20072036 Ver 1_More Info Received_20080527

nLetter of Transmittal
IR Ik W)
MAY 2 7 2008
Jordan, Jones & Goulding C0t:ATER 'R
rNE11 Wp STORNIWATE BRAS
9101 Southern Pine Boulevard • Suite 160
Charlotte, NC 28273
T: 704.527.4106 • F: 704.527.4108 9 www.jjg.com
DATE: 05-23-2008
PROJECT NO: 16022001
ATTENTION: ANNETTE LUCAS
TO: NCDENR Division of Water Quality RE
401 /Wetlands Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650
PHONE:: [phone]
WE ARE SENDING YOU VIA UPS GROUND
TEXLAND BLVD. UNATTENDED
FUEL STATION
CHARLOTTE, NC
DWQ PROJECT # 07-2036
® Attached: ? Under Separate Cover the Following Items:
? Drawings ? Prints ® Plans
? Copy of Letter ? Submittals ® Reports
® Other
COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION
3 05-07-08 1 PLAN SETS (REV C) SHEETS 1-16 OF 16
1 MAY 2008 2 REPORT-STORM DRAINAGE, DETENTION, EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
CONTROL PLAN (REV C)
1 5-14-2008 3 SIGNED AND NOTARIZED O&M AGREEMENT
1 05-21-2008 4 REPORT OF SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED AS CHECKED BELOW:
® For Approval
? For Your Use/Files
? As Requested
? For Review and comment
? For Execution
REMARKS:
? No Exception Taken
? Make corrections Noted
? Amend and Resubmit
? Rejected-(See Remarks)
? Other
? Submit _ Copies for Distribution
? Return _ Corrected Copies
? Resubmit _ Copies for Approval
? Return _ Approved Copies
Signed: C
RON POMPEY, P /tbm
IF ENCLOSURES ARE NOT AS NOTED, KINDLY NOTIFY US AT ONCE
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
Drainage Area Number:
Dry Extended Detention Basin
Operation and Maintenance Agreement
I will keep a maintenance record on this BMP. This maintenance record will be kept in a
log in a known set location. Any deficient BMP 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 removal efficiency of the BMP.
The dry extended detention basin system is defined as the dry detention basin, outlet
structure, pretreatment including forebays and the vegetated filter if one is provided.
This system (check one):
? does ® does not incorporate a vegetated filter at the outlet.
This system (check one):
? does ® does not incorporate pretreatment other than a forebay.
Important maintenance procedures:
- The drainage area will be managed to reduce the sediment load to the dry
extended detention basin.
- Immediately after the dry extended detention basin is established, the vegetation
will be watered twice weekly if needed until the plants become established
(commonly six weeks).
- No portion of the dry extended detention pond will be fertilized after the first
initial fertilization that is required to establish the vegetation.
- I will maintain the vegetation in and around the basin at a height of
approximately six inches.
- Once a year, a dam safety expert will inspect the embankment.
After the dry extended detention basin is established, it will be inspected once a quarter
and within 24 hours after every storm event greater than 1.0 inches (or 1.5 inches if in
a Coastal County). Records of operation and maintenance will be kept in a known set
location and will be available upon request.
Inspection activities shall be performed as follows. Any problems that are found shall
be repaired immediately.
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The entire BMP Trash/debris is resent. Remove the trash/debris.
The perimeter of the dry Areas of bare soil and/or Regrade the soil if necessary to
extended detention erosive gullies have formed. remove the gully, and then plant a
basin ground cover and water until it is
established. Provide lime and a
one-time fertilizer application.
Form SW401-Dry Detention O&M-Rev.3 Page 1 of 4
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The inlet device: pipe or The pipe is clogged (if Unclog the pipe. Dispose of the
swale applicable). sediment off-site.
The pipe is cracked or Replace the pipe.
otherwise damaged (if
applicable).
Erosion is occurring in the Regrade the swale if necessary to
swale (if applicable). smooth it over and provide erosion
control devices such as reinforced
turf matting or riprap to avoid
future problems with erosion.
The forebay Sediment has accumulated Search for the source of the
and reduced the depth to 75% sediment and remedy the problem if
of the original design depth possible. Remove the sediment and
(see diagram below). dispose of it in a location where it
will not cause impacts to streams or
the BMP.
Erosion has occurred or Provide additional erosion
riprap is displaced. protection such as reinforced turf
matting or riprap if needed to
prevent future erosion problems.
Weeds are present. Remove the weeds, preferably by
hand. If pesticides are used, wipe
them on the plants rather than
spraying.
The main treatment area Sediment has accumulated Search for the source of the
and reduced the depth to 75% sediment and remedy the problem if
of the original design depth possible. Remove the sediment and
(see diagram below). dispose of it in a location where it
will not cause impacts to streams or
the BMP. Revegetate disturbed
areas immediately with sod
(preferred) or seed protected with
securely staked erosion mat.
Water is standing more than Check outlet structure for clogging.
5 days after a storm event. If it is a design issue, consult an
appropriate professional.
Weeds and noxious plants are Remove the plants by hand or by
growing in the main wiping them with pesticide (do not
treatment area. spray).
Form SW401-Dry Detention O&M-Rev.3 Page 2 of 4
BMP element: Potential problem: How I will remediate the problem:
The embankment Shrubs or trees have started Remove shrubs or trees
to row on the embankment. immediately.
Grass cover is unhealthy or Restore the health of the grass cover
eroding. - consult a professional if necessary.
Signs of seepage on the Consult a professional.
downstream face.
Evidence of muskrat or Use traps to remove muskrats and
beaver activity is present. consult a professional to remove
beavers.
An annual inspection by an Make all needed repairs.
appropriate professional
shows that the embankment
needs repair.
The outlet device Clogging has occurred. Clean out the outlet device. Dispose
of the sediment off-site.
The outlet device is damaged Repair or replace the outlet device.
The receiving water Erosion or other signs of Contact the NC Division of Water
damage have occurred at the Quality 401 Oversight Unit at 919-
outlet. 733-1786.
The measuring device used to determine the sediment elevation shall be such that it will
give an accurate depth reading and not readily penetrate into accumulated sediments.
When the basin depth reads 620.15 feet in the main pond, the sediment shall be
removed.
When the basin depth reads
feet in the forebay, the sediment shall be removed.
BASIN DIAGRAM
(fill in the blanks)
Temporary Pool Elevation 623
Sediment Removal
Bottom
-/Volume'
25%
Sediment
Storage
Pool emporary
Sediment Removal Elevation 620.15 Volume
FOREBAY
Bottom Elevation 619.2 125%
MAIN POND
Form SW401-Dry Detention O&M-Rev.3 Page 3 of 4
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
I acknowledge and agree by my signature below that I am responsible for the
performance of the maintenance procedures listed above. I agree to notify DWQ of any
problems with the system or prior to any changes to the system or responsible party.
Project name:Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station
BMP drainage area number:
Print name: Craig McBride
Title: , .#-A Z
Address: 1704 Fall Hill Ave. Suite 300
Phone: [phone]
Signature:
Date: '5' 141 O
Note: The legally responsible party should not be a homeowners association unless more than 50% of
the lots have been sold and a resident of the subdivision has been named the president.
I, a,-'91e 4 &'// , a Notary Public for the State of
we A&tr of do hereby certify that
- MI
Cirt"r cff r--I ye personally appeared before me this /Z/ day of 2OOeF , and acknowledge the due execution of the
forgoing dry detention basin maintenance requirements. Witness my hand and official
seal,
SEAL
My commission expires `
(?,_J ? U b`? J e_ *:;_"g Sol

Form SW401-Dry Detention O&M-Rev.3 Page 4 of 4
September, 2007
Revised May 2008
•
•

Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion &
Sedimentation Control Plan
Rev C
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station CARO
%
• a SEAL ?
IF44
9/v C.
Prepared for
V@ OwI DO
MAY 2 7 2008
DENR - WATER QUAD I f
WETLANDS AND SToRMWATER BRANCH
Quarles Petroleum, Inc.
Working to better our communities & environment 0710
P:\16\16022\001\9-Published Documents\Erosion Control Plan
SECTION I - NARRATIVE .....................................................................................I
SECTION 2 - DETENTION ......................................................................................2
SECTION 3 - SEDIMENT TRAP .............................................................................4
SECTION 4 - CURB INLET/YARD INLETS ....................................................... 4
SECTION 5 - STORM DRAINAGE PIPING AND CULVERT ............................4
SECTION 6 - CHANNEL ........................................................................................5
SECTION 7 - OUTLET PROTECTION ..................................................................5
SECTION 8 - WATER QUALITY (BIORETENTION) ..........................................5
Note: The reference used in this plan is the Charlotte/Mecklenburg Storm Water Design Manual.
All figures, graphs, tables, and calculations used were derived from this reference except where
specifically indicated.
Textand Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Table of Contents
Appendix A
Exhibit 1: Drainage Basin Maps - Pre-Developed Conditions (CS03)
Exhibit 2: Drainage Basin Maps - Post-Developed Conditions (CS04)
Appendix B
Composite CN Calculations - Pre and Post-Development
Appendix C
Hydraflow Report
Watershed Model Schematic
Hydrograph Return Period Recap
Hydrograph Reports by Return Period including TR-55 Tc
Worksheets and Pond Report
IDF Report
Appendix D
Skimmer Sediment Trap Calculations and Worksheets
Nomograph for Skimmer Orifice Size
Appendix E
Curb Inlets Calculation Table
Yard Inlets Calculation Table
Appendix F
Nomographs for Time of Concentration to Pipe Inlets
Flow Rate Calculations
Storm Drainage Piping Autodesk Land Desktop Civil Design Report
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
List of Appendices
Appendix G
Channel Runoff Calculations
Channel Report
Appendix H
Outlet Protection Sizing
Appendix I
Bioretention Cell Suppliment
Rain Garden Sizing Worksheet
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
1. NARRATIVE
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this project is to construct an unmanned fueling station on a
currently vacant lot in Charlotte, NC. Approximately 1.8 acres will be disturbed
during the construction process. Of that area, approximately 1.6 acres is on the
developed property and 0.2 acres is in a road right-of-way.
1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is approximately 1.6 acres and is located off of Texland Blvd. at the
corner of Texland Blvd. and Westinghouse Blvd. in Charlotte, NC. Historical
land use in the area was wooded. Today, land use in the immediate vicinity is
commercial. The lot adjoins a restaurant to the east and a vacant lot to the
southwest. The site will be accessed from Texland Blvd. to the west.
Westinghouse Blvd. borders the site to the northeast. The 6.63 acre drainage basin
to the site includes the neighboring parcels and a portion of Texland Blvd. The
developed restaurant site includes a detention pond which returns the post-
development flows from that site to predevelopment levels.
The site contains 0.164 acres of isolated wetland as determined by the Army
Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The wetlands are not regulated by the ACOE and
are not subject to the permit requirements of section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
The isolated wetlands are regulated by the State Division of Water Quality.
1.3 SOILS
The soil throughout the entire project area and associated drainage area is Iredell
fine sandy loam, at 1-8 percent slopes (IrB) as identified on Mecklenburg County
GIS soils data. This soil type is classified as Hydrology Group D utilizing Table
16 of the Mecklenburg County Soil Survey.
1.4 MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY
The owner is responsible for ensuring compliance with temporary measures and
for instituting permanent measures.
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
2
2. DETENTION
2.1 SUMMARY
GIS and field survey topographic information were used to determine the existing
drainage characteristics of the project site and the surrounding area. The SCS
method was used to determine runoff at the existing site discharge point for both
pre-development and post-development conditions
The proposed development lies in a single drainage basin identified and
delineated on Exhibit 1, "PRE-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP" in
Appendix A. Post-developed conditions are presented on Exhibit 2, "POST-
DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP in Appendix A. Post-development flows
from on-site as well as some off site flows will be routed through a riser type
sediment basin.
Results from the analysis of the detention pond model indicate that proposed
stormwater flow rates will be maintained at levels below the pre-developed flow
rates for the 2, and 10-year storm events and the 100-year storm runoff can pass
the pond's outlet piping without overtopping the detention facility.
2.2 METHODOLOGY
Utilizing watershed computer modeling software developed by Intellisolve
(Hydraflow Hydrographs version 9.2.), hydrographs were created representing
existing conditions. Proposed flow conditions were then modeled by routing
hydrographs for the detained areas through the designed pond and to the existing site
outlet. The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method for analyzing stormwater runoff
was used to evaluate the 2, 10, 50 and 100 year storms for the detention basin.
In the assessment of existing conditions, the restaurant site to the east was observed
to have a storm water detention pond. Since the requirement of the detention
ordinance is that designed detention reduces flow to pre-development levels or
lower, it is assumed that the flows from that area are best modeled by the pre-
development conditions of that restaurant site. The undeveloped site to the east of
the restaurant is heavily wooded and therefore the undeveloped condition of the
restaurant site is taken to be heavily wooded. For assessments of proposed
conditions, ground cover conditions were taken from the project drawings.
Composite CN numbers were calculated for pre and post-development conditions
and presented in Appendix B.
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
3
The watershed schematic, time of concentration, peak flow rates and
stage/storage/discharge data for the proposed pond are presented in Appendix C.
2.3
2.4
2.5
PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION
The existing conditions for the drainage basin are delineated on Exhibit 1, "PRE-
DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP" in Appendix A. The CN values were
based on TR-55 publication and summarized in Appendix B. The time of
concentration (T.) and peak flow rates were determined using the SCS TR-55
method in Hydraflow Hydrographs.
POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION
The post-developed conditions for the drainage area are delineated on Exhibit 2,
"POST DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP" in Appendix A. CN values were
based on the TR-55 publication and summarized in Appendix B. The time of
concentration (Tj and peak flow rates were determined using the SCS TR-55
method in Hydraflow Hydrographs.
SUMMARY OF PEAK FLOW RATES
Table 2.5 summarizes site runoff conditions. The pre-development runoff to the
site discharge point (Pre) includes existing flows from both onsite and offsite
areas. The post-development runoff value (Post) reflects the same total drainage
area after on-site areas have been developed and impervious area has been
increased resulting in larger flows. The routed runoff value (Routed) reflects the
reduced peak flows resulting from the designed detention.
The runoff calculations, hydrographs of pre-development and post-development
conditions and routed flows resulting from detention pond design are attached in
Appendix C. As demonstrated by Table 2.5, the peak discharge flow rates of the
routed conditions are equal to or below the pre-developed flow rates at storm
frequency of 2 and 10-years. The 50-year storm headwater elevation is below the
top of the dam by a minimum of 6 inches, thus, sufficient freeboard is provided
with this design. The 100-year storm was also evaluated to ensure that it would
pass through the riser's emergency spillway and not overtop the pond.
Table 2.5
PRE (cfs) POST (cfs) ROUTED (cfs) ELEV
2-YEAR 8.84 13.13 7.91 620.82
10-YEAR 18.62 25.19 17.33 622.06
50-YEAR 29.07 37.82 26.80 622.95
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
4
3.
SEDIMENT TRAP
There will be one temporary skimmer sediment trap utilized on the project
(Practice Standard 6.64 from the North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual). A larger than required basin will be constructed
and later converted to a permanent riser type sediment basin.
The trap is to be sized for a minimum volume of 1800 ft3/acre based on disturbed
drainage area draining into the basin and a minimum surface area of 325 sf/cfs of
flow at the spillway elevation. The spillway weir is to be a minimum of 10 feet
wide. The basin is to contain 3 porous baffles and use a skimmer device which
will dewater the basin in between 24 and 72 hours.
The time of concentration for the drainage area to the trap was determined using
iterations of the kinematic wave equation. Minimum volume and surface area
were calculated. The skimmer orifice diameter was determined from using figure
6.64b from the manual.
Calculations are presented in appendix D.
The skimmer sediment basin will be 2.3 ft. deep with a bottom elevation of 619.2
and spillway elevation of 621.5. The berm elevation will be 2 ft. higher at
elevation 623.5 providing for passage of the peak runoff from the 10-year storm
with a minimum of 1 foot of freeboard. The basin will contain three porous
baffles. A skimmer dewatering device with a 1 inch orifice will be connected to
the outlet pipe for the permanent sediment basin. The basin will dewater in
between 2 and 3 days.
4.
CURB INLETSIYARD INLET
One curb inlet will be in the public right-of-way. The inlet was sized in
accordance with the reference and an inlet calculation table is presented in
Appendix E.
5.
STORM DRAINAGE PIPING AND CULVERT
For storm drainage pipe and culvert sizing, the rational method was used to
determine runoff. C values were obtained from Table 3-3 of the Charlotte-
Mecklenburg Storm Water Design Manual. Acreage contributing water to the site
was determined from Charlotte-Mecklenburg GIS topographic data. Post
development land use was determined from Mecklenburg County GIS aerial
'image data and design. Times of concentration were determined using the
nomograph for time of concentration Fig. 3-1 from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Storm Water Design Manual.
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Storm drainage pipes and the culvert were analyzed utilizing computer modeling
software developed by Autodesk Land Desktop Civil Design (2005).
Calculations and output from the design software are included in Appendix F.
6.
CHANNEL
A channel will be constructed at the eastern side of the paved area to capture and
convey runoff around the developed site. The channel was designed and analyzed
utilizing computer modeling software developed by Autodesk Land Desktop Civil
Design (2005). Output from the design software is included in Appendix G.
The maximum velocity of 2.62 ft/sec resulting in the channel is greater than can
be handled by bare soil conditions but less than the 5 ft/sec which can be handled
by an established grass lined channel. Accordingly, the channel will be seeded
and lined with temporary jute matting to expedite vegetation establishment.
7.
OUTLET PROTECTION
All outlet protections will be at minimum tail water. Dimensions are determined
based on the N.C. Erosion and Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
Nomographs for sizing the outlet protection are attached in Appendix H.
8.
WATER QUALITY
A bioretention cell intercepts flow from the developed area of the site to provide
85% Total Suspended Solids (TSS) removal. BMP design worksheets are
attached in Appendix I.
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Appendix A
Exhibit 1: Drainage Basin Maps - Pre-Developed Conditions (CS03)
Exhibit 2: Drainage Basin Maps - Post-Developed Conditions (CS04)
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
-? BP I
N?
MARK P. JOHNSON R - /
ti ` I DB 17518 PC 398
PID
d 2
ro
-
---??trVESiINBHpyg?BNfD.- ------ - ---------
_ EUB? IC-R/-W / T_ - 7- _ - - - _ _ - - _ -
.I.F US / - - _ 1
? CROyPTON ST
h
pESnNCHWSE ?..
BL
Q
9A
o,
?yJ
NOT TO SCALE
{
'spl?a. E.aaAA?tNS / / _. - - - - - - - _ ___. - - - - - VICINITY MAP
l \ I
i 1 11 2Z9? 19\\_
?^ \ \ I m I
/ f ? 1 err / l °'W"` \ \ 1 ; 11 I N.-?Ax
a?cccu
/y 1 I \`` yr FIR XX REALTY LP \ I It
- eAroKxl ` u
Q I bry '_ f I \ '?. PID#?W 121222 n I `
i i \ /.1 \ II I I ? saMro?arxnAKtT&WAwo
wma 114 sucy WAN
Q I ? I I 1 ?.. 1 I i I I I 1 I/ ?
HILLCRE T FOODS Ixc I I II ?. . I / / I = ROBERT LYLE D FING (TRUSTEE)
DRAWAGE
DPI "Z07121,iB l U] I I II ?? I 1 1 . II lY I ?I / /I / / /I {- JANDB IIB477 PG 958
,
fNEO. -2. I O I I I I 1 ?? / 1 I. I I 1111 z PIZONED -29 `? BASIN
I? I 1 \ Ohl. l I?IIII Y ??
I? m l ICI I a 1 vv1? / / ! ! I I VII Q
' 1 Q i III ? ? ? ? ?"? ?" I I I I JI I I `?
Ik i V / l / 1 l ?? `?
?? ?I I II I \ / / l / 1 I l l SA-ORA AOE AKA
r Acos
SIA-CRAMAC( AREA
_ _ p h p t
A-0.53 AC45 \ - `? / ry p m I m J J
s
I 53' N/E
I m xAA \ HONGTAO HAN
20"320391PG125
7ah 251" Tc MM
\
\ \ (VA 2 AI
\?H/---I1
I ?? III . ???x I
I NT
??` 0 a u
------
! 110 V SHAUON 07HCENIMRA rAplrr''?? 4
'' 1? I
1 I
\ftft \\
BEFORE 'fW W
GW INE NO ONE--CALL
CENIER AT
Ifa AE uE
\\
\ \ .00 I GRAPHIC SCfa,E
/A N A
000 \ ftft / / ow 0.0 .00 00 IN FELT )
Y inch - 00 IL
ftft "Ift ft% %% 00 000 100 / / .00
CITY OF CHARLOTTE AND
DESCRIPTION OF REVISION
I ]ORDAN
ES PETROLEUM INC.
]ONES & QUARL
,OPtP I^AR'0"'Myysq
O E 0 N v N
iP
?ENIIINp.I•'
TEXLAND BLVD.
UNATTENDED FUEL STATION
PRE-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP
DESIGNED: TBid CNECRED: DATE DECEMBER, 2007 6 OF 16 I C
DRANK: TBIA JOB N0. 16022-001 SCALE: 1'=30' SHEET REV

\.....
' N/F
w a .....

- \ \ MARK P. JOHNSON
-? pB IJ518 PC SBe
_ -
CROMp TON
Si
\ PID7 20.
,2N.. 1-2 2 _ p
I

`.

-

...

,,...
SI
Q WES7,1?NG,,. SE
X

- - - '- -
_ _ _ _
- WESTIN6HOUSF BLVD.-
- - - ,_ - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - r
a9:

- -VAIA@LE PU@LIG ?p - -_

- ----` -

-- -
_ _ -
- _ - - -
- - - -

o
r..? ?? -- ----------- - _

_
-
- - - -
- - - __ _ - _ _ ---
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
- - - _

1 ORAI
, I 1I FES 1-1
;&
CE 1 11WASS DER 1,
A- OTGLI
6 ? 11011
E p
(
R
r[ E
J \
i1E 6 6 9 A-&80
W LL%f `
111
l
I Mn
"° OLA
x TM

' I
I
nr. w
. MSS NT
AREA
S1MS rcRN"r0"
A-&37 A-&37 ACRES
tS 1•E QR•70 s*. X REALTY LP , `...
I IZONSD 11-2
`
4
:I I (
I : ? ASSIDOWED 11HROLIGHT DIE PROJECT AREA
DRAINAGE AREA 6 EN=.
I ? I? ?• I _. .' i ' ` RUMM N[ SWOP LOOM (&S)
I I I ? I1 ? ?? ? ??

I J I ORA6AR[
Q] To
MENTION, PC
RAN GARGd
rnsr swu[
«
ACRES
J
so

H NS
ILLCJSi FOODS.INC I a

I i p N/F

?OBEAi LrtE D FONG (TRUSTEE)

? -
DB E604 PG 4!jB
P1 20.11211$
Z EO 2 I
I O ; t:
I 11 -?

I qq
h
R
y : JANET M. GEE (TRUSTEE)
OB I94]] PG 958
I
4 ;

i j I
Dj 211
PIZ
ONED31-29
k
MS4
co I I
GWERVIONA AREA TO RAN
/ Q CH • al] ACRES
Q ? ?

rts 1111

DRAINAGE AREA I \\ .
% Wa12
A•OS1 ACRES
I
3
YR \
\

a•b wer v
ovR
I m c \ N
\\
RONGiAO HA
\ 08 20639 PG 549
f
\
\\ PID0 20312125
\ ZONED I-2

\
\ f k '
I ?\\\ ! T
a u TA MM '
OKRR DRAINAGE AREA A R
I
DETENDON
Ak4l ACRES M
MI
--------------- I
? '???''' ``
'
I-?
? __sTS v s4AUa mKERIMTCO rta ' U

?? I

ftft 400
400
-
ft

ft 4"
ft -ft 4
` -ft ?
BEFOIIE VW M -ft ? /
00 GRAPHIC SCALE
00
ft% 00 000

CALL AE NC OW-CALL
CENM AT \
/ /
I IN stitr)

1 inch . 90 M1
,

n
1 %%
/
nc LAa
FrS / o

COMMENTS
IN OF RAW GARDEN
.' JORDAN
JONES &
QUARLES PETROLEUM INC.
C.
GOULDING
a?SN CARpAG
AQ t
i 9 PNOx?EPp}? 9r
9C,NNANPyP
TEXLAND BLVD.
UNATTENDED FUEL STATION
POST-DEVELOPMENT DRAINAGE MAP
DESIGNED: TIBIA CHECKED: DATE DECEMBER, 2007 7 OF 16 I C
DAARN: TBM JOB NO. 16022-001 SCALE: 1"=30 SKEET REV
Appendix B
Composite CN Calculations - Pre and Post-Development
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station
REV C
MAY, 2008
Composite "CN" calculations
Pre-development areas:
Land Use Area
(ac) % Total Land
Area Runoff
Coefficient Weighted Runoff
Coefficient
Paved 0.53 0.08 98 7.85
Woods - Good hydrologic condition 6.09 0.92 77 70.84
6.62 1.00 78.68
Composite "CN" calculations
Post-development areas:
Land Use Area
(ac) % Total Land
Area Runoff
Coefficient Weighted Runoff
Coefficient
Paved 0.58 0.09 98 8.57
Open Space - Good hydrologic condition 0.37 0.06 78 4.35
Open Space - Good hydrologic condition 0.45 0.07 80 5.43
Woods - Good hydrologic condition 4.41 0.67 77 51.22
Paved 0.73 0.11 96 10.57
Open Space - Good hydrologic condition 0.09 0.01 80 1.09
6.63 1.00 81.23
Appendix C
Hydraflow Report
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Hydraflow Table of Contents
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Watershed Model Schematic ................................................................................... 1
Hydrograph Return Period Recap ........................................................................... 2
2 - Year
Summary Report ....................................................................................................................... 3
Hydrograph Reports ................................................................................................................. 4
Hydrograph No. 1, SCS Runoff, PRE-DEV ............................................................................ 4
TR-55 Tc Worksheet ......................................................................................................... 5
Hydrograph No. 2, SCS Runoff, POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN ................................ 6
Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN .................................................... 7
Pond Report - RAIN GARDEN ........................................................................................... 8
Hydrograph No. 4, SCS Runoff, POST-DEV TO DETENTION .............................................. 9
TR-55 Tc Worksheet ....................................................................................................... 10
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, TOTAL INTO DETENTION .................................................... 11
Hydrograph No. 6, Reservoir, FLOW FROM DETENTION .................................................. 12
Pond Report - DETENTION POND ................................................................................. 13
Hydrograph No. 7, SCS Runoff, POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION .................................. 14
Hydrograph No. 8, Combine, TOTAL FROM SITE ............................................................... 15
10 - Year
Summary Report ..................................................................................................................... 16
Hydrograph Reports ............................................................................................................... 17
Hydrograph No. 1, SCS Runoff, PRE-DEV .......................................................................... 17
Hydrograph No. 2, SCS Runoff, POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN .............................. 18
Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN .................................................. 19
Hydrograph No. 4, SCS Runoff, POST-DEV TO DETENTION ............................................ 20
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, TOTAL INTO DETENTION .................................................... 21
Hydrograph No. 6, Reservoir, FLOW FROM DETENTION .................................................. 22
Hydrograph No. 7, SCS Runoff, POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION .................................. 23
Hydrograph No. 8, Combine, TOTAL FROM SITE ............................................................... 24
50 - Year
Summary Report ..................................................................................................................... 25
Hydrograph Reports ............................................................................................................... 26
Hydrograph No. 1, SCS Runoff, PRE-DEV .......................................................................... 26
Hydrograph No. 2, SCS Runoff, POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN .............................. 27
Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN .................................................. 28
Hydrograph No. 4, SCS Runoff, POST-DEV TO DETENTION ............................................ 29
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, TOTAL INTO DETENTION .................................................... 30
Hydrograph No. 6, Reservoir, FLOW FROM DETENTION .................................................. 31
Hydrograph No. 7, SCS Runoff, POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION .................................. 32
Hydrograph No. 8, Combine, TOTAL FROM SITE ............................................................... 33
100 - Year
Summary Report ..................................................................................................................... 34
Hydrograph Reports ............................................................................................................... 35
Hydrograph No. 1, SCS Runoff, PRE-DEV .......................................................................... 35
Hydrograph No. 2, SCS Runoff, POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN .............................. 36
Contents continued...
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw
Hydrograph No. 3, Reservoir, IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN .................................................. 37
Hydrograph No. 4, SCS Runoff, POST-DEV TO DETENTION ............................................ 38
Hydrograph No. 5, Combine, TOTAL INTO DETENTION .................................................... 39
Hydrograph No. 6, Reservoir, FLOW FROM DETENTION .................................................. 40
Hydrograph No. 7, SCS Runoff, POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION .................................. 41
Hydrograph No. 8, Combine, TOTAL FROM SITE ............................................................... 42
IDF Report ............................................................................................................... 43
1
Watershed Model Schematic
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
1 - PRE-DEV 2 - POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 - IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDI`4 - POST-DEV TO DETENTION
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 - FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 - POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
0- TOTAL FROM SITE
Legend
Hyd• Origin Description
I SCS Runoff PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine TOTAL FROM SITE
Project: TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hydrograph Return Period Recap
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. Hydrograph Inflow Peak Outflow (cfs) Hydrograph

No. type Hyd(s) description
(origin) 1-Yr 2-Yr 3-Yr 5-Yr 10-Yr 25-Yr 50-Yr 100-Yr
1 SCS Runoff ------- ------- 8.841 ------- ------- 18.62 ------- 29.07 32.10 PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff ------- ------- 2.972 ------- ------- 4.685 ------- 6.382 6.865 POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir 2 ------- 1.824 ------- ------- 3.937 ------- 5.511 5.976 IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff ------- ------- 5.843 ------- ------- 12.81 ------- 20.36 22.57 POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine 3,4 ------- 7.403 ------- ------- 15.77 ------- 24.42 26.93 TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir 5 ------- 6.606 ------- ------- 14.51 ------- 23.39 26.38 FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff ------- ------- 4.311 ------- ------- 7.697 ------- 11.08 12.05 POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine 6,7 ------- 7.912 ------- ------- 17.33 ------- 26.80 30.52 TOTAL FROM SITE
Proj. file: TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd.
No. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cis) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Hyd.
volume
(cult) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Total
strge used
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 SCS Runoff 8.841 2 728 31,234 ---- ------ ------ PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff 2.972 2 716 6,634 ---- ------ ------ POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir 1.824 2 720 4,157 2 623.65 3,278 IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff 5.843 2 726 18,867 ---- ------ ------ POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine 7.403 2 724 23,023 3,4 ------ ------ TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir 6.606 2 728 23,021 5 620.82 2,010 FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff 4.311 2 716 8,787 ---- ------ ------ POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine 7.912 2 720 31,808 6,7 ------ ------ TOTAL FROM SITE
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw Return Period: 2 Year Wednesday, May 14, 2008
4
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 1
PRE-DEV
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 6.620 ac
Basin Slope = 0.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 3.12 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 8.841 cfs
Time to peak = 728 min
Hyd. volume = 31,234 cuft
Curve number = 79*
Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.30 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) = [(6.090 x 77) + (0.530 x 98)1/ 6.620
PRE-DEV
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 1 -- 2 Year
10.00 10.00
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 1 Time (min)
5
TR55 Tc Worksheet
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 1
PRE-DEV
Description A B C
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value = 0.800 0.011 0.011
Flow length (ft) = 65.0 0.0 0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 3.12 0.00 0.00
Land slope (%) = 9.61 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) 14.32 + 0.00 + 0.00
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft) = 760.00 0.00 0.00
Watercourse slope (%) = 1.72 0.00 0.00
Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved
Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.12 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) 5.99 + 0.00 + 0.00
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015
Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0
Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00
Total Travel Time, Tc ............... ................................................ ...............
Totals
14.32
5.99
0.00
20.30 min
Hydrograph Report
6
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 2
POST DEV IMPV T O RAIN GARDEN
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 0.730 ac
Basin Slope = 2.0%
Tc method = USER
Total precip. = 3.12 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 2.972 cfs
Time to peak = 716 min
Hyd. volume = 6,634 cuft
Curve number = 96*
Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.680 x 98) + (0.050 x 68)1/ 0.730
Q (Cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 ' '
0 120
Hyd No. 2
POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
Hyd. No. 2 -- 2 Year
240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080
Q (cfs)
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
1200
Time (min)
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 3
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge
Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN Max. Elevation
Reservoir name = RAIN GARDEN Max. Storage
7
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
= 1.824 cfs
= 720 min
= 4,157 cuft
= 623.65 ft
= 3,278 tuft
Storage Indication method used.
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 2 Year Q (cfs)
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
?--?- Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 F?11 Total storage used = 3,278 cuft
Pond Report s
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Pond No. 1 - RAIN GARDEN
Pond Data
Contours - User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 622.50 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sgft) Incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 622.50 2,181 0 0
1.00 623.50 2,784 2,476 2,476
1.50 624.00 8,965 2,791 5,267
2.00 624.50 17,664 6,535 11,802
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [PrfRsr] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) Inactive Inactive Inactive Inactive Crest Len (ft) = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 623.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 0 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33
Invert El. (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect --- --- ---
Length (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = No No No No
Slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 n/a
N-Value = .013 .013 .013 n/a
Orifice Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Exfil.(in/hr) = 0.000 (by Wet area)
Multi-Stage = n/a No No No TW Elev. (ft) = 0.00
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s).
Stage / Storage / Discharge Table
Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C PrfRsr Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil User Total
it cult it cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis
0.00 0 622.50 --- --- --- --- 0.00 --- --- --- --- --- 0.000
1.00 2,476 623.50 --- --- --- --- 0.00 --- --- --- --- --- 0.000
1.50 5,267 624.00 --- --- --- 11.77 --- --- --- --- 11.77
2.00 11,802 624.50 --- --- --- 33.30 --- --- --- --- --- 33.30
9
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 4
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 4.500 ac
Basin Slope = 0.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 3.12 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 5.843 cfs
Time to peak = 726 min
Hyd. volume = 18,867 cuft
Curve number = 77*
Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 17.90 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) _ [(4.410 x 77) + (0.090 x 80)] / 4.500
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 4 -- 2 Year
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 4 Time (min)
TR55 Tc Worksheet
10
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 4
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Description A B C
Sheet Flow
Manning's n-value = 0.800 0.011 0.011
Flow length (ft) = 53.0 0.0 0.0
Two-year 24-hr precip. (in) = 3.12 0.00 0.00
Land slope (%) = 7.50 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) = 13.43 + 0.00 + 0.00
Shallow Concentrated Flow
Flow length (ft) = 575.00 0.00 0.00
Watercourse slope (%) = 1.78 0.00 0.00
Surface description = Unpaved Paved Paved
Average velocity (ft/s) = 2.15 0.00 0.00
Travel Time (min) = 4.45 + 0.00 + 0.00
Channel Flow
X sectional flow area (sqft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Wetted perimeter (ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Channel slope (%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Manning's n-value = 0.015 0.015 0.015
Velocity (ft/s) = 0.00 0.00 0.00
Flow length (ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0
Travel Time (min) = 0.00 + 0.00 + 0.00
Total Travel Time, Tc ..............................................................................
Totals
= 13.43
= 4.45
= 0.00
17.90 min
Hydrograph Report
11
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 5
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 7.403 cfs
Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 724 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 23,023 cuft
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Contrib. drain. area = 4.500 ac
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
0 (cfs) 0 (cfs)
Hyd. No. 5 -- 2 Year
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
12
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 6
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 6.606 cfs
Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 728 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 23,021 cuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 5 - TOTAL INTO DETENTION Max. Elevation = 620.82 ft
Reservoir name = DETENTION POND Max. Storage = 2,010 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Hyd. No. 6 -- 2 Year
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
-? Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 5 Total storage used = 2,010 cuft
Pond Report
13
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Pond No. 9 - DETENTION POND
Pond Data
Contours - User-defined contour areas. Conic method used for volume calculation. Begining Elevation = 619.20 ft
Stage / Storage Table
Stage (ft) Elevation (ft) Contour area (sqft) Incr. Storage (cult) Total storage (cuft)
0.00 619.20 1,004 0 0
1.08 620.28 1,282 1,226 1,226
2.15 621.35 1,588 1,540 2,765
3.23 622.43 1,924 1,885 4,650
4.30 623.50 2,289 2,261 6,911
Culvert / Orifice Structures Weir Structures
[A] [B] [C] [PrfRsr] [A] [B] [C] [D]
Rise (in) = 30.00 19.00 20.00 0.00 Crest Len (ft) = 20.00 6.00 0.00 0.00
Span (in) = 30.00 19.00 20.00 0.00 Crest El. (ft) = 623.00 622.50 0.00 0.00
No. Barrels = 1 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33
Invert El. (ft) = 619.20 619.20 620.80 0.00 Weir Type = Riser Rect --- ---
Length (ft) = 95.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = Yes Yes No No
Slope (%) = 0.36 0.00 0.00 n/a
N-Value = .013 .013 .013 n/a
Orifice Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Exfil.(in/hr) = 0.000 (by Wet area)
Multi-Stage = n/a Yes Yes No TW Elev. (ft) = 0.00
Note: Culvert/Orifice outflows are analyzed under inlet (ic) and outlet (oc) control. Weir risers checked for orifice conditions (ic) and submergence (s).
Stage / Storage / Discharge Table
Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C PrfRsr Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil User Total
it tuft it cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis
0.00 0 619.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 0.000
1.08 1,226 620.28 3.83 oc 3.69 is 0.00 --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 3.690
2.15 2,765 621.35 9.47 oc 7.85 is 1.59 is --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 9.435
3.23 4,650 622.43 16.23 oc 7.73 is 8.51 is --- 0.00 0.00 --- --- --- --- 16.23
4.30 6,911 623.50 36.06 oc 3.73 is 4.14 is --- 16.97s 11.22s --- --- --- --- 36.06
Hydrograph Report
14
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 7
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 4.311 cfs
Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 8,787 cuft
Drainage area = 1.400 ac Curve number = 87*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 3.12 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.370 x 78) + (0.580 x 98) + (0.450 x 80)] / 1.400
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Hyd. No. 7 -- 2 Year
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440
Hyd No. 7 Time (min)
Hydrograph Report
15
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 8
TOTAL FROM SITE
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 2 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Inflow hyds. = 6, 7
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 7.912 cfs
Time to peak = 720 min
Hyd. volume = 31,808 cuft
Contrib. drain. area = 1.400 ac
Q (cfs)
8.00
TOTAL FROM SITE
Hyd. No. 8 -- 2 Year
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 8 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 7
16
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd.
No. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Hyd.
volume
(cuft) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Total
strge used
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 SCS Runoff 18.62 2 726 64,336 ---- ------ ------ PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff 4.685 2 716 10,766 ---- ------ ------ POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir 3.937 2 720 8,290 2 623.75 3,819 IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff 12.81 2 724 40,128 ---- ------ ------ POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine 15.77 2 722 48,418 3,4 ------ ------ TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir 14.51 2 726 48,415 5 622.07 4,002 FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff 7.697 2 716 16,100 ---- ------ ------ POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine 17.33 2 720 64,515 6,7 ------ ------ TOTAL FROM SITE
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw Return Period: 10 Year Wednesday, May 14, 2008
17
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 1
PRE-DEV
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 18.62 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 726 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 64,336 cuft
Drainage area = 6.620 ac Curve number = 79*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.30 min
Total precip. = 4.80 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) = [(6.090 x 77) + (0.530 x 98)] / 6.620
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
PRE-DEV
Hyd. No. 1 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
21.00
18.00
15.00
12.00
9.00
6.00
3.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 1 Time (min)
18
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 2
POST DEV IMPV T O RAIN GARDEN
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 4.685 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 10,766 cuft
Drainage area = 0.730 ac Curve number = 96*
Basin Slope = 2.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 4.80 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.680 x 98) + (0.050 x 68)] / 0.730
Q (cfs)
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0 00
POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
Hyd. No. 2 -- 10 Year
Q (cfs)
5.00
0 120
- Hyd No. 2
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
' 0.00
240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200
Time (min)
19
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 3
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN Max. Elevation
Reservoir name = RAIN GARDEN Max. Storage
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
= 3.937 cfs
= 720 min
= 8,290 cuft
= 623.75 ft
= 3,819 tuft
Storage Indication method used.
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 3 -- 10 Year
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440
Time (min)
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 I VIII ! ! Total storage used = 3,819 cuft
20
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 4
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 12.81 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 724 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 40,128 cuft
Drainage area = 4.500 ac Curve number = 77*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 17.90 min
Total precip. = 4.80 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(4.410 x 77) + (0.090 x 80)] / 4.500
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 4 -- 10 Year
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
-a Hyd No. 4 Time (min)
21
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 5
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 15.77 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 722 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 48,418 cuft
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Contrib. drain. area = 4.500 ac
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 -- 10 Year Q (cfs)
18.00 18.00
15.00 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
22
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 6
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 14.51 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 726 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 48,415 cuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 5 - TOTAL INTO DETENTION Max. Elevation = 622.07 ft
Reservoir name = DETENTION POND Max. Storage = 4,002 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 6 -- 10 Year Q (cfs)
18.00 18.00
15.00 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 6 - Hyd No. 5 LL1' i Total storage used = 4,002 cuft
23
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 7
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 7.697 cfs
Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 16,100 cuft
Drainage area = 1.400 ac Curve number = 87*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 4.80 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.370 x 78) + (0.580 x 98) + (0.450 x 80)] / 1.400
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 10 Year
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320
Hyd No. 7 Time (min)
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 8
TOTAL FROM SITE
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 10 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Inflow hyds. = 6, 7
TOTAL FROM SITE
24
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 17.33 cfs
Time to peak = 720 min
Hyd. volume = 64,515 cuft
Contrib. drain. area = 1.400 ac
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 8 -- 10 Year
18.00 18.00
15.00 15.00
12.00 12.00
9.00 9.00
6.00 6.00
3.00 3.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 8 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 7
25
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd.
No. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Hyd.
volume
(cult) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Total
strge used
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 SCS Runoff 29.07 2 726 100,558 ---- ------ ------ PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff 6.382 2 716 14,919 ---- ------ ------ POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir 5.511 2 718 12,442 2 623.81 4,159 IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff 20.36 2 724 63,731 ---- ------ ------ POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine 24.42 2 722 76,174 3,4 ------ ------ TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir 23.39 2 726 76,171 5 622.97 5,752 FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff 11.08 2 716 23,716 ---- ------ ------ POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine 26.80 2 722 99,887 6,7 ------ ------ TOTAL FROM SITE
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw Return Period: 50 Year Wednesday, May 14, 2008
26
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 1
PRE-DEV
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 29.07 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 726 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 100,558 cuft
Drainage area = 6.620 ac Curve number = 79*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.30 min
Total precip. = 6.48 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) = [(6.090 x 77) + (0.530 x 98)1/ 6.620
PRE-DEV
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 1 -- 50 Year
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
Q (cfs)
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
- Hyd No. 1 Time (min)
27
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 2
POST DEV IMPV T O RAIN GARDEN
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 6.382 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 14,919 tuft
Drainage area = 0.730 ac Curve number = 96*
Basin Slope = 2.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 6.48 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.680 x 98) + (0.050 x 68)] / 0.730
POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 2 -- 50 Year
7.00 7.00
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200
Hyd No. 2 Time (min)
28
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 3
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 5.511 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 718 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 12,442 cuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN Max. Elevation = 623.81 ft
Reservoir name = RAIN GARDEN Max. Storage = 4,159 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 3 -- 50 Year Q (cfs)
7.00 7.00
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 - 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320
Time (min)
F. Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 1110-t- ! Total storage used = 4,159 cuft
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 5
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Combine
Storm frequency = 50 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4
30
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 24.42 cfs
Time to peak = 722 min
Hyd. volume = 76,174 cuft
Contrib. drain. area = 4.500 ac
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 5 50 Year Q (cfs)
28.00 28.00
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
000 000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min) ,
Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
31
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 6
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 23.39 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 726 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 76,171 cuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 5 - TOTAL INTO DETENTION Max. Elevation = 622.97 ft
Reservoir name = DETENTION POND Max. Storage = 5,752 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 6 -- 50 Year
28.00 28.00
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
0.00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560

Hyd No
. 6
Hyd No. 5
LCL111U- Total storage used = 5,752 cuft Time (min)
Hydrograph Report 32
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 7
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 11.08 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 23,716 cuft
Drainage area = 1.400 ac Curve number = 87*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 6.48 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
' Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.370 x 78) + (0.580 x 98) + (0.450 x 80)] / 1.400
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 7 -- 50 Year
12.00 12.00
10.00 10.00
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200
Hyd No. 7 Time (min)
33
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 8
TOTAL FROM SITE
Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 26.80 cfs
Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time to peak = 722 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 99,887 cuft
Inflow hyds. = 6, 7 Contrib. drain. area = 1.400 ac
TOTAL FROM SITE
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 8 -- 50 Year
28.00 28.00
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
000 000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 8 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 7
34
Hydrograph Summary Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd.
No. Hydrograph
type
(origin) Peak
flow
(cfs) Time
interval
(min) Time to
peak
(min) Hyd.
volume
(cult) Inflow
hyd(s) Maximum
elevation
(ft) Total
strge used
(cuft) Hydrograph
description
1 SCS Runoff 32.10 2 726 111,237 ---- ------ ------ PRE-DEV
2 SCS Runoff 6.865 2 716 16,108 ---- ------ ------ POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
3 Reservoir 5.976 2 718 13,631 2 623.82 4,250 IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
4 SCS Runoff 22.57 2 724 70,729 ---- ------ ------ POST-DEV TO DETENTION
5 Combine 26.93 2 722 84,359 3,4 ------ ------ TOTAL INTO DETENTION
6 Reservoir 26.38 2 724 84,357 5 623.08 6,023 FLOW FROM DETENTION
7 SCS Runoff 12.05 2 716 25,921 ---- ------ ------ POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
8 Combine 30.52 2 722 110,278 6,7 ------ ------ TOTAL FROM SITE
TEXLAND 2008-05-07 REV C.gpw Return Period: 100 Year Wednesday, May 14, 2008
35
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Hyd. No. 1
PRE-DEV
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff
Storm frequency = 100 yrs
Time interval = 2 min
Drainage area = 6.620 ac
Basin Slope = 0.0%
Tc method = TR55
Total precip. = 6.96 in
Storm duration = 24 hrs
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Peak discharge = 32.10 cfs
Time to peak = 726 min
Hyd. volume = 111,237 cuft
Curve number = 79*
Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Time of conc. (Tc) = 20.30 min
Distribution = Type II
Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) = [(6.090 x 77) + (0.530 x 98)] / 6.620
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
PRE-DEV
Hyd. No. 1 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
- Hyd No. 1 Time (min)
Hydrograph Report
36
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 2
POST DEV IMPV T O RAIN GARDEN
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 6.865 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 16,108 cuft
Drainage area = 0.730 ac Curve number = 96*
Basin Slope = 2.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 6.96 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.680 x 98) + (0.050 x 68)] / 0.730
Q (cfs
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN
Hyd. No. 2 -- 100 Year
Q (cfs)
7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200
Hyd No. 2 Time (min)
Hydrograph Report
37
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 3
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 5.976 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 718 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 13,631 tuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 2 - POST DEV IMPV TO RAIN GARDEN Max. Elevation = 623.82 ft
Reservoir name = RAIN GARDEN Max. Storage = 4,250 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
IMPRV THRU RAIN GRDN
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 3 -- 100 Year
7.00 7.00
6.00 6.00
5.00 5.00
4.00 4.00
3.00 3.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
0.00 0.00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320
Time (min)
Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 2 L L LMITI Total storage used = 4,250 cuft
Hydrograph Report
38
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 4
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 22.57 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 724 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 70,729 cuft
Drainage area = 4.500 ac Curve number = 77*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = TR55 Time of conc. (Tc) = 17.90 min
Total precip. = 6.96 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
* Composite (Area/CN) _ [(4.410 x 77) + (0.090 x 80)] / 4.500
POST-DEV TO DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 4 -- 100 Year Q (cfs)
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
000 000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Hyd No. 4 Time (min)
39
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 5
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 26.93 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 722 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 84,359 cuft
Inflow hyds. = 3, 4 Contrib. drain. area = 4.500 ac
TOTAL INTO DETENTION
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 5 -- 100 Year
28.00 28.00
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
- Hyd No. 5 Hyd No. 3 Hyd No. 4
40
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 6
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 26.38 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 724 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 84,357 cuft
Inflow hyd. No. = 5 - TOTAL INTO DETENTION Max. Elevation = 623.08 ft
Reservoir name = DETENTION POND Max. Storage = 6,023 cuft
Storage Indication method used.
FLOW FROM DETENTION
Q (cfs) Q (cfs)
Hyd. No. 6 -- 100 Year
28.00 28.00
24.00 24.00
20.00 20.00
16.00 16.00
12.00 12.00
8.00 8.00
4.00 4.00
000 000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 5 1 fl-H-11 11 11 Total storage used = 6,023 cuft
41
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 7
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Hydrograph type = SCS Runoff Peak discharge = 12.05 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 716 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 25,921 cuft
Drainage area = 1.400 ac Curve number = 87*
Basin Slope = 0.0% Hydraulic length = 0 ft
Tc method = USER Time of conc. (Tc) = 6.00 min
Total precip. = 6.96 in Distribution = Type II
Storm duration = 24 hrs Shape factor = 484
Composite (Area/CN) _ [(0.370 x 78) + (0.580 x 98) + (0.450 x 80)] / 1.400
POST- DEV BYPASS DETENTION
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 7 -- 100 Year Q (cfs)
14.00 14.00
12.00 12.00
10.00 10.00
8.00 8.00
6.00 6.00
4.00 4.00
2.00 2.00
0 00 0 00
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200
Hyd No. 7 Time (min)
42
Hydrograph Report
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Hyd. No. 8
TOTAL FROM SITE
Hydrograph type = Combine Peak discharge = 30.52 cfs
Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time to peak = 722 min
Time interval = 2 min Hyd. volume = 110,278 cuft
Inflow hyds. = 6, 7 Contrib. drain. area = 1.400 ac
TOTAL FROM SITE
Q (cfs) Hyd. No. 8 -- 100 Year Q (cfs)
35.00 35.00
30.00 30.00
25.00 25.00
20.00 20.00
15.00 15.00
10.00 10.00
5.00 5.00
000 000
0 120 240 360 480 600 720 840 960 1080 1200 1320 1440 1560
Time (min)
- Hyd No. 8 Hyd No. 6 Hyd No. 7
Hydraflow Rainfall Report
43
Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve v9.2
Return
P
i
d Intensity-Duration-Frequency Equation Coefficients (FHA)
er
o
(Yrs) B D E (N/A)
1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 --------
2 45.7493 10.2000 0.8119 --------
3 53.7163 11.2000 0.8123 --------
5 61.0173 12.0000 0.8016 --------
10 84.3532 15.1000 0.8281 --------
25 93.8806 14.7000 0.8176 --------
50 108.9013 15.4000 0.8271 --------
100 119.2770 15.2000 0.8276 --------
File name: CHARLOTTE.IDF
Intensity = B / (Tc + D)^E
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Return
P
i
d Intensity Values (in/hr)
er
o
(Yrs) 5 min 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2 5.02 3.99 3.33 2.88 2.54 2.28 2.07 1.90 1.76 1.64 1.54 1.45
3 5.59 4.49 3.78 3.28 2.91 2.62 2.39 2.20 2.04 1.90 1.78 1.68
5 6.30 5.12 4.35 3.79 3.38 3.05 2.79 2.57 2.39 2.23 2.10 1.98
10 7.03 5.85 5.03 4.43 3.97 3.60 3.30 3.05 2.84 2.66 2.50 2.36
25 8.21 6.82 5.87 5.17 4.63 4.20 3.85 3.56 3.32 3.10 2.92 2.76
50 8.99 7.50 6.47 5.70 5.11 4.64 4.26 3.94 3.66 3.43 3.23 3.05
100 9.91 8.26 7.11 6.26 5.61 5.09 4.67 4.31 4.02 3.76 3.54 3.34
Tc = time in minutes. Values may exceed 60.
PreciD. file name: CHARLOTTE.DCD
Rainfall Precipitation Table (in)
Storm
Distribution 1-yr 2-yr 3-yr 5-yr 10-yr 25-yr 50-yr 100-yr
SCS 24-hour 0.00 3.12 0.00 4.32 4.80 5.76 6.48 6.96
SCS 6-Hr 0.00 1.80 0.00 0.00 2.60 0.00 0.00 4.00
Huff-1st 0.00 1.55 0.00 2.75 4.00 5.38 6.50 8.00
Huff-2nd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Huff-3rd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Huff-4th 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Huff-Indy 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Custom 0.00 1.75 0.00 2.80 3.90 5.25 6.00 7.10
Appendix D
Composite CN Calculations
Skimmer Sediment Basin Calculations
Nomograph for Skimmer Orifice Size
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Composite "CN" Calculations for Drainage Area to Temp. Skimmer_
Sediment Trap
Land Use Area % Total Land Runoff Weighted Runoff
(ac) Area Coefficient Coefficient
Graded (DISTURBED) 1.79 0.27 0.45 0.12
Pavement 0.53 0.08 0.95 0.08
Wooded (includes area 4.3 0.65 0.25 0.16
developed as commercial
but which has existing
storm water detention)
6.62 1.00 0.36
Tc to TSST
Length of overland flow feet : 693
Mannin 's "n" surface: 0.050
Average watershed slo : 0.026
Constant alpha: 4.805
Constant "m": 1.667
Rational Coefficient: 0.50
Trial Time of
Duration Rainfall
Intensity Calculated Time of
Concentration
Tr (minutes) I (inches/hour) T, (minutes)
5 7.26 14.04
10 5.80 15.36
15 4 89 16.45
30 3.55 18.70
60 2.31 22.20
.150 1.36 27.44
180 0.98 31.29
360 0.59 38.33
720 0.35 47.23
1440, 0.20 59.08
Select the rainfall intensity that corresponds to the
longest Trial Time of Duration that is equal to or less
than the calculated Time of Concentration
Total Drainage area = 6.62 acres
Disturbed Area = 1.79 acres
Calculated Tc = 16.45 min. Use TC = 15 min.
Ilo = 4.89
The governing equation is Q = C*I*A.
Qio = (0.36)(4.89)(6.62) =11.65 cfs.
Minimum storage required for the temporary skimmer sediment basin
= (1800cFac)(1.79ac) = 3222, cubic feet.
Minimum surface area at spillway
= (325 sf/cfs of runoff flow)(11.65 cfs) = 3786 sf
Min design satisfied by rectangular area of 44' x 88' at spillway, 2 feet deep with
1' cleanout.
Surface area provided at spillway is 3872 sf.
Storage provided = 3872 cubic feet
Practice Standards and Specifications
SKIMMER ORIFICE DIAMETER
In order to streamline the orifice sizing procedure, Figure 6.64b, may be
used. This design chart assumes the designer knows or has determined the
sedimentation basin's water storage volume in cubic feet and the desired
dewatering time (in days) for the basin under consideration. The skimmer
orifice size (in inches) can be read by entering Figure 6.64b from the x-axis
with the basin's water storage volume (in cubic feet), moving vertically to the
line that represents the basin's desired dewatering time (in days), then moving
to the left to the y-axis.
Figure 6.64b Skimmer
orifice diameter as a function
of the basin volume and
basin dewatering time.
0.25
.5
2
3
t E?, 5 -- 4 0.25 day -?- 0.5 day I day
Ish drs t? ? R?Q to
6e?wo - 2 days -?E- 3 days - -Ndays
. 5
d,V<. -+- days 10 days
1000 10000 100000 1000000
DESIGN EXAMPLE
Example: The design professional in charge of designing the sedimentation
basin for a 10-acre construction site desires to use a skimmer to control
dewatering of a sedimentation basin. The sedimentation basin fora 10-acre
disturbed area requires a water storage volume of 18,000 cubic feet. The
desired dewatering time is 1-3 days.
Solution: Using the water storage volume of 18,000 cubic feet and the 1-3
day dewatering time on Figure 6.64b, a 2-inch orifice diameter is required.
(Adapted from Proper Sizing of the Control Orifice for the Faircloth Skimmer.
Pennsylvania State University Department of Agricultural and Biological
Engineering Fact Sheet #252.)
Rev. 6/06 6.64.3
Appendix E
Curb Inlets Calculation Table
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station
REV C
MAY, 2008
Charlotte Office SPREAD CALCULATIONS
JOB NO.: 16022001 BY: TBM CURB INLET IN SUMP CONDITION
F
DATE: 05/14/08 T.L. ee

REVISED: :
P.M..
I
I
RAINFALL INTENSITY = 4.00 1N/HR (ALLOWABLE SPREAD FOR STANDARE 2'-6" CURB AND GUTTER = 8 FEET)
DRAINAGE RUNOFF SURFACE "Q" SLOPE SINGLE INLET DOUBLE INLET INDICATE

INLET # AREA
A (acres) COEFF.
C SUB.
QS (cfS) BYPASS
Qh WS) TOTAL
QT WS) TRANS,'
ST (ft/ft) SPREAD
? T (ft) DEPTH
D (ft) SPREAD
T (ft) DEPTH
D (ft) "SINGLE" OR
"DOUBLE"
SAMPLE CALCULATION
TEST 1.00 0.6 2.40 0.00 2.40 ' 0.03125 7.1 0.22 5.6 0.18 DOUBLE
PROJECT CALCULATIONS
CI #1-2 0.53 0.95 2.03 0.00 2.03 0.03125 6.4 0.20 5.0 0.16 SI ?GI E-
P:\16\16022\001\6-CIVIL NOTES AND CALCULATIONS\Reports\Storm Drainage Detention E&C Plan REV C MAY 2008\working docs\APPENDIX E - REV C\[SPREAD CALCULATIONS - CURB INLET -
SUMP.xls]Sheetl
Appendix F
Nomographs for Time of Concentration
Flowrate Calculations
Storm Drainage Piping and Culvert Reports
(Autodesk Land Desktop Civil Design)
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Km

boo
700
TJ
X
600
0

Soo 0JD4
_
300 as

- C (BARE PAM 9011,

W ii
200 OA2 Oz0
• W W
x
030 (POOR GRASS)
w ISO OK OAS 0.40 (AV. GRASS)
o MOM 0.50
'
0800DENSEORAV
4 .. 100 w 0A6 goo
90
00 O L

TO Q10 '
60
5O '.
40
30
20
OVERI.A CHANNELIZED
40- -4
Rk'Ina t GAT • W • `text end
w4d:
X05 ?(r '0 -3 .
0.013 .6 br
25 2.5
0110
0.15
0.20
0ao
0.40
Q.?
1.00
w rs0
IL 2.00
x.00
H 4.00
.= IJrnin
20 2

1 _
fj IS 1.5
z
z
0

-to Lo

V
9 0!
a
k
o 0.11
W

0.'
of
s
s 0.5
4
NOMOGRAPH FOR
TIME OF CONCENTRATION
3 `0.3 .
Figure 3.1
3-13
. t
Soume: Austin Texas Drainage Manual
?...?----.-- OYERLA CHANNEOZED
---40-- -?-----
©'YeId ca+J:_
ate 30 3
800 0.016
700 o02(PYµTa
600 25 2.5
OAS
0.04
O.OS
4
? - 20 2
s y 0.10
OAI Y 0.15
0
2
300 :c W 0.10
(BARE WMD 30 Z
_ V .
0
?
W o
O
0
02 010 2 1.00
?- 200
lug . r.s0
0.30.(1'OOft GRASS) c 3
00

ISO
z
3
0.40(A*v GRASS) .
4.00
•-
z

0 0.80 s, 5.00 z
°-
10.00
o F 0 80(OENSE GRABS a 20
00 i •
10 IA
. q0 OA6 Loo . w ,
90
00 9 0.9

70 OQ10 0
8 0.6
i0 i

7 0y
30
40
4 0.4
0
3
5 0.5

4 -04
NOMOGRAPH FOR
TIME OF. CONCENTRATION
3 0.3

Firm 3-1 Soule: Austin Texas Drainsas Msnuat
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station
REV C
MAY, 2008
Post-Develovment Runoff Flow to Storm System Inlets
Structure receiving flow Area
(ac) C Tc
(min) I
(in/hr) Q
(cfs)
C1#1-2 0.534 0.95 5 7.26 3.68
FES#3-2 (Q25) 4.414 0.25 30 4.20 4.63
Basin Riser (Qlo) Max flow rate from pond report output 14.51
TEXLAND BLVD. UNATTENDED FUEL STATION
REV C
LINE 1
Manning Pipe Calculator
Given Input Data:
Shape ............................................ Circular
Solving for ................................... Depth of Flow
Diameter ....................................... 1.5000 ft
Flowrate ....................................... 3.6800 cfs
Slope ............................................ 0.0050 ft/ft
Manning's n .................................. 0.0150
Computed Results:
Depth ............................................ 0.8128 ft
Area ............................................... 1.767112
Wetted Area ................................. 0.9776 ft2
Wetted Perimeter ......................... 2.4819 ft
Perimeter ...................................... 4.7124 ft
Velocity ........................................ 3.7642 fps
Hydraulic Radius ......................... 0.3939 ft
Percent Full .................................. 54.1852%
Full flow Flowrate ........................ 6.4373 cfs
Full flow velocity ......................... 3.6428 fps
Critical Information
Critical depth ................................ 0.7328 ft
Critical slope ................................ 0.0071 ft/ft
Critical velocity ............................ 4.2900 fps
Critical area .................................. 0.8578 ft2
Critical perimeter ......................... 2.3218 ft
Critical hydraulic radius ............... 0.3695 ft
Critical top width ......................... 1.4996 ft
Specific energy ............................. 1.0329 ft
Minimum energy .......................... 1.0992 ft
Froude number ............................. 0.8221
Flow condition ............................. Subcritical
TEXLAND BLVD. UNATTENDED FUEL STATION
REV C
LINE 3 - CULVERT
Culvert Calculator
All calculator output should be verified prior to design use
Entered Data:
Shape ............................................ Circular
Number of Barrels ........................ 1
Solving for ................................... Headwater
Chart Number ............................... 1
Scale Number ............................... 3
Chart Description ......................... CONCRETE PIPE CULVERT; NO BEVELED
RING ENTRANCE
Scale Decsription ......................... GROOVE END ENTRANCE, PIPE
PROJECTING FROM FILL
Overtopping ................................. Off
Flowrate ....................................... 4.6300 cfs
Manning's n .................................. 0.0130
Roadway Elevation ...................... 625.1500 ft
Inlet Elevation .............................. 621.5000 ft
Outlet Elevation ........................... 619.2000 ft
Diameter ....................................... 1.5000 ft
Length .......................................... 84.0000 ft
Entrance Loss ............................... 0.0000
Tailwater ...................................... 0.1000 ft
Computed Results:
Headwater .................................... 622.6712 ft Inlet Control
Slope ............................................ 0.0274 ft/ft
Velocity ........................................ 8.3275 fps
TEXLAND BLVD. UNATTENDED FUEL STATION
REV C
LINE 5 - OUTLET FROM DETENTION - Qio
Manning Pipe Calculator
Given Input Data:
Shape ............................................ Circular
Solving for ................................... Depth of Flow
Diameter ....................................... 2.5000 ft
Flowrate ....................................... 14.5100 cfs
Slope ............................................ 0.0036 ft/ft
Manning's n .................................. 0.0150
Computed Results:
Depth ............................................ 1.5123 ft
Area .............................................. 4.9087 ft2
Wetted Area ................................. 3.1054 ft2
Wetted Perimeter ......................... 4.4556 ft
Perimeter ...................................... 7.8540 ft
velocity ........................................ 4.6725 fps
Hydraulic Radius ......................... 0.6970 ft
Percent Full .................................. 60.4939%
Full flow Flowrate ........................ 21.3289 cfs
Full flow velocity ......................... 4.3451 fps
Critical Information
Critical depth ................................ 1.2837 ft
Critical slope ................................ 0.0061 ft/ft
Critical velocity ............................ 5.7158 fps
Critical area .................................. 2.5386 ft2
Critical perimeter ......................... 3.9944 ft
Critical hydraulic radius ............... 0.6355 ft
Critical top width ......................... 2.5000 ft
Specific energy ............................. 1.8492 ft
Minimum energy .......................... 1.9255 ft
Froude number ............................. 0.7401
Flow condition ............................. Subcritical
Appendix G
Nomograph for Time of Concentration
Channel Runoff Calculations
Channel Report
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
C??Hnne?'c?.?c??
1000 DAI 3q5
90o O.Oo1(Q .
s00 FO.016
TOO 0.02 (PVmTJ
600
OAS
S00 _-0A4
OAS
400 sc

OAI

-
-
C Q10
(BATE WKED 90
Z
? W

' ~
I.J 0
02 010
200 W . _
i i 0.30 (POOR GRASS) F
z 150 OA3 0.40(AV. GRASS)
0 0.04 0.50

y h 0.80(DENSE GRASS
100
1
00
39 !0
.
J s0
TO a10
60
30
40
30
20
y 0:10
0.1
= 0.?t-
z 1.00
W 1.50
CL 2.00
Q 3.00
4.00
5.00
10.00
n 20.00
is-- ? na•?1
NOMOGRAPH FOR
TIME OF CONCENTRATION

CHANNEI.IZED
0 •-4-
30 3
25 [2-5
20 1-- 2

1
W 15 1.5
r-

z
Z
O

F- 10 1
0
z .

9 0.9
1
V
W

o 0.6
W
I
?_ T LOY
6 06
5 F_ 0.5
4 1- 0.4
3 L.- 0.3
Fc"tgill'C 3-1 Soume: Austin Texas Drainage Manual
3-13
Post-Development Runoff Flow to Channel
Structure receiving flow Area C Tc I Q
(ac) (min) (in/hr) (cfs)
Channel 0.45 0.3 5 7.26 0.98
Channel l.txt
channel calculator
Given Input Data:
shape .......................
solving for .....................
Flowrate ........................
slope ........................
Manning's n .....................
Height .. . .....................
Bottom width ....................
Left slope ......................
Right slope .....................
computed Results:
De th ...........................
velocity .. .......... .........
Full Flowrate ...................
Flow area ...
Flow perimeter ....... .........
Hydraulic radius ................
Top width ...............
Area ..........
Perimeter .......................
Percent full .............:......
Trapezoidal
Depth of Flow
0.9800 cfs
0.0150 ft/ft
0.0200
1.0000 ft
1.0000 ft
0.3333 ft/ft (v/H)
0.3333 ft/ft (v/H)
0.2236 ft
2.6230 fps
24.3208 cfs
0.3736 ft2
2.4143 ft
0.1548 ft
2.3418 ft
4.0003 ft2
7.3251 ft
22.3608 %
Page l
Appendix H
Outlet Protection Sizing
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
CharlotteOffice
JOB NO.: 16022001 BY: TBM IPRAP APRON DESIGN
-fCdAl
DATE: 09/25/07 T.L.:
REVISED: P.M.: PROJECT: TEXLAND BLVD.
FES 1-1
3
outlet w CIO e L'a
pig
diameter (00)
La --?t
{iE
3
CL
as'
t?
f
1
U10
V=
Do
La =
W=
dw _
dmax =
H=
5.40 cfs
4.55 fps
1.5 ft
loft
11.5 ft
0.33 ft
0.50 ft
1.00 ft
18 in
3.96 in
5.94 in
12 in
'... $ 1 ..
5( la>0 200 Soo 1000
Discharge (01sec)
dmax = 1.5*(d50)
D. = Pipe Diameter
W=Do+La ,Pe h
H = minimum4ieigM of rip rap channel = 2/3 * Do
Use:
d50 = 41'
dmex = 6.0"
H=12"
Charlotte Office
JOB NO.: 16022001 BY: TBM IPRAP APRON DESIGN
DATE: 09/25/07 T.L.:
REVISED: P.M.: PROJECT: TEXLAND BLVD.
FES 3-1
o ? !1
Ouclei W Do + to # L
pig
tliameie {Qyi a
O.SDO
\ 70 h??91 ..i 'y? i 4 E t-- ij ldxl#i¢F 'S'; 4? * K•
,? S - a j ( 3 E E s
E 1 I }37({{y i - f a 4 F
so
E 4 F' Vii' 'r' Ii. rt , t.. [ { s t?< {r ?( .
4i I
FyE N t F
,? r r
if ?{ # i P 3: ? c 1 f 't4 11 `?. t
t i '. i ; 1 a'a :t I 1 i i 3
20
jai"
44
€ 1 ?( ?- (( ?' r#
( ( 1 A
1 r s a -, 1 F a {{ cs 1 4 .. A F F
c.s 4' Vg's"' -a
A 14
it t i ti t 4 € tpy
4_ E 1 # t E t t Y f t 4, t r ii T t r i 14}
! « ! f iE! ? n 1. `![ 1 ' 1. 1 ! i._ 4 ,j i (..
111( t 3 €, € i 71.. .. f ! t€ 1 7itj' i E 1 €.
1111 r !x e € :lei L
, d3
M -S
,
3 s 10 20' s0 100 200 5o0 1000
Discharge (Olsec)
Q10 = 3.98 cfs dmax = 1.5*(d50)
V = 4.03 fps Do = Pipe Diameter
Do= 1.25 ft 15 in W=Do+La
La = loft H = minimum height of rip rap channel = 2/3 * Do
W = 11.25 ft Use:
d50 = 0.25 ft 3.00 in d50 = 3"
dmax = 0.38 ft 4.50 in dmax = 4.5"
H= 0.83 ft 10 in H=10"
Charlotte Office
JOB NO.: 16022001 BY: TBM IPRAP APRON DESIGN
DATE: 09/25/07 T.L.:
REVISED: P.M.: PROJECT: TEXLAND BLVD.
FES 5-1
outee4 w oa .
pig [
diarnew (Do) ?E
00
R
R ?
t 0Y
1
1 _4
_O
3
i
A
2
CL
v.
1
Uio =
V=
Do
La =
W=
dr>o _
dmax =
H=
0.00 cfs
0 fps
Oft
Oft
0 ft
Oft
0.00 ft
0.00 ft
0 in
0.00 in
0.00 in
0 in
i
X 2tlf9 Soo 10019
Discharge (Aseq)
dmax = 1.5*(d5o)
Do = Pipe Diameter
W=Do+La
H = minimum height of rip rap channel = 2/3 * Do
Use:
d5o = 311
d,,, = 4.5"
H=10"
Appendix I
Bioretention Cell Suppliment
Raingarden Sizing Worksheet
Texland Blvd. Unattended Fuel Station REV C Jordan, Jones & Goulding
Storm Drainage, Detention, Erosion/Sedimentation Control Plan May, 2008
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
?pF ?,N A T f
r
NCDENR Y
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION FORM
401 CERTIFICATION APPLICATION FORM
BIORETENTION CELL SUPPLEMENT
This form must be filled out, printed and submitted.
The Required Items Checklist (Part lll) must be printed, filled out and submitted along with all of the required information.
L PROJECT INFORMATION
Project name Quarles Q-Card 816
Contact name Ron Pompey, P.E.
Phone number 704-527-4106
Date May 20, 2008
Drainage area number 1
11. DESIGN INFORMATION
Site Characteristics
Drainage area 31,799 ft2
Impervious area 29,185 ft2
Percent impervious 91.8% %
Design rainfall depth 12.0 inch
Peak Flow Calculations
Is pre/post control of the 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow required? N (Y or N)
1-yr, 24-hr runoff depth in
1-yr, 24-hr intensity in/hr
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ft3/sec
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr peak flow ft3/sec
Pre/Post 1-yr, 24-hr peak control ft3/sec
Storage Volume: Non-SR Waters
Design volume 2,731.0 ft3
Storage Volume: SR Waters
Pre-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff ft3
Post-development 1-yr, 24-hr runoff ft3
Minimum volume required 0 ft3
Volume provided ft3
Cell Dimensions
Ponding depth of water 12 inches OK
Ponding depth of water 1.00 ft
Surface area of the top of the bioretention cell 2,784.1 ftz OK
Length: 78 ft OK
Width: 38 ft OK
-or- Radius ft
Soils Report Summary
Drawdown time, ponded volume 8 hr OK
Drawdown time, to 24 inches below surface 6.4 hr OK
Drawdown time, total: 14.4 hr
In-situ soil:
Soil permeability 1.00 in/hr OK
Planting media soil:
Soil permeability 1.00 in/hr OK
Soil composition
% Sand (by weight) 85% OK
% Fines (by weight) 12% OK
Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.2 Parts I and II. Design Summary, Page 1 of 3
Permit Number:
(to be provided by DWQ)
% Organic (by weight)
Phosphorus Index (P-Index)
Basin Elevations
Temporary pool elevation
Planting elevation (top of the mulch)
Bottom of the cell
Planting depth
Depth of mulch
SHWT elevation
Are underdrains being installed?
3% OK
Total: 100%
30 (unitless) OK
How many clean out pipes are being installed?
What factor of safety is used for sizing the underdrains? (See
BMP Manual Section 12.3.6)
Additional distance between the bottom of the planting media and
the bottom of the cell to account for underdrains
Bottom of the cell required
Distance from bottom to SHWT
Type of bioretention cell (answer "Y" to only one of the two
following questions):
Is this a grassed cell?
Is this a cell with trees/shrubs?
Planting Plan
Number of tree species
Number of shrub species
Number of herbaceous groundcover species
Additional Information
Does volume in excess of the design volume bypass the
bioretention cell?
Does volume in excess of the design volume flow evenly
distributed through a vegetated filter?
What is the length of the vegetated filter?
Does the design use a level spreader to evenly distribute flow?
Is the BMP located at least 30 feet from surface waters (50 feet if
SA waters)?
Is the BMP localed at least 100 feet from water supply wells?
Are the vegetated side slopes equal to or less than 3:1?
Is the BMP located in a recorded drainage easement with a
recorded access easement to a public Right of Way (ROW)?
Inlet velocity (from treatment system)
Is the area surrounding the cell likely to undergo development in
the future?
Are the slopes draining to the bioretention cell greater than 20%?
Is the drainage area permanently stabilized?
Pretreatment Used
(Indicate Type Used with an "X" in the shaded cell)
Gravel and grass
(8'inches gravel followed by 3-5 It of grass)
Grassed swale
Forebay
624 fmsl
622.5 fmsl OK
620.5 fmsl
2ft
2 inches OK
615.2 fmsl OK
Y (Y or N)
3 OK
10 OK
1ft
619.5 fmsl
4.3 ft OK
Y (Y or N) OK
N (Y or N)
Y (Y or N) OK
Y (Y or N) OK
U0.J R
N (Y or N) Show how flow is evenly distributed.
Y (Y or N) OK
Y (Y or N) OK
Y (Y or N) OK
Y (Y or N) OK
0.72 ft/sec OK
N (Y or N) OK
N (Y or N) OK
Y (Y or N) OK
X
OK
Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.2 Parts I and II. Design Summary, Page 2 of 3
Permit No:
(to be assigned by DWO)
III. REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate the page or plan sheet numbers where the supporting documentation can be found. An incomplete submittal package will
result in a request for additional information. This will delay final review and approval of the project Initial in the space provided to
indicate the following design requirements have been met. If the applicant has designated an agent, the agent may initial below. If a
requirement has not been met, attach justification.
Pagel Plan
Initials Sheet No.
4 OF 16, 1. Plans (1" - 50' or larger) of the entire site showing:
7 OF 16 Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Delineated drainage basins (include Rational C coefficient per basin),
Cell dimensions,
Pretreatment system,
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Recorded drainage easement and public right of way (ROW),
Clean out pipe locations,
Overflow device, and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
7W 16 OF 16 2. Plan details (1" = 30' or larger) for the bioretention cell showing:
Cell dimensions
Pretreatment system,
High flow bypass system,
Maintenance access,
Recorded drainage easement and public right of way (ROW),
Design at ultimate build-out,
Off-site drainage (if applicable),
Clean out pipe locations,
- Overflow device, and
Boundaries of drainage easement.
7DA 16 OF 16 3. Section view of the bioretention cell (1" = 20' or larger) showing:
Side slopes, 3:1 or lower
Underdrain system (if applicable), and
Bioretention cell layers [ground level and slope, pre-treatment, ponding depth, mulch depth, fill media
depth, washed sand, filter fabric (or choking stone if applicable), #57 stone, underdrains (if applicable),
SHWT level(s), and overflow structure]
NA 4. A soils report that is based upon an actual field investigation, soil borings, and infiltration tests. The
results of the soils report must be verified in the field by DWQ, by completing & submitting the soils
investigation request form. County soil maps are not an acceptable source of soils information. All
elevations shall be in feet mean sea level (fmsl). Results of soils tests of both the planting soil and the in
situ soil must include:
Soil permeability,
Soil composition (% sand, %fines, %organic), and
P-index.
16 OF 16 5. A detailed planting plan (1" = 20' or larger) prepared by a qualified individual showing:
A variety of suitable species,
Sizes, spacing and locations of plantings,
Total quantity of each type of plant specified,
A planting detail,
The source nursery for the plants, and
Fertilizer and watering requirements to establish vegetation.
ethoC. 6. An assurance that the installed system will meet design specifications upon initial operation once the
project is complete and the entire drainage area is stabilized.
16 OF 16 7. A construction sequence that shows how the bioretention cell will be protected from sediment until the
entire drainage area is stabilized.
R Q? Included in 8. The supporting calculations (including underdrain calculations, if applicable).
Report
Q r mt 9. A copy of the signed and notarized inspection and maintenance (I&M) agreement.
NA 10. A copy of the deed restriction.
Form SW401-Bioretention-Rev.2 Part III, Page 3 of 3
Raingarden Sizing
1. Runoff Volume Calculations
(NCDENR Stormwater BMP Manual, 3.3.1., "Simple Method" - Schueler, 1987)
Calculate Runoff coefficient R„
Formula:
Rv=0.05+0.9(IA)
Where:
IA = Impervious fraction (Impervious portion of drainage area/drainage area)
Drainage Area = 0.73 acres
Impervious Area = 0.67 acres
IA = 1.09
Rv = 1.03
Calculate volume of runoff
Formula:
V=3630*RD*Rv *A
Where:
V = Volume of runoff to be controlled (ft)
RD = Design storm depth (in)
A = Watershed area (ac)
RD = 1 inch
A = 0.73 acres
V = 2730.98 ft3
2. Entrance Weir Length
(Brater and King, 1976)
Minimum weir length perpendicular to flow calculated with a 1" depth of water
Formula:
Q = CL(H)1.5
Where:
Q = Peak storm for 1" - 6 hour storm (ft3/s) from hydrology software
C = Broad crested weir coefficient (assume 2.5 for 1" depth)
L = Length of weir perpendicular to flow (ft)
H = Head above weir crest (ft) (use 1" depth)
Q = 1.07 (ft3/s)
C = 2.50
H = 1.00 inch
L = 17.79 ft minimum width
Velocity of stormwater:
Formula:
V= Q/A
Q= 1.07 (ft3/s)
A= 1.48 ft2
V = 0.72 (ft/s)
3. Determine Size of Bioretention Pond
According to Section 12.3.3. of the NCDENR Stormwater BMP Manual, the cell must hold the first inch of
runoff from the entire area. The surface area required is equal to the required treatment volume divided
by the ponding depth.
d = 12 inches
A = 2730.98 ft2
4. Size Underdrain System
(NCDENR Stormwater BMP Manual, 5.7)
Determine flow rate throuah soil media
Darcy's Equation: Q = 2.32e-5 * k * A * (H / L)
Where:
Q = Flow (Rate of Draw) through Bioretention Soil (ft%)
k = Hydraulic Conductivity of soil (in./hr.)
A = Surface Area of Bio-Retention Area (fe)
H = Height of Water above Drainage Pipe (Underdrain)
L = Thickness of Soil Bed
k = 1.0 in./hr.
H = 3.0 ft
L = 2.0 ft
Q = 0.0950 cfs
Determine pipe diameter to handle flow with a safety factor of 10:
(Bioretention Design Worksheet, Bill Hunt, NCSU)
Formula: Where:
D= 16'[(Q-n) / SI.1](31) D = Diameter of single pipe (in.)
Q = Design flow (ft3/s)
n = roughness factor
S = slope
Safety Factor = 10
n = 0.011
S = 0.50%
D = 7.81 inches
See Table 5-1 of NCDENR Stormwater BMP Manual to determine size and number of pipes
For 7.81 inches use 2-6" pipes
5. Time to draw water down to 2 feet below surface:
(Bioretention Design Worksheet, Bill Hunt, NCSU)
Time to Drawdown water from Inundation to Saturation at Surface:
Volume of water above surface equals surface area times depth (ft)
V, = 2730.98 ft3
Time to remove V1 at flowrate Q hr
T, = 8.0 hr
Time to draw down to 2.0 feet below surface:
Assume 40% Porosity
Volume = Area x 2'x 0.40
V2 = 2184.78 ft3
Time to remove V2 at flowrate Q (hr)
T2 = 6.4
Total time to draw to 2.0 feet below surface:
TT = 14.4 hr
Jordan, Jones & Goulding
9101 Southern Pine Boulevard • Suite 160
Charlotte, NC 28273
T 704.527.4106 F 704.527.4108
www.jjg.com
t[9@[95W191
MAY 2 7 2008
DENR - WATEk WN?TY
Y?NDS AN ) STOWdWATER WMW
Report of Subsurface Exploration
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816
11219 Texland Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina
TrigonIKleinfelder, Inc. Project No. 021-08-001
May 21, 2008
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING EVALUATION
FOR
QUARLES PETROLEUM Q-CARD SITE No. 816
11219 TEXLAND BOULEVARD
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared For:
Quarles Petroleum
1701 Fall Hill Avenue, Suite 300
Fredericksburg, Virginia 22401
Performed By:
TRIGONIKLEINFELDER, INC.
6200 Harris Technology Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28269
[phone]
TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. Project No. 021-08-001
Mav 21. 2008
Mr. Craig McBride
Quarles Petroleum
1701 Fall Hill Avenue, Suite 300
Fredericksburg, Virainia 22401
Reference: Report of Subsurface Exploration, Geotechnical Evaluation, and
Groundwater Study
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Tex-land Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina
TrigonIKlein felder, Inc. Project No. 021-08-001
Dear Mr. McBride:
This report presents the results of the subsurface exploration, geotechnical evaluation. and groundwater
study for the referenced project. In general. the site can be developed for planned pavement, underground
storage tank(s), and storm?iater system; however. additional expense should be anticipated due to the
encountered soil, groundwater, and rock conditions.
The subsurface conditions include highly plastic silt and clay soils at the ground surface overlying shallow
rock. Difficult rock excavation methods should be anticipated to remove the weathered rock and bedrock at
the underground storage tank site.
Stormwater accumulates near the middle of the site due to existing ground surface topography. Piezoineter
measurements at the rain garden bioretention pond indicate shallow groundwater infiltrates through the
surficial soils and into the underlying rock with sufficient speed to provide the required 2-foot separation
between the pond bottom and the seasonal high groundwater level.
TrigonjKleinfelder. Inc. (TRIGONN) appreciates haying had the opportunity to assist you during this phase of
the project. The recommendations are presented on the basis of our understanding of the project as
described herein and through the application of generally accepted soil. groundwater, and foundation
engineering practices. No other warranties, expressed or implied, are made or offered. Should there be any
changes in the scope of the project, as stated herein. we should be notified so that we may review these
changes and modifi our recommendations. if required.
L1r. Crag SfcBrtde. Quarles Petroleum Afal "J. '008
Ouarle, tr,51 um _-C ); k E ; 9 :and Bouielar?
i ar.!orte. : :: aroima - oa ; rutact 08-OGi
We recommend that the Project Geotechnical Engineer be provided the opportunit- to revle?v the final
design and specifications to determine that the recommendations presented herein have been properly
interpreted and applied.
Respectful) submitted.
TRIGO\IKLEPNFE.is??DIII! `f?
Mark H. TerreltP.F;
Senior GeotechrfV !%. F rr` . ??
Re4istered North i?- ?;'!++ff?dT. ?•;'•l
MHTLJM: mht
Attachments
Lee J. McGui ess. P.E.
EnaineerinQ Manager
.s: charlotte branch 0- 1O+ geotech 200x protects 00 / texland site - ouarles petroleum. reporr 0!!r dre

Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................1
3.0 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION ..................................................................................................2
3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION ................................................................................................... 2
3.2 LABORATORY TESTING ..............................................................................................3
3.3 DOCUMENT REVIEW .................................................................................................... 3
4.0 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................4
4.1 SITE CONDITIONS ..........................................................................................................4
4.2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................4
4.3 GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................5
4.4 LABORATORY RESULTS .............................................................................................7
4.5 SOIL SURVEY .................................................................................................................. 7
4.6 SITE GEOLOGY ...............................................................................................................7
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................8
5.1 GENERAL .........................................................................................................................8
5.2 STORMWATER SYSTEM PONDS AND GROUNDWATER STUDY ......................9
5.3 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK EXCAVATION ..............................................10
5.4 FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT SUPPORT .......................................................11
5.5 SITE PREPARATION ....................................................................................................11
5.6 EXCAVATION ...............................................................................................................14
5.7 FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT ........................................................................14
5.8 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING ...............................................................................15
Appendix
TRIGONIKLEINFELDER, INC. Page i
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a subsurface exploration, and geotechnical engineering and groundwater
evaluation completed by TrigonIKleinfelder, Inc. (TRIGON) for the planned Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site
No. 816 automated fueling facility at 11219 Texland Boulevard, in Charlotte, North Carolina. This work
was authorized by Mr. Craig McBride of Quarles Petroleum, Inc. of Fredericksburg, Virginia via signed
acceptance of/and was completed in general accordance with our Proposal No. 021-08-012-P dated March
24, 2008. The purpose of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering and groundwater
evaluation was to provide recommendations for the design and construction of pavements, underground
storage tank excavations, general earthwork, site preparation, and stormwater management system pond
recommendations.
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The planned project is located just east of Interstate 77 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North
Carolina, with north frontage on Westinghouse Boulevard. Please refer to the Site Vicinity Map Drawing
No. 021-08-001-1. The west half of the site is located under power lines in a Duke Energy easement. A large
aggregate quarry is located south of the
project. The new construction will
consist of a 24-hour automated fueling
station and driveway for commercial
vehicles on a ±1.6-acre site that
includes ±3/4-acre on the adjacent Duke
Energy right-of-way. Located
approximately 1/4-mile east of I-77, the
project includes a stormwater management detention pond and a bioretention rain garden.
Based on the provided plans, the grades at the site will be raised approximately 2 to 5 feet. Please refer to
the Site Ground Surface Topographic Map Drawing No. 021-08-001-2. Underground storage tanks (UST)
will be placed under the fuel islands. The plans indicate the bottom of the UST excavation will be
approximately 16 feet below pavement grade. No canopy or building is planned. We anticipate a
combination of flexible and rigid pavements will be used at the site.
TRIGONI KLEINEELDER, INC. Page I
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
3.0 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION
3.1 FIELD EXPLORATION
Prior to drilling, an engineer visited the site to perform a site reconnaissance to locate the borings in the field
based on the provided plans and using existing landmarks as references. The surface features of the site,
overhead utilities, and existing silt fence were observed with respect to drilling access and site features that
may affect development and construction.
The subsurface exploration included the completion of 5 soil test borings (B-1, B-2A, B-2B, B-3 and B-4) at
the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location Plan Drawing No. 021-08-001-3, included in the
Appendix. A temporary piezometer, P-1, was installed at boring location B-1 to evaluate the subsurface soil
and groundwater conditions at the rain garden. At the UST location, boring B-2A was terminated in auger
refusal conditions at 5 feet. Boring B-2B was offset approximately 15 feet from location B-2A where auger
refusal also terminated the boring. The boring locations were established in the field by personnel from
TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. using the existing boundaries and surface water as reference. Limited hand clearing
was performed to access boring locations.
The borings were advanced to depths ranging from 5.0 to 9.3 feet below the ground surface using
continuous-flight, hollow-stem augers. Standard Penetration Tests were performed at 2.5 foot intervals to a
depth of 10 feet and at 5 foot intervals thereafter to the depths explored in general accordance with ASTM
D 1586. Standard Penetration Test data (SPT N-values) were used to estimate the in situ soil strength and
density. Soil samples were obtained at each test interval.
Groundwater measurements were performed at the termination of drilling. The groundwater level was
measured in the piezometer 10 times from April 3 to May 9, 2008. Groundwater levels at the time of drilling
are indicated on the respective Test Boring Record. Piezometer groundwater level readings are presented
later in this report in Section 4.3.
TRIGONI KLEINFELDER, INC. Page 2
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum Map 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
Auger refusal occurred at depths between 5.0 and 9.3 feet in all five borings. Auger refusal is defined as
negligible penetration of the augers under the full weight and down pressure of the drill rig. Auger refusal
can occur on rock lenses, boulders or on top of continuous bedrock. Based on the subsurface conditions at
the site as indicated by our borings and our experience in the area, it is probable that auger refusal occurred
on weathered rock. Core sampling of the refusal materials to determine their character and continuity was
beyond the scope of services of this project.
4.3 GROUNDWATER
No groundwater was observed in any of the borings
performed for this project during drilling operations. A
temporary piezometer, P-1, was installed at borehole B-1 to
measure groundwater levels. The 11/2-Inch diameter, slotted
PVC pipe was placed in the borehole, the borehole annular
space was backfilled with No. 20-30 filter sand, bentonite
pellets were used to produce an approximately 16-inch seal
below the ground surface, and the PVC pipe was finished
with a cap approximately 12 inches above the ground
surface. Please refer to the embedded pictures of the
piezometer.
A total of 10 groundwater measurements at P-1, were taken
between April 3 and May 9, 2008. The piezometer total
length from top of casing is 10 feet and '/a inch. The tape
measure was dampened, powder was applied to the damp
tape, and the measurement was recorded where
groundwater washed the powder off the tape.
A summary of the groundwater measurements and rainfall
data is presented in the following Table 1.
TKIGONI KLEINFELDER, INC. Page 5
•
•
•
•
s
•
s
s
•
•
•
s
s
•
•
•
s
s
•
s
•
s
s
s
•
•
•
s
s
•
•
•
s
•
•
•
s
•
•
s
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina
May 21, 2008
Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
Table 1: Groundwater Level Measurements at Piezometer P-1 and Rainfall Data

Date Estimated
Surface Water Depth
(inches) Groundwater Depth from
Top of Casing
(inches) Measurable
Rainfall
(inches)
March 29, 2008 - - 0.01
March 31, 2008 - - 0.14
April 1, 2008 - - 0.07
April 3, 2008 <1 1 0.36
April 4, 2008 - - 0.80
April 5, 2008 - - 0.33
April 6, 2008 6 11/2 0.02
April 8, 2008 3 5 0.00
April 11, 2008 0 13'/2 0.18
April 12, 2008 - - 0.08
April 13, 2008 1 121/2 0.04
April 14, 2008 - - 0.05
April 17, 2008 0 7 0.00
April 20, 2008 - - 0.01
April 26, 2008 0 11/2 0.00
April 27, 2008 - - 0.58
April 28, 2008 - - 0.84
April 29, 2008 6 101/2 0.00
May 1, 2008 1 24 0.00
May 5, 2008 0 7 0.00
May 9, 2008 0 1 0.00
ivoie: Rainfall data source is Charlotte-Douglas International Airport (CDIA), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
Automated Surface Observation System (ASOS) via Weather Underground, Inc. internet website.
In general, piezometer readings where scheduled to take advantage of groundwater fluctuations induced by
rainfall events. A graphical representation of the piezometer readings, groundwater levels, rainfall data,
ground surface, and rain garden is presented on Groundwater and Rainfall Monitoring Drawing No. 021-08-
001-5 in the Appendix. Piezometer readings may have been taken before, during or after rain events.
Surface water depth estimates roughly reflect local stormwater runoff near the piezometer and should not be
construed as indicative of a particular pattern. Rainfall data is not listed in Table 1 for dates when there was
no recorded rain at the CDIA ASOS.
TRIGONIKLE/NFELDER, INC.
Page 6
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
4.4 LABORATORY RESULTS
The results of our laboratory tests are summarized below:
Boring Depth
(feet) Moisture
Content Fines
Content Liquid
Limit Plasticity
Index USCS
Classification
B-1 2 31 60 - - CL
B-1 4 16 34 - - SM
B-2A 4 8 21 - - SP-SM
4.5 SOIL SURVEY
The following information is presented based on a review of the Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina, published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service Web Soil Survey 2.0
in 2007. A copy of the Soil Survey map, Drawing No. 021-08-001-4, is included in the Appendix of this
report. According to the Soil Survey of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina, Iredell fine sandy loam is the
predominant soil type on the subject site. soil series. This soil series includes Soil Map Units frB described
as eroded Iredell fine sandy loam from 0 to 6 inches overlying clay and clay loam from 6 to 36 inches with
ground surface slopes of 1% to 8%.
4.6 SITE GEOLOGY
The referenced site is located within the Charlotte Belt of the Piedmont Geologic Province. According to
the Geologic Map of the Charlotte V x 2° Quadrangle, North and South Carolina, (1988), the site is
reportedly underlain mainly by the Gabbro of Concord Plutonic Site, consisting of primarily gabbro, norite,
gabbronorite, and horneblend gabbro.
Ground elevations within the
Piedmont Province vary from
approximately 400 feet above sea
level in the east to 2,000 feet in the
west. The topography of the Geologic Belts From West to East \
® Ild Ridge It" 't B
Be ® Caroll°° S10, BeB
a Murphy
Piedmont Plateau generally consists Site Location
- Rlogs M-W, Bell R°kigh Bell
Milton Bell Fa ler° SI°le Bell
of well-rounded hills and long-rolling ®ch°elolle Bell OCo°eha Fl°I°
TRtGONIKLFtNFELDER, INC. Page 7
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
ridges with a northeast-southwest trend. This rolling topography is the result of streams flowing across and
acting on rocks of unequal hardness. The Piedmont Plateau region is underlain by older crystalline
(metamorphic and igneous) rock formations that trend northeast-southwest and vary greatly in their
resistance to weathering and erosion. The major streams generally flow across these rock structures without
regard to their northeast-southwest tending structures.
The typical residual soil profile consists of fine-grained soils (clays/silts) near the surface, where soil
weathering is more advanced, underlain by more coarse-grained soils (sandy silts/silty sands). The boundary
between soil and rock is not sharply defined. This transitional zone, termed "weathered rock," is normally
found overlying the parent bedrock. The degree of weathering is facilitated by fractures, joints, and by the
presence of less resistant rock types. Consequently, the profile of the "weathered rock" and hard rock is
quite irregular and erratic, even over short horizontal distances. Lenses and boulders or hard rock and zones
of weathered rock are often encountered within the soil mantle, well above the general bedrock level.
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 GENERAL
Our conclusions and recommendations are based on the project description outlined above and on the data
obtained from our field and laboratory testing programs. We believe the site is suitable for the proposed
development provided the recommendations presented in this report are implemented during both the design
and construction phases of the project.
When the surficial clay is removed from the rain garden site, the seasonal high groundwater level is
predicted to occur approximately 3 feet above weathered rock surface which occurs at variable depths below
the existing ground surface. We note that excavation for the underground storage tanks will require
extensive rock removal that will likely require more than conventional means and methods for soil
excavation. In addition, the near-surface clay soils encountered at the boring locations are not suitable for
pavement support, may be moisture sensitive, and will be difficult to work with during grading operations
and proofrolling. Undercutting and replacement of these soils should be anticipated in pavement areas.
TRIGON1 KLEINFELDER, INC. Page 8
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
If the proposed development location and geometry, or anticipated finished grade elevation are changed or
significantly different from those outlined above, or if subsurface conditions are encountered during
construction which differ from those indicated by our borings, we will require the opportunity to review our
recommendations in light of the new information and make any necessary changes. The borings performed
at this site represent the subsurface conditions at the location of the borings only. Due to the prevailing
geology, there can be changes in the subsurface conditions over relatively short distances that have not been
disclosed by the economically limited number of borings performed. Consequently, there may be
undisclosed subsurface conditions that may require special treatment or preparation once these conditions
are revealed during construction.
The recommendations outlined in this report should not be construed to address moisture or water
intrusion effects after construction is completed. Proper design of landscaping, surface and subsurface
water control measures are required to properly address these issues.
5.2 STORMWATER SYSTEM PONDS AND GROUNDWATER STUDY
The planned stormwater management system includes a bioretention pond (rain garden), a detention
pond, and ancillary structures, pipes, and outfalls. Our groundwater study was based on our review of the
project plans, discussions with Ms. Annette Lucas of North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources and the NCDENR Stormwater BMP Manual, Chapter 12.3.2.
A primary focus of our geotechnical exploration and
groundwater study was to estimate the seasonal high
groundwater level at the proposed bioretention pond site, as it
exists within the shallow soils (unconfined surficial aquifer)
based on site-specific data. The results of our soil test borings
show that Iredell series fine sandy loam at the surface and clay
soils to a depth of approximately 3 feet are underlain by sandy
soils and weathered rock. The results of our groundwater
monitoring demonstrate that beginning about 3 feet below the
ground surface, these sandy soils are more permeable than the
Iredell clay soils above. In general, we agree with the NRCS
624.5
rain
622.5 garden fill
622
621 original
620 CLAY ground
619
618 piezometer
617
616
615 SAND
614
613
J
612
611 "5?
610 ROCK
Elevation
TR1G0N1 KLEINFELDRR, INC. Page 9
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
Soil Conservation Service that the seasonal high groundwater level for Iredell soils will occur within 18
inches of the ground surface for pre-development conditions; however, our groundwater study of site-
specific conditions measured at the P-1 piezometer demonstrates that the post-development seasonal high
groundwater level will occur approximately 6 to 7 feet below existing ground surface or Elevation ±614.
Please refer to the embedded diagram where we estimate the seasonal high groundwater level will occur
approximately where the blue color is shown in the piezometer.
Typically, low permeability clay soil strata include vertical fractures that fill with more permeable sand
or loam which allows temporarily perched stormwater at the surface to infiltrate downward. At the
project site, highly permeable sands and fractured rock underlying the clay allow for the seasonal high
groundwater to mound only a few feet above the fractured rock before a relatively rapid drawdown of the
water table. In the post-development condition, the removed clay will allow rapid groundwater
infiltration to occur in the vicinity of the rain garden where the seasonal high water level is predicted at
approximately or Elevation ±614. The rainfall and groundwater data measured at the rain garden site is
provided in Section 4.3, Table 1 of this report and is depicted on Groundwater and Rainfall Monitoring
Drawing No. 021-08-001-5 in the Appendix.
5.3 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK EXCAVATION
Based on the results of our borings, weathered rock and auger refusal were encountered at all five boring
locations below existing grade at depths ranging from approximately 3.5 to 9 feet and 5 to 9.3 feet,
respectively. Soil test boring B-2A and B-2B, located at the UST site, indicated variable, shallow rock will
be encountered during excavation. We understand the planned UST construction will include excavation
several feet into the encountered rock. The results of the borings indicate wave speed velocities in excess if
5,000 feet per second should be anticipated during excavation. Typically, rock with wave speeds in excess
of 5,000 feet per second will require blasting to remove. TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. can provide seismic
refraction testing in the field to more accurately evaluate the rock conditions and excavation potential for an
additional fee.
TRIGONIKLF,'INFF.LDF'R, INC. Page 10

• Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
•
• 5.4 FLEXIBLE AND RIGID PAVEMENT SUPPORT
• The clay/silt soils encountered at the ground surface at the boring locations are not suitable for support of
flexible or rigid pavement in their existing condition. Depending on the time of year the construction is
performed, we anticipate moisture conditioning will be required prior to compaction work to achieve the
required 95 percent of the soils' maximum dry density as determined by Standard Proctor (ASTM D698).
Proofrolling of the subgrade soils will be required to demonstrate bearing support and we anticipate weak
• soils will need to be undercut and replaced with structural fill.
• The existing undisturbed residual soils or controlled structural fill can provide adequate support for a pave-
ment structure designed for appropriate subgrade strength and traffic characteristics. Based on the results of
the laboratory tests performed, the soil types encountered in the test borings, and provided the site grading
recommendations outlined in this report are implemented, we recommend a CBR value of 4 be used in
design of the project pavements.
We emphasize that good base course drainage is absolutely essential for successful pavement performance.
Water buildup in the base course will result in premature pavement failures. The subgrade and pavement
should be graded to provide rapid runoff to either the outer limits of the paved area or to catch basins so that
standing water will not accumulate on the subgrade or pavement.
The pavements should be properly designed with respect to the high axial loads and twisting movements of
the trucks. Consideration should be given to the use of concrete pavement for the dumpster and approach
area. We recommend that the pavement at the fueling pumps and over the USTs be constructed as rigid
pavement. When traffic volume counts and wheel loading conditions become available, TrigonlKleinfelder,
Inc. can provide pavement design recommendations for an additional fee.
5.5 SITE PREPARATION
Initial site preparation should include the removal of topsoil, organic material and other soft or unsuitable
material from within the outline of the proposed structure or areas scheduled for pavement. The topsoil may
be stockpiled separately for use in future landscape activities. Note that during wet conditions, rubber-tired
equipment will mix topsoil with the underlying residual soils, resulting in stripping depths greater than the
TRIGONI KLEINFELL)FK, INC. Page 11
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
topsoil depths indicated in our borings. Based on the soil types immediately beneath the topsoil in our
borings, stripping depths as much as 24 inches can be expected low lying areas of the site with deeper
depths for stripping in isolated areas. The wooded area in the southeast part of the site was not explored.
Upon completion of the stripping operations, the exposed subgrade in areas to receive fill should be
proofrolled with a loaded dump truck or similar pneumatic-tired vehicle with a minimum loaded weight of
25 tons. Fills placed on existing slopes of 4(H):1(V) or steeper should be properly benched into the existing
soils. After excavation, the exposed subgrades in cut areas should be similarly proofrolled. Proofrolling
operations should be performed under the observation of a geotechnical engineer or his authorized
representative. The proofrolling should consist of two (2) complete passes of the exposed areas, with each
pass being in a direction perpendicular to the preceding one. Any areas which deflect, rut, or pump during
the proofrolling, and fail to be remedied with successive passes, should be undercut to suitable soils and
backfilled with compacted fill. Based on our site reconnaissance, the current poor site drainage, and
subsurface findings, we anticipate the need for some significant undercutting in the center parts of the site
depending on the moisture content of the soils.
We recommend the construction contract include unit prices for scarifying and drying wet subgrade soils.
In addition, the contract should provide an allowance for undercutting of soft or loose subgrade soils and for
replacement with controlled structural fill. Undercut volumes should be determined by field measurement.
Methods such as counting trucks should not be used for determination of undercut volume as they are less
accurate and often result in additional expense to the Owner.
Loose saturated subgrade soils disturbed as a result of construction equipment used in the stripping
operation will require removal. We caution that the subgrade soils exposed after topsoil stripping contain
sufficient silt and clay to render them both moisture sensitive and frost susceptible. Due to their moisture
sensitivity, water from storm runoff must be controlled during earthwork and construction activities by
intercepting and draining the runoff away from the site to prevent water from ponding on or saturating the
soils within the excavations or on final grades. These soils may become unstable due to the presence of
excess moisture and normal construction equipment traffic over them. Accordingly, construction traffic
should be kept to a minimum on the exposed soils to minimize the potential for creating an unstable
subgrade. We recommend that site development be performed during seasonally dry weather and
excavation/site preparation operations not be performed during or immediately following periods of high
T&GONIKLE/NFELDER, INC. Page 12
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
precipitation. Consideration should be given to constructing and maintaining designated haul/access roads
across the site to better control equipment traffic patterns and minimize disturbance to the sensitive
subgrade soils following stripping and cut/fill operations.
The existing fill material at the surface exhibits variable compaction and contains organic material. To
reduce the risk of poor pavement performance and provide adequate support of the proposed pavement,
we recommend removal of the existing fill within the planned pavement areas and replacement with a
properly compacted structural fill. Based on our boring results and visual observations, maximum
undercut depths could be as much as 2 to 3 feet below the existing ground surface. The undercuts should
also extend horizontally beyond the construction limits, extending outward 1 foot for every 1 foot of
undercut plus an additional 5 feet horizontally. After removal of the existing fill and unsuitable clay/silt
materials, the exposed subgrade soils should be observed by an experienced geotechnical engineer or his
authorized representative. Stabilization of the exposed subgrade or removal of organics may be required
for proper fill placement. Once the suitability of the subgrade has been established, fill operations can
begin. The economic feasibility of this approach must be determined by the owner.
As an alternative to complete removal and replacement of the existing fill and unsuitable clay/silt soils,
consideration could be given to partial removal and replacement. In this scenario, the existing fill and
unsuitable clay/silt soils should be excavated to a depth of 2 feet below the anticipated pavement subgrade.
This alternative presents some risk to pavement performance in that settlements can still occur; however, the
magnitude of the settlement and the localized effects are reduced. If this alternative is chosen, the owner
should be aware of and prepared to accept this risk.
Any existing foundations, pavements, or rock encountered during site grading should be further excavated
to maintain a minimum vertical separation of 1 foot between them and proposed pavement subgrades. This
minimum separation distance is necessary to prevent a "point-bearing" problem. Any resulting isolated
excavations should be backfilled with suitable fill material.
Bearing soils under stormwater pond embankments should be evaluated by a TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. soils
technician prior to fill placement. Grubbing and root raking of organic materials and existing roots should
be performed to reduce the risk of seepage. If settlement sensitive soils are encountered during site
TR/GONI KLEiNFELDER, INC. Page 13
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
preparation at the stormwater pond embankment locations, TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. can evaluate the soil
conditions and settlement potential prior to embankment fill placement.
5.6 EXCAVATION
Generally, the on-site soils at the rain garden and detention pond can be excavated with conventional
construction equipment. However, where very soft weathered rock (SPT N-value greater than 100 blows
per foot but less than 50 blows per 0.1 foot) is present, loosening with a large dozer (D-8 or similar size)
equipped with a single tooth ripper or a large track-mounted backhoe (Caterpillar 235 or similar size) may
be required prior to removal. Hard weathered rock and bedrock (SPT N-value greater than 50 blows per 0.1
foot and unable to be excavated with the previously mentioned equipment) may require light blasting to
excavate in utility and other confined excavations. If blasting is required, we recommend that it be
performed prior to the start of any construction and a pre-construction condition survey of the adjacent
buildings should be performed. TrigonlKleinfelder, Inc. can provide blast monitoring services during
construction.
The deep excavation for the UST's should be performed in accordance with OSHA requirements including
appropriate bracing, benching, or shoring for OSHA Class C soils. Additional details for the OSHA
standards are found in Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR) Sloping and Benching - 1926 Subpart P App B
at htlp://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show document?p table=STANDARDS&p id=10932.
UST installation should be performed in accordance with North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources regulations. Due to the variable nature of the rock at the UST location,
groundwater may accumulate in the UST excavation for short periods following installation.
Consideration should be given to providing anchors or ballast to hold the tanks in place in a buoyant
condition.
5.7 FILL MATERIAL AND PLACEMENT
Based on the results of our visual observations and laboratory testing, the majority of the on-site residual
soils appear suitable for use as project fill. Natural moisture contents of the clay/silt soil samples tested in
TRIGoN1KLFINFFLDFR, INC. Page 14
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
our laboratory and observed on site during piezometer readings varied from 30 percent to fully submerged.
Our experience indicates that soils similar to those tested in our laboratory should exhibit optimum moisture
contents for fill placement ranging from approximately 18 to 23 percent. As such, drying or wetting of the
on-site soils will likely be required depending upon the time of year during which site grading is performed.
As previously stated, the presence of excess moisture will result in instability of the soils.
All imported fill used for the project should be a clean soil, free of organic matter and debris, with a
Plasticity Index of less than 20. Preferable soil types, as defined by USCS, consist of GW, SW, SP, SC,
SM, ML and CL soils. The fill should exhibit a maximum dry density of at least 90 pounds per cubic foot
as determined by a Standard Proctor compaction test (ASTM D 698). All fill in pavement areas should be
placed during the initial stages of site development and prior to any pavement or stormwater pond
embankment construction. This will assist in the consolidation of natural soils below the additional load
imposed by the fill. The majority of consolidation of the soils under the new fill will likely occur within one
month following fill placement.
Based on the results of our visual observations, the on-site fill and residual soils observed in our borings
appear generally suitable for use as project fill with the exception of heavy clay such as that encountered
in the vicinity of boring B-4. In addition, we recommend that structural fill be limited to 5 percent of
small organics by weight.
All fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches loose thickness and should be compacted to at least
95 percent of its Standard Proctor maximum dry density. We recommend that moisture control limits of + 3
percent of the optimum moisture content be used for optimum placement of project fill with the added
requirement that fill soils placed wet of optimum remain stable under heavy pneumatic-tired construction
traffic. We recommend that field density tests be performed on the fill as it is being placed, at a frequency
determined by an experienced geotechnical engineer, to confirm that proper compaction is achieved.
5.8 CONSTRUCTION MONITORING
Quality assurance observations and testing related to earthwork should be performed by competent
personnel under the general administrative supervision of a geotechnical engineer familiar with the design
requirements and considerations of this project. As a minimum, we recommend that qualified geotechnical
TR/GONIKLEINFELDER, INC. Page 15
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
personnel observe proofrolling and associated undercutting, as required, fill placement, excavations, and
subgrades, evaluate the materials to be used as fill and test the compaction of all fill and baclfill.
Pavement bearing grades must be proofroll tested during construction to confirm suitable bearing. As
previously stated, TrigonIKleinfelder, Inc. can provide blast monitoring services during construction.
TRIGONI KLE]NFFLDFR, INC. Page 16
x
00
A
z
W
a
a

I I f f r 4. _ . ?I f'

,? ? tin I ? ..jl. _ t•
r
T
ir j,? ;
/JJ f
bihlki?S
Cam
`
1?), Jf i
L7` tl
r
l
,?+ !
c 1 ? J/J -?xd
.. ?. ' I '.?;•`l l •-? • Wis.
All
r
s
.
i
4#
'J
r r. j I ? -

025
PROJECT ,4 A: - '?a? ¦
SITE

VICINITY;

DATE: April 25, 2008
DRAWN BY
MHT SITE VICINITY MAP 1 7
&

REVIEWEDBY: LJM G
h
i
l E
l
i A
- eotec
n
ca
va
uat
on & Groundwater Study
FILE: 021-08-001 T;R=N,
SCALE: NTS Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 TRIGON I KLEINFELDER

DRAWING NO.:
1

11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina 6200 Harris Technology Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28269
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
- http://www-irigoneng.com

S:\Charlotte Branch\0210 Geolech\2008\Projects\001 Texland Site " Quarles Petroleum\CAD and PDF\Site Vicinity Map

J?

-3- A

r

t r
P-1
0
1f
Approximate
Piezometer and j,
Surfacewater Location
rl

DATE: April 25, 2008 SITE GROUND SURFACE TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
I
DRAWN BY: MHT PIEZOMETER LOCATION PLAN -
T
I

REVIEWED BY: LJ M l
ation & Groundwater Stud
h
i
l E
G
t 4
y
n
va
u
eo
ec
ca
CON
FILE: 021-08-001 1
SCALE: NTS Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. /??( H1/„?
V
TRIGON I KLEINFELDER
6200 Harris Technology Boulevard
DRAWING NO.:
2
11219 Texland Boulevard,Charlotte, North Carolina Charlotte, North Carolina 28269
Phone: (704) 59B 1049
Fax: [phone]
http://-.Irigoneng.com

S1Charlotte Branch\0210 Geotech\2008\Prcjects\001 Texland Site - Quarles Petroleum\CAD and PDRSite Topo Map

LLJ
U)
Z)
O
LLJ
J
LL
LL
Q

s0,-,FE3S' PPE i
eLPFEUM1 ,1ATTASWE E
FPPR7?MFE r
LiCAiYa'V - ?' .. _
F.
`
PFRE ?
v

? FES 1.1
L: INV. OUT
Q ELEV.620
roE
a=i x
CURB INLET 1.2
GRATE ELEV.. 024.00
INV
24
ELEV
. 620 i-
.
.
,

it DETEM
BGTiOI
y( 619.2
w
,
BERM E

NIF
HILLCREST FOODS INC. _
DS 9602 PG 498 ,
PI DM 20312115
ZONED 1-2
TRaIV„n`+is-ION iowEF,
`III II
I
FES 3-2
1 INV. ELEV.. 621.5
p?
??2
APPROXIMATE BORING AND PIEZOMETER LOCATION
i i i 4
FIRST X REALTY LP
PIDM 20312122
ZONED 1.2
0

y
I

EAST SWALE
1
i
1lJERi
- a2a m
X
W
LU
Y
N
`i
I
\A r
S:\Charlotte Branch\0210 Geotech\2008\Projects\001 Texland Site - Quarles Petroleum\CAD and PDF\Boring Location Plan Drawing

Depth to Water Table-Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
(Quarles Petroleum)
50(1700 506800 506900 507000 507100 507 00 507300 507400 507500 507600
r 7 f
r

liV

J r

°o

_
e I
?

l -
q .,
PROJECT F= ,
i
? r
SIT E
VICINITY
' ?
•II

f +s 4} -
y

500700 508800 Sflfi4r10 5071 0 507100 507200 SU]300 ri07400 5075)0 507600
N Meters
A 0 so 100 200 300
Feet
0 350 700 1,400 2,100
USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 516/2008
iM Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3

http://www.trigoneng.com

DATE: April 25, 2008
DRAWN BY: MHT NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP 7
&

REVIEWED BY: L.IM h
i
l E
G
t
l
i
& G
d
S
d j

FILE: 021-08-001 n
eo
ec
ca
va
on
roun
uat
water
tu
y
N
SCALE: NTS R
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. H1^„ V TRIGONI KLEINFELOER

DRAWING No.:

4

1219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina J
6200 Harris Technology Boulevard
Charlotte, North Carolina 28269
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
S \Charlotte Branch\0270 Geo[ech\2008\Projects\001 Texland Site - Quarles Petro leum\CAD and PDFINRCS Soil Survey Map Drawing 4

Groundwater and Rainfall Monitoring
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816
625
0
3.0 .
Approximate

623.0

2.5
622.0

Botto
m Drain 621.0 j
4)
O _ o w
zo
?
2.0
_
.
,

Approximate
_.
. .
_._._,
. . .
,
. L_
19.0 CO

C 618.0

1.5
617.0 0
C 0
616.0
cc
615
0 E
1.0 .
X
614.0

613.0

0.5
Oaft 612.
611.0

0.0 i It u.i;

3/28/2008 4/4/2008 4/11/2008 4/18/2008 4/25/2008 5/2/2008 5/9/2008
Date
Rainfall (inches) -Groundwater Level In Piezometer

Top of Berm
Rain Garden

rain Garden Bottom
7

Approximate
Piezometer

I
Bottom

?„ 624.0
p
Groundwater and Rainfall Monitoring Drawing No. 021-08-001-5
Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
PROJECT NO. 021-08-001 ID No. COUNTY Mecklenburg GEOLOGIST Terrell
SITE DESCRIPTION Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site 816 GROUND WATER (ft)
BORING NO. B-1 BORING LOCATION OFFSET ALIGNMENT 0 HR. GNE
COLLAR ELEV. NORTHING EASTING 24 HR. NA
TOTAL DEPTH 9.3 ft DRILL MACHINE CME 55 DRILL METHOD HSA HAMMER TYPE 140 lb. Manual
DATE STARTED 4/2/08 COMPLETED 4/2/08 SURFACE WATER DEPTH
ELEV. DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT SAMP. - L
O
SOIL AND ROCK DESCRIPTION
(ft) (ft) O.Sft 0.5ft 0.5ft 0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 1,00 NO. MOI
100.0 Herbaceous Vegetation Cultivated Field 100.0 0.0
? y Damp Organic Laden Disturbed Soil - FILL
99.6 0.4
Wet Firm Brown Black CLAY with Medium to
Fine Sand-RESIDUAL
99.0 1.0
3 3 5 SS-1 MC = 30.5%

.. .................. -200 = 59.8%
96.5 3.5
4 10 14 SS-2
24 95.5 4.5
Moist Medium Dense Black Brown Tan Silty
Medium to Fine SAND
MC = 16.2%
-200 = 33.6%
94.0 6.0
5 7 11 SS-3

91.5 8.5
41 50/0.3 SS 4
91.0 9.0
90.7 PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK - Sampled 93
iuu+
As: Black Tan Medium to Fine SAND
No Groundwater Encountered
Auger Refusal at 9.3 feet
NOTE: A 1.5" Diameter PVC Piezometer
casing extends from approximately 1 foot
above the existing ground elevation down to
the approximate refusal elevation.
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1

PROJECT NO. 021-08-001
ID No.
COUNTY Mecklenburg
-7
GEOLOGIST Terrell
SITE DESCRIPTION Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site 816 GROUND WATER (ft)
BORING NO. B-2A BORING LOCATION OFFSET ALIGNMENT 0 HR. GNE
COLLAR ELEV. NORTHING EASTING 24 HR. NA
TOTAL DEPTH 6.3 ft DRILL MACHINE CME 55 DRILL METHOD HSA HAMMER TYPE 140 lb. Manual
DATE STARTED 4/2/08 COMPLETED 4/2/08 SURFACE WATER DEPTH
ELEV. DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT SAMP. V L
O
SOIL AND ROCK DESCRIPTION
(ft) (ft) 0.5ft O.Sft O.Sft 0 20 40 60 80 100 NO MOI G
100.0 Herbaceous Vegetation Cultivated Field 100.0 0.0
? y Damp Organic Laden Disturbed Soil - FILL
99.5 0.5

99.0
1.0

.
..
.
....
....... Wet Firm Light Brown CLAY with Fine Sand -
RESIDUAL
1 3 4 .
...
.
.
407 . . . . . SS-1

96.5
3.5 .. ...................
96.5 3.5
20 50/0.5

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SS-2 PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK - Sampled
As: Black Tan Fine to Medium SAND with Silt

MC = 8.0%
-200 = 21
2%

94.0
6.0 100+
.................... .
50/0.3 SS-3 93.7 6.3
+ Groundwater Not Encountered
Auger Refusal at 6.3 Feet
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
PROJECT NO. 021-08-001 ID No. COUNTY Mecklenburg GEOLOGIST Terrell
SITE DESCRIPTION Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site 816 GROUND WATER (ft)
BORING NO. 13-26 BORING LOCATION OFFSET ALIGNMENT 0 HR. GNE
COLLAR ELEV. NORTHING EASTING 24 HR. NA
TOTAL DEPTH 5.0 ft DRILL MACHINE CME 55 DRILL METHOD HSA HAMMER TYPE 140 lb. Manual
DATE STARTED 4/2/08 COMPLETED 4/2/08 SURFACE WATER DEPTH
ELEV. DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT SAMP. - L
O
SOIL AND ROCK DESCRIPTION
(ft) (ft) 0.5ft 0.5ft 0.5ft 0 2,0 4,0 6,0 8,0 1,00 NO MOI G
100.0 Herbaceous Vegetation Cultivated Field 100.0 0.0
? y Damp Organic Laden Disturbed Soil -FILL
99.6 0.4
Wet Firm Light Brown CLAY with Fine Sand -
RESIDUAL
99.0 1.0 .....................
3 3 5
..................

96.5
3.5 .....................
96.5 3.5
16 28 50 Moist Very Dense Black Tan Fine to Medium
SAND with Silt
76 95.5 4.5
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK - Sampled
Nil 95.0 As: Black Tan Fine to Medium SAND with Silt 5.0
No Groundwater Encountered
Auger Refusal at 5.0 feet
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
PROJECT NO. 021-08-001 ID No. COUNTY Mecklenburg GEOLOGIST Terrell
SITE DESCRIPTION Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site 816 GROUND WATER (ft)
BORING NO. B-3 BORING LOCATION OFFSET ALIGNMENT 0 HR. GNE
COLLAR ELEV. NORTHING EASTING 24 HR. NA
TOTAL DEPTH 5.0 ft DRILL MACHINE CME 55 DRILL METHOD HSA HAMMER TYPE 140 lb. Manual
DATE STARTED 4/2/08 COMPLETED 4/2/08 SURFACE WATER DEPTH
ELEV. DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT SAMP. - L
O
SOI
AND
OCK DESCRIPTION
(ft) (ft) 0.5ft 0.5ft 0.5ft 0 20 4,1 1,0 1,0 100 NO. MOI G L
R
100.0 Herbaceous Vegetation Cultivated Field 100.0 0.0
? y Damp Organic Laden Disturbed Soil - FILL
99.6 0.4

99.0
1.0 Wet Stiff Light Brown CLAY - RESIDUAL
2 4 9
013 . SS-1
98.0 2.0
Moist Loose Green Brown Silty Medium to Fine
SAND
97.0 3.0

96.5
3.5 Damp Very Dense Brown Grey Silty Medium to
Fine SAND
24 34 50
40
84 SS-2
95.5 4.5
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK - Sampled
95.0 As: Brown Grey Silty Medium to Fine SAND 5.0
No Groundwater Encountered
Auger Refusal at 5.0 feet
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.
BORING LOG
PAGE 1 OF 1
•
•
•
•
•
PROJECT NO. 021-08-001 ID No. COUNTY Mecklenburg GEOLOGIST Terrell
SITE DESCRIPTION Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site 816 GROUND WATER (ft)
BORING NO. B-4 BORING LOCATION OFFSET ALIGNMENT 0 HR. GNE
COLLAR ELEV. NORTHING EASTING 24 HR. NA
TOTAL DEPTH 7.5 ft DRILL MACHINE CME 55 DRILL METHOD HSA HAMMER TYPE 140 lb. Manual
DATE STARTED 4/2/08 COMPLETED 4/2/08 SURFACE WATER DEPTH
ELEV. DEPTH BLOW COUNT BLOWS PER FOOT SAMP.

7/ L
O
SOIL AND ROCK DESCRIPTION
(ft) (ft) 0.5ft 0.5ft 0.5ft 0 2,0 4,0 60 80 100 NO. O, G
100.0 Herbaceous Vegetation Cultivated Field 100.0 0.0
?? Damp Organic Laden Disturbed Soil -FILL
99.6 0.4

99.0
1.0

..................... Wet Stiff Red Brown CLAY with trace
Manganese - RESIDUAL
3 4 7
?.? ............. SS-1
97.0 3.0

96.5
3.5 Moist Loose Grey Brown Silty Medium to Fine
SAND
4 6 8
4014 SS-2
94.5 5.5

94.0
6.0 Moist Very Dense Grey Brown Medium to Fine
SAND
9 24 50
74 SS-3
93.0 7.0
PARTIALLY WEATHERED ROCK - Sampled
92.5 As: Grey Brown Medium to Fine SAND 7.5
No Groundwater Encountered
Auger Refusal at 7.5 feet
Mr. Craig McBride, Quarles Petroleum May 21, 2008
Quarles Petroleum Q-Card Site No. 816 at 11219 Texland Boulevard, Charlotte, North Carolina Trigon Project No. 021-08-001
INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURES
FIELD
Soil Test Borings
Soil sampling and penetration testing for this project were performed in accordance with ASTM D 1586.
The borings were advanced with hollow-stem, continuous flight augers and, at standard intervals, soil
samples were obtained with a standard 1.4-inch I.D., 2 inch O.D., split-tube sampler. The sampler was first
seated six (6) inches to penetrate any loose cuttings, then driven an additional foot with blows of a 140
pound hammer falling 30 inches. The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot
was recorded and is designated the "Standard Penetration Resistance" (N-Value). The Standard Penetration
Resistance, when properly evaluated, is an index to soil strength, density, and ability to support foundations.
Representative portions of each soil sample were placed in glass jars and taken to our laboratory. The
samples were then examined by an engineer to verify the driller's field classifications. Test Boring Records
are attached indicating the soil descriptions and Standard Penetration Resistances.
LABORATORY
Moisture Content
The moisture content is the ratio expressed as a percentage, of the weight of water in a given mass of soil to
the weight of the solid particles. This test was conducted in accordance with ASTM Designation D 2216.
The test results are presented on the attached sheets.
Percent Fines
In this test, the sample is dried and then washed over a standard No. 200 sieve. The percentage of soil, by
weight, passing the sieve is the percentage of fines or portion of the sample in the silt and clay size range.
This test was conducted in accordance with ASTM Designation D 1140.
TRIGON ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, INC.