SW6240803_Stormwater Report_20240916

Sediment, Erosion Control, & Stormwater
Calculations
For
HIES EASTOVER
VP FRESH FOODS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NC
June 2024 011,111,
SE.
4 f.
ii�i /q�.�:C`, \S
JOB NO. 21047
CLAYTON
ENGINEERING & DESIGN

HIES - EASTOVER
SEDIMENT & EROSION CONTROL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TAB 1 - Project Narrative
- Sequence of Construction Activities
- Maintenance Plan
TAB 2 - Maps
- Location Map
USGS Topo Map
Pre-Construction Erosion Control Drainage Area Map
- Post Construction Drainage Map
TAB 3 - Soils Information
TAB 4 - Erosion Control Calculations
Outlet Protection
TAB 5 - Storm Drainage
- Storm Drainage Calculations
TAB 6 - Appendices
- SHWT Report#1
- GEOTECH REPORT
- Deed Restrictions Agreement
- Deed
- Application
- O&M Agreement
- Wetland Supplement Form
- Supplement EZ Form
Page 1 of 1

CLAYTON
ENGINEERING & DESIGN
HIES EASTOVER
EROSION, SEDIMENTATION & STORMWATER
Project Narrative
Our client wishes to construct a new hotel in Eastover. Project will include one building with required parking
and drives. Please see the attached plans. The total site is 6.55 acres and approximately 2.00 acres will be
disturbed during construction. This is the second phase to a project that started in 2018. The c-store and DQ
were completed in 2020. The majority of the site work, grading, and erosion control were completed for the
entire site. Phase 2 is for the construction of the hotel building. This will include minor site work, installation of
BMPs, and final paving etc.
Post construction stormwater will be handled through a series of storm piping and a stormwater wetland.
Soil erosion will be controlled with the use of perimeter silt fence, a skimmer basin, and a series of diversion
swales. Approximately 2.00 acres of area will be disturbed during construction. Several temporary diversions
will be utilized to direct flow into the skimmer basin. Silt fence inlet protection will be installed concurrently with
the installation of the new storm drain piping. Calculations for temporary skimmer basin sizing are found in the
following report. As stated before...the majority of the site work is complete and the site is currently stable.
Erosion control measures were designed in accordance with NCDENR Erosion and Sediment Control Planning
and Design Manual, 2006 edition.
Site Info:
Drainage Area: 187,582 sf
Impervious Area: 174,894 sf
Percent Impervious Area: 93.2%
Wetland Storage Volume
Surface Area: 12,000 sf
Volume Required: 13,114
Volume Provided: 15,000 cuft
\\10.0.1.250\WCE\WCE\Projects\2024\24059 - HIES Eastover Submittal Package\400 Analysis & Design\430 Civil\435
Design submissions\435.6 Applications\Narrative.doc

Sequence Of Construction Activities
1. Determine and mark limits of disturbance.
2. Construct stabilized construction entrance.
3. Place perimeter sediment fence and stone outlets.
4. Construct temporary skimmer basins and temporary diversions. Place seeding
immediately after constructing these structures. These structures shall be
constructed prior to the disturbance of each contributing area.
5. Begin demolition of existing structures in accordance with the Demolition Plan.
6. Remove topsoil and stockpile for use on slopes and in berms. Stockpile area is
designated on plans or as directed by engineer.
7. Construct storm drainage. Excavated drop inlet protection and outlet protection to
be constructed concurrently with storm drains. Silt sacks are to be installed at
each inlet upon placement of base course.
8. Place temporary seeding on all disturbed areas.
9. Complete final grading.
10. Place permanent seeding and do final landscaping.
11. Remove temporary erosion control measures after site is stabilized.
12. Estimated time before final stabilization is 3 months after completion of
construction.

Maintenance Plan
1. All erosion and sediment control practices will be checked for stability and proper
operation following every runoff-producing rainfall, but at a minimum of once
every week. Any needed repairs will be made immediately to maintain all erosion
and sedimentation controls as designed.
2. Stabilization measures shall be initiated as soon as practicable in portions of the
site where construction activities have temporarily or permanently ceased,but in
no case more than 14 days after the construction activity in that portion of the site
has temporarily or permanently ceased,unless activity in that portion of the site
will resume within 21 days.
3. Silt/sediment fences will be repaired as necessary to maintain a barrier. Sediment
will be removed from behind the fence when it becomes about 0.5 feet deep.
Removed sediment shall be disposed of in a suitable area and stabilized to prevent
erosion and sedimentation.
4. All seeded areas will be fertilized,reseeded as necessary, and mulched to
maintain a vigorous, dense vegetative cover.
5. Additional control devices may be required during construction in order to control
erosion and/or off site sedimentation. All temporary control devices shall be
removed once construction is completed and the site is stabilized.
6. Where practicable, trenches should be filled, covered, and temporary seeding
applied at the end of each day.
7. Contractor must take necessary action to minimize the tracking of mud onto the
paved roadway from construction areas. The contractor shall daily remove
mud/soil from pavement, as maybe required.

Y
/ /
1?5
apiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii zrt3
r
NN,
123
r
r
�' - ' Waffle House9
/Eastover-Central
)) .
/Elementary School -_ -
+ — GoMsboroJ
8__, /Eastover / ••`- 7rzrzt a6rr•, Q
c
ebb'fp`' tv - ,♦♦♦♦♦.....•
,.♦:♦;.•fr
•/1 / e..
j�� �� �Ra PROJECT
"°` e'er pe1,,,ro, 0vo, LOCATION
ill
aii
r
NOT TO SCALE
Owner Project Title Date
ALLTYPE CONSTRUCTION 06/29/22
C LAYTO 14.1 HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS Job No.
MANAGEMENT, INC & SUITES 18053
ENGINEERING & DESIGN Drawing Title
STREET VIEW Project Location C-002
EASTOVER, NC Sht. 1 of 1

-7 . a501 `
04 05 35-12.5O`
r.,,._..41:ei
. ..
., . ,
...,„. 13 'W. i
ibis - gePA. -,...... ar-,44%ot'
......4-11..404,:a .4 -I-
89
eor
r4y.� --
rin—liC 4131 0
•
PROJECT
4, LOCATION
ti
88
11
mil
J
U l Jr
/..
atir
•
ii
nit) 1
..
1
....:,
_..r.,s--.:0A.N.
S"'
NOT TO SCALE
Owner Project Title Date
ALLTYPE CONSTRUCTION 009/22
C �14 � HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS Job No.
MANAGEMENT, INC & SUITES 53
No.
ENGINEERING& DESIGN Drawing Title
Project Location C-001
USGS MAP EASTOVER, NC Sht. 1 of 1

a Soil Map—Cumberland County,North Carolina a
N
704460 704530 704600 704670 704740 704810 704880 704950 705020 705090
35°T25"N � - \ , / /f , _, r — 35°T25"N
, rile
/
iw'
° IL�_ i�
�' Ramp,
111116.
,�'. . a%''��' I. iv.
'' . � t , , 1 t
Ay6 "V '
•
!. ,� �-,. ...4
-i. ''y� Ali 1 h• �'7
x
WV '
�k .7 .'�Q.* l ,i +% y;,• ,i;. . '� NOS` i!' , `� ...71•
a � ..0 4e
-Ra
t r •
.. B., . �r • )+�r'' , 4.4 WaB
1 ,4.49*,-.0%.1 yv 17-1111P- ' 0. 4 •,
_
aoi1 Map ma not bea7 Iod'at.fi o4g�24. '
• i` * _ •
_
35°T 10"N —1 35°T 10"N
704460 704530 704600 704670 704740 704810 704880 704950 705020 705090
3 3
N
Map Scale:1:3,090 if printed on A landscape(11"x 8.5")sheet.
Meters
m N 0 45 90 180 270 m
Feet
0 150 300 m 600 90D
Map projection:Web Mercato Coer coo dinates:WGS84 Edge dcs:UTM Zone 17N WGS84
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 6/29/2022
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3

Soil Map—Cumberland County,North Carolina
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest(AOI) A Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
ILI Area of Interest(AOI) 1:24,000.
Q StonySpot
Soils a) Very Stony Spot Warning:Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
0 Soil Map Unit Polygons
Wet Spot Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
,.rr Soil Map Unit Lines misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
Other line placement.The maps do not show the small areas of
• Soil Map Unit Points contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
Special Line Features
Special Point Features scale.
u Blowout Water Features
Streams and Canals Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
El Borrow Pit measurements.
Transportation
Clay Spot Rails Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
0 Closed Depression Web Soil Survey URL:
ti Interstate Highways Coordinate System: Web Mercator(EPSG:3857)
X Gravel Pit US Routes
oio Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
Gravelly Spot Major Roads projection,which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area.A projection that preserves area,such as the
Q Landfill Local Roads Albers equal-area conic projection,should be used if more
Lava Flow accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
Background
+• Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s)listed below.
Mine or Quarry
Soil Survey Area: Cumberland County,North Carolina
O Miscellaneous Water Survey Area Data: Version 23,Jan 21,2022
Q Perennial Water Soil map units are labeled(as space allows)for map scales
V Rock Outcrop 1:50,000 or larger.
Saline Spot Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Oct 22,2018—Oct
25,2018
Sandy Spot
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
Severely Eroded Spot compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor
4) Sinkhole shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
33 Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
7\ Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 6/29/2022
i Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3

Soil Map—Cumberland County,North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
AyB Aycock loam, 1 to 4 percent 1.9 3.9%
slopes
BrB Bragg sandy loam, 1 to 4 19.5 40.7%
percent slopes
Gr Grantham loam 0.9 1.9%
JT Johnston loam 0.0 0.0%
Na Nahunta loam 4.7 9.8%
NoA Norfolk loamy sand,0 to 2 8.3 17.4%
percent slopes
Ra Rains sandy loam,0 to 2 10.8 22.5%
percent slopes
WaB Wagram loamy sand,0 to 6 1.9 3.9%
percent slopes
Totals for Area of Interest 48.0 100.0%
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 6/29/2022
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

DESIGN OF RIPRAP OUTLET PROTECTION
User Input Data
Calculated Value
Reference Data
Designed By: wsc Date:
Checked By: wSC Date:
Company:
Project Name: HIES EASTOVER
Project No.:
Site Location (City/Town) Raleigh
Culvert Id. 1A
Total Drainage Area (acres) 2.5
Rainfall Intensity 7
Runoff Coefficient 0.7
Step 1. Determine the tailwater depth from channel characteristics below the
pipe outlet for the design capacity of the pipe_ If the tailwater depth is less
than half the outlet pipe diameter. it is classified mnnmuun tailwater condition.
If it is greater than half the pipe diameter. it is classified maximum condition.
Pipes that outlet onto wide fiat areas with no defined channel are assumed
to have a minimum tailwater condition unless reliable flood stage elevations
show otherwise.
Outlet pipe diameter, Do (in.) 24
Tailwater depth (in.) 11
Minimum/Maximum tailwater? Min TW (Fig. 8.06a)
Discharge (cfs) 12.25
Velocity (ft./s) 2.97
Step 2. Based on the tailwater conditions determined in step 1. enter Figure
8.06a or Figure 8.06b_and determine d;,,riprap size and minimum apron length
(La). The d:. size is the median stone size in a well-graded nprap apron.
Step 3. Determine apron width at the pipe outlet. the apron shape. and the
apron width at the outlet end from the same figure used in Step 2.
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Figure 8.06a Figure 8.06b

Riprap d50, (ft.) 0.5
Minimum apron length, La (ft.) 12
Apron width at pipe outlet (ft.) 6 6
Apron shape
Apron width at outlet end (ft.) 14 2
Step 4. Determine the maximum stone diameter:
= 1 .5xd50
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Max Stone Diameter, dmax (ft.) 0.75 0
Step 5. Determine the apron thickness:
Apron thickness = I x d„,
Minimum TW Maximum TW
Apron Thickness(ft.) 1.125 0
Step 6. Fit the riprap apron to the site by making it level for the minimum
length, La. from Figure 8.06a or Figure 8.06b. Extend the apron farther
downstream and along channel banks until stability is assured. Keep the
apron as straight as possible and align it with the flow of the receiving stream.
Make any necessary alignment bends near the pipe outlet so that the entrance
into the receiving stream is straight.
Some locations may require lining of the entire channel cross section to assure
stability.
It may be necessary to increase the size of riprap where protection of the
channel side slopes is necessary (Appendix S.05)_ Where overfills exist at
pipe outlets or flows are excessive, a plunge pool should be considered, see
page 8.06.8.

4/10/2022

Curb Cumulative Runoff Time Of Rainfall Total PIPE Computed Design Design Design
Inlet No./ From To Face/ Area Coef. Sum Concentration Intensity Runoff Invert Invert Pipe Pipe Pipe Pipe Full-PipeFull-Pipe Q/Q-full VN-full Actual Travel cover Size/Type
Descriptior Structure Structure RIM Area "A" "C" "CA" "CA" "Tc" "110" "Q10" Inlet Elev.Outlet Elev. Slope No.of Size Size Length Capacity Velocity Factor Factor Velocity Time
Number Number ELEV (acres) (min) (in/hr) (cfs) (%) Pipes (in) (in) (ft) (cfs) (fps) (fps) (min)
6a 6a 5a 134.00 0.78 0.78 0.90 0.70 0.70 5.00 6.50 4.56 131.76 130.62 1.50% 1 12 18 76 12.86 7.28 0.355 0.35 2.58 0.49 0.74
5a 5a 4a 134.60 0.14 0.92 0.90 0.13 1.70 5.00 6.50 11.02 130.62 130.27 0.50% 1 21 24 71 15.99 5.09 0.689 0.69 3.51 0.34 1.98
4a 4a 3a 134.45 0.19 1.11 0.60 0.11 1.81 5.00 6.50 11.77 129.77 129.29 0.50% 1 21 24 95 15.99 5.09 0.736 0.74 3.74 0.42 2.69
3a 3a 2a 133.75 0.32 1.43 0.60 0.19 2.00 5.00 6.50 13.01 129.29 128.70 0.50% 1 22 24 119 15.99 5.09 0.814 0.81 4.14 0.48 2.46
2a 2a la 133.46 0.11 1.54 0.60 0.07 2.07 5.00 6.50 13.44 128.20 127.17 0.50% 1 22 30 206 28.99 5.91 0.464 0.46 2.74 1.25 2.77
1a la OutletA 131.45 0.29 1.83 0.60 0.17 2.24 5.00 6.50 14.57 127.17 127.00 0.50% 1 23 30 33 28.99 5.91 0.503 0.50 2.97 0.19 1.78
2c 2c 1c 132.45 0.39 0.39 0.80 0.31 0.77 5.00 6.50 4.99 128.78 128.30 1.00% 1 14 18 48 10.50 5.94 0.475 0.47 2.82 0.28 2.17
lc 1c outlet C 133.40 0.5 0.50 0.70 0.35 0.35 5.00 6.50 2.28 128.10 127.00 5.00% 1 8 18 22 23.48 13.29 0.097 0.10 1.29 0.28 3.80
4b 4b 3b 134.75 0.49 0.49 0.90 0.44 0.44 5.00 6.50 2.87 132.45 131.27 1.00% 1 11 15 118 6.46 5.26 0.444 0.44 2.34 0.84 1.05
3b 3b 2b 134.75 0.34 0.83 0.70 0.24 0.68 5.00 6.50 4.41 131.27 130.82 0.77% 1 14 18 58 9.21 5.21 0.479 0.48 2.50 0.39 1.98
2b 2b 1b 134.50 0.14 0.97 0.70 0.10 0.78 5.00 6.50 5.05 130.82 130.00 0.50% 1 16 24 164 15.99 5.09 0.316 0.32 1.61 1.70 1.68
1 b lb 4A 135.00 0.14 0.14 0.65 0.09 0.87 5.00 6.50 5.64 130.00 129.77 0.50% 1 16 24 46 15.99 5.09 0.353 0.35 1.80 0.43 3.00
culverta inva invb 139.00 0.65 0.65 0.70 0.46 0.46 5.00 6.50 2.96 136.09 135.20 0.77% 1 12 18 116 9.21 5.21 0.321 0.32 1.67 1.16 1.41

ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP Setting the Standard for Service"
•� Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1073
NC Registered Geologists Firm C-553
SC Registered Engineering Firm 3239
August 17, 2023
Mr. Nirav Modi
Fresh Foods, Inc
301 North Pines Street
Lumberton, North Carolina 28358
Reference: Report of Seasonal High Water Table Estimation and Infiltration Testing
Holiday Inn Wade Additional
Wade, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.21021
Dear Mr. Modi:
ECS Southeast, LLP (ECS) recently conducted a seasonal high water table (SHWT) estimation
and infiltration testing within the stormwater control measure (SCM) area(s) along Pembroke
Road in Wade, Cumberland County, North Carolina. This letter, with attachments, is the report
of our testing.
Field Testing
On August 16, 2023, ECS conducted an exploration of the subsurface soil conditions, in
accordance with the NCDEQ Stormwater Design Manual section A-2, at two additionally
requested locations shown on the attached Boring Location Plan (Figure 1). ECS used GPS
equipment in order to determine the boring locations. The purpose of this exploration was to
obtain subsurface information of the in situ soils for the SCM area(s). ECS explored the
subsurface soil conditions by advancing one hand auger boring into the existing ground surface
at each of the requested boring locations. ECS visually classified the subsurface soils and
obtained representative samples of each soil type encountered. ECS also recorded the SHWT
elevation observed at the time of the hand auger borings. The attached Infiltration Testing Form
provides a summary of the subsurface conditions encountered at the hand auger boring locations.
The SHWT elevation was estimated at the boring locations below the existing grade elevation. A
summary of the findings are as follows:
Location SHWT
1-5 35 inches
1-6 22 inches
ECS has conducted two additional infiltration tests utilizing a compact constant head
permeameter near the hand auger borings in order to estimate the infiltration rate for the
subsurface soils. Infiltration tests are typically conducted at two feet above the SHWT or in the
most restrictive soil horizon. Tests in clayey conditions are conducted for durations of up to 30
minutes. If a more precise hydraulic conductivity value is desired for these locations, then ECS
recommends collecting samples and performing laboratory permeability testing.
ECS Capitol Services, PLLC • ECS Florida.LLC • ECS Mid-Atlantic,LLC • ECS Midwest,LLC • ECS Southeast, LLP • ECS Southwest, LLP
www ecsltmited.com

Report of SHWT Estimation and Infiltration Testing
Holiday Inn Wade Additional
Wade, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.21021
August 17, 2023
Field Test Results
Below is a summary of the infiltration test results:
Location Description Depth Inches/
hour
1-5 Tan/orange/gray sandy CLAY 30 inches <0.001
1-6 Orange/gray sandy CLAY 18 inches <0.001
Infiltration rates and SHWT may vary within the proposed site due to changes in elevation, soil
classification and subsurface conditions. ECS recommends that a licensed surveyor provide the
elevations of the boring locations.
Closure
ECS's analysis of the site has been based on our understanding of the site, the project information
provided to us, and the data obtained during our exploration. If the project information provided
to us is changed, please contact us so that our recommendations can be reviewed and
appropriate revisions provided, if necessary. The discovery of any site or subsurface conditions
during construction which deviate from the data outlined in this exploration should be reported to
us for our review, analysis and revision of our recommendations, if necessary. The assessment
of site environmental conditions for the presence of pollutants in the soil and groundwater of the
site is beyond the scope of this geotechnical exploration.
ECS appreciates the opportunity to provide our services to you on this project. If you have any
questions concerning this report or this project, please contact us.
Respectfully,
ECS SOUTHEAST, LLP
K. Brooks Wall W. Brandon Fulton, PSC, PWS, LSS
Project Manager Environmental Department Manager
[e-mail] [e-mail]
910-686-9114 704-525-5152
Attachments: Figure 1 - Boring Location Plan
Infiltration Testing Form
GBA Document
2

e/ , w irl _
itimiww : -- _
/ _
. . .., . ..
. . ,
••••
• • • Clik
...Yr t
. . _
1.0
.' - .116F i
4;
A ir' . , • - - - I.
— - W' ob.- -•_1_
. Pe
.;. •
- - e
..- ....--.,--
..,.. . .. ,5 _ -.-,-----
• . . ,..-*
-- - • —
- .-,
- ,,Aille• •
. ._ ::i '-- . . •'
-
0 . _
?eco ...,
„Akesko2.6
, . -.. , ... -..
, -...f, •, ' -;', ...4 ,
s• 1 . ..' .....- ..,...f' ,
,.
. ,-.----'
. -' 1444 14.:‘----.E- *.--4•— -:- • - _
. • - .7016-.- ' -: ...4, '..'''' ', ,...4"''' 1- .4-'''
. -$ +
.._ -;„. • ,elii .
. • ...
„wok,-,
'7,* . - :,i:----- _ .1 -71.••• '1(74Tts : .,`„fi '7.4( '
firlit
..:,"v-a . , „"-, i • • Ir-.. - •,iir. -,, , 141IL-t—
.
: , - '_':_,_ , ‘ ',if 4,' -• - IC,.. t ,. • - •••
- • 4-.n.- ..4 . 1-r.'.1a1"., .` c J_. .. -
.6 t •' .:1?"` ' ts' `., :.-el. ' .ir...:
44. - a ,` i, • . - • - ,%--,,. r . ..4. .. . -
V I S a ' • 111... ' ''" .,4r. -"' , '‘ t._.,..., .... • i. 's..•••,..4:.,- • . _ ...: •,'
N
0 APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATIONS
W E
SCALE SHOWN ABOVE
s
Holiday Inn Wade Additional ___ _I
Wade, Cumberland County, Eil_ _ _
Figure 1— Boring Location Plan
North Carolina
Provided by: Google Earth
ECS Project#49.21021
August 16, 2023
JF I -..,

Infiltration Testing Form
Holiday Inn Wade Additional
Wade, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project No. 49.21021
August 16, 2023
Location Depth USCS Soil Description
-1 0-24" SM Brown/orange fine SAND w/ clay
24"-44" CL Tan/orange/gray sandy CLAY
Seasonal High Water Table was estimated to be at 35 inches below the
existing grade elevation.
Test was conducted at 30 inches below existing grade elevation
Infiltration Rate: <0.001 inches per hour
Location Depth USCS Soil Description
1-2 0-6" SM Brown/orange fine SAND w/ clay
6"-27" CL Orange/gray sandy CLAY
Seasonal High Water Table was estimated to be at 22 inches below the
existing grade elevation.
Test was conducted at 18 inches below existing grade elevation
Infiltration Rate: <0.001 inches per hour

Important Information about This
(-- Geotecbnical-[ngineering
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.
The Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA) Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include
has prepared this advisory to help you—assumedly those that affect:
a client representative—interpret and apply this • the site's size or shape;
geotechnical-engineering report as effectively • the function of the proposed structure,as when it's
as possible. In that way, clients can benefit from changed from a parking garage to an office building,or
a lowered exposure to the subsurface problems from a light-industrial plant to a refrigerated warehouse;
• the elevation,configuration,location,orientation,or
that,for decades, have been a principal cause of weight of the proposed structure;
construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and • the composition of the design team;or
disputes. If you have questions or want more • project ownership.
information about any of the issues discussed below,
contact your GBA-member geotechnical engineer. As a general rule,always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
Active involvement in the Geoprofessional Business changes-even minor ones-and request an assessment of their
Association exposes geotechnical engineers to a impact.The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
wide array of risk-confrontation techniques that can responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
be of genuine benefit for everyone involved with a engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
would have considered.
construction project.
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Geotechnical-Engineering Services Are Performed for Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects • for a different client;
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific • for a different project;
needs of their clients.A geotechnical-engineering study conducted for a different site(that may or may not include all or a
for a given civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil- portion of the original site);or
works constructor or even a different civil engineer.Because each • before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
geotechnical-engineering study is unique,each geotechnical- to it;e.g.,man-made events like construction or
engineering report is unique,prepared solely for the client.Those who environmental remediation,or natural events like floods,
rely on a geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client droughts,earthquakes,or groundwater fluctuations.
can be seriously misled.No one except authorized client representatives
should rely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first Note,too,that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it.And no one report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
-not even you-should apply this report for any purpose or project except because of factors like changed subsurface conditions;new or modified
the one originally contemplated. codes,standards,or regulations;or new techniques or tools.If your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an`apply-by"date on the report,
Read this Report in Full ask what it should be,and,in general,if you are the least bit uncertain
Costly problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical- about the continued reliability of this report,contact your geotechnical
engineering report did not read it in its entirety.Do not rely on an engineer before applying it.A minor amount of additional testing or
executive summary.Do not read selected elements only.Read this report analysis-if any is required at all-could prevent major problems.
in full.
Most of the "Findings" Related in This Report Are
You Need to Inform Your Geotechnical Engineer Professional Opinions
about Change Before construction begins,geotechnical engineers explore a site's
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique,project-specific factors subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
when designing the study behind this report and developing the Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
confirmation-dependent recommendations the report conveys.A few those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed.The
typical factors include: data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
• the client's goals,objectives,budget,schedule,and geotechnical engineer,who then applied professional judgment to
risk-management preferences; form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site.Actual
• the general nature of the structure involved,its size, sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ-maybe significantly-from
configuration,and performance criteria; those indicated in this report.Confront that risk by retaining your
• the structure's location and orientation on the site;and geotechnical engineer to serve on the design team from project start to
• other planned or existing site improvements,such as project finish,so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
retaining walls,access roads,parking lots,and whenever needed.
underground utilities.

This Report's Recommendations Are perform their own studies if they want to,and be sure to allow enough
Confirmation-Dependent time to permit them to do so.Only then might you be in a position
The recommendations included in this report-including any options to give constructors the information available to you,while requiring
or alternatives-are confirmation-dependent.In other words,they are them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
not final,because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied from unanticipated conditions.Conducting prebid and preconstruction
heavily on judgment and opinion to do so.Your geotechnical engineer conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
can finalize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
conditions revealed during construction.If through observation your Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
geotechnical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist Some client representatives,design professionals,and constructors do
actually do exist,the recommendations can be relied upon,assuming not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
no other changes have occurred.The geotechnical engineer who prepared engineering disciplines.That lack of understanding has nurtured
this report cannot assume responsibility or liability for confirmation- unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments,delays,
dependent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform cost overruns,claims,and disputes.To confront that risk,geotechnical
construction observation. engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled"limitations,'many of these provisions indicate
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted where geotechnical engineers'responsibilities begin and end,to help
Other design professionals'misinterpretation of geotechnical- others recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read these
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems.Confront that risk provisions closely.Ask questions.Your geotechnical engineer should
by having your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the respond fully and frankly.
design team,to:
• confer with other design-team members, Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
• help develop specifications, The personnel,equipment,and techniques used to perform an
• review pertinent elements of other design professionals' environmental study-e.g.,a"phase-one"or"phase-two"environmental
plans and specifications,and site assessment-differ significantly from those used to perform
• be on hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering a geotechnical-engineering study.For that reason,a geotechnical-
guidance is needed. engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions,or recommendations;e.g.,about the likelihood of
You should also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
report.Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction failures.If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
observation. information,ask your geotechnical consultant for risk-management
guidance.As a general rule,do not rely on an environmental report
Give Constructors a Complete Report and Guidance prepared for a different client,site,or project,or that is more than six
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift months old.
unanticipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation.To help prevent Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
the costly,contentious problems this practice has caused,include the Infiltration and Mold
complete geotechnical-engineering report,along with any attachments While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
or appendices,with your contract documents,but be certain to note water infiltration,or similar issues in this report,none of the engineer's
conspicuously that you've included the material for informational services were designed,conducted,or intended to prevent uncontrolled
purposes only.To avoid misunderstanding,you may also want to note migration of moisture-including water vapor-from the soil through
that"informational purposes"means constructors have no right to rely building slabs and walls and into the building interior,where it can
on the interpretations,opinions,conclusions,or recommendations in cause mold growth and material-performance deficiencies.Accordingly,
the report,but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific proper implementation of the geotechnical engineer's recommendations
times,locations,and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration.Confront
constructors know they may learn about specific project requirements, the risk of moisture infiltration by including building-envelope or mold
including options selected from the report,only from the design specialists on the design team.Geotechnical engineers are not building-
drawings and specifications.Remind constructors that they may envelope or mold specialists.
5 GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
t ASSOCIATION
Telephone:[phone]
e-mail:[e-mail] wwwgeoprofessional.org
Copyright 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association(GBA).Duplication,reproduction,or copying of this document,in whole or in part,by any means whatsoever,is strictly
prohibited,except with GBAs specific written permission.Excerpting,quoting,or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA,and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review.Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report of any
kind.Any other firm,individual,or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent

REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
HOLIDAY INN & SUITES
EASTOVER, CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
PREPARED FOR:
MR. P. SINGH SANDHU
ALL TYPE CONSTRUCTION & MANAGEMENT, INC.
3229 S. COLLEGE ROAD
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28412
ECS PROJECT NUMBER 33:3711
June 22, 2016

ECS CAROLINAS, "Setting LLP the Standard for Service"
�.M Geotechnical • Construction Materials • Environmental • Facilities NC Registered Engineering Firm F-1078
June 22, 2016
Mr. P. Singh Sandhu
All Type Construction & Management
3229 S. College Road
Wilmington, NC 28412
RE: Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Services
Holiday Inn & Suites
Eastover, Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
Dear Mr. Sandhu:
As authorized by your acceptance of ECS Proposal 33:2770 dated May 16, 2016, ECS has
completed the subsurface exploration and geotechnical services for the above-referenced
project.
This report presents the findings of our subsurface exploration and our evaluations, as well as
recommendations, regarding geotechnical-related design and construction considerations for
the site.
Thank you for the opportunity to work with you on this project. We would also at this time like to
express our interest in providing a project-specific field construction testing and observation
services required during the construction phase of this project.
Should you have questions or if we can be of further assistance, please contact us.
Respectfully Submitted,
ECS CAROLINAS, LLP
: '
A ^ llC 44„<„,_
:'k/i1JP1di` l �.
/22/16 •
Michael M. Ellis, El Winslow E. Goins, PE �o `{ �`'':f '\\'�
Staff Professional Principal Engineer J/ 1 �ti ?u,\-\\
NC PE License No. 033751
726 Ramsey Street, Suite 3, Fayetteville, NC 28301 • T: 910-401-3288 • F: 910-323-0539 • www.ecslimited.com
ECS Carolinas, LLP • ECS Florida, LLC • ECS Midwest, LLC • ECS Mid-Atlantic, LLC • ECS Southeast, LLC • ECS Texas,LLP

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW 2
2.1 Project Information 2
2.2 Scope of Work 2
2.3 Purpose of Exploration 2
3.0 EXPLORATION PROCEDURES 3
3.1 Subsurface Exploration Procedures 3
3.2 Laboratory Testing Program 3
4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION 4
4.1 Site Conditions 4
4.2 Regional Geology 4
4.3 Soil Conditions 4
4.4 Groundwater Conditions 5
4.5 Laboratory Test results 5
5.0 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6
5.1 Subgrade Preparation 6
5.2 Groundwater Control 6
5.3 Engineered Fill Placement 7
5.4 Foundations 8
5.5 Slab-on-Grade 10
5.6 Pavement Design Considerations 11
5.7 Site Drainage 12
5.8 Construction Considerations 12
6.0 CLOSING 13
APPENDICES
Appendix A Figures
Appendix B Boring Logs
Appendix C Laboratory Test Results
Appendix D General Conditions
Appendix E Procedures Regarding Field Logs, Laboratory Testing, and Samples

Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ECS Carolinas, LLP (ECS) has completed a subsurface exploration and geotechnical
engineering services for the proposed site located in Eastover, Cumberland County, North
Carolina. This summary should not be considered apart from the entire text of the report with
all the qualifications and conditions mentioned herein. Once the site plans are developed,
additional site-specific geotechnical exploration should be conducted.
The soil test borings encountered organic topsoil at the initial ground surface with thicknesses
of approximately 2 inches. Underlying the organic topsoil to approximately 10 feet, soils
consisting of stiff to very stiff, fat clay (CH), very soft to very stiff, sandy lean clay (CL), very
loose to dense, clayey and silty sand (SC, SM) were encountered in the borings. From 10 feet
to termination depths ranging from about 15 to 20 feet, borings B-1 through B-6 typically
encountered stiff, sandy lean clay (CL) and very loose to medium dense, clayey, silty, and clean
sand (SC, SM, SP).
The on-site sandy soils (SC, SM, SP) should be appropriate for use as backfill material for this
project, provided their moisture contents are within the acceptable range outlined in this report.
We anticipate that minor cuts and fills on the order of 3 feet or less will be incorporated into the
development of the site, with greater fill depths being anticipated for existing ditches at the site.
A perched groundwater condition may exist on the site and temporary groundwater control
measures may be necessary on the perimeter of the site.
Provided the site preparation recommendations in this report are followed, proposed lightly to
moderately loaded structures (column loads up to 150 kips and wall loads up to 5 kips per foot)
may be supported on conventional shallow foundations. For footings supported on firm natural
soil materials or new-engineered fill materials over firm natural soils, an allowable bearing
pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended. In order to achieve adequate
bearing and reduce the potential for post construction settlements of the structures, the
loose/soft near-surface soils encountered in the vicinity of boring B-2 may require localized
undercutting and replacement or other appropriate remedial activities if they exist at the
foundation subgrade elevation in building areas. Aggregate pier systems and driven timber
piles are alternative options that can be used for the foundation of the building instead of
undercutting the soft soils. Further details describing the foundation options are provided in
section 5.3 "Foundations Recommendations" of this report.
Based on the boring data, site conditions are suitable for a typical slab-on-grade section.
Therefore, we recommend supporting the floor slab as a slab-on-grade over existing natural
soils and new compacted structural fill that are stable when proofrolled.
Based on the boring data, site conditions are suitable for support of asphaltic or Portland
cement concrete pavement sections according to the criteria outlined in this report.
Based on the boring data, difficult excavations are not anticipated for shallow foundation or
utility excavations.
1

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
2.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
2.1 Project Information
The project consists of the construction of a multi-story hotel along with associated parking and
driveways. The site is located near the intersection of Pembroke Lane and Goldsboro Road in
Eastover, Cumberland County, North Carolina. No additional project information including
structural information was available at the time of this report.
2.2 Scope of Work
The site was explored by drilling eight soil test borings (Borings B-1 through B-8) and sampling
the soils to termination and refusal depths ranging from approximately 10 to 20 feet below
existing site grades. The boring locations were located in the field by ECS personnel using
handheld GPS equipment and existing site features as reference. The locations shown should
be considered approximate given the methods used. A Site Location Plan and Boring Location
Diagram are provided in Appendix A of this report.
2.3 Purposes of Exploration
The purpose of this exploration program was to determine the soil and groundwater conditions
at the site and to develop engineering recommendations to assist in the design and
construction of the proposed project. We accomplished these objectives as follows:
• Performing a site reconnaissance to evaluate the existing site conditions,
• Performing soil test borings to explore the subsurface soil and groundwater
conditions,
• Performing laboratory tests on selected representative soil samples from the borings
to evaluate pertinent engineering properties; and,
• Analyzing the field and laboratory data to develop appropriate geotechnical
engineering design and construction recommendations.
2

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
3.0 FIELD EXPLORATION
3.1 Exploration Procedures
The soil borings were performed with a drill rig, which utilized hollow stem augers (HSA) to
advance the boreholes.
Representative soil samples were obtained by means of the split-barrel sampling procedure in
general accordance with ASTM Specification D-1586. In this procedure, a 2-inch O. D. split-
barrel sampler is driven into the soil a distance of 18 inches by a 140 pound hammer with a free
fall of 30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler through the final 12-inch
interval is termed the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N-value and is indicated for each
sample on the boring logs.
The SPT N-value can be used to provide a qualitative indication of the in-place relative density
of cohesionless soils. In a less reliable way, SPT N-values provide an indication of consistency
for cohesive soils. These indications of relative density and consistency are qualitative, since
many factors can significantly affect the SPT N-value and prevent a direct correlation between
drill crews, drill rigs, drilling procedures, and hammer-rod-sampler assemblies.
Field logs of the soils encountered in the borings were maintained by the drill crew. The soil
samples obtained from the drilling operations were sealed in containers and were brought to
ECS' laboratory for visual classification.
3.2 Laboratory Testing Program
Representative soil samples obtained during our field exploration were selected and tested in
our laboratory to check field classifications and to determine pertinent engineering properties.
The laboratory testing program included:
• visual classifications of soil according to ASTM D 2487;
• index property testing included natural moisture content determinations (ASTM D 2216),
grain size analyses (ASTM D 1140), and Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318).
Data obtained from the laboratory tests are included on the Laboratory Testing Summary and in
Appendix C of this report.
3

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
4.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
4.1 Site Conditions
The site is located near the intersection of Pembroke Lane and Goldsboro Road in Eastover,
Cumberland County, North Carolina. The site is relatively level, cleared to moderately wooded,
and slopes upward from west to east with approximate site elevations ranging from 128 to 134
feet.
4.2 Site Geology
The site is located in the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province of North Carolina. The Coastal
Plain is composed of seven terraces, each representing a former level of the Atlantic Ocean.
Soils in this area generally consist of sedimentary materials transported from other areas by the
ocean or rivers. These deposits vary in thickness from a thin veneer along the western edge of
the region to more than 10,000 feet near the coast. The sedimentary deposits of the Coastal
Plain rest upon consolidated rocks similar to those underlying the Piedmont and Mountain
Physiographic Provinces. In general, shallow unconfined groundwater movement within the
overlying soils is largely controlled by topographic gradients. Recharge occurs primarily by
infiltration along higher elevations and typically discharges into streams or other surface water
bodies. The elevation of the shallow water table is transient and can vary greatly with seasonal
fluctuations in precipitation.
4.3 Soil Conditions
The soil conditions at each boring location are noted on the individual boring logs presented in
Appendix B. A general description is provided below and a summary of the soil stratigraphy is
shown on the Generalized Subsurface Profile in Appendix A. Subsurface conditions should be
expected to vary between boring locations.
The soil test borings encountered organic topsoil at the initial ground surface with thicknesses
of approximately 2 inches. The topsoil thicknesses reported on the logs was based on driller
observations and should be considered approximate. It should be noted that topsoil depths are
expected to vary throughout the site.
Underlying the organic topsoil to approximately 10 feet, soils consisting of stiff to very stiff, fat
clay (CH), very soft to very stiff, sandy lean clay (CL), very loose to dense, clayey and silty sand
(SC, SM) were encountered in the borings. The SPT resistance values (N-values) in the soils
ranged from weight of hammer (W.O.H) to 37 blows per foot (bpf).
From 10 feet to auger refusal depths ranging from about 15 to 20 feet, borings B-1 through B-6
typically encountered stiff, sandy lean clay (CL) and very loose to medium dense, clayey, silty,
and clean sand (SC, SM, SP) with N-values ranging from 3 to 11 bpf.
4

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
4.4 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at approximate depths ranging from 1 to 8 feet below existing
grades at borings B-1, B-2, B-5, and B-6. At borings B-3, B-4, B-7, and B-8 groundwater was
not encountered, however, cave in depths were observed to range from 6.5 to 8 feet. Cave in
depths can sometimes be indicative of groundwater. Based on the groundwater measurements
and our experience in the area, the groundwater readings are indicative of a perched water
table.
The highest groundwater observations are normally encountered in the late winter and early
spring. Variations in the location of the long-term water table may occur as a result of changes
in precipitation, evaporation, surface water runoff, and other factors not immediately apparent at
the time of this exploration. Extended monitoring of the groundwater using wells would be
required to determine the fluctuation of the groundwater level over time.
4.5 Laboratory Test Results
The moisture contents in the tested samples ranged from 14.0 to 24.5 percent.
In the tested samples, the percent passing the No. 200 sieve ranged from 21.1 to 48.0 percent.
The Atterberg Limit tests resulted in liquid limits (LL) ranging from 40 to 56 and plastic limits
(PL) ranging from 20 to 25 in the tested samples, respectively.
Specific laboratory test results are provided in Appendix C of this report.
5

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
5.0 PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following preliminary design and construction recommendations are based on our above-
stated understanding of the proposed potential development and on the data obtained from the
field exploration, visual soil classification, and laboratory results. The following preliminary
recommendations are for preliminary design purposes. Once preliminary structural loading,
geometry, and location of the structure are developed, we request the opportunity to review our
recommendations in light of the new information and revise them as necessary.
5.1 Subgrade Preparation
The first step in preparing the site for the proposed construction should be to remove
vegetation, rootmat, topsoil, debris, deleterious materials and other soft or unsuitable materials
from the existing ground surface. These operations should extend at least 10 feet, where
possible, beyond the planned limits of the proposed structures and pavements.
The exposed subgrade soils in structural and pavement areas should be proofrolled using a
loaded dump truck, prior to placing any new fill to raise the grade. The subgrade soils in cut
areas should also be proofrolled. The loaded dump truck should have an axle weight of at least
10 tons. Proofrolling should be observed by an experienced geotechnical engineer, or their
personnel, at the time of construction to aid in identifying areas with soft or unsuitable materials.
Soft or unsuitable materials encountered during proofrolling should be removed and replaced
with an approved backfill compacted to the criteria given in Section 5.3 Fill Placement and Soil
Compaction. Undercutting should be anticipated due to the presence of soft clays/loose sands
in the upper three feet.
Site subgrade conditions will be significantly influenced by weather conditions.
Subgrades that are evaluated after periods of rainfall will not respond as well to proofrolling as
subgrades that are evaluated after periods of more favorable weather. We strongly
recommend that rubber tire equipment not be used if subgrade conditions exhibit elevated
moisture conditions. The contractor should use tracked equipment to minimize the degradation
of marginally stable subgrades.
The preparation of fill subgrades, as well as proposed building subgrades, should be observed
on a full-time basis by ECS personnel. These observations should be performed by a
geotechnical engineer, or his representative, to ensure that the unsuitable materials have been
removed and that the prepared subgrade is suitable for support of the proposed construction
and/or fills.
5.2 Groundwater Control
Temporary groundwater control measures may be necessary around the perimeter of the
building pad and pavement areas to address the perched groundwater condition.
Groundwater control is the purposeful drawdown of groundwater below subgrades, foundations,
slabs, or pavements to facilitate construction and to mitigate long term problems associated
with groundwater. It is the contractor's responsibility to plan for and budget for temporary
groundwater control. The means and methods of lowering the groundwater are at the
contractor's discretion. Temporary groundwater control measures typically consist of gravity
ditches, well points, sump pumps, pumping from gravel lined and cased sumps, or other
6

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
suitable methods. Whatever method used, the groundwater control should be in place and
operating continuously (around the clock) to achieve and maintain the desired drawdown in
advance of excavation, proofrolling, compaction or other construction. Permanent groundwater
control measures typically consist of French drain systems and/or permanent sumps/pumps.
5.3 Engineered Fill Placement
Following the removal of deleterious surface and subsurface materials, and after achieving a
stable subgrade, engineered fills can be placed and compacted to achieve the desired site
grades. Fill for support of the proposed construction and for backfill of utility lines within
expanded building and pavement limits should consist of an approved material, free of organic
matter and debris and cobbles greater than 3 inches, and have a Liquid Limit (LL) and Plasticity
Index (PI) less than 40 and 20, respectively. We also recommend that fills within structural
areas have a modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) maximum dry density of at least 100 pounds per
cubic foot (pcf).
Unsuitable fill materials include topsoil, organic materials (OH, OL), and high plasticity clays
and silts (CH, MH). Such materials removed during grading operations should be either
stockpiled for later use in landscape fills, or placed in approved on or off-site disposal areas.
Existing soils containing significant amounts of organic matter will not be suitable for re-use as
engineered fill. As such, the organic content of the near surface soils should be evaluated to
determine if some of these soils will be suitable for re-use as engineered fill. Natural fine-
grained soils classified as clays or silts (CL, ML) with LL and PI greater than 40 and 20,
respectively, should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction to
determine their suitability for use as engineered fill.
Prior to the commencement of fill operations and/or utilization of any off-site borrow materials,
the contractor should provide representative samples of the proposed fill soils to the
geotechnical engineer. The geotechnical engineer can determine the material's suitability for
use as an engineered fill and develop moisture-density relationships in accordance with the
recommendations provided herein. Samples should be provided to the geotechnical engineer
at least 3 to 5 days prior to their use in the field to allow for the appropriate laboratory testing to
be performed.
Fill materials placed within the building and pavement areas should be placed in lifts not
exceeding 8 inches in loose lift thickness and moisture conditioned to within their working range
of optimum moisture content. The fills should then be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent
of the soil's modified Proctor (ASTM D 1577) maximum dry density. The typical working range
of optimum moisture for the natural Coastal Plain soils at the site is expected to be within
approximately 3 percent of the optimum moisture content. Care should also be taken to provide
a smooth, gently sloping ground surface at the end of each day's earthwork activities to help
reduce the potential for ponding and absorption of surface water.
Grade controls should also be maintained throughout the filling operations. Filling operations
should be observed on a full-time basis by a qualified representative of ECS to determine that
the required degrees of compaction are being achieved. We recommend that a minimum of
one compaction test per 2,500-square-foot area be performed for each lift of controlled fill.
Within trench or other localized excavations at least one test shall be performed for each 200

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
linear feet of each lift of fill. The elevation and location of the tests should be clearly identified
at the time of fill placement. Areas which fail to achieve the required degree of compaction
should be re-worked until the specified degree of compaction is achieved. Failing test areas
may require moisture adjustments or other suitable remedial activities in order to achieve the
required compaction.
Fill materials should not be placed on frozen, frost-heaved, and/or soils which have been
recently subjected to precipitation. Wet or frozen soils should be removed prior to the
continuation of site grading and fill placement. Borrow fill materials, if required, should not
contain excessively wet or frozen materials at the time of placement. Additionally, if grading
operations occur during the winter months, frost-heaved soils should be removed prior to
placement of engineered fill, granular sub-base materials, foundation or slab concrete, and
asphalt pavement materials.
If problems are encountered during the site grading operations, or if the actual site conditions
differ from those encountered during our subsurface exploration, the geotechnical engineer
should be notified immediately.
5.4 Foundations
Shallow Foundations- Provided that the subgrade preparation and earthwork operations are
completed in strict accordance with the recommendations of this report, the proposed
residential structures can be supported on conventional shallow foundations bearing on
approved natural materials and/or properly compacted fill. We recommend a maximum net
allowable design soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf for proportioning shallow foundations. To
reduce the possibility of foundation bearing failure and excessive settlement due to local shear
or "punching" failures, we recommend that continuous footings have a minimum width of 18
inches and that isolated column footings have a minimum lateral dimension of 30 inches.
Furthermore, footings should bear at a depth to provide adequate frost cover protection. For
this region, we recommend the bearing elevation be a minimum depth of 18 inches below the
finished exterior grade or in accordance with the local building code requirements.
Undercutting of up to 8 feet may be required in the vicinity of Boring B-2 due to the presence of
very loose/very soft soils. Once structural loads and site grades are finalized, ECS requests the
opportunity to review and revise our recommendations, if necessary.
The settlement of a structure is a function of the compressibility of the bearing materials,
bearing pressure, actual structural loads, fill depths, and the bearing elevation of footings with
respect to the final ground surface elevation. Estimates of settlement for foundations bearing
on engineered or non-engineered fills are strongly dependent on the quality of fill placed.
Factors which may affect the quality of fill include maximum loose lift thickness of the fills
placed and the amount of compactive effort placed on each lift. Provided that the
recommendations outlined in this report are strictly adhered to, we expect that total settlements
for the proposed construction are expected to be in the range of 1 inch or less, while the
differential settlement will be approximately '/2 of the anticipated total settlement. This analysis
is based on our engineering experience and assumed structural loadings for this type of
structure, and is intended to aid the structural engineer with his design.
8

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
The net allowable soil bearing pressure refers to that pressure which may be transmitted to the
foundation bearing soils in excess of the final minimum surrounding overburden pressure. The
final footing elevation should be evaluated by ECS personnel to verify that the bearing soils are
capable of supporting the recommended net allowable bearing pressure and suitable for
foundation construction. These evaluations should include visual observations, hand rod
probing, and dynamic cone penetrometer (ASTM STP 399) testing, or other methods deemed
appropriate by the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction.
If unsuitable materials are encountered at the base of a foundation excavation, it will be
necessary to lower the base of the footing through the unsuitable materials or to undercut the
unsuitable soils and to restore original bearing levels by placing compacted engineered fill
materials, compacted graded aggregate base, No. 57 stone, or concrete. These evaluations
should be performed within each column footing excavation and at intervals not greater than 50
feet in continuous footing excavations.
Exposure to the environment may weaken the soils at the foundation bearing level if the
foundation excavations remain exposed during periods of inclement weather. This is especially
true for the fine-grained soils at the site. Therefore, foundation concrete should be placed the
same day that proper excavation is achieved and the design bearing pressure is verified. If the
bearing soils are softened by surface water absorption or exposure to the environment, the
softened soils must be removed from the foundation excavation bottom immediately prior to
placement of concrete. If the foundation excavation must remain open overnight, or if rainfall is
imminent while the bearing soils are exposed, we recommend that a 2 to 3-inch thick "mud mat"
of "lean" concrete be placed over the exposed bearing soils before the placement of reinforcing
steel.
Aggregate Pier System: A ground improvement system, such as an aggregate pier system
combined with conventional shallow foundations can be utilized to support the proposed
structure. An aggregate pier system is a ground improvement method used to improve shallow
to intermediate, soft clay, loose silt, and loose sand soil for support of shallow foundations.
Aggregate piers improve soft soil and fill by vibration, compaction, and ramming of thin lifts of
crushed rock into a drilled hole. Soft soil is removed from the ground and then very dense, high
quality crushed rock is compacted into the drilled hole which expands the hole into the adjacent
soil. The cavity expansion effects increase the strength and stiffness of adjacent soil. The
compaction and ramming of thin lifts of crushed rock increases the strength and stiffness,
increases soil bearing capacity, and reduces soil compressibility. Aggregate piers can allow the
soil to support heavier loads on conventional shallow spread and strip footings with reduced
settlement.
If an aggregate pier system is selected for support of foundations, we recommend that the
following issues be considered prior to construction:
• Specifications for the aggregate pier system for support of foundations should be
prepared by a qualified specialty contractor.
• One demonstration pier should be installed with the aggregate pier installer's standard
procedures and then load-tested to determine the modulus. The load testing setup and
procedures should be selected by the aggregate pier installer and submitted for review
to the project geotechnical engineers. The demonstration pier should be installed at the
foundation grade level.
9

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
• The aggregate pier element installation operations should be conducted under the
continuous observation of the geotechnical engineer's representative. This observation
is conducted to reduce the potential for short aggregate pier element installations and
excessive aggregate lift thicknesses.
Driven Timber Piles: The structure can be supported on a deep foundation system consisting
of driven timber piles. The allowable capacities and embedment depths for an 8-inch square
timber pile are presented in the summary table below.
Embedment Axial Uplift Lateral
Depth (ft) (kips) (kips) (kips)
13-15 20 2 1
Pile capacity analyses were performed assuming a free head condition and the provided
compression and tension capacities are based on a factor of safety of 2.0 and 3.0, respectively.
We recommend that the pile driving hammer used to install each timber pile have a minimum
rated energy blow of 8,000 foot-pounds. Driving criteria and bearing elevations should be
established prior to driving piles.
It is suggested that several over length piles be driven prior to the start of production pile
driving, to establish the driving criteria, pile lengths to be ordered and to determine if auger
"pilot" holes are justified. Production piles should not be ordered until the pile lengths can be
determined. A minimum of two over length piles are recommended for the structure.
The over length piles could be driven in production pile locations. Pile installation operations
and load tests, if necessary, should be monitored by a senior soil technician working under the
supervision of a Licensed Engineer. ECS would be pleased to develop driving criteria for the
project, once the method of installation and the contractor has been selected.
5.5 Slabs-on-Grade
Slabs-on-grade can be adequately supported on undisturbed, low-plasticity soils or on newly-
placed engineered fill provided the site preparation and fill recommendations outlined herein are
implemented. For a properly prepared site, a modulus of subgrade reaction (ks) for the soil of
150 pounds per cubic inch for the soil can be used. This value is representative of a 1-ft square
loaded area and may need to be adjusted depending on the size and shape of the loaded area
depending on the method of structural analysis.
We recommend the slabs-on-grade be underlain by a minimum of 4 inches of granular material
having a maximum aggregate size of 1'/2 inches and no more than 2 percent fines. Prior to
placing the granular material, the floor subgrade soil should be properly compacted, proofrolled,
and free of standing water, mud, and frozen soil. A properly designed and constructed capillary
break layer can often eliminate the need for a moisture retarder and can assist in more uniform
curing of concrete. If a vapor retarder is considered to provide additional moisture protection,
special attention should be given to the surface curing of the slabs to minimize uneven drying of
10

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
the slabs and associated cracking and/or slab curling. The use of a blotter or cushion layer
above the vapor retarder can also be considered for project specific reasons.
Please refer to ACI 302.1R96 Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction and ASTM E
1643 Standard Practice for Installation of Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Earth or
Granular Fill under Concrete Slabs for additional guidance on this issue.
In order to minimize the crack width of shrinkage cracks that may develop near the surface of
the slab, we recommend mesh reinforcement as a minimum be included in the design of the
floor slab. For maximum effectiveness, temperature and shrinkage reinforcements in slabs on
ground should be positioned in the upper third of the slab thickness. The Wire Reinforcement
Institute recommends the mesh reinforcement be placed within 2 inches below the slab surface
or within upper one-third of slab thickness, whichever is closer to the surface.
Adequate construction joints, contraction joints and isolation joints should also be provided in
the slab to reduce the impacts of cracking and shrinkage. Please refer to ACI 302.1R96 Guide
for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction for additional information regarding concrete slab joint
design.
5.6 Pavement Design Considerations
For the design and construction of exterior pavements, the subgrades should be prepared in
strict accordance with the recommendations in the "Subgrade Preparation" and "Engineered Fill
Placement" sections of this report. An important consideration with the design and construction
of pavements is surface and subsurface drainage. Where standing water develops, either on
the pavement surface or within the base course layer, softening of the subgrade and other
problems related to the deterioration of the pavement can be expected. Furthermore, good
drainage should minimize the possibility of the subgrade materials becoming saturated during
the normal service period of the pavement.
Actual traffic conditions were not provided to ECS. However, based on our experience for light
duty traffic for similar projects, a light duty flexible pavement section may consist of 2 inches of
surface SF9.5 mix overlying at least 6 inches of compacted ABC stone in the parking and drive
aisle areas. Similarly, a heavy duty flexible pavement section may consist of 3 inches of
surface SF9.5 mix overlying at least 8 inches of compacted graded aggregate base in the
roadway areas. For a rigid pavement section, we recommend 6 inches of 450 psi flexible
strength concrete overlying at least 6 inches of compacted ABC stone in the roadway areas.
Regardless of the section and type of construction utilized, saturation of the subgrade materials
and asphalt pavement areas results in a softening of the subgrade material and shortened life
span for the pavement. Therefore, we recommend that both the surface and subsurface
materials for the pavement be properly graded to enhance surface and subgrade drainage. By
quickly removing surface and subsurface water, softening of the subgrade can be reduced and
the performance of the parking area can be improved. Site preparation for the parking areas
should be similar to that for the building area including stripping, proofrolling, and the placement
of compacted structural fill.
Please note that large, front-loading trash dumpsters frequently impose concentrated front-
wheel loads on pavements during loading. This type of loading typically results in rutting of

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
bituminous pavements and ultimately pavement failures and costly repairs. Consequently, we
recommend the use of an 8 inch thick, mesh reinforced concrete slab that extends the entire
length of the truck. Concrete pavements should be properly jointed and reinforced as needed to
help reduce the potential for cracking and to permit proper load transfer.
5.7 Site Drainage
Positive drainage should be provided around the perimeter of the pavement to minimize the
potential for moisture infiltration into the subgrade soils. We recommend that landscaped areas
adjacent to the pavements be sloped away from the construction and maintain a fall of at least
6 inches for the first 10 feet outward from the structure. The parking lots, sidewalks, and other
paved areas should also be sloped to divert surface water away from the proposed pavement.
The proper diversion of surface water during site grading and construction will help reduce the
potential for delays associated with periods of inclement weather. The proper diversion of
surface water is especially critical since portions of the site soils are expected to be moisture
sensitive. Based upon our past experience, the use of "crowning" large areas of exposed soils
should be useful to help divert surface water from the prepared subgrades.
5.8 Construction Considerations
It is imperative to maintain good site drainage during earthwork operations to help maintain the
integrity of the surface soils. The surface of the site should be kept properly graded to enhance
drainage of surface water away from the proposed construction areas during the earthwork
phase of this project. We recommend that surface drainage be diverted away from the
proposed pavements areas without significantly interrupting its flow. Other practices would
involve crowning and sealing the exposed soils daily with a smooth-drum roller at the end of the
day's work to reduce the potential for infiltration of surface water into the exposed soils.
The key to minimizing disturbance problems with the soils is to have proper control of the
earthwork operations. Specifically, it should be the earthwork contractor's responsibility to
maintain the site soils within a workable moisture content range to obtain the required in-place
density and maintain a stable subgrade. Scarifying and drying operations should be included in
the contractor's price and not be considered an extra to the contract. In addition, construction
equipment cannot be permitted to randomly travel across the site, especially once the desired
final grades have been established. Construction equipment should be limited to designated
lanes and areas, especially during wet periods to minimize disturbance of the site subgrades. It
will likely be necessary to utilize tracked equipment during grading operations particularly if the
subgrade soils exhibit elevated moisture conditions.
12

Report of Subsurface Exploration and Geotechnical Engineering Services June 22,2016
Holiday Inn&Suites
Eastover,Cumberland County, North Carolina
ECS Project Number 33:3711
6.0 CLOSING
Our geotechnical analysis of the site has been based on our understanding of the site, the
project information provided to us, and the data obtained during our exploration. The general
subsurface conditions utilized in our analyses have been based on interpolation of subsurface
data between the borings. If the project information provided to us is changed, please contact
us so that our recommendations can be reviewed and appropriate revisions provided, if
necessary. The discovery of any site or subsurface conditions during construction which
deviate from the data outlined in this exploration should be reported to us for our review,
analysis and revision of our recommendations, if necessary. The assessment of site
environmental conditions for the presence of pollutants in the soil and groundwater of the site is
beyond the scope of this geotechnical exploration.
13

APPENDIX A
FIGURES

•
.40: N . .
. .
aft.,.. .
iik .
, _
(c5 - to
• _
'
� � 95
of
Nt\4411;---""'W
'
olrt t
•� . � -
• . A ,„,,e ;
.k. .
/
1863 .� r
1 1
/ „•,4,..4.4t. i •• •• T.— • sr
• ..'/ ..-- ...er. ••
/ Y.I F • ' .e ......7.
.r
A.
' t 4 i
•..... r , A hst4r7 .1*-- -- , it --4._-1-4 ,,,,i
-- , -4;-- .,i.t. .."6' '°.• .' • ‘511%.. '1"-= . %lieleilliiill
i.
,• - . vt p•:.,!,AfAil
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
EG NTS
SITE VICINITY MAP Holiday Inn & Suites �v _, `_ --O,.E:T
LIME ^r' 33.3711
1
Source: Google Maps 1., ImS Eastover, North Carolina
"MTE I 6/20/2016

. . . ir , * • I'l
0 ."` . ; 1 .....: L.___.,.
> • ... ..4 14:14 4. • a .
CO •• • ,i‘ F6V 'IL ' • A.
Z -1�I
/y 1
OWli:SIk
1.
,/'` 'SOWN
it •
Lz- B-6 C. } ,
„ _.y ,\ El;
Li •
L. [1 :- B-8
L _ - -
'4� ' '-� ' 7
`
- - . . 4
......... .
, __
.A._ ....
..
0 . B-7 .
"' \ B-5
a. B-2
a)
Z = •0 _-:11k -444r .
vlk
a a B-3 .,.
CD
Ec, mm, Wes , • :• `I .• .sue 'et.'
��77 ` '1 Sir
SCALE •. .� _i .46, •'e
4sSHO'�id�l1 yt !- •
:'40.E0T •
No 33:3711 i ~• ,��
_S..�E
1 Ali,_ DENOTESAPPROXIMATE
ATE LOCATION OF SOIL TEST BORING
6/17/2016

SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND SURFACE MATERIALS ROCK TYPES SYMBOL LEGEND
!/yy�• 0-SHEINR E AL ilea ME tM-FFFi9 4METES �AILL .-Ev59LE[EILL .-rogEAELE nu
'+^ I ■ L1 �- �Y WART LEVEL DWDAS LADLIElMyAWEDAS
®6W N81 EaALED 6RAYEL GC LUYEY 6RAYEL � A-LQWMSMRY CLAY St EI)01LY WAND SAND ON L460 RASTIQTV OA6AIdL SILTS AND RAYS WR-WEATIBIED OOP DA DECOMPOSED cccc —Tssoa MOOT MEWS
_ _ _ i WATER LEM-SEASONAL Mt6N WA tfi
I6M SAW 411AYFL ^ SW WELL 4240E15 SMA) ®MA•ram ItASRIlTY SAT --4 SL CLAYFt SAM a2.LOW AASTILI-V WNWSAES AND a. E iMW•RMITMLY WEATNEAEOPO .ASPHALT -'VpJD ❑ MOMETA L 1 WA ER EEL AERA CASING9EMOVIL
(7'6A.N70E2v 6RAPIIPO4 II II ML LOW n RS ASTiS SAT ❑SM-SUS$Alup a C. 4RWEEASTtm SaM .+T.PEAT ENWA-NEBIY WEADLWEDE00( �. ESED NARY _ wARA LEtII AFtEC NNOLAS
o B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 BR6 0
up.
9F 0 1'� :50
SM
SC CL CLCL 0 � � 5
v� •° Sc
11 / 0 / 13/ 28 13/, 16/
/ CL Sc CL
5 5 / 9 13 12� 12/
4- 10 / .. SC �• :f 10 0
N
/./1/
C9 'Cr
SM
S
C
- SP T
a
N 5 6 6 12 11 CL 7 M
Q 15 . � . . 15 .+
v� /
Terminated due to heavingseTerminated due to heavingsand /
� SM SM
5 @ 1 @ 15 /
vv��
�'•: SC
4 3 6
20 20
Terminated due to heaving seTerminated due to heaving seTerminated due to heaving seTerminated due to heaving sand -
@20' @ 20' @ 20' @20'
25 25
_ i GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE
E6SOIL PROFILE
NOTES:
1 SEE INDIVIDUAL BORING LOG AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
2 PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER FOOT (ASTM D1586). All Type Construction & Management, Inc.
3 HORIZONTAL DISTANCES ARE NOT TO SCALE. Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
1 PROJECT N03711 I DATE:6/20/20161 VERTICAL SCAL&L.'=5'

SOIL CLASSIFICATION LEGEND SURFACE MATERIALS ROCK TYPES SYMBOL LEGEND
!/yy�• St-$Earl Tta I.Par COPE YAl-APE69,a ME1Ei Snit 11,-E055TiE F111 .-rogiAPAE nu
+^ I ■ L1 �- �Y WART LEVEL DWDAS DPD1IE6yAAKDA6
®6W•N81 PaALED QAYEE 6C[UYEY 6RAYEL � A-LOW MSMRY CLAY 9 YI)01LY WAND SAND CM H160 EtASRLITY 0660I4L SILTS ANpCGYS WR-WEATIBED WI D6•DECOMPOSED ROCY —Y650a MOOT MEWS
_ i WATER LEM-%AWN.Ht6H WAlTP
®6.N SILTY 4NAOFl '^ SW•NfU GRADED SAtq ®NN ram iNSRQTY say Sc-�7 CLAYEY SANG a-LOW AASITLIN OPCMIIC SILTS AND am. E`E�'iWW•RMITALLY II/EMBED Ka (.'AYHAL, -,YOJD ❑OETAWWWIC WA1EII lFIFI AiRA CASING 9EMVVII
(7'P.KOORLY ilmallGMYFL III ALL LawtASTI4TY SILT ❑NA-sun SAND a CN.1D9HKASTTCCSaM .'II PT YEAT I� HWA.HWYEYE.1MMAS= I I6RAKi E.SEDINENTaPY ,: wATEA lEtT3 ,rff.NHOIAIS
.L'I. f/• E� II i LLL...
0 B"7 B"8 0
/'s
15/ CL
6
CL
/ .• SC
26 28 ''
5 5
15/ 16
CH
37 SM 11
/f- 10 10 0
LL END OF BORING END OF BORING -
@ 10' @ 10' f
t 5.
+- T
IZ - - 10
N M
Q 15 15 .♦
20 20
25 25
I GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE
NOTES: Eill° 13 SOIL PROFILE
1 SEE INDIVIDUAL BORING LOG AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
2 PENETRATION TEST RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER FOOT (ASTM D1586). All Tye Construction & Management, Inc.
3 HORIZONTAL DISTANCES ARE NOT TO SCALE. Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
1 PROJECT N03711 I DATE:6/20/20161 VERTICAL SCAL&A.'=5'

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D 2487)
Major Divisions Group Typical Names Laboratory Classification Criteria
Symbols
W ell-graded gravels, gravel-
GW sand mixtures,little or no fines N
(0C"=D6o/D10 greater than 4
N > o _ Ce=(D30)21(D1oxD6o)between 1 and 3
o
co
o m a) '55 Poorly graded gravels, gravel- Qj -0
.N — GP sand mixtures,little or no fines L .c Not meeting all gradation requirements for GW
a) a) U � U co
2 a>i N d)
( > O ° U
o o d c
a z N c ^
eD UZ O a ID o GMa Silty gravels, gravel-sand .( .N Atterberg limits below "A" line
o a r _c m mixtures cm 83 or P.I.less than 4 Above "A" line with P.I.
o co 3 ro ai u E between 4 and 7 are
d m co m m - O oo aN borderline cases requiring
CO c o co m I N Q° use of dual symbols
as n o E
o — O Q GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand- > N Atterberg limits below "A" line
c a clay mixtures y To or P.I.less than 7
'o os
7).a N '0 ' co
u) .ao ° Well-graded sands, gravelly (Q E '5 Cu=D60/D10 greater than 6
as ° c SW sands,little or no fines -0 c m Ce=(D30)2/(D1oxD6o)between 1 and 3
o � .cn co c
U E 15 o c o -i (13 o > N
m a a U SP Poorly graded sands,gravelly O u) ° Not meeting all gradation requirements for SW
_c w a v sands,little or no fines m a
c 2 .m N E 0 � =
.a N `m
Y ° ��
2 2 ° c- as 0 (D `o
° C o) m
o m o z d N c6
E.
co co c E SMa Silty sands,sand-silt mixtures 2 8 3 a U Atterberg limits above "A" line
m n Q Q o o or P.I.less than 4 Limits plotting in CL-ML
Y m .3 a c u N _ o Q N zone with P.I. between 4
2 E ° caw c ° o, ° and 7 are borderline cases
2 E c o . m a requiring use of dual
in o —_' — - c" symbols
Q SC Clayey sands,sand-clay N Q N N m o Atterberg limits above "A" line
mixtures a a ° J 2 Lo with P.I.greater than 7
Inorganic silts and very fine
E ML sands, rock flour, silty or Plasticity Chart
cr, c clayey fine sands, or clayey
-a, co, silts with slight plasticity
> ° u) Inorganic clays of low to 60
o as CL
medium plasticity, gravelly
o a E clays, sandy clays, silty clays, "A" line
lean clays 50
z° J Organic silts and organic silty CH
vco
OL clays of low plasticity ,< 40
= t d
N Inorganic silts, micaceous or CL
0 E 6 MH diatomaceous fine sandy or Y
in silty soils,elastic silts F.)" 30
m u, cn c6
>,--
d U -
iL co
m -01 2 CH Inorganic clays of high o. 20 MH and OH
E co 0) plasticity,fat clays
m
. E 10
.0 Cl)
co OH Organic clays of medium to CL-ML ML and OL
— high plasticity,organic silts 0
o 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
U
r g .a Liquid Limit
CD a, o Pt Peat and other highly organic
= O soils
a Division of GM and SM groups into subdivisions of d and u are for roads and airfields only. Subdivision is based on Atterberg limits;suffix d used when L.L.
is 28 or less and the P.I.is 6 or less;the suffix u used when L.L.is greater than 28.
b Borderline classifications, used for soils possessing characteristics of two groups, are designated by combinations of group symbols. For example: GW-
GC,well-graded gravel-sand mixture with clay binder. (From Table 2.16-Winterkorn and Fang, 1975)

REFERENCE NOTES FOR BORING LOGS
I. Drilling Sampling Symbols
SS Split Spoon Sampler ST Shelby Tube Sampler
RC Rock Core, NX, BX, AX PM Pressuremeter
DC Dutch Cone Penetrometer RD Rock Bit Drilling
BS Bulk Sample of Cuttings PA Power Auger (no sample)
HSA Hollow Stem Auger WS Wash sample
REC Rock Sample Recovery% RQD Rock Quality Designation %
II. Correlation of Penetration Resistances to Soil Properties
Standard Penetration (blows/ft) refers to the blows per foot of a 140 lb. hammer falling 30 inches on a
2-inch OD split-spoon sampler, as specified in ASTM D 1586. The blow count is commonly referred
to as the N-value.
A. Non-Cohesive Soils (Silt, Sand, Gravel and Combinations)
Density Relative Properties
0 to 4 blows/ft Very Loose Adjective Form 12%to 49%
5 to 10 blows/ft Loose With 5%to 12%
11 to 30 blows/ft Medium Dense
31 to 50 blows/ft Dense
Over 51 blows/ft Very Dense
Particle Size Identification
Boulders 12 inches or larger
Cobbles 3 inches to 12 inches
Gravel Coarse 3/4 inch to 3 inches
Fine 4.75 mm to 3/4 inch
Sand Coarse 2.00 mm to 4.75 mm
Medium 0.425 mm to 2.00 mm
Fine 0.075 mm to 0.425 mm
Silt and Clay Less than 0.075 mm
B. Cohesive Soils (Clay, Silt, and Combinations)
Unconfined Degree of Plasticity
Blows/ft Consistency Comp. Strength Plasticity Index
Qp (tsf)
0 to 2 Very Soft Under 0.25 None to slight 0—4
3 to 4 Soft 0.25-0.49 Slight 5—7
5 to 8 Medium Stiff 0.50-0.99 Medium 8—22
9 to 15 Stiff 1.00-1.99 High to Very High Over 22
16 to 30 Very Stiff 2.00-3.99
31 to 50 Hard 4.00-8.00
Over 50 Very Hard Over 8.00
III. Water Level Measurement Symbols
WL Water Level BCR Before Casing Removal DCI Dry Cave-In
WS While Sampling ACR After Casing Removal WCI Wet Cave-In
WD While Drilling 0 Groundwater Level at Time of Drilling
GWT Day After Drilling
The water levels are those levels actually measured in the borehole at the times indicated by the
symbol. The measurements are relatively reliable when augering, without adding fluids, in a granular
soil. In clay and plastic silts, the accurate determination of water levels may require several days for
the water level to stabilize. In such cases, additional methods of measurement are generally applied.

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-1 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w • z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w X • A
a
z o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>1�7= O
w w w w
as 2 g 2 0 SURFACE ELEVATION w w STANDARD PENETRATION
o an co coaw[ w m BLOWS/FT
0 — \Topsoil Depth[2.00"] / 7
(CL)SILTY LEAN CLAY, Red/Gray/Tan,Wet, j 2
S-1 SS 18 18 Stiff 4 • ►:�
j n 5
4
S-2 SS 18 18 4 9 ►:�
5 5
3
— S 3 SS 18 18 4 11
j 7
(SM)SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,Orange/ 2
_- S 4 SS 18 18 Tan, Saturated, Loose 3 5 ►a
10.19
2
3
_- S-5 SS 18 18 2 5 ►3
3
15 AUGER REFUSAL @ 15'
20—
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL 2.5 WS❑ WD BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 6.0'
• WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-2 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC NORTHING EASTING STATION _ ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w • z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w X • A
a
z o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100 O
WWWW
as 2 g 2 OU SURFACE ELEVATION w w STANDARD PENETRATION
• a• n co coaw[ w BLOWS/FT
0 — \Topsoil Depth[2.00"] / .:c.
77
(SC)CLAYEY FINE SAND, Dark Gray, r• WOH_
S-1 SS 18 18 Saturated,Very Loose woF -0
WOH
WOH
- S-2 SS 18 18 WolO
5' WOH
' (CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,Tan/Light Gray/
— S 3 SS 18 18
Orange,Saturated,Very Soft to Medium Stiff / woH
/ WOH
_ / WOH
S-4 SS 18 18 j 2 5
10' 9
— j
— j
(SP) MEDIUM SAND,Orange/Tan,Wet, Loose
4
- S-5 SS 18 18 4 6-0
2
15 AUGER REFUSAL @ 15'
20—
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL 1.0 WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 4.5'
• WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

APPENDIX B
BORING LOGS

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-3 1 OF 1WI
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC NORTHING EASTING STATION _ ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD°% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w X � A
a
LL z o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION%1007) 1 O
w w w w cc F
Ch-
as 2 g 2 OU SURFACE ELEVATION w w STANDARD PENETRATION
o can c¢ coaw[ w m BLOWS/FT
o — Topsoil Depth[2.00"] %•
.
(SC)CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND,Tan// ix•s•
• 5
S-1 SS 18 18 Red/Orange, Moist to Saturated, Mediums 5 13
Dense to Very Loose / = 8
- S-2 SS 18 18 11 21 ►D
5 10
::7'
— S-3 SS 18 18 7 1
6
_ 3 •
S-4 SS 18 18 ;• 4 9
10' % 5
j/'
_- S-5 SS 18 18 j./' 3 6 ►:�
15 3
•::
_- S-6 SS 18 18 1 3
20 2
AUGER REFUSAL @ 20'
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL 2.0 WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 6.5'
31 WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-4 1 OF 1 WI
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC NORTHING EASTING STATION _ ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z
w DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w X • A
a
LL z , o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100X) 1 O
w w w W
F
csh
as 2 g 2 OU SURFACE ELEVATION w w STANDARD PENETRATION
o can c¢n co w coBLOWSIFT
0 _ \Topsoil Depth[2.00"] / r
(CL)SILTY LEAN CLAY, Brown/Tan/Red, 2
S-1 SS 18 18 Moist, Medium Stiff to Very Stiff 2 ►�
3 5
6 25
S-2 SS 18 18 j 10
5 j 15
(SC)CLAYEY FINE SAND,Orange/Red/Gray,
' S 3 SS 18 18 Wet, Medium Dense is 28 ►e
— 14
_ i.• .. 4
S4 SS 18 18 6
10 .• 7 13
(SM)SILTY FINE SAND,Orange,Wet, Medium
— Dense to Very Loose
_ 3
_ S-5 SS 18 18 4 12
15' 8
_ 3
S-6 SS 18 18 2 4
2
20 AUGER REFUSAL @ 20'
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 8'
31 WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET 11
mi
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-5 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w 2- co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
1- w X • A
a
LL z , o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>10022 J ZO
w w w w cc F
csii
a m m CL OU SURFACE ELEVATION w w ® STANDARD PENETRATION
w• C COi aw[ d m BLOWS/FT
5 )-Topsoil Depth[2.00"] /
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY, Brown/Red, Moist, j 2
S-1 SS 18 18 Medium Stiff to Hard j 2 ►.�
— 4 6
_ 8
S-2 SS 18 18 j 16 ►D
5' j 17 33
2158 (SC)CLAYEY FINE SAND, Red/Tan, Moist, K`; 7 1356
S-3 SS 18 18 Medium Dense 6 245 25
7
_ :
... 5
S-4 SS 18 18 5 1 ►D
10' _;:;. 7
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY, Red/Gray/Orange,
— Wet,Stiff
_ j
4
S-5 SS 18 18 4 11 ►:�
15' 7
(SC)CLAYEY FINE SAND,Tan,Wet,Very /</e.
— Loose
:.:' 2
_- S-6 SS 18 18 2 ►D 3
20 AUGER REFUSAL @ 20' �s//
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL 8 WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @a 9'
31 WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET d
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-6 1 OF 1 1E -777.1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w • z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
a w X • A
LL z o BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>len) O
w w w w F
a a a > SURFACE ELEVATION w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
a_ 0o can (I) COCC w BLOWS/FT
o — \Topsoil Depth[2.001
(SM)SILTY FINE SAND,Tan, Moist, Medium 2
S-1 SS 18 18 Dense,With Tree Roots 3 11 ell
8
(SM)SILTY FINE SAND, Brown/Black, Moist,
Medium Dense 4
- S-2 SS 18 18 8 17
5 9
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,Gray,Moist to Wet,
S-3 SS 18 18 Very Stiff to Stiff j 7 16
9
77
_ 4
S-4 SS 18 18 5 12
10 7
j
(SM)SILTY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND,Tan,
Saturated, Loose
WOH
_- S-5 SS 18 18 3 7
15' 4
2
_- S-6 SS 18 18 3 6
3
20 AUGER REFUSAL @ 20'
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL 8 WS❑ WD BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 11'
• WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Manual
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-7 1 OF 1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
w • z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w X • A
z o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>1007= O
w w w w
as 2 g 2 0 SURFACE ELEVATION w w STANDARD PENETRATION
o an co coit w m BLOWS/FT
0 — \Topsoil Depth[2.00"] / j
7 '
(CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY,Tan/Red,Moist, 1
S-1 SS 18 18 Medium Stiff to Very Stiff 3
— j 3 6
6 26
S-2 SS 18 18 13
5 13
(CL) SILTY LEAN CLAY, Gray/Red, Moist, Stiff 6
— S-3 SS 18 18 6 15
9
(SM)SILTY FINE SAND,Tan/Orange/Red,
Moist, Dense 7
_- S-4 SS 18 18 20
17 S7
10 END OF BORING @ 10'
15—
20—
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
• WL WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 7'
• WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
• WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

CLIENT JOB# BORING# SHEET 0 d
All Type Construction & Management, Inc. 3711 B-8 1 OF 11E -777.1
PROJECT NAME ARCHITECT-ENGINEER
Holiday Inn & Suites Eastover GEO
SITE LOCATION
CALIBRATED PENETROMETER TONS/FT2
Eastover, Cumberland County, NC
NORTHING EASTING STATION ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION&RECOVERY
RQD% - — - REC%
z DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL ENGLISH UNITS PLASTIC WATER LIQUID
z co E LIMIT% CONTENT% LIMIT%
w •1- ,.. w X • A
a
LL z o ¢ BOTTOM OF CASING M LOSS OF CIRCULATION>100i) J O
w w w w cc F
I a a a > SURFACE ELEVATION w > ® STANDARD PENETRATION
o can (I) COo w onBLOWS/FT
o — \Topsoil Depth[2.001 / ri
— (CL)SANDY LEAN CLAY, Brown,Moist,Stiff 4
S-1 SS 18 18 6 15
9
— j
2157 (SC)CLAYEY FINE SAND, Red/Tan, Moist, 14 0-0X ———40
7
S-2 SS 18 18 Medium Dense 13 20 28
5 15
(CH)SILTY FAT CLAY,Gray,Moist, Very Stiff
S-3 SS 18 18 to Stiff / 5 16
9
_ 5
_ S4 SS 18 18 5
10 / 6 J1
END OF BORING @ 10'
15—
20—
25—
30—
THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL TYPES.IN-SITU THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL.
WL WS❑ WD® BORING STARTED 06/07/16 CAVE IN DEPTH @ 7'
51 WL(SHW) 1 WL(ACR) BORING COMPLETED 06/07/16 HAMMER TYPE Auto
WL RIG ATV FOREMAN Jake DRILLING METHOD HSA

APPENDIX C
LABORATORY RESULTS

Laboratory Testing Summary Page 1 of 1
Atterberg Limits3 Percent Moisture - Density(Corr.)5
Sample Sample Depth MC1 Soil Passing Maximum Optimum CBR
Source Number feetOther
(feet) (%) Type2 LL PL PI No. 200 Density Moisture Values
Sieve4 (pcf) (%)
B-5 _ 2158 6.0-7.5 24.5 SC 56 25 31 _ 48.0
B-8 2157 3.5-5.0 14.0 SC 40 20 20 21.1
_ . - -
Notes: 1.ASTM D 2216,2.ASTM D 2487,3.ASTM D 4318,4.ASTM D 1140,5.See test reports for test method,6.See test reports for test method
Definitions: MC:Moisture Content,Soil Type:AASHTO,LL:Liquid Limit,PL:Plastic Limit,PI:Plasticity Index,CBR:California Bearing Ratio,OC:Organic Content
Project No. 33.3711 i ECS Carolinas, LLP
Project Name: Holiday Inn and Suites 6714 Netherlands Drive
PM: Mike Ellis WS' Wilmington, NC 28405
PE: Winslow E.Goins Phone: [phone]
Printed On: 6/20/16

APPENDIX D
GENERAL CONDITIONS
The analysis, conclusions, and recommendations submitted in this report are based on the
exploration previously outlined and the data collected at the points shown on the attached
location plan. This report does not reflect specific variations that may occur between test
locations. The borings were located where site conditions permitted and where it is believed
representative conditions occur, but the full nature and extent of variations between borings and
of subsurface conditions not encountered by any boring may not become evident until the
course of construction. If variations become evident at any time before or during the course of
construction, it will be necessary to make a re-evaluation of the conclusions and
recommendations of this report and further exploration, observation, and/or testing may be
required.
This preliminary report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and
foundation engineering practices and makes no other warranties, either express or implied, as
to the professional advice under the terms of our agreement and included in this report. The
recommendations contained herein are made with the understanding that the contract
documents between the owner and foundation or earthwork contractor or between the owner
and the general contractor and the caisson, foundation, excavating and earthwork
subcontractors, if any, shall require that the contractor certify that all work in connection with
foundations, piles, caissons, compacted fills and other elements of the foundation or other
support components are in place at the locations, with proper dimensions and plumb, as shown
on the plans and specifications for the project.
Further, it is understood the contract documents will specify that the contractor will, upon
becoming aware of apparent or latent subsurface conditions differing from those disclosed by
the original soil exploration work, promptly notify the owner, both verbally to permit immediate
verification of the change, and in writing, as to the nature and extent of the differing conditions
and that no claim by the contractor for any conditions differing from those anticipated in the
plans and specifications and disclosed by the soil explorations will be allowed under the
contract unless the contractor has so notified the owner both verbally and in writing, as required
above, of such changed conditions. The owner will, in turn, promptly notify ECS of the
existence of such unanticipated conditions and will authorize such further exploration as may be
required to properly evaluate these conditions.
Further, it is understood that any specific recommendations made in this report as to on-site
construction review by ECS will be authorized and funds and facilities for such review will be
provided at the times recommended if we are to be held responsible for the design
recommendations.

APPENDIX E
PROCEDURES REGARDING FIELD LOGS, LABORATORY TESTING AND SAMPLES
In the process of obtaining and testing samples and preparing this report, procedures are
followed that represent reasonable and accepted practice in the field of soil and foundation
engineering.
Specifically, field logs are prepared during performance of the drilling and sampling operations,
which are intended to portray, in the driller's judgment: field occurrences, sampling locations,
and other information.
Samples obtained in the field are frequently subjected to testing and reclassification in the
laboratory by more experienced soil engineers, and differences between the field logs and the
final logs exist. The engineer preparing the report reviews the field logs, lab classifications, and
test data. Using his judgment in interpreting this data, he may make further changes.
Samples taken in the field are retained in our laboratory for sixty days and are then discarded,
unless special disposition is requested by our client. Samples retained over a long period of
time, even if sealed in jars, are subject to moisture loss which changes the apparent strength of
cohesive soil generally increasing the strength from what was originally encountered in the field.
Since they are then no longer representative of the moisture conditions initially encountered, an
inspection of these samples should recognize this factor.

Important Information About Your
Geotechnical Engineering Report -.
Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes
The following information is provided to help you manage your risks.
Geotechnical Services Are Performed for • elevation,configuration,location,orientation,or weight of the
Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects proposed structure,
Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of • composition of the design team,or
their clients.A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engineer • project ownership.
may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil
engineer.Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique,each geo- As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project
technical engineering report is unique,prepared solely for the client.No one changes - even minor ones - and request an assessment of their impact.
except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without first Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems
conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it.And no one-not that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which they
even you-should apply the report for any purpose or project except the one were not informed.
originally contemplated.
Subsurface Conditions Can Change
Read the Full Report A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at the
Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineering
engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. report whose adequacy may have been affected by:the passage of time; by
Do not read selected elements only. man-made events,such as construction on or adjacent to the site;or by natu-
ral events,such as floods,earthquakes,or groundwater fluctuations.Always
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report to determine if it
A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors is still reliable.A minor amount of additional testing or analysis could prevent
Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique,project-specific factors major problems.
when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include:the client's
goals,objectives,and risk management preferences;the general nature of the Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional
structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of the structure Opinions
on the site;and other planned or existing site improvements,such as access Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where
roads,parking lots,and underground utilities.Unless the geotechnical engi- subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken.Geotechnical engineers
neer who conducted the study specifically indicates otherwise,do not rely on review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional judgment
a geotechnical engineering report that was: to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the site.Actual
• not prepared for you, subsurface conditions may differ-sometimes significantly from those indi-
• not prepared for your project, cated in your report.Retaining the geotechnical engineer who developed your
• not prepared for the specific site explored,or report to provide construction observation is the most effective method of
• completed before important project changes were made. managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions.
Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final
engineering report include those that affect: Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your re-
•the function of the proposed structure,as when it's changed from a port.Those recommendations are not final,because geotechnical engineers
parking garage to an office building,or from alight industrial plant develop them principally from judgment and opinion.Geotechnical engineers
to a refrigerated warehouse, can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual
J

subsurface conditions revealed during construction.The geotechnical engi- to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk of such
neer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for outcomes,geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of explanatory
the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform construction provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" many of these
observation. provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin
and end,to help others recognize their own responsibilities and risks.Read
A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to these provisions closely.Ask questions.Your geotechnical engineer should
Misinterpretation respond fully and frankly.
Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineer-
ing reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
geotechnical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron-
after submitting the report.Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical
pertinent elements of the design team's plans and specifications.Contractors study.For that reason,a geotechnical engineering report does not usually re-
can also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by late any geoenvironmental findings,conclusions,or recommendations;e.g.,
having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or regulated
conferences,and by providing construction observation. contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous
project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoenvironmental in-
Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs formation,ask your geotechnical consultant for risk management guidance.
Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for someone else.
their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or
omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold
never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Diverse strategies can be applied during building design,construction, op-
Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize eration,and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from grow-
that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. ing on indoor surfaces.To be effective,all such strategies should be devised
for the express purpose of mold prevention,integrated into a comprehensive
Give Contractors a Complete Report and plan,and executed with diligent oversight by a professional mold prevention
Guidance consultant. Because just a small amount of water or moisture can lead to
Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make the development of severe mold infestations, a number of mold prevention
contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. While groundwater, wa-
they provide for bid preparation.To help prevent costly problems,give con- ter infiltration, and similar issues may have been addressed as part of the
tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report,but preface it with a geotechnical engineering study whose findings are conveyed in-this report,
clearly written letter of transmittal.In that letter,advise contractors that the the geotechnical engineer in charge of this project is not a mold prevention
report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the report's consultant; none of the services performed in connection with
accuracy is limited;encourage them to confer with the geotechnical engineer the geotechnical engineer's study were designed or conducted
who prepared the report(a modest fee may be required)and/or to conduct ad- for the purpose of mold prevention.Proper implementation of
ditional study to obtain the specific types of information they need or prefer. the recommendations conveyed in this report will not of itself
A prebid conference can also be valuable.Be sure contractors have sufficient be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the struc-
time to perform additional study.Only then might you be in a position to give ture involved.
contractors the best information available to you,while requiring them to at
least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unantici- Rely on Your ASFE-Member Geotechnical
pated conditions. Engineer For Additional Assistance
Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical engi-
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely neers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of genuine
Some clients,design professionals,and contractors do not recognize that benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer with your
geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disciplines. ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information.
This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that have led
ASFE
The Best People on Earth
8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106,Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone:'301/565-2733 Facsimile:301/589-2017
e-mail: [e-mail] www.asfe.org
Copyright 2004 by ASFE,Inc.Duplication,reproduction,or copying of this document,in whole or in part,by any means whatsoever,is strictly prohibited,except with ASFE's specific
written permission.Excerpting,quoting,or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE,and only for purposes
of scholarly research or book review.Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report.Any other firm,
individual,or other entity that so uses this document without being anASFE member could be committing negligent or intentional(fraudulent)misrepresentation.
I IGER06045.OM

High Density Commercial Subdivisions
Deed Restrictions & Protective Convenances
In accordance with Title 15 NCAC 2H.1000 and S.L. 2006-246, the Management Regulations, deed
restrictions and protective covenants are required for High Density Commercial Subdivisions where
lots will be subdivided and sold and runoff will be treated in an engineered stormwater control facility.
Deed restrictions and protective covenants are necessary to ensure that the development maintains a
built-upon area consistent with the design criteria used to size the stormwater control facility.
I NI V M 0 acknowledge, affirm and agree by my signature below, that
I will cause the following deed restrictions and covenants to be recorded prior to the sale of any lot
within the project known as 1`L- a l ci,c)._f --i-N N E y jr-m S 4 S S� rt o Y Nr
1. The following covenants are intended to ensure ongoing compliance with State Storm water
Management Permit Number . as issued by the Division of Energy, Mineral
and Land Resources under the Storm water Management Regulations.
2 The State of North Carolina is made a beneficiary of these covenants to the extent necessary to
maintain compliance with the storm water management permit.
3. These covenants are to run with the land and be binding on all persons and parties claiming
under them.
4. The covenants pertaining to storm water may not be altered or rescinded without the express
written consent of the State of North Carolina. Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources.
5. Alteration of the drainage as shown on the approved plan may not take place without the
concurrence of the Division of Energy. Mineral and Land Resources.
6. The maximum allowable built-upon area per lot is square feet.
*Note: If the BUA per lot varies, please substitute the following statement for the one above and
provide a complete listing of the proposed BUA for each lot:
The maximum built-upon area per lot, in square feet. is as listed below:
Lot# BUA Lot# BUA Lot# BUA Lot # BUA
0479-49-2444 / 62.270 sf 0479-39-6179 / 88,730 sf
This allotted amount includes any built-upon area constructed within the lot property boundaries,
and that portion of the right-of-way between the front lot line and the edge of the pavement. Built
upon area includes. but is not limited to. structures, asphalt, concrete, gravel. brick, stone, slate.
coquina and parking areas, but does not include raised, open wood decking, or the water
surface of swimming pools.
7. All runoff from the built-upon areas on the lot must drain into the permitted system. This may be
accomplished through a variety of means including roof drain gutters which drain to the street,
grading the lot to drain toward the street. or grading perimeter swales to collect the lot runoff
and directing them into a component of the stormwater collection system_ Lots that will naturally
drain into the system are not required to provide these additional measures.
8. The owner of each lot, whose ownership is not retained by the permittee. is required to submit a
separate stormwater permit application to the Division of Energy. Mineral and Land Resources
and receive a permit prior to construction.
9 The project and each lot will maintain a 30**foot wide vegetated buffer between all impervious
areas and surface waters.
**50 foot for projects located in the 20 coastal counties.
Form DRPC-1 Rev.2 05Nov2009 Page I of

High Density Commercial Subdivisions
Deed Restrictions & Protective Convenances
Signature: /Vnef kli4d,a/;f
Date 8-, s ��
S� a Notary Public in the
State of 4)0(V\ � . County of `,
►J
do hereby certify that .(b� _ cS personally appeared
before me this the Fj day of Mk" , 20 . and acknowledge
the due execution of the foregoing instrument \ itness my hand and official seal,
SEAL
4,4
Si natu
My Co fission expires Da / (�,4) `.`a���`(uH
IR, AUS7;41'i,
NQTAR Y
E.
9
.,*„f,, COIU�N-11;010
ttttt Form DRPC-1 Rev.2 05Nov2009 Page 2 of 2

BK 11521 PG 0600 FILED ELECTRONICALLY
CUMBERLAND COUNTY NC
J. LEE WARREN, JR.
FILED Jul 14, 2022
AT 12:18:11 PM
BOOK 11521
START PAGE 0600
END PAGE 0603
INSTRUMENT # 28471
RECORDING $26.00
EXCISE TAX $0.00
submitted electronically by "Eric west, Attorney at Law, PLLC"
in compliance with North Carolina statutes governing recordable documents
and the terms of the submitter agreement with the Cumberland County Register of Deeds.
Revenue: $ 0.00
Prepared By&Return to: Eric West, Attorney at Law, PLLC; 500 N. Walnut Street, Lumberton,NC 28358
(**No Title Certification Given)
DEED OF CORRECTION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND
Parcel Nos.: 0479-39-6/79 (Tract One) and 0479-49-2444 (Tract Two)
This Deed, made and entered into this day of July, 2022 by and between Atkinson 58
Inc. (a North Carolina corporation) — 2203 N. Rowland Avenue, Lumberton, NC 28358
("Grantor"); and Venus Plaza JCE, LLC (a North Carolina limited liability
company) ("Grantee"); whose address is: 3oi North Pine Street, Lumberton, NC 28358.
WITNESSETH:
That whereas, said Grantor heretofore executed to Grantee a certain deed dated October 24,
20i8, which was recorded in Deed Book 1.0403, Page 52; and whereas, said Grantor also
heretofore executed to Grantee a certain correction deed dated November 13, 20i8, which
was recorded in Deed Book 10405, Page 450 for the properties, and whereas, by mutual
mistake said deeds contained some errors in the legal descriptions of the properties; and
whereas, said Grantee has requested said Grantor to correct said errors and said Grantor has
agreed to do so; and whereas, the Grantor now executes this deed in order to correct said
errors;
1

BK 11521 PG 0601
Now, therefore, said Grantor, for the purpose of correcting said errors and in consideration of
the sum of One Dollar, to them in hand paid, have bargained and sold and by these presents
do grant, bargain, sell, and convey unto said Grantee and their heirs and assigns a certain
tract or parcel of land lying and being in Cumberland County, North Carolina, in
Eastover Township and more particularly described as follows:
TRACT ONE: (Parcel Number: 0479-39-6179)
All of that certain tract or parcel of land situated in Eastover Township,
Cumberland County, North Carolina which is more particularly described as
follows:
All of Tract One (1) as the same is shown on a map entitled "Recombination
Survey for Venus Plaza JCE, LLC" which was prepared by Terry C. Faircloth, P.
L. S., dated February 15, 2019 and recorded in Map Book 142, Page 67 in the
office of the Register of Deeds of Cumberland County. Reference to said map is
hereby made and incorporated herein for a more complete and accurate
description of said tract of land.
TRACT TWO: (Parcel Number: 0479-49-2444)
All of that certain tract or parcel of land situated in Eastover Township,
Cumberland County, North Carolina which is more particularly described as
follows:
All of Tract Two (2) as the same is shown on a map entitled "Recombination
Survey for Venus Plaza JCE, LLC which was prepared by Terry C. Faircloth,
P.L.S., dated February 15, 2019 and recorded in Map Book 142, Page 67 in the
office of the Register of Deeds of Cumberland County. Reference to said map is
hereby made and incorporated herein for a more complete and accurate
description of said tract of land.
Tract Two is conveyed subject to that certain Deed of Trust to M. J. Huggins, III
Trustee for Crescom Bank as beneficiary filed on July 20, 2019 in Book 10525,
Page 23o, that Assignment of Rents to CresCom Bank filed on July 20, 2019 in
Book 10525, Page 424, that UCC Financing Statement filed on July 20, 2019 in
Book 10525, Page 249, and that Deed of Trust to M. J. Huggins, III as Trustee for
United Bank as beneficiary filed on December 17, 2021 in Book 11342, Page 691,
all filed in the Cumberland County Registry.
Both tracts herein conveyed are conveyed subject to any easements, right of
ways or restrictions of record.
2

BK 11521 PG 0602
The Grantor herein was dissolved by the board of directors and shareholders on
October, 9, 2019 by the filing of a dissolution with the North Carolina Secretary
of State, the Vice President of the Corporation, Nirav Modi, is authorized to
execute this deed as part of the winding up of the affairs of the corporation.
To have and to hold said land, together with all privileges and appurtenances thereunto
belonging to them the said Grantee and their heirs and assigns in fee simple forever.
And said Grantors covenant that they are seized of said land in fee and have the right to
convey the same in fee simple; that the same is free and clear of all encumbrances; and that
they will warrant and defend the title herein conveyed against the lawful claims of all persons
whomsoever.
In Testimony Whereof, said parties have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year
first above written.
Atkinson 58 Inc.
A'a4By: (SEAL)
Ni i —Vice President
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ROBESON
I, D@VD\ %,ckqPS , Notary Public for the County and
State aforesaid do hereby ceYtify that Nirav Modi, personally known to me and personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that he is the Vice President of Atkinson 58
Inc., a North Carolina corporation, and that by authority duly given and as the act of such
entity, he signed the foregoing instrument in its name and on its behalf as its act and deed.
Witness my hand and official seal this the I Lot, day of July, 2022.
`0g00010001000100,°°vB
A irk 0 D
40
°'lion a A\ft Jb4
�pIAFtY /^`O'n SC(
eo o U e Notary Public
�®•°•�9U g2+9Oryy�vae p
••°.°. 'v,�e,< My Commission Expires: 3 0)2Z/2o25
N C�
3

BK 11521 PG 0603
Venus Plaza JCE, LLC
By: /1// (SEAL)
Nir i — anager
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ROBESON
I, D \(On \A, PS , Notary Public for the County and
State aforesaid do hereby certy that Nirav Modi, personally known to me and personally
appeared before me this day and acknowledged that they is the Manager of Venue Plaza JCE,
LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, and that by authority duly given and as the
act of such entity, he signed the foregoing instrument in its name and on its behalf as its act
and deed. t `
Witness my hand and official seal this the I`t day of July, 2022.
Boa®®aeaaveoroeaoyaa' CtAkY),
ITC&
:`�`� a%`° o% Notary Public
® 5° �oN
,01PRY CI
° �
PUB1/4"\G Z. My Commission Expires: 0 e t 2212025
‘.'.a-P®�'g4�US12Z ���om
i
4

c. 1Crt.3 � �
DEMLR USE ONLY
Date Received Fee Paid Permit Number
Applicable Rules: ❑Coastal SW- 1995 ❑Coastal SW-2008 ❑Ph II-Post Construction
(select all that apply) ❑Non-Coastal SW-HQW/ORW Waters ❑Universal Stormwater Management Plan
❑Other WQ Mgmt Plan:
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
This form may be photocopied for use as an original
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Project Name(subdivision,facility,or establishment name-should be consistent with project name on plans,
specifications,letters,operation and maintenance agreements,etc.):
HIES EASTOVER-HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS Sr SUITES
2. Location of Project(street address):
PEMBROKE ROAD
City:EASTOVER County:CUMBERLAND Zip:28312
3. Directions to project(from nearest major intersection):
EXIT 58 OFF OF I-95,ONTO NC HWY 1.3-GOLDSBORO ROAD.TAKE A RIGHT(SOUTH)ON
PEMBROKE ROAD
4. Latitude:35°07' 17" N Longitude:-78°45' 16"W of the main entrance to the project.
II. PERMIT INFORMATION:
1.a.Specify whether project is (check one): /1 New ['Modification ❑Renewal w/ Modificationt
tRenewals with modifications also requires SWU-102-Renewal Application Form
b.If this application is being submitted as the result of a modification to an existing permit,list the existing
permit number , its issue date(if known) ,and the status of
construction: ❑Not Started ['Partially Completed* ❑ Completed* *provide a designer's certification
2. Specify the type of project(check one):
ELow Density ►1High Density ['Drains to an Offsite Stormwater System ['Other
3. If this application is being submitted as the result of a previously returned application or a letter from
DEMLR requesting a state stormwater management permit application,list the stormwater project number,
if assigned, and the previous name of the project, if different than currently
proposed,
4.a.Additional Project Requirements (check applicable blanks;information on required state permits can he
obtained by contacting the Customer Service Center at 1-877-623-6748):
❑CAMA Major ®Sedimentation/Erosion Control: 2-, 0 ac of Disturbed Area
❑NPDES Industrial Stormwater ❑404/401 Permit: Proposed Impacts
b.If any of these permits have already been acquired please provide the Project Name,Project/Permit Number,
issue date and the type of each permit:CUMBE-2016-173 EROSION CONTROL
5. 15 the project located within 5 milca of ca public airport? No ❑YCS
If yes,see S.L.2012-200, Part VI:http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/tr/rules-and-regulations
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31. 2013 Page 1 of 6

III. CONTACT INFORMATION
1.a.Print Applicant/ Signing Official's name and title(specifically the developer,property owner,lessee,
designated government official,individual,etc.who owns the project):
Applicant/Organization:VENUS PLAZA JCE,LLC(ALSO KNOWN AS FRESHFOODS)
Signing Official&Title:NIRAV MODI
b.Contact information for person listed in item la above:
Street Address:301 NORTH PINE STREET
City:LUMBERTON State:NC Zip:28358
Mailing Address(if applicable):
City: State: Zip:
Phone: (773 ) 691-5137 Fax: ( )
Email:[e-mail]
c.Please check the appropriate box.The applicant listed above is:
®The property owner(Skip to Contact Information,item 3a)
❑ Lessee*(Attach a copy of the lease agreement and complete Contact Information,item 2a and 2b below)
❑Purchaser*(Attach a copy of the pending sales agreement and complete Contact Information,item 2a and
2b below)
❑ Developer*(Complete Contact Information,item 2a and 2b below.)
2.a.Print Property Owner's name and title below,if you are the lessee,purchaser or developer. (This is the
person who owns the property that the project is located on):
Property Owner/Organization:
Signing Official&Title:
b.Contact information for person listed in item 2a above:
Street Address:
City: State: Zip:
Mailing Address(if applicable):
City: State: Zip:
Phone: ( ) Fax: ( )
Email:
3.a. (Optional)Print the name and title of another contact such as the project's construction supervisor or other
person who can answer questions about the project:
Other Contact Person/Organization:
Signing Official&Title:
b.Contact information for person listed in item 3a above:
Mailing Address:
City: State: Zip:
Phone: ( ) Fax: ( )
Email:
4. Local jurisdiction for building permits:CUMBERLAND COUNTY
Point of Contact:TOEL SCHULT Phone#: (910 ) 321-6655
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31,2013 Page 2 of 6

IV. PROJECT INFORMATION
1. In the space provided below,briefly summarize how the stormwater runoff will be treated.
RUNOFF IS COLLECTED IN A SYSTEM OF CATCH BASINS AND STORM PIPING.RUNOFF IS THEN
SENT TO A PROPOSED STORMWATER WETLAND
2.a.If claiming vested rights,identify the supporting documents provided and the date they were approved:
n Approval of a Site Specific Development Plan or PUD Approval Date:
❑Valid Building Permit Issued Date:
❑ Other: Date:
b.If claiming vested rights,identify the regulation(s) the project has been designed in accordance with:
❑ Coastal SW-1995 ❑Ph II-Post Construction
3. Stormwater runoff from this project drains to the CAPE FEAR River basin.
4. Total Property Area:6.55 acres 5. Total Coastal Wetlands Area:0 acres
6. Total Surface Water Area:0.298 acres
7. Total Property Area(4)-Total Coastal Wetlands Area(5) -Total Surface Water Area(6) =Total Project
Area+:6.52 acres
+ Total project area shall be calculated to exclude the following: the normal pool of impounded structures, the area
between the banks of streams and rivers, the area below the Normal High Water(NEIW)line or Mean High Water
(MIIW) line,and coastal wetlands landward from the NI-W(or MHW) line. The resultant project area is used to
calculate overall percent built upon area(BUA). Non-coastal wetlands landward of the NHW(or MI-W)line may
be included in the total project area.
8. Project percent of impervious area: (Total Impervious Area/ Total Project Area)X 100 =53.17
9. How many drainage areas does the project have?1 (For high density, count 1 for each proposed engineered
stormwater BMP. For low density and other projects, use 1 for the whole property area)
10. Complete the following information for each drainage area identified in Project Information item 9. If there
are more than four drainage areas in the project,attach an additional sheet with the information for each area
provided in the same format as below.
Basin Information Drainage Area Drainage Area �Drainage Area_ Drainage Area
Receiving Stream Name BAKER SWAMP
Stream Class * C
Stream Index Number* 18-28-2-2
Total Drainage Area(sf) 187,582
On-site Drainage Area(sf) 187,582
Off-site Drainage Area(sf)
Proposed Impervious Area**(sf) 174,894
% Impervious Area**(total) 93.20
Impervious**Surface Area Drainage Area_ Drainage Area_ Drainage Area_ Drainage Area
On-site Buildings/Lots (sf) 22,940
On-site Streets (sf)
On-site Parking (sf) 151,954
On-site Sidewalks (sf)
Other on-site (sf)
Future(sf)
Off-site (sf)
Existing BUA***(sf)
Total (sf): 174,894
* Stream Class and Index Number can be determined at: http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications
** Impervious area is defined as the built upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, roads,parking areas,
sidewalks,gravel areas, etc.
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31,2013 Page 3 of 6

***Report only that amount of existing BUA that will remain after development. Do not report any existing BUA that
is to be removed and which will be replaced In/new BUA.
11. How was the off-site impervious area listed above determined?Provide documentation. NA
Projects in Union Counts: Contact DEMLR Central Office staij-to check if the project is located within a Threatened&
Endangered Species watershed that nut}'he subject to more stringent stormwater requirements as per 15.4 NC I C(12B.0600.
V. SUPPLEMENT AND O&M FORMS
The applicable state stormwater management permit supplement and operation and maintenance(O&M) forms
must be submitted for each BMP specified for this project. The latest versions of the forms can be downloaded
from http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq(ws/su/bmp-manual.
VI. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Only complete application packages will be accepted and reviewed by the Division of Energy, Mineral and
Land Resources (DEMLR). A complete package includes all of the items listed below. A detailed application
instruction sheet and BMP checklists are available from
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su/statesw/forms docs. The complete application package should be
submitted to the appropriate DEMLR Office. (The appropriate office may be found by locating project on the
interactive online map at http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su/maps.)
Please indicate that the following required information have been provided by initialing in the space provided
for each item. All original documents MUST be signed and initialed in blue ink. Download the latest versions
for each submitted application package fromhttp://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ws/su/statesw/forms docs.
'als
1. Original and one copy of the Stormwater Management Permit Application Form.
2. Original and one copy of the signed and notarized Deed Restrictions&Protective Covenants r�
Form. (if required as per Part VII below)
3. Original of the applicable Supplement Form(s) (sealed,signed and dated)and O&M
agreement(s)for each BMP.
4. Permit application processing fee of$505 payable to NCDENR. (For an Express review,refer to
http://www.envhelp.org/pages/onestopexpress.html for information on the Express program
and the associated fees. Contact the appropriate regional office Express Permit Coordinator for
additional information and to schedule the required application meeting.)
3. A detailed narrative(one to two pages)describing the stormwater treatment/management for
6. A USGS map identifying the site location. If the receiving stream is reported as class SA or the
receiving stream drains to class SA waters within i mile of the site boundary, include the 1
mile radius on the map.
7. Sealed,signed and dated calculations(one copy).
8. Two sets of plans folded to 8.3"x 14" (sealed,signed,&dated),including:
a. Development/Project name.
b. Engineer and firm.
c. Location map with named streets and NCSR numbers.
d. Legend.
e. North arrow.
f. Scale.
g. Revision number and dates.
h. identity all surface waters on the plans by delineating the normal pool elevation of
impounded structures, the banks of streams and rivers,the MHW or NHW line of tidal
waters,and any coastal wetlands landward of the MHW or NHW lines.
• Delineate the vegetated buffer landward from the normal pool elevation of impounded
structures, the banks of streams or rivers,and the MHW (or NHW) of tidal waters.
i. Dimensioned property/project boundary with bearings&distances.
j. Site Layout with all BUA identified and dimensioned.
k. Existing contours, proposed contours,spot elevations, finished floor elevations.
1. Details of roads, drainage features,collection systems, and stormwater control measures.
m. wetlands delineated,or a note on tie plans mat none exist. !must be ttelLneatet by a
qualified person. Provide documentation of qualifications and identify the person who
made the determination on the plans.
n. Existing drainage(including off-site),drainage easements,pipe sizes,runoff calculations.
o. Drainage areas delineated (included in the main set of plans,not as a separate document).
Form SWU-101 Version Oct. 31.2013 Page 4 of 6

p. Vegetated buffers(where required).
9. Copy of any applicable soils report with the associated SHWT elevations(Please identify
elevations in addition to depths) as well as a map of the boring locations with the existing
elevations and boring logs. Include an 8.5"x11 copy of the NRCS County Soils map with the
project area clearly delineated. For projects with infiltration BMPs, the report should also
include the soil type,expected infiltration rate, and the method of determining the infiltration rate.
(Infiltration Devices submitted to WiRO:Schedule a site visit for DEMLR to verify the SHWT prior
to submittal, [phone].)
10. A copy of the most current property deed. Deed book: /Ict I Page No: 060 0
11. For corporations and limited liability corporations(LLC): Provide documentation from the NC
Secretary of State or other official documentation,which supports the titles and positions held
by the persons listed in Contact Information,item la,2a,and/or 3a per 15A NCAC 2H.1003(e).
The corporation or LLC must be listed as an active corporation in good standing with the NC
Secretary of State,otherwise the application will be returned.
http://www.secretary.state.nc.us/Corporations/CSearch.aspx
VII. DEED RESTRICTIONS AND PROTECTIVE COVENANTS
For all subdivisions,outparcels,and future development,the appropriate property restrictions and protective
covenants are required to be recorded prior to the sale of any lot. If lot sizes vary significantly or the proposed
BUA allocations vary,a table listing each lot number,lot size, and the allowable built-upon area must be
provided as an attachment to the completed and notarized deed restriction form. The appropriate deed
restrictions and protective covenants forms can be downloaded from http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/lr/state-
stormwater-forms docs. Download the latest versions for each submittal.
In the instances where the applicant is different than the property owner, it is the responsibility of the property
owner to sign the deed restrictions and protective covenants form while the applicant is responsible for ensuring
that the deed restrictions are recorded.
By the notarized signature(s)below,the permit holder(s) certify that the recorded property restrictions and
protective covenants for this project,if required,shall include all the items required in the permit and listed
on the forms available on the website,that the covenants will be binding on all parties and persons claiming
under them,that they will run with the land,that the required covenants cannot be changed or deleted
without concurrence from the NC DEMLR,and that they will be recorded prior to the sale of any lot.
VIII. CONSULTANT INFORMATION AND AUTHORIZATION
Applicant: Complete this section if you wish to designate authority to another individual and/or firm(such as a
consulting engineer and/or firm)so that they may provide information on your behalf for this project(such as
addressing requests for additional information).
Consulting Engineer: WILL IAA I, C L,AW°kJ
Consulting Firm: G La i) Et14,4 Qltllk
Mailing Address: Po jl•x 2 3r1
State: N� Zip:k�r�lwn Y p: 29603
Phone: ( 2 b ) 1st-- 31r6 Fax: ( 'P
Email: fitck y e al plieA ' >C•1�,wGWra
IX. PROPERTY OWNER AUTHORIZATION (if Contact Information, item 2 has been filled out,complete this
-;e lion)
I,(print or type name of person listed in Contact Information, item 2a) ,certify that I
own the property identified in this permit application, and thus give permission to(print or type name of person
listed in Contact Information, item 1a) with (print or type name of organization listed in
Contact Information, item la) to develop the project as currently proposed. A copy of
the lease agreement or pending property sales contract has been provided with the submittal,which indicates the
party responsible for the operation and maintenance of the stormwater system.
Form SWU-I01 Version Oct. 31.2013 Page 5 of 6

As the legal property owner I acknowledge,understand,and agree by my signature below,that if my designated
agent(entity listed in Contact Information,item 1) dissolves their company and/or cancels or defaults on their
lease agreement, or pending sale,responsibility for compliance with the DEMLR Stormwater permit reverts back
to me,the property owner. As the property owner,it is my responsibility to notify DEMLR immediately and
submit a completed Name/Ownership Change Form within 30 days;otherwise I will be operating a stormwater
treatment facility without a valid permit. I understand that the operation of a stormwater treatment facility
without a valid permit is a violation of NC General Statue 143-215.1 and may result in appropriate enforcement
action including the assessment of civil penalties of up to S25,000 per day,pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6.
Signature: __ Date:
I, ,a Notary Public for the State of ,County of
, do hereby certify that _ personally appeared
before me this day of , and acknowledge the due execution of the application for
a stormwater permit. Witness my hand and official seal, _
SEAL
My commission expires
X. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION
I, (print or type name of person listed in Contact Information,item la) _
certify that the information included on this permit application form is, to the best of my knowledge,correct and
that the project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans,that the required deed restrictions
and protective covenants will be recorded,and that the proposed project complies with the requirements of the
applicable stormwater rules under 15A NCAC 2H .1 00 and any other applicable state stormwater requirements.
1
Signature: t f Date: * f.2
I, ,a Notary Public for the State of iDAln �11�1IrP.. County of
l_,,,1.=
, do herebycertifythat ,`roo Z1n personallyappeared
Y'� N 1 r W PP
before me this_f rday of _ o204,and acknowledge the due execution of the application for
a stormwater permit. Witness my and and official seal,
SEAL
1.10
,,yAUBLIC a 2, tollaUS
G. My commission expires 1
,4'oononnnun„
Form SWU-10] Version Oct.31.2013 Page 6 of 6

Operation & Maintenance Agreement
Project Name: HIES - EASTOVER (HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS & SUITES)
Project Location: PEMBROKE ROAD, EASTOVER, NC
Cover Page
Maintenance records shall be kept on the following SCM(s). This maintenance record shall be kept in a log in a known set location.
Any deficient SCM elements noted in the inspection will be corrected, repaired, or replaced immediately. These deficiencies can
affect the integrity of structures, safety of the public, and the pollutant removal efficiency of the SCM(s).
The SCM(s) on this project include(check all that apply &corresponding O&M sheets will be added automatically):
Infiltration Basin Quantity: Location(s):
Infiltration Trench Quantity: Location(s):
Bioretention Cell Quantity: Location(s):
Wet Pond Quantity: Location(s):
Stormwater Wetland Quantity: 1 Location(s): southwest corner
Permeable Pavement Quantity: Location(s):
Sand Filter Quantity: Location(s):
Rainwater Harvesting Quantity: Location(s):
Green Roof Quantity: Location(s):
Level Spreader- Filter Strip Quantity: Location(s):
Proprietary System Quantity: Location(s):
Treatment Swale Quantity: Location(s):
Dry Pond Quantity: Location(s):
Disconnected Impervious Surface Present: No Location(s):
User Defined SCM Present: No Location(s): _
Low Density Present: No Type:
CLICK TO UPDATE O&M MANUAL
I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the performance of the maintenance procedures listed for
each SCM above, and attached O&M tables. I agree to notify NCDEQ of any problems with the system or prior to any changes to
the system or responsible party.
Responsible Party: NIRAV MODI
Title &Organization: OWNER-VENUS PLAZA JCE, LLC - FRESH FOODS
Street address: 301 NORTH PINE STREET
City, state, zip: LUMBERTON, NC 28358
Phone number(s): 773-691-5137
Email: [e-mail]
Signatur : Date: A laa1 L L1
I, C
l In , a Notary Public for the State of N C
County of ( ` , do hereby cert fy that N\YO'V Mod► I
personally appeared before me this (J day of =eb 909)4 and
acknowledge the due execution of Op r tions and M tenan a Agreement .
Witness my hand and official seal, l�
ASHLEY BRITT
NOTARY DUBLIC
Robeson County
North Carolina
My Commission Expires July 8. 2026
Seal My commission expires 314 $` (4l p
STORM-EZ 2/22/2024
Version 1.5 O&M Agreement Page 1 of 1

Red triangles at the upper right hand corner indicate design comments
Please complete the yellow shaded items.
OF v4 A T6-6,
AIC.1011;11raisA
NCDENR p
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMfT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERIThICATION APPLICATION FORM
WETLAND SUPPLEIVENT
This form must be filled out,printed and submitted
The Required Items Checklist(Part III)must be printed,filled out and submitted along with all the required information.
L PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name IIIES EASTOVER
Contact name WILLIAMCLAYION,PE
Phone number 828-455-3456
Date
Drainage area number 1
IL DESIGN INFORMATION
Site Characteristics
Drainage area 187,582.00 ft2
Impervious area 174,894.00 ft2
Percent impervious 93.2%%
Design rainfall depth 1.00 inch
Peak Flow Calculations
1-yr,24-hr rainfall depth 3.02 in
1-yr,24-hr intensity 0.13 in/hr
Pm-development 1-yr,24-hr runoff 0.39 ft3/sec
Post-development 1-yr,24-hr runoff 0.53 ft3/sec
Pre/Post 1-yr,24-hrpeakcontrol 0.14 ft3/sec
Storage Volume: Non-SA Waters
Mnimum required volume 13,114.00 ft3
Volume provided(temporary pool volume) 15,000.00 ft3 OK
Storage Volume: SA Waters Parameters
1.5"runoff volume ft3
Pre-development 1-yr,24-hr runoffvolume ft3
Post-development 1-yr,24-hr runoff volume ft3
Minimum volume required ft3
Volume provided ft3
Outlet Design
Depth of temporarypool/ponding depth Paints) 12.00 in OK
Drawdown time 2.70 days OK
Diameter of orifice 2.00 in OK
Coefficient of discharge(CD)used in orifice diameter
calculation 0.60(unitless)
Driving head(H.)used in the orifice diameter calculation 0.33 ft Provide calculations to support this driving head.
Form SW401-Wetland-Rev.6-11/16/09 Parts I and II.Project Design Summary,Page 1 of 3

Surface Areas of Wetland Zones
Surface Area of Entire Wetland 15,000.00$2 OK
Shallow Land 5,000.00$2 OK
The shallow land percentage is: 33%%
Shallow Water 6,000.00$2 OK
The shallow water percentage is: 40%%
Deep Pool
Forebay portion of deep pool(pretreatment) 1,500.00$2 OK
The farebay surface area percentage is: 10%%
Non-forebay portion of deep pool 1,500.00$2 OK
The non-forebay deep pool surface area percentage is: 10%%
Total of wetland zone areas 14,000.00$2 Enter data into the shaded cells in this section.
Add or subtract the following area from the zones -1,000.00$2
Topographic Zone Elevations
Temporary Pool Elevation(TPE)
Shallow Land(top) 127.50 It amsl
Permanent Pool Elevation(PPE)
Shallow Water/Deep Pool(top) 127.50 It amsl
Shallow Water bottom 127.00 It amsl
Nbst shallow point of deep pool's bottom 125.00 ft amsl
Deepest point of deep pool's bottom 125.00 it amsl
Design must meet one of the following two options:
This design meets Option#1,
Top of PPE is within 6"of SHWT,Ifyes: (YorN)
SHWT(Seasonally High Water Table) 124.80$amsl OK
This design meets Option#2,
Wetland has liner with pemneabllity<0.01 in/hr,Ifyes: (YorN)
Depth of topsoil above impermeable liner in
Topographic Zone Depths
Temporary Pool
Shallow Land 0.00 in
Permanent Pool
Shallow Water 6.00 in OK
Deep Pool(shallowest) 30.00 in OK
Deep Pool(deepest) 30.00 in OK
Planting Plan
Are cattails included in the planting plan? N (Y or N) OK
Number ofPlants recommended in Shallow Water Area:
Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch container) 1,500
Number of Plants recommended in Shallow Land Area:
Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch container),OR 1,250
Shrubs(1 gallon or larger),OR 200
Trees(3 gallon or larger)and Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch) 25 and 1,000
Number of Plants provided in Shallow Water Area:
Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch container)
Number of Plants provided in Shallow Land Area:
Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch container)
Shrubs(1 gallon or larger)
Trees(3 gallon or larger)and
Crass-like Herbaceous(4+cubic-inch)
Form SW401-Wetland-Rev.6-11/16/09 Parts I and II.Project Design Summary,Page 2 of 3

Additional Information
Can the design volume be contained? Y (YorN) OK
Does project drain to SAwaters? Ifyes, N (YorN) Excess volume roast pass through filter.
What is the length ofthe vegetated filter? ft
Are calculations for supporting the design volume provided in the Y (YorN) OK
application?
Is BMP sized to handle all runoff from ultimate build-out? Y (YorN) OK
Is the BMP located in a recorded drainage easement with a
recorded access easement to a public Right ofWay(ROW)? (YorN) OK
The length to width ratio is: 1.78 :1 OK
Approximate wetland length 160.00 ft
Approximate wetland width 90.00 ft
Approximate surface area using length and width provided 14,400.00 ft2 This approx.surface area is within this number of square feet
ofthe entire wetland surface area reported above:
Will the wetland be stabilized within 14 days of construction? Y (YorN) OK
Form SW401-Wetland-Rev.6-11/16/09 Parts I and II.Project Design Summary,Page 3 of 3

SUPPLEMENT-EZ COVER PAGE
FORMS LOADED
PROJECT INFORMATION
1 IProject Name HIES EASTOVER
2 I Project Area(ac) _ 6.557 _
3 'Coastal Wetland Area(ac) 0
4 Surface Water Area(ac) _ {{ 0
5 Is this project High or Low Density? — High _
6 Does this project use an off-site SCM? No
ICOMPLIANCE WITH 02H.1003(4)
7 iWdth of vegetated setbacks provided(feet)
8 WII the vegetated setback remain vegetated?
9 If BUA is proposed in the setback,does it meet NCAC 02H 1003(4)1cd)? _
10 I Is streambank stabilization proposed on this project?
NUMBER AND TYPE OF SCMs:
11 Infiltration System
12 Bioretention Cell .._ _ _ _
13 Wet Pond —
14 Stormwater Wetland 1 _ _ _
15 Permeable Pavement
16 Sand Filter _ _ —
17 Rainwater Harvesting(RWH)
18 1 Green Roof
19 Level Spreader-Filter Strip(LS-FS) _ __, _
20 Disconnected Impervious Surface(DIS)
21 Treatment Swale
22 ,Dry Pond _
23 StormFilter
24 Silva Cell —_
25 Bayfilter _ �.
26 Filterra
FORMS LOADED
DESIGNER CERTIFICATION
27 Name and Title: _ WILLIAM S CLAYTON,PE
28 Organization: CLAYTON ENGINEERING&DESIGN
29 Street address: _ _ 1209 9TH AVE NE
30 ICity,State,Zip: HICKORY.NC 28601
31 Phone number(s): I 828-455-3456
32 !Email: [e-mail]
Certification Statement
I certify,under penalty of law that this Supplement-EZ form and all supporting information were prepared under my direction or supervision that
the information provided in the form is,to the best of my knowledge and belief,true,accurate,and complete and that the engineering plans,
specifications,operation and maintenance agreements and other supporting information are consistent with the information provided here.
Designer
\ Cr A, 0 //
.� -7 •
SE L r; •_ Signature of esigner
040758 -
Seal Date

DRAINAGE AREAS
1 Is this a high density project? _ Yes
2 If so,number of drainage areas/SCMs _ 1 _
3 Does this project have low density areas? i _ No
4 If so,number of low density drainage areas 0
Is all/part of this project subject to previous rule
5 versions? _ NO
FORMS LOADED
DRAINAGE AREA INFORMATION Entire Site 1
STORMWATER
4 Type of SCM WETLAND
5 Total drainage area(sq ft) 301243 187582
6 I Onsite drainage area(sq ft) 285622 _ _ 171961
7 I Offsite drainage area(sq ft) 15621 15621
8 1Total BUA in project(Sq ft) 174954 sf 174894 sf
1 New BUA on subdivided lots(subject to
9 permitting)(sq ft)
New BUA not on subdivided lots(subject to
10 permittingZg
11 lOffsite BUA(sq ft)
12 Breakdown of new BUA not on subdivided lots:
-Parking(sq ft) 116402 sf �_.116402 sf
-Sidewalk(sq ft) 6225 sf 6225 sf
1 -Roof(sq ft) 22940 sf 22940 sf
-Roadway(sq ft) 29327 sf 29327 sf
1 -Future(sq ft)
-Other,please specify in the comment box
below(sq ft) 60 sf
New infiltrating permeable pavement on
13 subdivided lots(sq ft)
New infiltrating permeable pavement not on
14 subdivided lots(sq ft)
Existing BUA that will remain(not subject to
15 permitting)(sq ft)
16 !Existing BUA that is already permitted(sq ft)
17 Existing BUA that will be removed(sq ft)
18 1Percent BUA 58% 94%
19 !Design storm(inches) 1.0 in
20 !Design volume of SCM(cu ft) _ 15000 cf
21 Calculation method for design volume SIMPLE
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
'Please use this space to provide any additional information about the
22 drainage area(s):
Impervious area of signs(60 sf)that doesn't drain into wetland offset by
offsite impervious area in ROW(15,621 sf)that drains into the wetland.

STORMWATER WETLAND _ 1
1 Draitl8ge wee number 1 __
2 Minimum required treatment volume tcu ft) 13114 d
GENERAL MDC FROM 02H.3050
3 Is the SCM sized to treat the SW from all surfaces at build-out? Yes
4 Is the SCM located away from contaminated soils? Yes
5 What are the side slopes of the SCM(HIV)? - 3:1
6 Does the SCM hove retaining walls,gabion walls or other Yes
engineered side slopes?
7 Are the inlets,outlets,and receiving stream protected from erosion Yes
(t 0-year storm)?
Is there an overflow or bypass for inflow volume in excess of the Yes
a design volume? -
9,What Is the method for dewatering the SCM for maintenance? -Pump(preferred).
10111 applicable,will the SCM be cleaned out after construetwn' Yes _
11 Does the maintenance access comply with General MOC(13)? Yes
12 Does the drainage easement comply with General MDC(9)? Yes
If the SCM is on a single family lot does(will?)the plat comply with N/A
13General MDC(1l)?
14 Is there an O&M Agreement that complies with General MDC(11)? I Yes
15,Is there an O&M Plan that complies with General MDC(12)? Yes
16:Does the SCM follow the device selfic MDC? _Yes
17 Was the SCM designed by an NC licensed professional? Yes
;TORMWATER WOUND MOC FROM 0214.1054
18 Design volume of SCM(cu ft) I 15000
19 Are the inlet(s)and outlet located in a manner that avoids Von-
Yes
circuiting?
20 Are berrns or baffles provided to improve the flow path? Yes
21 Does the orifice drawdown from below the top surface of the Yes
permanent pool?
Does the wetland mi smize impacts to the receiving channel from the Yes
221-yr.24-hrstorm?
23 Is a trash rack or other device provided to protect the outlet system? Yes
Elevations
24 Elevation,peak attenuation above temporary pool(if applicable) I 129.00
,(finsl)
Elevation,temporary pool(top of the temporary inundation zone) 128 75
25((mill)
26 Elevation,permanent pool(top of the shallow water zone)(fmsl) 127 50
27 Elevation,bottom of shallow water zone(msl) 127.00_
28'Elevation.bottom of forebay deep pool at deepest point(at forebay 125 00
entrance)jfmgl)_
29'Elevation,bottom of forebay deep pool at shallowest point(at 127 50
(forebay exit)(final)
30 Elevation,bottom of non-forebay deep pool at deepest point(fmsl) I 125 00
plant/ng Zones
31 lAres'total surface area of the SW wetland at temporary pool elm, 12.000,00
ft
32Area,temporary inundation zone at temporary pool elev (sq ft) 8,079.00
33,Area,shallow water zone at temporary pool elev_tsq ft) 4,283.00 -
34'Area.forebay at temporary pool elev.(sq ft) _ 1.120 00
35 Area,non-forebay deep pool at temporary pool elev (sq ft) 601 00
Percent area provided,temporary inundation zone(should be 30- 67%
36',
37 Percent area provided.shallow water zone(should be 35-45%) 36%
381 Percent area provided,deep pool(forebay)(should be 10-1590 9%
39 Percent area provided,deep pool(non-forebay)(should be 5-15%) 5%
Depths and Outlet
40 Peak attenuation depth above temporary inundation zone(inches) 18 in
41 Temporary inundation zone depth(temporary pool to permanent 15 in
of Inches _
42 Shallow water zone depth(permanent pool to bottom of wetland) 6 in
(inches)
43'Depth,forebay at entrance(permanent pool to bottom of forebay 30 in
entrance)(inches)
44 Depth,forebay at exit(permanent pool to bottom of fohebey exit) 30 in
45'Depth non-forebay deep pools(permanent pool to deep pool 30 in
bottom)(inches.]
4E01 there is an orifice.diameter(inches) _ 2 in
47'If there is a weir.weir height(millet) 18 in
49 If there ie a weir,weir length(inches) 192 in
49 Drawdown time for the temporary pool(daysi 2.7
Wetland 3 2:36 PM 6/25/2024

STORMWATER WETLAND
Soil and Plants-
50'Soil amendment depth(inches) _ _ _}t _ _
51 Has a soil amendment specification been provided? , No
52.Has a landscaping plan that meets SW Wetland MDC(12)been Yes
provided'
53 Number of plants per 200 square feet(#)in the shallow water zone:
54 Does the temporary inundation zone planting comply with SW Y
es
Wetland MDC(IA? _ .
55 Are the dam structure and temporary fill slopes planted in non- Yes
clumpng turfgrass? _
56 Will cattails be planted in the wetland? No
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Please use this space to provide any additional information about
57 the stormwater wetland(s):
Wetland 4 2:36 PM 6/25/2024

BMP Sizing Data Id
XX.XX Required user input data
XX.XX Calculations
Post Developed Basin Data Pre-Developed Basin Data
Drainage Area= _ 4.300 ac Drainage Area= 4.300 ac
Impervious% (I)= 93.256 % Impervious% (I)= 23.256 %
Impervious acres= 4.010 ac Impervious acres= 1.000 ac
Curve Number(CN)= 89.000 Curve Number(CN)= 75.000
Tc= 5.000 minutes= 0.083 hours Tc= 14.000 minutes= 0.233 hours
T lag = 3.000 minutes= 0.050 hours T lag = 8.400 minutes= 0.140 hours
Water Quality Volume Calculations Channel Protection Volume Calculations
Rv=0.05+0.009(1)= 0.889 Q=(P-0.2S)^2/(P+0.8S)= 1.525 inches
WQv= 1.0RvA/12= 0.319 ac-ft S= 1000/CN-10= 1.236
WQv= 1.0Rv= 0.889 inches CPv = 0.546 acre-ft
Modified CN = 99.010

STORM
WATER
4.3.7 Design Procedure Form
Design Procedure Form:Storm Water Wetland
WETLAND FEASIBILITY NOTES:
1 Is the use of a storm water wetland appropriate?
2 Confirm other design criteria and applicability.
Pollutant Removal Effectiveness Required Standard
PRELIMINARY HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS
3 Compute site hydrologic input parameters
Development Conditions Pre-developed Post-developed
Area 4.3 acres 4.3 acres
CN(SCS curve number) 75 89
Adjusted CN(curve number adjusted for 1-inch storm) 99.01
Time of concentration 14 min 5 min
0.23 hours 0.08 hours
4 Compute,WQ„water quality volume requirements
Compute Runoff Coefficient, R„ R„= 0.89
Compute WQ„Volume requirements WQv= 0.319 acre-ft
5 Compute WQP peak flow using SCS WQp= 0.53 cfs
Compute modified SCS curve number CN= 99.01
6 Compute CPv
Compute S(maximum retention) S= 1.24
Compute 1-yr,24-hr total rainfall depth Rainfall Depth= 2.58 inches
Compute Qd(runoff volume) Qd= 1.52 inches
Compute CPv(chnnnel protection volume) CPv= 0.55 acre-ft
Estimate t,(time of concentration) t,= 0.08 hours
Compute approximate storage volume CPv Storage volume= 0.29 acre-ft
7 Compute release rates
Compute WQv release rate Release Rate= 0.076 cfs
Time for CPv to be released(must be between 60-132 hrs) CPv Dt= 60 hrs
Compute CP„release rate Release Rate= 0.110 cfs
STORM WATER DETENTION BASIN DESIGN
8 Volpfe=Acres of Impervious Area(0.2")(1"/12") WQpre= 0.067 acre-ft
9 Allocate permanent pool and temporary pool storage WQv(storage vol.)= 0.34 at elev.
volumes based on design requirements. CPv(storage vol.) = 0.2 at elev.
10 Allocate the shallow land,shallow water,and deep pool
zones.
Areashallow land >0.30(BMP area @WQv elevation) Areasnallow land= 4000.0000
Areashallow water >0.38(BMP area @WQv elevation) Areasnallowwater = 5000
Areadeep Pool >0.15(BMP area @WQv elevation) Areadeep pool =

STORM
WATER
Elevation Area Average Depth Incremental Volume Cumulative Volume
Area Volume above
Permanent
Pool
MSL (acres) (acres) (ft) (acre-ft) (acre-ft) (acre-ft)
12 WQv Orifice Computations
Average ED release rate Release Rate= 0.39 cfs
Average head,h=(ED elev.—Permanent pool elev.)/2 h= 0.33 ft
Area of orifice from orifice equation:Q=CA(2gh)0.5 A= 0.26 ft2
Diameter= 2 in
13 Compute release rate for CP„control and
Establish CP„elevation WSEL= 1.5 ft
Release rate Release Rate= 0.45 cfs
Average head h=CP„elev.—Permanent pool elev.)/2 h= 0.33 ft
Area or orifice from orifice equation:Q=CA(2gh)°5 A= 0.26 ft2
Diameter= 2 in
14 Calculate Qp release rate and water surface elevation
Set up a stage-storage-discharge relationships.
Peak stage for(WQv),the 1-inch,6-hour storm Peak Stage= ft
Peak stage for(CP„),the 1-yr,24-hour storm Peak State= ft
Peak Q1°—Undeveloped Q10-undev= cfs
Peak Q1°—Developed Q10-dev= cfs
Peak Q25—Undeveloped Q25-undev= cfs
Peak Q25—Developed Q25-dev= cfs
Size emergency spillway,calculate 50-year WSEL WSEL50= ft
and set top of embankment elevation Embankment Elevation= ft
15 Investigate potential wet detention basin hazard Notes:
classification
16 Assess maintenance access and safety features.
17 Attach landscaping plan