
Representative portions of the soil samples,thus obtained,were placed in glass jars and transported
to the laboratory. In the laboratory,the samples were examined by a geotechnical engineer to verify
the field classifications of the driller. Boring Logs are attached, showing the soil descriptions and
penetration resistance.

APPENDIX C
Boring Logs

SOIL BORING NO. B-1
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START: 2/9/2024 END:2/9/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: 10.5 AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 5 CAVING>377 16.5
w
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
A2"Root Mat /%�
Soft to firm,light to dark brown,silty CLAY(CL-ML)with organics 2 •
(topsoil,small roots)and trace sand and gravel-(Fill) 2
2 j
di 23
-5 Loose,damp to saturated,brown and gray,silty,fine to medium SAND C:•,: 3 —
_ (SM)with mica-(Alluvium) :�. ....:. / 3 "'
X •
4
-10 3
Very loose,wet,orange and gray,micaceous,silty SAND(SM)with rock
\ —
- fragments-(Residuum) ':�. ..•''
:.: 2
•
-15 r +- 3 —.... ...
Firm,saturated,tan to gray with white,micaceous,silty,fine to coarse
- SAND(SM)with rock and quartz fragments-(Residuum) :�'•. •''
▪ 4
•
-20 ▪ [� s
•
▪ 4
•
-25Boring terminated at 25 feet.
- Groundwater encountered at 10.5 feet at time of drilling.
- Groundwater measured at 5 feet after 24 hours.
Boring caved at 16.5 feet at time of drilling.
-30 —....
-35 —
N
N
-40
a —
cD
0
N
N
N -
J
W -
O
SOIL BORING NO. B-1
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-2
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START: 2/9/2024 END:2/9/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 CAVING>377 34
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
2"Root Mat r' '
Firm,damp,orange to brown,micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with trace ;• :v 2
organics(small roots)and trace quartz fragments-(Residuum) 3 a •• ••
Stiff to very stiff,damp,brown,micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with trace
• •
rock fragments-(Residuum) ....
4 •
—5 8 —
X6 . .. .. ....
6 •
—10 7 —
':.-:.,. X 3 •
—15
Very stiff,damp,tan/brown to gray,micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with
rock fragments and quartz-(Residuum)
•
17
—20 13 —
• .� 14
• 15 •
—25 14 —
•
—30 '
Hard,damp,tan and gray with black,white and orange layers,micaceous,
sandy SILT(MLS)-(Residuum)
_
.: 14
—35 17 —
N X 15
•,'
N 16 •
N 20 -
-40 Boring terminated at 40 feet.
No groundwater encountered at time of boring or at 24 hours.
Boring caved at 34 feet at time of drilling.
J
W
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-2
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-3
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START: 2/9/2024 END:2/9/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALAND ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 5 CAVING>377 11
w
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
2"Root Mat r' `'
- Firm,damp,medium brown,sandy SILT(MLS)with trace gravel-(Fill) • ;• . 3
•
—5 1 4 —
Soft,saturated,tan to gray,micaceous,silty,high plasticity CLAY(CH)-
- (Alluvium) — •A 2
2
- Soft,wet,white and gray,highly micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with •
cobble layer at 13.5 feet sampled as quartz fragments-(Alluvium) •
• :..\/ 2
X •
—10 2 —
'• • 2 •
—15 •• —.... ...
Stiff,damp,orange/red to brown,SILT(ML)with trace mica and quartz-
- (Residuum)
X2
4 •
—20 5 —
Boring terminated at 20 feet.
- Groundwater measured at 5 feet after 24 hours.
- Boring caved at 11 feet at time of drilling.
—25 —
—30 —....
—35 —
N
—40
a —
cD
0
N
N -
J
W -
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-3
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-4
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START: 2/9/2024 END:2/9/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 CAVING>3 17.5
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
-A2"Root Mat
- Firm to very stiff,damp,orange to brown,SILT(ML)with trace clay,sand, X 3
- and quartz fragments-(Residuum) s �• •• ••. .•••••••.
X 12
13 •
—5 13 —
Firm to stiff,slightly damp,orange to brown,SILT(ML)with trace quartz
- fragments and manganese-(Residuum) X 5
— 66
6.... .........
X3
—10 — 5 —
_ 5
•
15
Firm,damp,gray and brown,micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with black
mottling-(Residuum)
... X
2 ,
— •
20 4 Boring terminated at 20 feet.
- No groundwater encountered at time of boring or at 24 hours.
- Boring caved at 17.5 feet at time of drilling.
—25 —
—30 —....
—35 —
N
0-5
—40
a —
cD
0
N
N -
J
w -
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-4
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-5
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START:2/10/2024 END:2/10/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: 33.5 AFTER 6 HOURS: 1 31 CAVING>3 37
w
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
2"Root Mat r' •••`'
- Soft,damp,orange to brown,slightly micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with .•.:.v 2 �
- trace organics(small roots)and trace quartz-(Residuum) • 1
3
000.°V 3
Firm to dense,damp,white,micaceous SAND(SW)with quartz fragments 4 _
—5 -(Residuum) 5
00000
0000000000X
2
14
20
00000
000000000 /\
19
14
•
—10 13 —
00000
00000
00000
0000000000
00000
•
•
— 00000
46.
'0°
15 9 —.... ...
Very stiff,damp,tan/brown to gray,very micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)
- with quartz fragments-(Residuum)
•:• 10
9 •
—20 8 —
8 •
—25 10 —
•.:• 9 •
—30
- 1
. 12
—35 10 —
X
•
CON 9 .
. ;. . .. .. ....
9
19 -
-40 Boring terminated at 40 feet.
Groundwater encountered at 33.5 feet at time of drilling.
Broungwater measured at 31 feet at end of day.
Boring caved at 37 feet at time of drilling.
N -
J
W -
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-5
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-6
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START:2/10/2024 END:2/10/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: 29 AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 CAVING>3 35
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
A2"Root Mat /
Soft,moist,dark brown,clayey,organic SILT(MLS/OL)with organics •i —X 2
- (small roots)-(Fill) 1 •
- Stiff,moist,brown,clayey SILT(MH)with trace mica and gravel-(Fill)
X5
8 •
—5 7 —
X
3
6
- Firm to stiff,moist,tan to brown,highly micaceous SILT(ML)with trace
sand and quartz fragments-(Residuum) 4
3 •
—10 6 —
X
—
4
5 •
—15 5 —.... ...
X2
4 •
—20 4 —
X 2
2
•
—25 3 —
_ X
5
5 •
—30 10 —
Very stiff,gray and brown,highly micaceous,SILT(ML)with trace
- kaoliniate and quartz fragments-(Residuum)
9
14
—3 ����� 15 —
v — 7 •
csi X
N 8
10
—40 Boring terminated at 40 feet.
Groundwater encountered at 29 feet at time of drilling.
Boring caved at 35 feet at time of drilling.
J
W
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-6
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-7
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START:2/10/2024 END:2/10/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: 6.5 AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 CAVING>3 7.5
w
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
\2"Root Mat
Firm,moist,brown,clayey SILT(MH)with organics(roots and possible ix 2- topsoil)and trace gravel-(Fill) q ••• ••-••- - •••- •• •• ••
- Hard,moist,gray to brown,micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with rock •
fragments-(Residuum) • 10
20 •
5 Partially Weathered Rock(PWR)sampled as gray to brown,silty sand
S 15 —
- with rock fragments. ' - 8 ••
50/5
•
' 50/3
. 6 SUfs
—10 .• •
Auger refusal at 10 feet.
- Groundwater encountered at 6.5 feet at time of drilling.
- Boring caved at 7.5 feet at time of drilling. ..,....
—15 —.... ..•
—20 —
—25 —
—30 —.... .. .. ....
—35 —
N
—40
a —
cD
0
N
N -
J
W -
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-7
Sheet 1 of 1

SOIL BORING NO. B-8
PROJECT: 1684 Jones Cove Road PROJECT NO.: 22245-01
BUNNELL-LAMMONS CLIENT: Haywood Community College START:2/10/2024 END:2/10/2024
ENGINEERING, INC. LOCATION: Clyde,NC ELEVATION:
DRILLER: Jordan Environmental,LLC LOGGED BY: CFH
GEOTECHNICALANDENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTANTS DRILLING METHOD: ASTM D1586
DEPTH TO-WATER> INITIAL: AFTER 24 HOURS: 1 CAVING>3 36
ELEVATION/ SOIL DESCRIPTION SOIL a STANDARD PENETRATION RESULTS
DEPTH(FT) TYPE 2 BLOWS/FOOT
2 5 10 20 30 40 50 70 90
Loose,moist,tan to gray/white,micaceous,silty,well-graded SAND(SM)
- with quartz fragments-(Residuum) :�'•. •' X 2
•
- Firm to very stiff,moist,brown,highly micaceous,sandy SILT(MLS)with '• '.-
•
• •
koalinite and quartz-(Residuum) ...
• 2 •
—5 4 —
• •• •• • •......
• •
X 4 •
—10 •
7 —
10 �
—15 12 —.... ...
.,':.X
5 •
—20 7 —
—25 8 —
' 9 •
—30 :'•:.'•': 14 —....
Dense,moist,tan to brown with white,micaceous,silty SAND(SM)with
- koalinite-(Residuum) :�'•. •''
+•:' 12
•
•S 19
35 Partially Weathered Rock(PWR)sampled as white to tan,silty sand with •
- mkoalinite and quartz fragments '
'
• 40
N 50/4c:i 5014•
—40 Boring terminated at 40 feet.
No groundwater encountered at time of boring or at end of day.
Boring caved at 36 feet at time of drilling.
J
W
O
z' SOIL BORING NO. B-8
Sheet 1 of 1

APPENDIX D
A Key to Soil Classification

KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS AND CONSISTENCY DESCRIPTIONS
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING, INC.
GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA
Penetration Resistance* Relative
Blows per Foot Density Particle Size Identification
SANDS Boulder: Greater than 300 mm
Cobble: 75 to 300 mm
0 to 4 Very Loose Gravel:
5 to 10 Loose Coarse-19 to 75 mm
11 to 20 Firm Fine-4.75 to 19 mm
21 to 30 Very Firm Sand:
31 to 50 Dense Coarse-2 to 4.75 mm
over 50 Very Dense Medium-0.425 to 2 mm
Fine-0.075 to 0.425 mm
Silt&Clay:Less than 0.075 mm
Penetration Resistance* Consistency
Blows per Foot
SILTS and CLAYS
0 to 2 Very Soft
3 to 4 Soft
5 to 8 Firm
9 to 15 Stiff
16 to 30 Very Stiff
31 to 50 Hard
over 50 Very Hard
*ASTM D 1586
KEY TO DRILLING SYMBOLS
SGrab Sample
X
NR=No reaction to HCL Groundwater Table at Time of Drilling
Split Spoon Sample NA=Not applicable
INS=No sample .
Undisturbed Sample Groundwater Table 24 Hours after Completion of Drilling
KEY TO SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
iTionwio
.▪,��� Well-graded Gravel / Low Plasticity Clay Clayey Silt Silty Sand
es.4 GW / CL MH .% :':`:.•.%• SM
0• bcDc Poorly-graded Gravel Sandy Clay Sandy Silt '_,•>'/y••>'/% Topsoil
00 0 of GP CLS MLS :\kr,.;T1).:�‘ TOPSOIL
•mi S •' //////////
i.. ,4116. Partially Weathered Rock IIIIIIIIII Silty Clay Sand — E Liquid Sludge
•e 1 BLDRCBBL ��1������� CL-ML —SW �� SLUDGE
S //////////
High PlasticityClaySilt %i .
Cla e Sand ififif
�i Y Y Fill
CH ML SC i FILL
Poorly Graded Sand Bedrock Waste
SP BEDROCK WOOD

APPENDIX E
Laboratory Test Results

III '1 BUNNELL
LAMMONS Moisture Content of Soil and Rock (ASTM D2216)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 003-L2
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE DATA
Boring No: B-2 Depth(ft): 10-15'
Sample Location/No:
Test Procedure: ASTM D2216
Sample Source: B-2 10-15'
Visual Classification: Brown/tan silt
LAB SUMMARY
Sample Description Measurements and Results Variables and Equations
Container ID/Mass(g) Mc=Mass of Sample Containner
Initial Mass(g) 232.4 W=Mass Original,the original sample Mass
Dry at 110±5°C until AM 0.1%
Massl M1=Massl,the Mass after the 1st drying cycle.
Mass2 M2=Mass2,the Mass after the 2nd drying cycle.
Mass3 M3=Mass3,the Mass after the 3rd drying cycle.
Mass4 M4=Mass4,the Mass after the 4th drying cycle.
Mass5 M5=Mass5,the Mass after the 5th drying cycle.
Final Mass(g) 203.8 D=Mass Final,the Mass after the final drying cycle in the Microwave oven.
Moisture Content(%) 14.03 P=100 X[(W-D)/D]
Moisture Content(%) = [(Alas sORIGINAL—MassFINAL X 100
Ma ss FI NAL
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech
Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

II
' lUll
� CANNONSBUNNELL Standard proctor (ASTM D698 / AASHTO T99)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 003-L1
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024 Sample Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE AND PROCTOR/SATURATION CURVE (MOISTURE DENSITY)
Sample Source: B-2 10-15' Proctor#: 003-L1
Visual Classification: Brown/tan silt
Sample Location/No: t Proctor
Test Procedure/Method: A
ASTM D-698(Proctor)
Max Dry Density(pcf): 116.1
Optimum Moisture(%): 13
118 -
Saturation Results
Specific Gravity: 0
%Retained Rock Correction:
3/4" Sieve: 3/8" Sieve: 116 -
No.4:
4 114
112 -
110
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Moisture Content(%)
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

III '1 BUNNELL
LAMMONS Moisture Content of Soil and Rock (ASTM D2216)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 004-L2
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE DATA
Boring No: B-5 Depth(ft): 35-40'
Sample Location/No: B-5 35-40'
Test Procedure:
Sample Source:
Visual Classification: Tan silty clay
LAB SUMMARY
Sample Description Measurements and Results Variables and Equations
Container ID/Mass(g) Mc=Mass of Sample Containner
Initial Mass(g) 237.7 W=Mass Original,the original sample Mass
Dry at 110±5°C until AM 0.1%
Massl M1=Massl,the Mass after the 1st drying cycle.
Mass2 M2=Mass2,the Mass after the 2nd drying cycle.
Mass3 M3=Mass3,the Mass after the 3rd drying cycle.
Mass4 M4=Mass4,the Mass after the 4th drying cycle.
Mass5 M5=Mass5,the Mass after the 5th drying cycle.
Final Mass(g) 170.4 D=Mass Final,the Mass after the final drying cycle in the Microwave oven.
Moisture Content(%) 39.5 P=100 X[(W-D)/D]
Moisture Content(%) = [(Alas sORIGINAL—MassFINAL X 100
Ma ss FI NAL
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech
Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

1 BUNNELL
" ' '� CANNONS Standard proctor (ASTM D698 / AASHTO T99)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 004-L1
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024 Sample Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE AND PROCTOR/SATURATION CURVE (MOISTURE DENSITY)
Sample Source: Proctor#: 004-L1
Visual Classification: Tan silty clay
Sample Location/No: t Proctor
B-5 35-40' 106 -
Test Procedure/Method: A
ASTM D-698(Proctor)
Max Dry Density(pcf): 103.9
Optimum Moisture(%): 17.1 %
Saturation Results 104 r
Specific Gravity: 0
%Retained Rock Correction:
3/4" Sieve: 3/8" Sieve: nu
No.4:
102 - j-
t
100 -
98
15 20 25
Moisture Content(%)
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

III '1 BUNNELL
LAMMONS Moisture Content of Soil and Rock (ASTM D2216)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 002-L2
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE DATA
Boring No: B-6 Depth(ft): 25-30'
Sample Location/No:
Test Procedure: ASTM D2216
Sample Source: B-6 25-30'
Visual Classification: Grey/Tan silt with Mica&small gravel
LAB SUMMARY
Sample Description Measurements and Results Variables and Equations
Container ID/Mass(g) Mc=Mass of Sample Containner
Initial Mass(g) 222.7 W=Mass Original,the original sample Mass
Dry at 110±5°C until AM 0.1%
Massl M1=Massl,the Mass after the 1st drying cycle.
Mass2 M2=Mass2,the Mass after the 2nd drying cycle.
Mass3 M3=Mass3,the Mass after the 3rd drying cycle.
Mass4 M4=Mass4,the Mass after the 4th drying cycle.
Mass5 M5=Mass5,the Mass after the 5th drying cycle.
Final Mass(g) 195 D=Mass Final,the Mass after the final drying cycle in the Microwave oven.
Moisture Content(%) 14.21 P=100 X[(W-D)/D]
Moisture Content(%) = [(Alas sORIGINAL—MassFINAL X 100
Ma ss FI NAL
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech
Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

1 BUNNELL
" ' '� CANNONS Standard proctor (ASTM D698 / AASHTO T99)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 002-L1
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024 Sample Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE AND PROCTOR/SATURATION CURVE (MOISTURE DENSITY)
Sample Source: B-6 25-30' Proctor#: 002-L1
Visual Classification: Grey/Tan silt with Mica&small gravel
Sample Location/No: t Proctor
Test Procedure/Method: A
ASTM D-698(Proctor) 116
Max Dry Density(pcf): 115.3
Optimum Moisture(%): 12.8%
Saturation Results
Specific Gravity: 0
%Retained Rock Correction: 114 -
3/4" Sieve: 3/8" Sieve:
No.4: _a
112
110
108
8 10 12 14 16 18
Moisture Content(%)
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

III '1 BUNNELL
LAMMONS Moisture Content of Soil and Rock (ASTM D2216)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 001-L2
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE DATA
Boring No: B-8 Depth(ft): 20-25'
Sample Location/No:
Test Procedure:
Sample Source: B-8 20-25'
Visual Classification: Brown Silt
LAB SUMMARY
Sample Description Measurements and Results Variables and Equations
Container ID/Mass(g) Mc=Mass of Sample Containner
Initial Mass(g) 237 W=Mass Original,the original sample Mass
Dry at 110±5°C until AM 0.1%
Massl M1=Massl,the Mass after the 1st drying cycle.
Mass2 M2=Mass2,the Mass after the 2nd drying cycle.
Mass3 M3=Mass3,the Mass after the 3rd drying cycle.
Mass4 M4=Mass4,the Mass after the 4th drying cycle.
Mass5 M5=Mass5,the Mass after the 5th drying cycle.
Final Mass(g) 206.7 D=Mass Final,the Mass after the final drying cycle in the Microwave oven.
Moisture Content(%) 14.66 P=100 X[(W-D)/D]
Moisture Content(%) = [(Alas sORIGINAL—MassFINAL X 100
MassFINAL
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech
Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

II
' lUll
� CANNONSBUNNELL Standard proctor (ASTM D698 / AASHTO T99)
ENGINEERING
Report#: 001-L1
Client: Haywood Community College Report Date: 02/13/2024 Sample Date: 02/13/2024
Project: 1684 Jones Cove Road Project#: 22245-01
Location: Clyde,NC
SAMPLE AND PROCTOR/SATURATION CURVE (MOISTURE DENSITY)
Sample Source: B-8 20-25' Proctor#: 001-L1
Visual Classification: Brown silt
Sample Location/No: t Proctor
Test Procedure/Method: A
ASTM D-698(Proctor)
Max Dry Density(pcf): 109.7 112 - - —
Optimum Moisture(%): 15.3 %
Saturation Results
Specific Gravity: 0
%Retained Rock Correction:
3/4" Sieve: 3/8" Sieve: 110 - -
No.4: _a
.y
�-i
108
106 -
10 15 20
Moisture Content(%)
Remarks:
Report Copied to:
Claire Hill,Melanie Robinson,Colm O'Doherty
Lab Representative:BLEAE Labtech Colm O'Doherty
Project Engineer/Geologist/Scientist
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering,Inc.
Notes:The results above apply only to the specific samples noted using the aforementioned test method(s)and do not represent any other sample.
Reports may not be reproduced except in full without permission.
30 Park Ridge Dr I Fletcher I North Carolina 128732
https://www.blecorp.com/
Phone [phone] Page 1 of 1

Laboratory Procedures
Compaction
Representative samples of potential borrow soils from the project site were collected, placed in
cloth sacks, and transported to the laboratory for compaction testing. Standard Proctor compaction
tests (ASTM D 698) were performed on selected samples to determine their compaction
characteristics, including their maximum dry density and optimum moisture content. Test results
are presented on the attached Compaction Test sheets.
Soil Plasticity
Representative samples of the upper clayey soils were selected for Atterberg Limits testing to
determine their soil plasticity characteristics. The soil's Plasticity Index (PI) is representative of this
characteristic and is bracketed by the Liquid Limit (LL) and the Plastic Limit (PL). These
characteristics are determined in accordance with ASTM D 4318. The LL is the moisture content at
which the soil will flow as a heavy viscous fluid. The PL is the moisture content at which the soil
begins to lose its plasticity. The data obtained are presented on the attached Summary of Laboratory
Test Data.
Grain Size Distribution
Grain size tests were performed on representative soil samples to determine the particle size
distribution of these materials. After initial drying, the samples were washed over a U. S. Standard
No. 200 sieve to remove the fines(particles finer than a No.200 mesh sieve). The samples were then
dried and sieved through a standard set of nested sieves. This test was performed in a manner similar
to that described by ASTM D 422. The results are presented as percent finer by weight versus
particle size curves on the attached Grain Size Distribution sheets
Natural Moisture Content
The natural moisture content of selected samples was determined in accordance with ASTM D 2216.
The moisture content of the soil is the ratio, expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in a
given mass of soil to the weight of the soil particles. The results are presented in the attached
Summary of Laboratory Test Data.

APPENDIX F
Important Information about
This Geotechnical Engineering Report

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS
GEOTECHNICAL-ENGINEERING REPORT
Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.
While you cannot eliminate all such risks, you can manage them.The following information is provided to help.
Bunnell-Lammons Engineering, Inc. (BLE) has project and purpose. For example, it is unlikely that a geotechnical-
prepared this advisory to help you interpret and engineering study for a refrigerated warehouse will be the same as
one prepared for a parking garage; and a few borings drilled during a
apply this geotechnical-engineering report as preliminary study to evaluate site feasibility will not be adequate to
effectively as possible. In that way, you can benefit develop geotechnical design recommendations for the project.
from a lowered exposure to problems associated
with subsurface conditions at project sites and Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
their development, which for decades have been a • fora different client;
principal cause of construction delays,cost overruns, ▪ foradifferentprojectorpurpose;
• for a different site(that may or may not include all or a portion of the
claims, and disputes. If you have questions or want
original site);or
more information about any of the issues discussed • before important events occurred at the site or adjacent to it;
herein, reach to your BLE contact. e.g., man-made events like construction or environmental
remediation,or natural events like floods,droughts, earthquakes,or
Understand the Geotechnical-Engineering Services groundwater fluctuations.
Provided for this Report
Geotechnical-engineering services typically include the planning, Note, too, the reliability of a geotechnical-engineering report can be
collection, interpretation, and analysis of exploratory data from widely affected by the passage of time,because of factors like changed subsurface
spaced borings and/or test pits.Field data are combined with results from conditions; new or modified codes, standards, or regulations; or new
laboratory tests of soil and rock samples obtained from field exploration(if techniques or tools.If you are the least bit uncertain about the continued
applicable),observations made during site reconnaissance,and historical reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical engineer before
information to form one or more models of the expected subsurface applying the recommendations in it.A minor amount of additional testing
conditions beneath the site.Local geology and alterations of the site surface or analysis after the passage of time—if any is required at all— could
and subsurface by previous and proposed construction are also important prevent major problems.
considerations. Geotechnical engineers apply their engineering training,
experience, and judgment to adapt the requirements of the prospective Read this Report in Full
project to the subsurface model(s). Estimates are made of the subsurface Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-
conditions that will likely be exposed during construction as well as the engineering report did not read the report in its entirety.Do not rely on an
expected performance of foundations and other structures being planned executive summary.Do not read selective elements only.Read and refer
and/or affected by construction activities. to the report in full.
The culmination of these geotechnical-engineering services is typically a You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer
geotechnical-engineering report providing the data obtained,a discussion About Change
of the subsurface model(s), the engineering and geologic engineering Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project-specific factors
assessments and analyses made, and the recommendations developed when developing the scope of study behind this report and developing
to satisfy the given requirements of the project. These reports may be the confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys.Typical
titled investigations, explorations, studies, assessments, or evaluations. changes that could erode the reliability of this report include those that
Regardless of the title used, the geotechnical-engineering report is an affect:
engineering interpretation of the subsurface conditions within the context • the site's size or shape;
of the project and does not represent a close examination, systematic • the elevation,configuration,location,orientation,function or weight
inquiry,or thorough investigation of all site and subsurface conditions. of the proposed structure and the desired performance criteria;
• the composition of the design team;or
Geotechnical-Engineering Services are Performed • project ownership.
for Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects, And At
Specific Times As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs, or site changes even minor ones and request an assessment of their
goals, and risk management preferences of their clients.A geotechnical- impact.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
engineering study conducted for a given civil engineer will not likely meet responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
the needs of a civil-works constructor or even a different civil engineer. engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
Because each geotechnical-engineering study is unique,each geotechnical- would have considered.
engineering report is unique,prepared solely for the client.
Likewise,geotechnical-engineering services are performed for a specific
'I ' IM L AMMON SL
AMMON
ENGINEERING

Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note that
Professional Opinions "informational purposes"means constructors have no right to rely on the
interpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in the report.
Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a site's Be certain that constructors know they may learn about specific project
subsurface using various sampling and testing procedures. Geotechnical requirements, including options selected from the report, only from the
engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at those specific design drawings and specifications. Remind constructors that they may
locations where sampling and testing is performed. The data derived from perform their own studies if they want to, and be sure to allow enough
that sampling and testing were reviewed by your geotechnical engineer, time to permit them to do so.Only then might you be in a position to give
who then applied professional judgment to form opinions about subsurface constructors the information available to you,while requiring them to at least
conditions throughout the site.Actual sitewide-subsurface conditions may share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated
differ—maybe significantly—from those indicated in this report.Confront
that risk by retaining your geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team conditions.Conducting prebid and preconstruction conferences can also be
through project completion to obtain informed guidance quickly,whenever valuable in this respect.
needed.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
This Report's Recommendations Are Confirmation- Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do not
Dependent realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering
disciplines.This happens in part because soil and rock on project sites are
The recommendations included in this report including any options or typically heterogeneous and not manufactured materials with well-defined
alternatives—are confirmation-dependent.In other words,they are not final, engineering properties like steel and concrete. That lack of understanding
because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied heavily on has nurtured unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments,
judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer can finalize delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk,
the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface conditions geotechnical engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their
exposed during construction. If through observation your geotechnical
engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist actually do exist, reports.Sometimes labeled"limitations,"many of these provisions indicate
the recommendations can be relied upon,assuming no other changes have where geotechnical engineers'responsibilities begin and end,to help others
occurred.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot assume recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read these provisions closely
responsibility or liability for confirmation-dependent recommendations if Ask questions.Your geotechnical engineer should respond fully and frankly.
you fail to retain that engineer to perform construction observation.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted The personnel,equipment,and techniques used to perform an environmental
Other design professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical-engineering study—e.g.,a"phase-one"or"phase-two"environmental site assessment—
reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk by having your differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical-engineering
geotechnical engineer serve as a continuing member of the design team,to: study. For that reason, a geotechnical-engineering report does not usually
• confer with other design-team members; provide environmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; e.g.,
• help develop specifications; about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated
• review pertinent elements of other design professionals' plans and contaminants. Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have
specifications;and led to project failures. If you have not obtained your own environmental
• be available whenever geotechnical-engineering guidance is needed. information about the project site, ask your geotechnical consultant for a
recommendation on how to find environmental risk-management guidance.
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report. Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction-phase Infiltration and Mold
observations. While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,water
infiltration, or similar issues in this report, the engineer's services were
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance not designed, conducted, or intended to prevent migration of moisture —
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can including water vapor—from the soil through building slabs and walls and
shift unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by into the building interior, where it can cause mold growth and material-
limiting the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent performance deficiencies. Accordingly, proper implementation of the
the costly, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the geotechnical engineer's recommendations will not of itself be sufficient
complete geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront the risk of moisture infiltration
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note by including building-envelope or mold specialists on the design team.
conspicuously that you've included the material for information purposes Geotechnical engineers are not building-envelope or mold specialists.
BUNNELL-LAMMONS ENGINEERING, INC.- ENVIRONMENTAL I GEOTECHNICAL I CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

DEED

Instrument# 2015009738 Book 896 Page 2264
1111111111111111111111 II IlU
DATE I I of S BYI\A,A
2015009738
HAYWOODWOOD CO.CO NC FEE$26.00
STATE OF NC REAL ESTATE EXTX
$392.00
PRESENTED B RECORDED
11-19-2015 01:59:02 PM
HAYWOOD COUNTY TAX CERTIFICATION SHERRI cERocERs
REGISTER OF SEEDS
BY SfACY C MOORE
DEPUTY
There are no delinquent taxes due that are a lien BK: RB 896
against parcel number(s)A. —09—gliOS PG: 2264-2267
Mike Matthews,Haywood County Tax Collector
Date:It-IC,— /5-By:(..t L--
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
Excise Tax: $392.00
Parcel Identifier No._8636-08-8403_Verified by Haywood County on the 19th day of November ,2015
By:_
Mail/Box to: Patrick U. Smathers; 118 Main St., Ste B;Canton,NC 28716
This instrument was prepared by: Patrick U. Smathers
Brief description for the Index: 1684 Jones Cove Road,Clyde NC 28721
THIS DEED made this 12th day of November 2015,by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
LYNDON MCKEE SMATHERS,JR and LINDA S.ROBINSON, THE TRUSTEES OF HAYWOOD
Co-Trustees of the ARTIE R. SMATHERS LIVING TRUST COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Dated March 6, 1992;LYNDON MCKEE SMATHERS,JR.,
(single);and LINDA S.ROBINSON(single) 185 FREELANDER DR.
CLYDE,NC 28721
Enter in appropriate block for each Grantor and Grantee: name,mailing address,and,if appropriate,character of entity,e.g.
corporation or partnership.
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs, successors,and assigns,and shall include
singular,plural,masculine,feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH,that the Grantor,for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,has and
by these presents does grant,bargain,sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple,all that certain lot or parcel of land situated in the
City of CLYDE , Township, Haywood County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
See Exhibit"A"attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference
The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument recorded in Book 424_page 1243
All or a portion of the property herein conveyed includes or X does not include the primary residence of a Grantor.
A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat Book slot .
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to the Grantee in
fee simple.
NC Bar Association Form No.3©1976,Revised© 1/1/2010
Printed by Agreement with the NC Bar Association

Instrument# 2015009738 Book 896 Page 2265
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee,that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple,has the right to convey the same in fee
simple,that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances, and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the
lawful claims of all persons whomsoever,other than the following exceptions:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor has duly executed the foregoing asbb of the day and year first above written.
dlyt 'fa�.te, Six (SEAL)
(Entity Name) Print/Type Name: LYNDON MCI E SMATHERS,JR
By: Co-Trustee
Z • GZ4I►nAwpti. (SEAL)
Print/Type Name&Title: Print/Type Name: LINDA S.ROBINSON
Co-T stee pp��
By: In1t—�L z ry1,� .11np�" (SEAL)
Print/Type Name&Title: Prin�Name: LYNDON MCKEE�SMATHERS,JR.
� rI Individual
By: otMn.cllG- ,8 . (SEAL)
Print/Type Name&Title: Print/Type Name: LINDA S. ROBINSON
Individual
NC Bar Association Form No.3©1976,Revised© 1/1/2010
Printed by Agreement with the NC Bar Association

Instrument# 2015009738 Book 896 Page 2266
O(Z •t C6-"114 a-
State of -County or City of k4 w,.�a�
I,the undersigned Notary Public of the County or City of t,,,,a,,j and State aforesaid,certify that
epquhtlle 10440 A (Y1l C. k e.e - -- -kersi Sr personally appeared before me this day and
41 Pile•: �,ue execution of the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein expressed. Witness my hand and Notarial stamp or
'�� eal ttljlr� d Vu J w+her 20 Ste'
S.
MY C1 �, .._n . --e
COMMISSION EXPIRES Z
yMy Imip ,grl7Expi es: 3- 1--e,0 11 M u +i 0. Cyr• I; �,, - Notary Public
11` ffj 6i":6G Vq Notary's Printed or Typed Name
'''°O covr'o\''
-11tlttt o"``
State of ro (-c'N'NIA, -County or City of ,,,,.,..,0)
I,the undersigned Notary Public of the County or City di Kq , ,,,mot and State aforesaid,certify that
1-1`n dla. S . ko b;n_s.n . , personally appeared before me this day and
`` Rltilthe due execution of the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein expressed. Witness my hand and Notarial stamp or
`` ',/day of Il ie - r 201.s7
rQ.c1GTARY Co 11\ ._ 0.• ��e : 3 I� M i- o�!1 alcr.4-t ,, ,�,r(t'n n N yPublic
_ co
_ Notary's Printed or Typed e
y _ eo �_' -County or City of
:9 UBl_ ,th j ersigned Notary Public of the County or City of and State aforesaid,certify that
State of n or-l-k Co./-o l Pn_a, -County or City of f(&yy 4 0 A
��.�� `""0. A '!t��undersigned Notary Public of the County or City bf Ke-j4-.4�e�( and State aforesaid,certify that
a`tee.ZS L14.` WI C- k'-a e. Sin." , -�e,-s1 3T- personally appeared before me this day and
. i •. ue executionA / of the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein expressed. Witness my hand and Notarial stamp or
Q eal Os 9� Cilia IV o Q,"�j�- ,20 137
2 COMMISSION EXPIFIFS _
i ....2:::.1=-95.4-1-7—og nA„.,..t, ...._„0„ J„,,,,,IL,
y9 NAG igCiis n expires: 3--I-- o I SF O1 ,i D- Gc I;„g�n Nota Public
I: 8i l Q`1fff Notary's Printed or Typed ItSme
411i...nn„o►
State of no a r LGra/,`n•-. -County or City of H. 0.,�
I,the undersigned Notary Public of the County or City of �Ke w.ej, and State aforesaid,certify that
Li r\d a- 5. go b i n'ten 7 personally appeared before me this day and
o the due execution of the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein expressed. Witness my hand and Notarial stamp or
�P,seal t is '7� ' ay of a o,/a.� ,7,20/
tOTAR 1' o
Q MY 2 y 1/t 1)
=� col I6 Tsff4� 1 E fires: 3^ col? (Y c..r /a-`0_ Oiset,'n ary Public
3 11 ( 4 Notary's Printed or Typed Name
%y9 Statejti-kG �`e -County or City of
)Iy I,46ki dersigned Notary Public of the County or City of and State aforesaid,certify that
NC Bar Association Form No.3©1976,Revised©1/1/2010
Printed by Agreement with the NC Bar Association

Instrument# 2015009738 Book 896 Page 2267
SMATHERS & SMATHERS PAGE 01/01
EXHIBIT "A"
Being and comprising that 11.1.34 acres tract as shown on plat titled: "Haywood County,
a body corporate and politic",by Clifford G. Sechser, P.L.S. L-3952, dated o8-25-08,
recorded in Plat Cabinet C, Slot 5361, Haywood County Registry.
Lyndon Smathers and Linda Smathers Robinson are joining in this conveyance to
transfer any interest they may have, if any, resulting from Item III of the Revocable
Trust Agreement attached to the recorded Trust Certificate (Deed Book 444, Page 1185;
Haywood County Registry).