SW6130201_Geotechnical Report_20140214

5w61 302.01
Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford
Intersection of Fayetteville Road and N. Parker Church Road
Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012
Project No. 71125073
Prepared for:
Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Charlotte, North Carolina
RECEIVED
FEB 0 6 2013
DENR-FAYETTEMLE REGIONAL OFFICE

December 21, 2012
Durban Development, LLC
3735 Beam Road, Suite B
Charlotte, North Carolina 28217
Attn: Mr. Darren Tuitt
P: [704] 496-7190
F: [704] 357-0018
Irerracon
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford
Intersection of Fayetteville Road & N. Parker Church Road
Raeford, North Carolina
Terracon Report No. 71125073
Dear Mr. Tuitt:
Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for
the above referenced project. This study was performed in general accordance with our
proposal numbered 71127E099, dated November 13, 2012. This report presents the findings
of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical recommendations concerning
earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor slabs, and pavements for the
proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
nr. a d L. Blake, E! I
d�
Project Manager
Reviewed by: Jonathan P. Manke, P.E.
Enclosures
cc: 3—Client
t — File
J. CorIeV P
Manager
'�Q�pFESS/p'y��Z
SEAL
2191
12rzr�v
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 2020 Starila Road, Suite E Charlotte, North Carolina 28206
NC License No. F-0869 P [704] 509 1777 F [704) 509 1898 terracon.com

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVESUMMARY.............................................................................................................i
1.0
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1
2.0
PROJECT INFORMATION.............................................................................................1
2.1 Site Location and Description...............................................................................1
2.2 Project Description...............................................................................................2
3.0
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS........................................................................................2
3.1 Geology...............................................................................................................2
3.2 Typical Profile......................................................................................................2
3.3 Groundwater........................................................................................................3
4.0
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION......................................3
4.1 Geotechnical Considerations...............................................................................3
4.2 Earthwork.............................................................................................................4
4.2.1 Compaction Requirements.......................................................................4
4.2.2 Material Types..........................................................................................5
4.2.3 Grading and Drainage..............................................................................5
4.2.4 Earthwork Construction Considerations....................................................5
4.2.5 Excavations..............................................................................................5
4.3 Foundations.........................................................................................................6
4.3.1 Design Recommendations........................................................................6
4.3.2 Foundation Construction Considerations..................................................6
4.4 Seismic Considerations........................................................................................7
4.5 Floor Slab............................................................................................................7
4.5.1 Design Recommendations........................................................................7
4.5.2 Floor Slab Construction Considerations....................................................8
4.6 Infiltration Testing.................................................................................................8
4.7 Pavements...........................................................................................................9
4.7.1 Pavement Design Recommendations.......................................................9
4.7.2 Pavement Construction Considerations...................................................10
5.0
GENERAL COMMENTS...............................................................................................11
APPENDIX A — FIELD EXPLORATION
Exhibit A-1 Site Vicinity Plan
Exhibit A-2 Boring Location Plan
ExhibitA-3' Field Exploration Description
Exhibits A-4 to A-12 Boring Logs
APPENDIX B — LABORATORY TESTING
Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing Summary
APPENDIX C — SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Exhibit C-1 General Notes
Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System
Responsive a Resourceful ■ Reliable

Geotechnical Engineering Report l�erracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford a Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 a Terracon Project No. 71125073
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A geotechnical investigation has been performed for the proposed Family Dollar to be located at
the intersection of Fayetteville Road and N. Parker Church Road in Raeford, North Carolina. Ten
(10) borings, designated B-01 through B-10, were performed to depths of approximately 10 to 15
feet below the existing ground surface in the proposed building and parking areas.
Based on the information obtained from our subsurface exploration, the site can be developed for
the proposed project. The following geotechnical considerations were identified:
o Based on the results of our subsurface exploration, it is our opinion that the soils at the
site are suitable for support of shallow foundations outlined in this report and structures
may be supported on conventional spread and strip footings with a net allowable bearing
pressure of 3,000 psf.
o The natural soils encountered at the boring locations may be excavated with
conventional construction equipment, such as bulldozers, backhoes, and trackhoes.
o The 2012 North Carolina State Building Code (NCSBC) seismic site classification for this
site is D. A geophysical exploration to develop the shear wave velocity profile to a depth
of 100 feet could be utilized to verify the seismic site class or as an attempt to justify a
higher seismic site class.
This summary should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design purposes. It
should be recognized that details were not included or fully developed in this section, and the
report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained
herein. The section titled GENERAL COMMENTS should be read for an understanding of the
report limitations.
Responsive o Resourceful a Reliable

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
PROPOSED FAMILY DOLLAR — RAEFORD
FAYETTEVILLE RD & N. PARKER CHURCH RD
RAEFORD, NORTH CAROLINA
Project No. 71125073
December 21, 2012
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A geotechnical investigation has been performed for the proposed Family Dollar to be located at
the intersection of Fayetteville Road and N. Parker Church Road in Raeford, North Carolina. Ten
(10) borings, designated B-01 through B-10, were performed to depths of approximately 10 to 15
feet below the existing ground surface in the proposed building and parking areas. Logs of the
borings along with a Site Vicinity Plan and Boring Location Plan are included in Appendix A of
this report.
The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering
recommendations relative to:
■ subsurface soil conditions ■ floor slab design and construction
■ groundwater conditions ■ seismic considerations
■ earthwork ■ pavements
■ foundation design and construction
2.0 PROJECT, INFORMATION
2.1 Site Location and Description
ITEM
DESCRIPTION j
Location
The south quadrant of the intersection of Fayetteville Road
and N. Parker Church Road in Raeford, North Carolina.
Existing development
The area proposed for development is currently an
undeveloped 1.92 acre tract.
Current ground cover
The site appears to be lightly wooded and relatively flat with
grass cover.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 1

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
2.2 Project Description
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
A one-story building with a proposed footprint of
Structures
approximately 8,320 square feet. Parking will be to the
north of the structure.
Steel frame construction supported on a reinforced
Building construction
concrete foundation system, concrete slab -on -grade floors
and steel interior columns.
Column Load — 30 kips
Maximum loads (assumed)
Continuous Load -Bearing Wall Loads — 3 klf
Floor Load (provided) — 150 psf
Maximum allowable settlement
Columns: 1-inch
(assumed)
Walls: '14 inch over 40 feet
Grading (assumed)
Assumed to be less than 2 feet excavation or fill placement
Cut and fill slopes
None.
Free-standing retaining walls
None.
Below Grade Areas
None.
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Geology
The project site is located in the Coastal Plain physiographic province of North Carolina. The
Coastal Plain consists mainly of marine sediments that were deposited during successive periods
of fluctuating sea level and moving shoreline. The soils in this province consist of sands, silts,
and clays with irregular deposits of shells, which are typical of those lain down in a shallow
sloping sea bottom. Recent alluvial sands, silts, and clays are typically present near rivers and
creeks. According to the 1985 Geologic Map of North Carolina, the site is located within the
Middendorf formation. This formation is described as consisting of sand, sandstone and
mudstone with clay balls and iron cemented concretions.
3.2 Typical Profile
Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized
as follows:
The borings were generally advanced through approximately 4 to 6 inches of topsoil. Natural
materials were encountered below the surface materials to depths of approximately 10 to 15
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 2

Geotechnical Engineering Report l�erracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford a Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 © Terracon Project No. 71125073
feet below existing grades. Natural materials encountered consist of silty sand, sandy silt,
sandy clay and poorly graded sand and visually classify as SM, ML, CL and SP, respectively,
in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Standard penetration test
values (N-values) in the sands range from 2 to 58 blows per foot (bpf), indicating very loose to
very dense relative density. N-values range from 4 to 28 bpf in the silts and clays indicating a
medium stiff to very stiff consistency.
Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs.
Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil
types; in -situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings
can be found on the boring logs in Appendix A of this report.
3.3 Groundwater
The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of
groundwater. Groundwater was not observed in any of the borings after the short amount of time
(less than one hour) the borings were left open. The borings were backfilled with the cuttings
immediately after completion, making subsequent groundwater measurements unobtainable.
The soil samples obtained during our field exploration were also observed for redoximorphic
features of the soil profile to estimate the seasonal high water table levels. Redoximorphic
features (a gray or bluish -gray colored soil matrix) and mottles are formed by the process of
reduction, translocation and/or oxidation of iron and manganese oxides as the water table
fluctuates. A soil layer exhibiting redoximorphic features can be representative of the seasonal
high water table level. Based on our observations of the soil samples, redoximorphic features
were not observed within the depth of our borings. Additionally, the relative moisture content of,
the soil samples did not indicate the presence of groundwater within the depth of our borings.
Based on our experience in this area and the information obtained from field exploration, it is
our opinion that the'seasonal high water table level occurs at a depth greater than 15 feet. '
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
4.1 Geotechnical Considerations
Based on the results of our subsurface exploration, it is our opinion that the proposed building
may be supported on conventional spread and strip footings with a net allowable bearing
pressure of 3,000 psf. Further details and recommendations are provided herein.
Responsive o Resourceful o Reliable 3

Geotechnical Engineering Report l�erracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
4.2 Earthwork
Existing tree cover, vegetation, topsoil, and any otherwise unsuitable material should be
removed from the construction areas prior to placing fill. The exposed subgrade soils in areas
to receive fill or at the subgrade elevation in cut areas should be proofrolled to detect soft or
loose soils and other unsuitable materials that may be present. Proofrolling should be
performed with a fully -loaded, tandem -axle dump truck or similar pneumatic -tired construction
equipment in the proposed pavement areas and a moderately loaded, tandem axle dump
truck or similar pneumatic -tired construction equipment weighing approximately 20 tons in the
proposed building area. A Terracon representative should observe this operation to aid in
delineating unstable soil areas. Proofrolling should be performed after a suitable period of dry
weather to avoid degrading an otherwise acceptable subgrade. Soils which continue to rut or
deflect excessively under the proofrolling operations should be remediated as recommended
by the geotechnical engineer.
Based on the borings and moisture condition of the samples, we do not anticipate that mass
undercutting of near -surface natural soils will be required; however, undercutting of any
soft/loose soils should be performed if soft/loose soils are encountered are at subgrade
elevations.
4.2.1 Compaction Requirements
We recommend that engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during
placement. Should the results of the in -place density tests indicate the specified moisture or
compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked
and retested as required until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are
achieved.
Engineered fill should meet the following compaction requirements:
I ITEM I DESCRIPTION I
Fill LiftThickness
8 to 10 inches or less in loose thickness when
heavy, self-propelled compaction equipment is
used
4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand -
guided equipment (e.g. jumping jack or plate
compactor) is used
Minimum 95% of the material's maximum
standard Proctor dry density (ASTM D 698)
Compaction Requirements The upper 12 inches in pavement and building
areas should be compacted to at least 100% of
the materials maximum standard Proctor dry
density (ASTM D 698)
Responsive ■ Resourceful o Reliable 4

Geotechnical Engineering Report l�err�con
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Within 3% of the optimum moisture content
Moisture Content Requirements value as determined by the standard Proctor test
at the time of placement and compaction
4.2.2 Material Types
Engineered fill should meet the following material property requirements:
Fill Type'
USCS Classification
Acceptable Location for Placement
On -Site Soils
ML, CL, SM and SP
The on -site soils typically appear suitable for use
as fill at all locations and elevations.
Imported Low
SM, SC, CL, ML, SW
Plasticity Soils
(LL<50 & PI<20)
All locations and elevations.
1. Controlled, compacted fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and
debris. Frozen material should not be used, and fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. A
sample of each material type should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer for evaluation.
4.2.3 Grading and Drainage
Final surrounding grades should be sloped away from the buildings on all sides to minimize
ponding of water. Gutters and downspouts should drain water at least 10 feet beyond the
footprint of the proposed building. This can be accomplished through the use of splash -
blocks, downspout extensions, and flexible pipes that are designed to attach to the end of the
downspout. Flexible pipe should only be used if it is daylighted in such a manner that it
gravity -drains collected water. Splash -blocks should also be considered below hose bibs and
water spigots.
4.2.4 Earthwork Construction Considerations
The geotechnical engineer should be retained during the construction phase of the project to
observe earthwork and to perform necessary tests and observations during subgrade
preparation; to monitor proof rolling, placement and compaction of controlled compacted fills,
backfilling of excavations to the completed subgrade; and to observe footing excavations prior
to placing reinforcing steel.
4.2.5 Excavations
The soils encountered at the boring locations may be excavated with conventional
construction equipment, such as bulldozers, backhoes, and trackhoes.
As a minimum, all temporary excavations should be sloped or braced as required by
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations to provide stability and
safe working conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading
operations. The grading contractor should be responsible for designing and constructing
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 5

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations
as required, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations
should comply with applicable local, state and federal safety regulations, including the current
OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards.
Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor who controls the means,
methods and sequencing of construction operations. Under no circumstances shall the
information provided herein be interpreted to mean that Terracon is assuming any responsibility
for construction site safety or the contractor's activities; such responsibility shall neither be
implied nor inferred.
4.3 Foundations
In our opinion, the proposed structure can be supported by shallow, spread footing foundation
systems bearing within the natural soils or new, engineered fill. Design recommendations for
shallow foundations for the proposed structures are presented in the following sections.
4.3.1 Design Recommendations
DESCRIPTION
Column
Wall
Net allowable bearing pressure
3,000 psf
3,000 psf
Minimum dimensions
30 inches
18 inches
Minimum protective embedment
18 inches
18 inches
Approximate total settlement
<1 inch
<3/ inch over 40 feet
1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum
surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. Assumes soft/loose soils
identified during foundation evaluations are removed and replaced as recommended by the
geotechnical engineer.
4.3.2 Foundation Construction Considerations
The base of all foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil and rock prior to
placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil
disturbance. Should the soils at bearing level become disturbed, saturated, or frozen, the
affected soil should be removed prior to placing concrete. Exposure to inclement weather can
introduce unwanted moisture into the footing subgrade. If construction occurs during
inclement weather, and concreting of foundations is not possible at the time they are
excavated, a layer of lean concrete should be placed on exposed bearing surfaces for
protection. Where high moisture conditions are encountered at footing bearing elevations, the
bottom of the excavations could be stabilized with a relatively clean, well -graded crushed
stone or gravel, or a lean concrete mud mat to provide a working base for construction.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 6

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Proposed Family Dollar— Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
The foundation bearing materials should be evaluated at the time of the foundation
excavation. A representative of the geotechnical engineer should use a combination of hand
auger borings and dynamic cone penetrometer (DCP) testing in conjunction with visual
observations to determine the suitability of the bearing materials for the design bearing
pressure. If encountered, excessively soft, loose or wet bearing soils should be remediated as
recommended by the geotechnical engineer.
4.4 Seismic Considerations
I Code Used I Site Classification
2012 North Carolina State Building Code (NCSBC) I D'
1. The 2012 NCSBC requires a site soil profile determination extending a depth of 100 feet for seismic
site classification. The scope of work authorized did not include a boring to a depth of 100 feet.
The borings performed for this report extended to a maximum depth of 15 feet. A geophysical
exploration to develop the shear wave velocity profile to a depth of 100 feet could be utilized to verify
the seismic site class or as an attempt to justify a higher seismic site class.
The subsurface materials are not considered subject to liquefaction under the magnitude of
seismic events predicted for the area.
4.5 Floor Slab
4.5.1 Design Recommendations
ITEM
DESCRIPTION I
Floor slab support
Natural soils or new engineered fill compacted in
accordance with Earthwork section of this report
Modulus of subgrade reaction
100 pounds per square inch per inch (psi/in)
Aggregate base course/capillary break
4 inches of free draining granular material (< 5
percent passing the No. 200 sieve)
1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of any building footings or walls to reduce the
possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation.
Where appropriate, saw -cut control joints should be placed in the slab to help control the
location and extent of cracking. For additional recommendations refer to the ACI Design
Manual. Joints or any cracks that develop should be sealed with a water -proof, non -extruding
compressible compound specifically recommended for heavy duty concrete pavement and wet
environments.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 7

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs on grade that will be
covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious coverings, or when
the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant the use of a
vapor retarder, the slab designer should refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and
cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.
4.5.2 Floor Slab Construction Considerations
Upon completion of grading operations in the building areas, care should be taken to maintain
the recommended subgrade moisture content and density prior to construction of the building
floor slabs.
On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase.
However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations,
construction traffic, desiccation, rainfall, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgrade may not be
suitable for placement of base rock and concrete and corrective action will be required.
We recommend the area underlying the floor slab be rough graded and then thoroughly
proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck prior to final grading and placement of base
rock. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed
earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions
are located should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly
compacted fill. All floor slab subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly
compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement of the base
rock and concrete.
4.6 Infiltration Testing
We understand that a detention pond and septic field are proposed at this project site.
Infiltration testing was performed at one SPT boring location (B-01) as shown on the Boring
Location Plan (Figure A-2). The boring was cleaned out with hand auger equipment after
drilling, and was filled with water to a depth of 24 inches and allowed to pre-soak for 24 hours.
After 24 hours, an additional 24 inches of water was added to the boring and the drop in the
water level was monitored for 1 hour. This process was repeated three times. Upon
completion of the infiltration testing, the boring was backfilled with the drilling cuttings. The
table below provides a summary of the infiltration rate measured from the final (fourth) test.
Boring Number I Infiltration Rate (in/hr) I
B-01 1 0.9
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 8

Geotechnical Engineering Report
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
4.7 Pavements
4.7.1 Pavement Design Recommendations
lrerracon
Following the stripping of deleterious materials, we recommend the proposed pavement
subgrade be prepared and compacted in accordance with the recommendations provided in the
Earthwork section of this report. Proofrolling and recompacting of the upper 1-foot of subgrade is
recommended immediately prior to stone base placement. Soft or unstable areas delineated by
the proofrolling operations should be undercut or stabilized in -place to achieve the appropriate
subgrade support. Potential areas for encountering unsuitable or unstable soils are in the vicinity
of drainage features and in the low lying areas of the site.
Based on our borings and assumed grading, we anticipate the on -site sandy silt will be present at
subgrade elevation. Two pavement section alternatives are provided, one for light duty and one
for heavy duty. Loading conditions were provided as listed below:
Heavy duty: 30,576 ESAL's over 20-year design life
Light duty of 11,279 ESAL's over a 20 year design life
Recommended alternatives for flexible pavements, summarized for each traffic area, are as
follows:
Recommended Pavement Section Thickness
Material
NC DOT
inches
(inches)
Grading
Light Duty
Heavy Duty
Hspnan concrete
S — 9.SB 2 3'
Surface
Asphalt Concrete Base I — 19.0B
Aggregate Base ABC 8 6
`Place asphalt in two lifts. Each lift should be at least 1.5 inches thick
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 9

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Proposed Family Dollar— Raeford ■ Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
Recommended alternatives for rigid pavements, summarized for each traffic area, are as
follows:
Recommended Pavement Section Thickness
NC DOT (inches)
Material Grading Automobile Parking Main Drives & Truck
Stalls Access Areas
(Light Duty) (Heavy Duty)
Portland Cement Concrete 4,000 psi 6" 6
'Recommended thickness is based on the "Standard Pavement Design" outlined in the "Exhibit H
Family Dollar Geotechnical Report Requirements" document provided.
For areas subject to concentrated and repetitive loading conditions such as dumpster pads, truck
delivery docks and ingress/egress aprons, we recommend using a Portland cement concrete
pavement with a thickness of at least 7 inches underlain by at least 4 inches of crushed stone.
Prior to placement of the crushed stone the areas should be thoroughly proofrolled. For dumpster
pads, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the container and tipping
axle of the refuse truck.
ACI 330R-01 provides recommendations for control joints, joint spacing, and joint construction.
Concrete slabs should be separated from other structures or fixed objects within or abutting
paved areas with expansion joints to offset the effects of expected differential horizontal and
vertical movements.
The minimum pavement sections outlined above were recommended based on estimated soil
parameters and post -construction traffic loading conditions for this type of development. These
pavement sections do not account for heavy construction traffic during construction. A partially
constructed structural section may be subjected to heavy construction traffic that can result in
pavement deterioration and premature failure. Our experience indicates that this pavement
construction practice can result in pavements that will not perform as intended. Considering this
information, several alternatives are available to mitigate the impact of heavy construction traffic
on the pavement construction. These include using thicker sections to account for the
construction traffic, using some method of soil stabilization to improve the support characteristics
of the pavement subgrade, or by routing heavy construction traffic around paved areas.
4.7.2 Pavement Construction Considerations
Materials and construction of pavements for the project should be in accordance with the
requirements and specifications of the North Carolina Department of Transportation "Standard
Specifications for Roads and Structures'.
Responsive ■ Resourceful ■ Reliable 10

Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rrac®n
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford a Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 o Terracon Project No. 71125073
Site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction
proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to utility excavations, construction traffic,
desiccation, or rainfall. As a result, the pavement subgrade may not be suitable for pavement
construction and corrective action will be required. The subgrade should be carefully evaluated at
the time of pavement construction for signs of disturbance or excessive rutting. If disturbance
has occurred, pavement subgrade areas should be reworked, moisture conditioned, and properly
compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to paving.
Base course or pavement materials should not be placed when the surface is wet. Surface
drainage should be provided away from the edge of paved areas to minimize lateral moisture
transmission into the subgrade.
Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for through an on -going pavement
management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventative
maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to
preserve the pavement investment.
Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance (e.g. crack sealing and
patching) and global maintenance (e.g. surface sealing). Preventative maintenance is usually
the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides
the highest return on investment for pavements.
5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS
Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications so comments
can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations
in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and
testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction and other earth -related
construction phases of the project.
The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained
from the borings performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in
this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between borings, across the
site, or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather. The nature and extent of such
variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we
should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations
can be provided.
The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any
environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or
prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the
potential for such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
Responsive o Resourceful a Reliable 11

Geotechnical Engineering Report 1%rracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford a Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 ■ Terracon Project No. 71125073
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the
project discussed and has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical
engineering practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site
safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the
event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are
planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered
valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this
report in writing.
Responsive o Resourceful a Reliable 12

I
N
I
I
fir
4Dt i 'ry.t tho Rd
t r:,
P.KAgpark-5w9
Sdvef city: ¢ �t
t+ _ APPROXIMATE SITE ,
f
'1 RB�fardr! LOCATION
41,
(B i
f
MAP IS. FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY rd, yad - Map ;d ata"®2 T4 Gogg.; Edit tin _Google;Map
PfOfeL S pr° "N° SITE VICINITY PLAN Exhibit
DLB „z507'.T,S 1rerraeon
Drawn ey: DLB scale: N.T.S
cneckee hy: rue Name: Cnnsufing Enginee¢.0 scientists FAMILY DOLLAR —RAEFORD
D c Fayetteville Road and N. Parker Church Road i�-1
Approved by: Date: mm sanu ae.e, s.ue c wm�ar,H� xema
Ddc ivzvzoiz m,�,m o« ®tea Raeford, North Carolina

PEOU7. OY t
�LGG FAOM1: ENAiANOE W.\
POIUm`y96N •A•
COCIE whnENSERP
Firi Pvl()N 9CN
CPpy I.a',G^u
/
B-10
/ B-01 �
O\
^` P n �
11
1 1 �
-CAME �'E. aw
B-08 B-06 B-03
B-05 n/ j 1
V
/ � t
Na sls*P ME
ouriPaT%Rs
E�wERrawR
VOSCMFD 6UFf£R
nw
LEGEND:
= Approximate Location of Soil Test Borings
N
�r
Prgeduanagec
Pro;ecrNo.
BORING LOCATION PLAN
Exhibit
DLB
7111%rr�con
Drawn by:
Scale:
DLB
N.T.S..T.s.
FAMILY DOLLAR — RAEFORD
Checkedby:
File Name:
ConSuhingEngineCraRScientists
Intersection of Fayetteville Road and N. Parker Church Road
A-2
DIAGRAM Is FOR GENERAL LocnnoN
DJC
A-z BLP
L
ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR
Approvetlby:
Datc:
s.�n, wR E cmmm, wm um. ma's
Raeford, North Carolina
CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
DJC
12/21/2D12
eR pw��im a:d>on cwir

Geotechnical Engineering Report l�erracon
Proposed Family Dollar — Raeford o Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 o Terracon Project No. 71125073
Field Exploration Description
The boring locations were laid out on the site by Terracon personnel utilizing a site plan provided
and were measured from available site features. Right angles for the boring locations were
estimated. The locations of the borings should be considered accurate only to the degree
implied by the means and methods used to define them.
The borings were drilled with an ATV -mounted rotary drill rig using hollow stem augers to
advance the boreholes. Samples of the soil encountered in the borings were obtained using the
split -barrel sampling procedure.
In the split barrel sampling procedure, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2
inch O.D. split barrel sampler the last 12 inches of the typical total 18 inch penetration by
means of a 140 pound hammer with a free fall of 30 inches, is the standard penetration
resistance value (SPT-N). This value is used to estimate the in -situ relative density of
cohesionless soils and consistency of cohesive soils.
An automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the split -barrel sampler in the borings
performed on this site. A significantly greater efficiency is achieved with the automatic
hammer compared to the conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. This
higher efficiency has an appreciable effect on the SPT-N value.
The samples were tagged for identification, sealed to reduce moisture loss, and taken to our
laboratory for further examination, testing, and classification. Information provided on the boring
logs attached to this report includes soil descriptions, consistency evaluations, boring depths,
sampling intervals, and groundwater conditions. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings
prior to the drill crew leaving the site.
A field log of each boring was prepared by the drill crew. These logs included visual
classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as the driller's interpretation of
the subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs included with this report represent
the engineer's interpretation of the field logs and include modifications based on laboratory
observation and tests of the samples.
Responsive a Resourceful o Reliable
Exhibit A-3

BORING LOG NO. B-01
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
JLOCATION
See Exhibit A-2
z
ATLEMITSRG
`.
>�>
Q.
WIN-
K
c
U
WF
F
)
ii
e_
D_
w
ou K
r w
d
>
o
O N
_ wp
Q F
3 z
LL-PL-PI
3
30
Q
w
tt
w
U
,i
DEPTH
on
4" GRASSMAT / TOPSOIL
SILTY SAND (SMI, brown, very loose, fine to medium grained sands
18
2-1-1
113.5
N=2
CLAYEY SAND (SC), orange to brown, loose to medium dense, medium
stiff to very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
12
2-2-2
N=4
5
18
5-7-11
19
40-24-16
27
N=18
8.5
CLAYEY SAND (SC1, gray to red, medium dense, stiff, fine to medium
grained sands
18
5-5-7
17
40-17-23
36
N=1 2
10.0
�
Boring Terminated at 10 Feet
Stratification lines are approdmate. Inshu, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
8.5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
Boring Started: 1215/2012
Boring Completed: 12/5/2012
No free water observed
1 rerraeon
Drill Rig: CME 550X
Dnlle[ Ameridrill
2020-E Stadta Road
Chadolm, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A4

a
BORING LOG NO. B-02
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar- Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
00
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
wM
wa
a
ATLMITSRG
LL
>z
F
WZ
Q
au
LL
a
Q
a
<
w
3 O
LL-PL-PI
m
S on
rc
u
DEPTH
O
N
LA.4" GRASSMAT / TOPSOIL
SANDY SILT (MLI, brown to tan, very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
18
4-8-15
N=23
3.5
SILTY SAND (SMI, orange to tan, medium dense to dense, fine to medium
grained sands
15
-18-20
9N=38
38
5
18
5-8-16
N=24
8.5
SILTY SAND (SMI, gray to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
it
sands
8-9-7
N=16
10.0
1
Boring Terminated at 10 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. Irvsitu, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hallow Stem Auger
procedures.
5.5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Borings ba11ed vnth soil cuttings upon completion.
t
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 rerracon
Boring Started: 121512012
Boring Completed: 12/5/2012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550X
Driller. Ameridrill
i
2020-E Stanta Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-5

BORING LOG NO. B-03
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
00
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
W Z
a
ATTMITSRG
ir
�F
F
>
w
w
ww
o3Z
LL-PL-PI
c2
3 m
N
a
LL
°
d
DEPTH
6" TOPSOIL
SILTY SAND (SMI, brown tan to orange, medium dense, fine to medium
grained sands
18
7-15-9
N=24
3.5
SILTY SAND (SM), gray to tan, dense, fine to medium grained sands.
78
9-16-23
N=39
5
6.0
SILTY SAND ISM, gray to pink, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
18
11-11-9
N=20
18
7-7-9
N=16
1
13.5
POORLY GRADED SAND ISM, brown to pink, medium dense, fine to
medium grained sands
18
13-9-7
N=16
E
1 s.o
1
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procetlures.
12• Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 rerraeon
Boring Started: 12/512012
Boring Completed: 12/512012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550X
Driller Ameridrill
2o2f1-E Starita Road
Chadotta, North Carolina jProject
No.: 71125073
Exhibit: AE

BORING LOG NO. B-04
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
0LOCATION
See Exhibit A-2
w>Q
m}
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL-
W F
a
F
F
W Fes-
U
Q
W
F?
FZ
u
Wo
p
3 o
LL-PL-PI
¢ y
3
y
ido
0
DEPTH
o
=. "�
o.s 6" LEAVES / TOPSOIL
SANDY SILT fli brown to tan, very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
12
6-8-8
N=16
3.5
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CL1, tan gray to red, very stiff, fine to medium grained
sands
18
1
N=285
28
16.0
5
SANDY LEAN CLAY (CLI, gray to tan, very stiff, fine to medium grained
sands
18
6-8-11
N=19
18
5-8-10
N=18
1
13.5
SILTY SAND ISM, orange to red, loose, fine to medium grained sands
18
4-4-5
N=9
1s.o
1
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. lrvsitu, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See E#ii bit A-3 for description of field
Notes
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
8.5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix an B for oescdpti of laboratory
to
procedures and additional tlata, (if any).
ny).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Bonngs backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 �erracon
Boring Started. 12I5I2012
Boring Completed: 1215/2012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550k
Driller Amendnll
2020-E Stadta Roatl
Charlotte, Nonh Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-7

BORING LOG NO. B-05
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar - Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
dd>z
A�MITSRG
)MW)
2
I
of >
W
WJ
~7
WF
FW
qa
w
F w
o
o W
3 z
LL-PL-PI
(2
3 m
¢
rc
LL
O
U
a
DEPTH
O
y
�-
0.5 6" LEAVES (TOPSOIL
SILTY SAND Still, brown to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
12
7-8-9
N=17
18
6-8-13
17
42-27-15
35
N=21
5
6.0
CLAYEY SAND fSCI, gray to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
18
11-12-16
17
43-19-24
32
N=28
18
5-9-14
N=23
1
13.5
SILTY SAND (SM), tan to yellow, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
t8
7-11-12
N=23
15.0
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
8' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 rerraeon
Boring Started: 12/5/2012
Boring Completed: 12/5/2012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME SSOX
Driller Ameriddll
202NE Stanta Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125013
Exhibit: A-8

F
i.
0
0
BORING LOG NO. B-06
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
O
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
W0
2
e
ATLMITSRG
LL
wz
)
F
wZ
-
LL
U
jQ
w
¢
FJ
o
¢
w
wild
03Z
LL-PL-PI
f?
ad
0
¢m
30
¢
w
o:
LL
OU
a
DEPTH
ad
0.5 6" PINE STRAW / TOPSOIL
SILTY SAND ISM, gray tan to red, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
12
8-10-10
N=20
5
7-9-14
N=23
5
5
9-10-11
N=21
15
7-8-11
N=19
1
13.5
SILTY SAND (SMI, tan to orange, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
18
7-7-11
N=18
1s.o
1
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
7Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix R for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Endings backflled vdth soil cuttings upon completion,
abbreviations.
i WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
lrerracon
BoningSadetl 125/2012
RodngCompeted 1252072
' No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550X
Driller: Ameridrill
i
202f}E Starita Road
x
Charlotte, Nath CarolinaI
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-9

BORING LOG NO. B-07
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
00
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
z
a
ATL MITSRG
>w>
F
F
R
KJ
J
�N
w
F w
J
O
w
QW
3 z
LL-PL-PI
c2
0
3 m
¢
w
a
DEPTH
C
y
= �.
0.5 6" PINE STRAW I TOPSOIL
SILTY SAND fSMI, brown to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
15
8-13-13
N=26
3.5
SILTY SAND ISM, gray to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
78
10-12-10
N=22
16.0
5
POORLY GRADED SAND fSP1, orange to tan, medium dense to very
dense, fine to medium grained sands
18
7-21-37
N=58
18
10-11-11
N=22
1
13.5
SILTY SAND fSMI, gray to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
18
12-11-12
N=23
1s.o
1
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
8.5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Borings backflled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 ferrac®n
Boring Started: 12/5/2012
Baring Completed: 12/52012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550%
Duller: Ameridrill
2024E Slarita Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-10

BORING LOG NO. B-08
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
O
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
J m
W
c
ATTERBERG
LIMffB
O
„
LL
wz
>O
d
F
a"
WZ
_
U
JQ
K
w
F�
C
w W
o
w
3 z
LL-PL-PI
0
3 m
¢
0a-
DEPTH
O
uOf
0.5 6" PINE STRAW / TOPSOIL
SANDY SILT (MIL), brown to tan, very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
15
7-11-16
N=27
18
10-12-13
N=25
5
s.o
SANDY SILT WU tan to red, very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
18
1 5
N=26
26
8.5
SANDY SILT (MIL), gray to tan, very stiff, fine to medium grained sands
18
-15
23=N23
1
11V3.5
SILTY SAND ISM, gray to red, medium dense, fine to medium grained
sands
18
7-6-6
N=12
15.0
�
Boring Terminated at 15 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes.
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
8' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
data
procedures acid additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled Win soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
' WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1%rraeon
Started:Boring125/2m2
BoringCompleletl 12I512012
No free water observed
DnII Rig: CME 55OX
Driller Amendrill
i
2020-E Stanta Road
Chedotte, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-11

BORING LOG NO. B-09
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
w z
a
c
Al LIE�RIBERG
TS
o
(J
LL
f-
a
a
¢>
>
oy
aw
_
w
Fw
<
o
wow
3z
LL-PL-PI
c0
m
¢ m
30
¢
w
LL
O
n
DEPTH
4" GRASSMAT I TOPSOIL
SANDY SILT (MU brown to tan, stiff to very stiff, fine to medium grained
sands
12
3-3-8
N=11
8
7-8-11
N=19
5
s.o
SILTY SAND (SM), orange to tan, medium dense, fine to medium grained
_
sands
18
6-6-8
N=14
18
5-5-13
N=18
10.0
t
Boring Terminated at 10 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. Insitu, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for desciption of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method:
Borings backfilled with soil cuttings upon completion,
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
1 rerracon
Boring Started: 12/5/2012
Boring Completed: 12/512012
No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME SSOX
Diller Ameridrill
2020-E Stadia Road
Charlotte, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-12

'o
w
0
0
BORING LOG NO. B-10
Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: Family Dollar -Raeford
CLIENT: Durban Development, LLC
Charlotte, North Carolina
SITE: Fayetteville Rd. & N. Parker Church Rd.
Raeford, North Carolina
LOCATION See Exhibit A-2
a
e
ATrERBERG
LIMITS
LL
>o
WF
F
>
F
WF
WF
—
U
Q
Z
Q
p
�w�
3O
LL-PL-PI
v
o
Q�
�Q
N
rc
U
n
DEPTH
4"GRASSMAT TOPSOIL
SANDY SILT (MU, brown, stiff to very stiff, fine to medium grained sand
9
5-5-6
N=11
12
6-9-10
N=19
5
SANDY SILT (MU, brown to red, very stiff, fine to medium grained sand
18
9-9-12
N=21
8.5
SANDY LEAN CLAY ICLI, gray to red, very stiff, fine to medium grained
1/1000
sand
—
X
18
8-12-15
N=27
1
Boring Terminated at 10 Feet
Stratification lines are approximate. In -situ, the transition may be gradual. Hammer Type: Automatic
Advancement Method:
See Exhibit A-3 for description of field
Notes:
Hollow Stem Auger
procedures.
5' Dry Cave -In Depth
See Appendix B for description of laboratory
procedures and additional data, (if any).
See Appendix C for explanation of symbols and
Abandonment Method
Borings backflled with soil cuttings upon completion.
abbreviations.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
lrerracon
Boring Started: 12/512012
Boring Completed: 12/512012
- No free water observed
Drill Rig: CME 550%
Driller: Amedddll
i
202f1-E Starts Road
ChadoMe, North Carolina
Project No.: 71125073
Exhibit: A-13

Geotechnical Engineering Report 1%rracon
Proposed Family Dollar - Raeford a Raeford, North Carolina
December 21, 2012 a Terracon Project No. 71125073
Laboratory Testing
As part of the testing program, all samples were examined in the laboratory by experienced
personnel and classified in accordance with the attached General Notes and the Unified Soil
Classification System based on the texture and plasticity of the soils. The group symbol for the
Unified Soil Classification System is shown in the appropriate column on the boring logs and a
brief description of the classification system is included with this report in Appendix C.
At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary and an applicable
laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the
subsurface materials.
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples and the test results are presented
on the boring logs in Appendix A. The laboratory test results were used for the geotechnical
engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations.
Laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM, local or
other accepted standards.
Selected soil samples obtained from the site were tested for the following engineering
properties:
o In -situ Water Content a Atterberg Limits
a Sieve Analysis
Responsive a Resourceful a Reliable
Exhibit B-1

GENERAL NOTES
DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS
SS:
Split Spoon —1 3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted
HS:
Hollow Stem Auger
ST:
Thin -Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted
PA:
Power Auger
RS:
Ring Sampler- 2.42" I. D., 3" O.D., unless otherwise noted
HA:
Hand Auger
DB:
Diamond Bit Coring - 4", N, B
RB:
Rock Bit
BS:
Bulk Sample or Auger Sample
WB:
Wash Boring or Mud Rotary
The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split -spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch
penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the "Standard Penetration" or "N-value".
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL:
Water Level
WS:
While Sampling N/E: Not Encountered
WCI
Wet Cave in
WD:
While Drilling
DCI
Dry Cave in
BCR:
Before Casing Removal
AB:
After Boring
ACR:
After Casing Removal
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other
times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater.
In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils
have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand.
Fine Grained Soils have less than 50% of their dry weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are
plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may
be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the
basis of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined
Standard
Compressive
Penetration or N-
value SS)Consistency
Strength, Qu, psf
Blows/Ft.
< 500
0-1
Very Soft
500-1,000
2-4
Soft
1,001-2,000
4-8
Medium Stiff
2,001-4,000
8-15
Stiff
4,001 — 8,000
15 — 30
Very Stiff
8,000+
> 30
Hard
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL
Descriptive Terms) of other
Percent of
Constituents
Dry Weight
Trace
< 15
With
15 — 29
Modifier
> 30
RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE -GRAINED SOILS
Standard Penetration
or N-value (SS)
Relative Density
Blows]Ft.
0-3
Very Loose
4-9
Loose
10 — 29
Medium Dense
30 — 49
Dense
> 50
Very Dense
GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Major Component
Particle Size
of Sample
Boulders
Over 12 in. (300mm)
Cobbles
12 in. to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm)
Gravel
3 in. to #4 sieve (75mm to 4.75 mm)
#4 to #200 sieve (4.75mm to
Sand
0.075mm)
Silt or Clay
Passing #200 Sieve (0.075mm)
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES
PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Descriptive Term(s) of other
Percent of
Plasticity
Term
Constituents
Dry Weight
Index
Trace
<5
Non -plastic
0
With
5-12
Low
1-10
Modifiers
> 12
Medium
11 — 30
High
> 30
low
%rracon
Exhibit C-1

il
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Soil Classification
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names
Using Laboratory Tests
Group
Symb
Group Name e
of
Gravels: Clean Gravels:
Cu 2 4 and 1 s Cc s 3'
GW
Well -graded gravel
More than 50 % of Less than 5% fines c
Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc> 3 E
GP
Poorly graded gravel
coarse fraction Gravels with Fines:
Coarse Grained Soils: retained on No. 4
Fines classify as ML or MH
GM
Silty gravel "
More than 50% sieve More than 12%fines
Fines classify as CL or CH
GC
Clayey gravel
retained on No. 200 Sands: Clean Sands:
Cu 2 6 and 1 <Cc 5 3 E
SW
Well -graded sand
sieve 50 % or more of Less than 5% fines °
Cu < 6 and/or 1 > Cc> 3 E
SP
Poorly graded sand
coarse fraction passes Sands with Fines:
Fines classify as ML or MH
SM
Silty sand "
No. 4 sieve More than 12 % fines
0
Fines classify as CL or CH
SC
Clayey sand
PI > 7 and plots on or above "A" line
CL
Lean clay
Silts and Clays: Inorganic:
PI <4 or plots below "A" line
ML
Sill K,,M
Liquid limit less than
Liquid limit - oven
q
Organic clay KLM,N
Fine -Grained Soils: 50 Organic:
Liquid limit - not dried <0.75
OIL
Org anic silt 1,L,II
the or more passes
the No. 200 sieve
PI plots on or above "A" line
CH
Fat clay K,L,M
Inorganic:
Sills and Clays:
PI plots below "A" line
MH
Elastic Silt K.L.M
Liquid limit 50 or more
Liquid limit - oven
Organic clay �L,MP
Organic:
<0.75
Liquid limit -not dried
OH
Organic silt KlM°
Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark in color, and organic odor
PT
Peat
" Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm) sieve
N If fines are organic, add "with organic fines"
to group name.
e If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles
If soil contains z 15% gravel, add "with
gravel" to group name.
or boulders, or both" to group name.
' If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL-ML, silty clay.
c Gravels with 5 to 12 % fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well -graded
K If soil contains 15 to 29 % plus No. 200,
add
"with sand" or "with gravel,"
gravel with silt, GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly
whichever is predominant.
graded gravel with silt, GP -GC poody graded gravel with clay.
L If soil contains >_ 30 % plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add "sandy" to
° Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well -graded
group name.
sand with silt, SW -SC well -graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
M If soil contains>_ 30 % plus No. 200,
predominantly
gravel, add
sand with silt, SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay
"gravelly" to group name.
(DJ0 )'
N PI 24 and plots on or above "A" line.
E Cu = D,,/Dro Cc =
° PI < 4 or plots below "A" line.
1310 x D60
P PI plots on or above "A" line.
F If soil contains a 15% sand, add "with sand" to group name.
° PI plots below "A" line.
c If fines classify as CL-ML, use dual symbol GC -GM, or SC-SM.
6050
For classification
a
ao
W
Z
30
U
g20
a
10
7
4
0
0 10 16 20 30 40 60
60 70 80 90
100
110
LIQUID LIMIT (LL)
lrerracIan
Exhibit C-2
of floe -grained
lolls and fine-grained fraction
of coarse -grained soils
Equation of "A" •line
Horizontal at PI=4 to LL=25.5.
then PI=0.73 (LL-20)
"U"
ofO
Equation of -line
Ve