STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN

PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT

265 SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE & 265 SOUTH ALBANY POST ROAD VILLAGE OF BRIARCLIFF MANOR, NY

Applicant/Owner: Black Diamond Equity, LLC PO Box 1932 Huntington, NY 11743 Contact: Mr. Edward Glackin Phone: (516) 359-9484

Prepared by: JMC Planning Engineering Landscape Architecture & Land Surveying, PLLC 120 Bedford Road Armonk, NY 10504 JMC Project 20021

Date: 01/22/2021

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1

II. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING ................................................................ 1

III. STUDY METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 6

IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................... 9

V. PROPOSED CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 11

VI. SOIL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL ..................................................................... 18

VII. CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE .... 32

VIII. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 34

APPENDICES FIGURES DESCRIPTION 1. Site Location Map

APPENDIX DESCRIPTION

A. Existing Hydrologic Calculations B. Proposed Hydrologic Calculations C. NYSDEC Stormwater Sizing Calculations D. Preliminary Geotechnical Data Report E. Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Permanent Stormwater

Management Practice Inspection Checklists F. Cascade Separator Inspection and Maintenance Guide G. Contractor’s Certification H. Drawings

DA-1 "Existing Drainage Area Map" (11" x 17" & Full Size) DA-2 "Proposed Drainage Area Map" (11" x 17" & Full Size)

P:\2020\20021\ADMIN\SWPPP_2021-01-22.doc

ii

REFERENCED DRAWINGS FOR SWPPP DESIGN AND DETAILS

JMC SITE PLANS Dwg. No. Title Rev. No./Date C-000 “Cover Sheet” 4 01/22/2021 C-010 “Existing Conditions Map” 4 01/22/2021 C-020 “Demolition Plan” 4 01/22/2021 C-030 “Tree Protection Plan” 3 01/22/2021 C-100 “Layout Plan” 4 01/22/2021 C-110 “Passenger Vehicle Turning Analyses” 3 01/22/2021 C-120 “Delivery Vehicle Turning Analyses” 3 01/22/2021 C-130 “Refuse Vehicle Turning Analyses” 3 01/22/2021 C-200 “Grading Plan” 4 01/22/2021 C-200A “Site Cross Sections” 2 01/22/2021 C-300 “Utilities Plan” 4 01/22/2021 C-400 “Erosion & Sediment Control Plan” 4 01/22/2021 C-900 “Construction Details” 4 01/22/2021 C-901 “Construction Details” 4 01/22/2021 C-902 “Construction Details” 4 01/22/2021 C-903 “Construction Details” 1 01/22/2021 C-904 “Construction Details” 01/22/2021 L-100 “Landscaping Plan” 3 01/22/2021

1

I. INTRODUCTION

This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been prepared for the redevelopment of a 1.02

acre site located at 265 South Highland Avenue & 265 Albany Post Road in the Village of

Briarcliff Manor, New York (hereinafter referred to as the "Site"). The site is bordered by a

commercial building to the north, the Scarborough Glen condominium property to the east,

Glenwood Drive to the south, and South Highland Avenue and the Arcadian Shopping Center to

the west. The development has been designed in accordance with the following:

Requirements of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

(NYSDEC) SPDES General Permit No. GP-0-20-001, effective January 29, 2020.

Chapter 184 "Stormwater, Drainage, Erosion and Water Pollution Control" of the Village

of Briarcliff Manor Code.

The project proposes the demolition of the existing office building and the remains of the

former Landmark Diner, and the construction of a 2,076 S.F. Taco Bell drive-thru restaurant on

the northern parcel and a 3,032 S.F. 7-Eleven convenience store with a gasoline filling station on

the southern parcel. Associated site improvements are proposed including a dedicated drive-

thru lane and associated appurtenances for Taco Bell, and underground fuel tanks, fuel pumps,

and a canopy for 7-Eleven. Additionally, site landscaping, lighting, and stormwater management

improvements are proposed for both sites.

II. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLANNING

In order to be eligible for coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES General Permit No. GP-0-20-001

for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activities, the Stormwater Pollution Prevention

Plan (SWPPP) includes stormwater management practices (SMP's) from the publication "New

York State Stormwater Management Design Manual," last revised January 2015.

A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been prepared for this project because it is a

construction activity that involves:

2

Soil disturbances of one (1) or more acres of land.

The proposed stormwater facilities have been designed such that the quantity and quality of

stormwater runoff during and after construction are not adversely altered or are enhanced

when compared to pre-development conditions.

The Six Step Process for Stormwater Site Planning and Practice Selection

Stormwater management using green infrastructure is summarized in the six step process

described below. The six step process was adhered to when developing this SWPPP.

Information is provided in this SWPPP which documents compliance with the required process

as follows:

Step 1: Site Planning

Implement planning practices that protect natural resources and utilize the hydrology of the site.

Strong consideration must be given to reducing impervious cover to aid in the preservation of

natural resources including protecting natural areas, avoiding sensitive areas and minimizing

grading and soil disturbance.

Step 2: Determine Water Quality Treatment Volume (WQv)

Determine the required WQv for the site based on the site layout, impervious areas and sub-

catchments. This initial calculation of WQv will have to be revised after green infrastructure

techniques are applied. The following method has been used to calculate the WQv.

90% Rule - According to the New York State Stormwater Design Manual, Section 4.1,

the water quality volume is determined from the 90% rule. The method is based on

90% of the average annual stormwater runoff volume which must be provided due to

impervious surfaces. The Water Quality Volume (denoted as the WQv) is designed to

3

improve water quality sizing to capture and treat 90% of the average annual

stormwater runoff volume. The WQv is directly related to the amount of impervious

cover created at a site. The average rainfall storm depth for 90% of storms in New

York State in one year is used to calculate a volume of runoff. The rainfall depth

depends on the location of the site within the state. From this depth of rainfall, the

required water quality volume is calculated.

The project is a redevelopment and therefore will comply with the strategies outlined within

Chapter 9: Redevelopment Projects of the Design Manual. There are different options to control

water quality depending on the redevelopment.

The proposed stormwater management practices will effectively treat 100% of the 1 year storm

for all impervious areas on-site which is consistent with the requirements for Redevelopment

Projects.

Step 3: Runoff Reduction Volumes (RRv) by Applying Green Infrastructure Techniques and

Standard SMP's

RRv is not required for this project since it is a redevelopment.

Step 4: Determine the minimum RRv Required

RRv is not required for this project since it is a redevelopment.

Step 5: Apply Standard Stormwater Management Practices to Address Remaining Water Quality

Volume

Apply the standard SMP's to meet additional water quality volume requirements that cannot be

addressed by applying the green infrastructure techniques. The standard SMP's with RRv

capacity must be implemented to verify that the RRv requirement has been met.

4

Filtering Practices

Perimeter Sand Filter (F-3)

Description

A filter that incorporates a sediment chamber and filer bed as parallel vaults adjacent to a

parking lot. Stormwater filtering systems capture and temporarily store the WQv and pass it

through a filter bed of sand, organic matter, or soil. Filtered runoff may be collected and

returned to the conveyance system, or allowed to partially exfiltrate into the soil.

Non Standard/Alternative SMP's (for Redevelopment Projects)

Hydrodynamic Separators

Hydrodynamic separators will be used to provide pretreatment of the water quality flow

rate for separating sediment, debris, floatables, etc. from the runoff prior to discharge to the

SMP's.

Step 6: Apply Volume and Peak Rate Control Practices to Meet Water Quantity Requirements

The Channel Protection Volume (CPv), Overbank Flood Control (Qp) and Extreme Flood

Control (Qf) must be met for the plan to be completed. This is accomplished by using practices

such as infiltration basins, dry detention basins, etc. to meet water quantity requirements. The

following standards must be met:

1. Stream Channel Protection (CPv)

Stream Channel Protection Volume Requirements (CPv) are designed to protect

stream channels from erosion. In New York State this goal is accomplished by

providing 24-hour extended detention of the one-year, 24-hour storm event, remained

5

from runoff reduction. Reduction of runoff for meeting stream channel protection

objectives, where site conditions allow, is encouraged and the volume reduction

achieved through green infrastructure can be deducted from CPv. Trout waters may

be exempted from the 24-hour ED requirement, with only 12 hours of extended

detention required to meet this criterion. Detention time may be calculated using

either a center of mass method or plug flow calculation method.

CPv for a redevelopment project is not required if there is no increase in

impervious area or changes to hydrology that increase the discharge rate. This

criterion, as defined in Chapter 4 of New York State Stormwater Design Manual, is

not based on a pre versus post-development comparison. However, for a

redevelopment project this requirement is relaxed. If the hydrology and hydraulic

study shows that the post-construction 1-year 24 hour discharge rate and velocity

are less than or equal to the pre-construction discharge rate, providing 24 hour

detention of the 1-year storm to meet the channel protection criteria is not

required.

2. Overbank Flood (Qp) which is the 10 year storm.

Overbank control requires storage to attenuate the post development 10-year, 24-hour

peak discharge rate (Qp) to predevelopment rates.

The overbank flood control requirement (Qp) does not apply in certain conditions,

including:

The site discharges directly tidal waters or fifth order (fifth downstream) or larger

streams.

A downstream analysis reveals that overbank control is not needed.

6

3. Extreme Storm (Qf) which is the 100 year storm.

100 Year Control requires storage to attenuate the post development 100-year, 24-

hour peak discharge rate (Qf) to predevelopment rates.

The 100-year storm control requirement can be waived if:

The site discharges directly tidal waters or fifth order (fifth downstream) or larger

streams.

Development is prohibited within the ultimate 100-year floodplain

A downstream analysis reveals that 100-year control is not needed.

If redevelopment results in no increase in impervious area or changes to hydrology

that increase the discharge rate from the site the hundred-year criteria does not

apply.

Based on the foregoing, this project is eligible for coverage under NYSDEC SPDES General

Permit No. GP-0-20-001.

III. STUDY METHODOLOGY

Runoff rates were calculated based upon the standards set forth by the United States

Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Technical Release 55, Urban

Hydrology for Small Watersheds (TR-55), dated June 1986. The methodology set forth in TR-55

considers a multitude of characteristics for watershed areas including soil types, soil permeability,

vegetative cover, time of concentration, topography, rainfall intensity, ponding areas, etc.

7

The 1, 10, 25, and 100 year storm recurrence intervals were reviewed in the design of the

stormwater management facilities (see Appendices A & B for the Existing & Proposed Hydrologic

Calculations).

Anticipated drainage conditions were analyzed taking into account the rate of runoff which will

result from the construction of buildings, parking areas and other impervious surfaces associated

with the site development.

Base Data and Design Criteria

For the stormwater management analysis, the following base information and methodology were

used:

1. The site drainage patterns and outfall facilities were reviewed by JMC personnel for the

purpose of gathering background data and confirming existing mapping of the watershed

areas.

2. An Existing Drainage Area Map was developed from the topographical survey. The

drainage area map reflects the existing conditions within and around the project area.

3. A Proposed Drainage Area Map was developed from the proposed grading design

superimposed over the topographical survey. The drainage area map reflects the proposed

conditions within the project area and the existing conditions to remain in the surrounding

area.

4. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey of the site available

on its website at http://websoilsurvey.nrcd.usda.gov.

5. Soil Survey of Putnam and Westchester Counties, 1994.

8

6. The United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service

National Engineering Handbook, Section 4 - Hydrology", dated March 1985.

7. The United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service

Technical Report No. 55, Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (TR-55), dated June

1986.

8. United States Department of Commerce Weather Bureau Technical Release No. 40

Rainfall Frequency Atlas of the United States.

9. The time of concentration was calculated using the methods described in Chapter 3 of TR-

55, Second Edition, June 1986. Manning's kinematics wave equation was used to determine

the travel time of sheet flow. The 2-year 24 hour precipitation amount of 3.5 inches was

used in the equation for all storm events. The travel time for shallow concentrated flow

was computed using Figure 3-1 and Table 3-1 of TR-55. Manning's Equation was used to

determine the travel time for channel reaches.

10. All hydrologic calculations were performed with the Bentley PondPack software package

version 10.0.

11. The New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual, revised January 2015.

12. New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control, November

2016.

13. The storm flows for the 1, 10, 25, and 100 year recurrence interval storms were analyzed

for the total watershed areas. The Type III distribution design storm for a 24 hour

duration was used and the mass rainfall for each design storm was taken from the Extreme

Precipitation in New York & New England developed by the Natural Resource

Conservation Service (NRCS) and the Northeast Regional Climate Center (NRCC) as

follows:

9

24 Hour Rainfall Amounts

Design Storm Recurrence Interval Inches of Rainfall 1 Year 2.78 10 Year 5.13 25 Year 6.48 100 Year 9.25

IV. EXISTING CONDITIONS

The project site is 1.02 acres in size and is comprised of two parcels, 265 South Highland

Avenue and 265 Albany Post Road. The existing conditions of the project site consists of a

1,200± S.F. office building on the northern parcel, and the remains of the former Landmark

Diner on the southern parcel. Portions of the project site drain to existing subsurface infiltration

facilities that were constructed in 2012. These systems overflow in larger storm events through

their contributing drain inlets. Overflows from the existing infiltration systems are observed

during the 25 and 100 year storm events as shown within the hydrologic calculations. The

portions of the site that do not drain toward the existing infiltration systems drain overland

directly to South Highland Avenue.

The following natural features, conservation areas, resource areas and drainage patterns of the

project site have been identified and utilized to develop Drawing DA-1 “Drainage Area Map”

which is included in Appendix H:

Forest, vegetative cover

Topography (contour lines, existing flow paths, steep slopes, etc.)

Soil (hydrologic soil groups, highly erodible soils, etc.)

Bedrock, significant geology features

Based on the Westchester County Soil Survey, all on-site soils are well drained and moderately

drained and belong to hydrological groups B and C. The soil types, boundaries and drainage

areas/designations are depicted on Drawing DA-1 within Appendix H.

10

One Design Point was identified for comparing peak rates of runoff in existing and proposed

conditions. Similarly, four separate drainage areas were identified in existing conditions based

on the existing drainage divides at the site. The numbers included in the name of each drainage

area correspond to the Design Point they drain towards.

The following is a description of each of the drainage areas analyzed in the existing conditions

analysis:

Existing Drainage Area 1A (EDA-1A) is 0.146 acres in size and is located at the northeastern

corner of the property. This area consists of a parking lot constructed in 2012 to supplement

parking for the former diner. Stormwater runoff from this area drains into a drain inlet within the

parking area that collects the runoff and discharges it into a subsurface infiltration system also

constructed in 2012. This system was designed to mitigate peak rates from the 10 year storm

event, and the system overflows in the 25 year and 100 year storm events.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 97 and 5

minutes respectively.

Existing Drainage Area 1B-1 (EDA-1B-1) is 0.090 acres in size and consists of a portion of the

parking lot for the existing office building located on the northwest corner of the property.

Stormwater runoff from this area drains into a drain inlet within the parking area that collects

the runoff and discharges it into a subsurface infiltration system constructed in 2012. This system

was designed to mitigate peak rates from the 10 year storm event, and the system overflows in

the 25 year and 100 year storm events.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 87 and 5

minutes respectively.

Existing Drainage Area 1B-2 (EDA-1B-2) is 0.132 acres in size and consists of the existing office

building and associated landscaped and impervious areas. Stormwater runoff from PDA-1B-2

flows overland towards South Highland Avenue.

11

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 87 and 5

minutes respectively.

Existing Drainage Area 1C (EDA-1C) is 0.836 acres in size and consists of the former diner and

associated existing parking areas. Stormwater runoff from this area drains into an existing

stormwater drainage system consisting of drywells and a trench drain. Any overflow from this

system will flow overland toward South Highland Avenue.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 84 and 5

minutes respectively.

The peak rates of runoff to the design points from the drainage areas for each storm are shown

in the table below:

Table 1 Summary of Peak Rates of Runoff in Existing Conditions

(Cubic Feet per Second)

Storm Recurrence Interval

DP-1

1 year 1.64 10 year 3.66 25 year 4.82 100 year 8.67

V. PROPOSED CONDITIONS

The project proposes the demolition of the existing office building and the remains of the

former Landmark Diner, and the construction of a 2,076 S.F. Taco Bell drive-thru restaurant on

the northern parcel and a 3,032 S.F. 7-Eleven convenience store with a gasoline filling station on

the southern parcel. Associated site improvements are proposed including a dedicated drive-

thru lane and associated appurtenances for Taco Bell, and underground fuel tanks, fuel pumps,

and a canopy for 7-Eleven. Additionally, site landscaping, lighting, and stormwater management

improvements are proposed for both sites.

12

The proposed drainage improvements include a variety of stormwater practices, such as a sand

filter, hydrodynamic separators, and two R-Tank infiltration systems. Because the proposed

gasoline filling station is a hotspot runoff generator as outlined in the NYS Stormwater

Management Design Manual (SWMDM), runoff from these areas must be fully treated before

being allowed to infiltrate as required in Section 2.2. A sand filter (filtering practice) is proposed

to fully treat stormwater runoff from the gasoline station areas in accordance with the

Stormwater Management Design manual. All impervious areas on-site, including the areas which

drain to the proposed sand filter, will be treated with hydrodynamic separators prior to entering

the proposed infiltration systems.

The proposed infiltration systems will overflow in larger storm events through their contributing

trench drains. The proposed infiltration systems will infiltrate the majority of stormwater runoff

from the site as shown within the hydrologic calculations. Infiltration System ‘A’ will completely

infiltrate stormwater runoff from during the 1, 10, and 25 year storm events. A small overflow

(0.21 CFS) is observed from this system during the 100 year storm event. Infiltration System ‘B’

will completely infiltrate stormwater runoff during the 1 year storm. A very small overflow (0.13

CFS) is observed from Infiltration System ‘B’ during the 10 year storm event. In the 25 and 100

year storm events, Infiltration System ‘B’ will overflow at a rate of 1.28 CFS and 6.58 CFS

respectively.

The proposed stormwater management facilities result in significant reductions in peak rates of

runoff when compared to existing conditions. During the 1, 10, 25, and 100 year storm events,

the percent reductions observed are 100%, 96.4%, 73.4%, and 26.1% respectively.

This section describes the design and analysis of the proposed conditions used to demonstrate

that the SWPPP meets the requirements of the General Permit.

The Six Step Process For Stormwater Site Planning and Practice Selection

Step 1: Site Planning

The following practices and site features were incorporated in the site design:

13

Preserving hydrology - Maintaining drainage divides

Forest, vegetative cover – The maximum amount of forest and vegetative cover has been

maintained and/or provided.

Topography (contour lines, existing flow paths, steep slopes, etc.) has been maintained or

disturbed to the minimum extent practicable.

Soil (hydrologic soil groups, highly erodible soils, etc.)

Bedrock, significant geology features have been accounted for.

Step 2: Determine Water Quality Treatment Volume (WQv)

The following method has been used to calculate the WQv.

90% Rule - According to the New York State Stormwater Design Manual, Section 4.1,

the water quality volume is determined from the 90% rule. The method is based on

90% of the average annual stormwater runoff volume which must be provided due to

impervious surfaces. The Water Quality Volume (denoted as the WQv) is designed to

improve water quality sizing to capture and treat 90% of the average annual

stormwater runoff volume. The WQv is directly related to the amount of impervious

cover created at a site. The average rainfall storm depth for 90% of storms in New

York State in one year is used to calculate a volume of runoff. The rainfall depth

depends on the location of the site within the state. From this depth of rainfall, the

required water quality volume is calculated.

The project is a redevelopment and therefore will comply with the strategies outlined within

Chapter 9: Redevelopment Projects of the Design Manual. There are different options to control

water quality depending on the redevelopment.

The proposed stormwater management practices will effectively treat 100% of the 1 year storm

for all impervious areas on-site which is consistent with the requirements for Redevelopment

Projects.

14

Step 3: Runoff Reduction Volumes (RRv) by Applying Green Infrastructure Techniques and

Standard SMP's

RRv is not required for this project since it is a redevelopment.

Step 4: Determine the minimum RRv Required

RRv is not required for this project since it is a redevelopment.

Step 5: Apply Standard Stormwater Management Practices to Address Remaining Water Quality

Volume

Filtering Practices

Perimeter Sand Filter (F-3)

Description

A filter that incorporates a sediment chamber and filer bed as parallel vaults adjacent to a

parking lot. Stormwater filtering systems capture and temporarily store the WQv and pass it

through a filter bed of sand, organic matter, or soil. Filtered runoff may be collected and

returned to the conveyance system, or allowed to partially exfiltrate into the soil.

Non Standard/Alternative SMP's (for Redevelopment Projects)

Hydrodynamic Separators

Hydrodynamic separators will be used to provide pretreatment of the water quality flow

rate for separating sediment, debris, floatables, etc. from the runoff prior to discharge to the

SMP's.

15

Step 6: Apply Volume and Peak Rate Control Practices to Meet Water Quantity Requirements

Infiltration Systems

Infiltration Basin (I-2)

Description

An infiltration practice that stores the water quality volume in a shallow depression,

before it is infiltrated it into the ground. R-Tank chambers are proposed and are a

subsurface storage solution that allow stormwater to be stored within the void until it

can infiltrate into the ground. They are able to be used for residential, commercial or

industrial applications and provide a way to treat and dispose of stormwater runoff

underground. Water is infiltrated into the ground through the chambers and surrounding

crushed stone and will replenish the groundwater as a natural condition.

All practices exceed the required elements of SMP criteria as outlined in Chapter 6 of the NYS

Stormwater Management Design Manual. A summary of each category is provided below.

1. Feasibility – Stormwater practices are designed based upon unique physical environmental

considerations noted in the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual (NYSSMDM).

2. Conveyance – The design conveys runoff to the designed stormwater practice in a manner that is

safe, minimizes erosion and disruption to natural drainage channel and promotes filtering and

infiltration.

3. Pretreatment – All stormwater practices provide pretreatment as required in accordance with

NYSSMDM design guidelines.

4. Treatment Geometry – The plan provides water quality treatment in accordance with NYSSMDM

guidelines.

16

5. Environmental/Landscaping –Extensive landscaping has been provided for each proposed stormwater

practice to enhance pollutant removal and provide aesthetic enhancement to the property.

6. Maintenance – Maintenance for the environment practices has been provided and is detain the

SWPPP Report as required. Maintenance access is provided in the design plans.

In order to determine the post-development rates of runoff generated on-site, the following

drainage areas were analyzed in the post-development conditions. These areas are graphically

depicted on Drawing DA-2 "Proposed Drainage Area Map" located in Appendix "H".

One Design Point was identified for comparing peak rates of runoff in existing and proposed

conditions. Similarly, three separate drainage areas were identified in proposed conditions based

on the proposed drainage divides at the site. The numbers included in the name of each

drainage area correspond to the Design Point they drain towards.

The following is a description of each of the drainage areas analyzed in the proposed conditions

analysis:

Proposed Drainage Area A (PDA-A) is 0.555 acres in size and is located on the northern portion

of the property and encompasses the proposed Taco Bell site. This area consists of the proposed

Taco Bell building and drive-thru lane, parking areas, landscaped areas, and a small portion of off-

site area at the rear of the property. This drainage area drains towards a trench drain and drain

inlet, which will convey stormwater runoff to a hydrodynamic separator for water quality

treatment, and then to a subsurface infiltration system comprised of R-Tank UD Double storage

units. During larger storm events and once the R-Tank system is full, stormwater runoff will

overflow via the contributing trench drain to South Highland Avenue.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 85 and 5

minutes, respectively.

17

Proposed Drainage Area B-1 (PDA-B-1) is 0.536 acres in size and is located on the southern

portion of the property and encompasses the proposed 7-Eleven site. This area consists of the

proposed 7-Eleven building, gas station canopy, parking areas, landscaped areas, and a small

portion of off-site area at the rear of the property. This drainage area drains towards two trench

drains at the proposed driveways, which will convey stormwater runoff to a hydrodynamic

separator for water quality treatment, and then to a subsurface infiltration system comprised of

R-Tank UD Triple storage units. During larger storm events and once the R-Tank system is full,

stormwater runoff will overflow via the contributing trench drain to South Highland Avenue.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 86 and 5

minutes, respectively.

Proposed Drainage Area B-2 (PDA-B-2) is 0.147 acres in size and is located on the southern

potion of the site in the area of the gasoline pumps. This area consists of the concrete pad

beneath the canopy surrounding the gasoline pumps, and the concrete pad surrounding the

subsurface gasoline tanks. This drainage area drains towards proposed trench drains and then to

a proposed sand filter which will fully treat the runoff from the areas where gasoline filling will

occur. Once stormwater runoff leaves the proposed sand filter, it will be conveyed to a

hydrodynamic separator for additional water quality treatment. Stormwater runoff will then be

directed to a subsurface infiltration system comprised of R-Tank UD Double storage units.

During larger storm events and once the R-Tank system is full, stormwater runoff will overflow

via the contributing trench drain to South Highland Avenue.

The Curve Number (CN) and Time of Concentration (Tc) for this drainage area are 95 and 5

minutes, respectively.

Refer to Drawing DA-2 in Appendix H.

The peak rates of runoff to the design point of each of the analyzed drainage areas for each

storm are shown on the table below:

18

Table 3 Summary of Proposed Peak Rates of Runoff in Proposed Conditions

(Cubic Feet per Second)

Storm Recurrence Interval

DP-1

1 year 0.00 10 year 0.13 25 year 1.28 100 year 6.58

The reductions in peak rates of runoff from proposed to existing conditions are shown on the

table below:

Table 4 Percent Reductions in Peak Rates of Runoff (Existing vs. Proposed Conditions)

(Cubic Feet per Second)

Design Point

Storm Recurrence Frequency

(Years)

Existing Peak Runoff Rate

(cfs)

Proposed Peak Runoff Rate

(cfs)

Percent Reduction (%)

1 1 year 1.64 0.00 100.0 10 year 3.66 0.13 96.4 25 year 4.82 1.28 73.4 100 year 8.67 6.58 24.1

VI. SOIL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL

A potential impact of the proposed development on any soils or slopes will be that of erosion

and transport of sediment during construction. An Erosion and Sediment Control Management

Program will be established for the proposed development, beginning at the start of construction

and continuing throughout its course, as outlined in the "New York State Standards and

Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control," November 2016. A continuing maintenance

program will be implemented for the control of sediment transport and erosion control after

construction and throughout the useful life of the project.

The Operator shall have a qualified professional conduct an assessment of the site prior to the

commencement of construction and certify that the appropriate erosion and sediment controls,

19

as shown on the Sediment & Erosion Control Plans, have been adequately installed to ensure

overall preparedness of the site for the commencement of construction. In addition, the

Operator shall have a qualified professional conduct one site inspection at least every seven

calendar days and at least two site inspections every seven calendar days when greater than five

acres of soil is disturbed at any one time.

Prior to the commencement of construction activity, the owner or operator must identify the

contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) that will be responsible for installing, constructing, repairing,

replacing, inspecting and maintaining the erosion and sediment control practices included in the

SWPPP; and the contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) that will be responsible for constructing the

post-construction stormwater management practices included in the SWPPP. The owner or

operator shall have each of the contractors and subcontractors identify at least one person from

their company that will be responsible for implementation of the SWPPP. This person shall be

known as the trained contractor. The owner or operator shall ensure that at least one trained

contractor is on site on a daily basis when soil disturbance activities are being performed.

The owner or operator shall have each of the contractors and subcontractors identified above

sign a copy of the certification statement provided in Appendix G before they commence any

construction activity.

Soil Description

As provided by the United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service "Web

Soil Survey," soil classifications which exist on the subject site are described below.

Soils are placed into four hydrologic groups: A, B, C, and D. In the definitions of the classes,

infiltration rate is the rate at which water enters the soil at the surface and is controlled by the

surface conditions. Transmission rate is the rate at which water moves in the soil and is

controlled by soil properties. Definitions of the classes are as follows:

20

A. (Low runoff potential). The soils have a high infiltration rate even when thoroughly wetted.

They chiefly consist of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravels. They have

a high rate of water transmission.

B. The soils have a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly are

moderately deep to deep, moderately well drained to well drained soils that have moderately

fine to moderately coarse textures. They have a moderate rate of water transmission.

C. The soils have a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted. They chiefly have a layer that

impedes downward movement of water or have moderately fine to fine texture. They have a

slow rate of water transmission.

D. (High runoff potential). The soils have a very slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wetted.

They chiefly consist of clay soils that have a high swelling potential, soils that have a

permanent high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and

shallow soils over nearly impervious material. They have a very slow rate of water

transmission.

A soil’s tendency to erode is also described in the USDA web soil survey. The ratings in this

interpretation indicate the hazard of soil loss from unsurfaced areas. The ratings are based on

soil erosion factor K, slope, and content of rock fragments. The hazard is described as "slight,"

"moderate," or "SEVERE." A rating of "slight" indicates that little or no erosion is likely;

"moderate" indicates that some erosion is likely, that the temporarily unsurfaced / unstabilized

during construction may require occasional maintenance, and that simple erosion-control

measures are needed; and "SEVERE" indicates that significant erosion is expected, that the roads

or trails require frequent maintenance, and that erosion-control measures are needed.

Per the Soil Survey, the following soils listed below are present at the site. Following this list is a

detailed description of each soil type found on the property:

21

SYM. HYDRO. SOIL GROUP DESCRIPTION ChC B Charlton fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes Uf D Urban land

ChC, Charlton fine sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes

This soil is strongly sloping, very deep, and well drained. The parent material consists of glacial till

derived from granite, schist, and gneiss. Depth to the top of a seasonal high water table is at a

depth of more than 6 feet throughout the year. Available water capacity is moderate.

Hydrologic group: B

Erosion Hazard Rating: Moderate

Uf, Urban Land

This unit consists of areas where at least 60 percent of the land surface is covered with buildings

or other structures. Depth to the top of a seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6

feet throughout the year. Available water capacity is moderate.

Hydrologic group: D

Erosion Hazard Rating: Not Rated

On-Site Pollution Prevention

There are temporary pollution prevention measures used to control litter and construction

debris on site, such as:

Silt Fence

Inlet Protection

Stabilized Construction Entrance

Tree Protection

22

There will be inlet protection provided for all storm drains and inlets with the use of curb gutter

inlet protection structures and stone & block drop inlet protection, which keep silt, sediment and

construction litter and debris out of the on-site stormwater drainage system.

Temporary Control Measures

Temporary control measures and facilities will include silt fences, construction ditches, stabilized

construction access, temporary seeding, mulching and sediment traps with temporary riser and

anti-vortex devices.

Throughout the construction of the proposed redevelopment, temporary control facilities will be

implemented to control on-site erosion and sediment transfer. Construction ditches, if required,

will be used to direct stormwater runoff to temporary sediment traps for settlement. The

sediment traps will be constructed as part of this project will serve as temporary sediment basins

to remove sediment and pollutants from the stormwater runoff produced during construction.

Descriptions of the temporary sediment & erosion controls that will be used during the

development of the site including silt fence, stabilized construction access, seeding, mulching and

inlet protection are as follows:

1. Silt Fence is constructed using a geotextile fabric. The fence will be either 18 inches or 30

inches high. The height of the fence can be increased in the event of placing these devices on

uncompacted fills or extremely loose undisturbed soils. The fences will not be placed in

areas which receive concentrated flows such as ditches, swales and channels nor will the filter

fabric material be placed across the entrance to pipes, culverts, spillway structures, sediment

traps or basins.

2. Stabilized Construction Access consists of AASHTO No. 1 rock. The rock entrance will be a

minimum of 50 feet in length by 24 feet in width by 8 inches in depth.

3. Seeding will be used to create a vegetative surface to stabilize disturbed earth until at least

80% of the disturbed area has a perennial vegetative cover. This amount is required to

23

adequately function as a sediment and erosion control facility. Grass lining will also be used

to line temporary channels and the surrounding disturbed areas.

4. Mulching is used as an anchor for seeding and disturbed areas to reduce soil loss due to

storm events. These areas will be mulched with straw at a rate of 3 tons per acre such that

the mulch forms a continuous blanket. Mulch must be placed after seeding or within 48

hours after seeding is completed.

5. Inlet Protection will be provided for all stormwater basins and inlets with the use of curb &

gutter inlet protection and stone & block inlet protection structures, which will keep silt,

sediment and construction debris out of the storm system. Existing structures within existing

paved areas will be protected using “Silt Sacks” inside the structures.

6. Erosion Control Matting will be utilized on slopes and within swales, where applicable, to

provide stabilization in advance of vegetation being established. Such matting will be

biodegradable to facilitate long term growth of vegetation in swales, on slopes and within

stormwater management facilities.

The contractor shall be responsible for maintaining the temporary sediment and erosion control

measures throughout construction. This maintenance will include, but not be limited to, the

following tasks:

1. For dust control purposes, moisten all exposed graded areas with water at least twice a day

in those areas where soil is exposed and cannot be planted with a temporary cover due to

construction operations or the season (December through March).

2. Inspection of erosion and sediment control measures shall be performed at the end of each

construction day and immediately following each rainfall event. All required repairs shall be

immediately executed by the contractor.

3. Sediment deposits shall be removed when they reach approximately the height of the silt

fence. All such sediment shall be properly disposed of in fill areas on the site, as directed by

24

the Owner’s Field Representative. Fill shall be protected following disposal with mulch,

temporary and/or permanent vegetation and be completely circumscribed on the downhill

side by silt fence.

4. Rake all exposed areas parallel to the slope during earthwork operations.

5. Following final grading, the disturbed area shall be stabilized with a permanent surface

treatment (i.e. turf grass, pavement or sidewalk). During rough grading, areas which are not

to be disturbed for fourteen or more days shall be stabilized with the temporary seed

mixture, as defined on the plans. Seed all piles of dirt in exposed soil areas that will not

receive a permanent surface treatment.

Concrete Material and Equipment Management

Concrete washouts shall be used to contain concrete and liquids when the chutes of concrete

mixers and hoppers of concrete pumps are rinsed out after delivery. The washout facilities

consolidate solid for easier disposal and prevent runoff of liquids. The wash water is alkaline and

contains high levels of chromium, which can leach into the ground and contaminate groundwater.

It can also migrate to a storm drain, which can increase the pH of area waters and harm aquatic

life. Solids that are improperly disposed of can clog storm drain pipes and cause flooding.

Installing concrete washout facilities not only prevents pollution but also is a matter of good

housekeeping at your construction site.

Prefabricated concrete washout containers can be delivered to the site to provide maintenance

and disposal of materials. Regular pick-ups of solid and liquid waste materials will be necessary.

To prevent leaks on the job site, ensure that prefabricated washout containers are watertight. A

self installed concrete washout facility can be utilized although they are much less reliable than

prefabricated containers and are prone to leaks. There are many design options for the

washout, but they are preferably built below-grade to prevent breaches and reduce the

likelihood of runoff. Above-grade structures can also be used if they are sized and constructed

correctly and are diligently maintained. One of the most common problems with self-installed

25

concrete washout facilities is that they can leak or be breached as a result of constant use,

therefore the contractor shall be sure to use quality materials and inspect the facilities on a daily

basis.

Washouts must be sized to handle solids, wash water, and rainfall to prevent overflow.

Concrete Washout Systems, Inc. estimates that 7 gallons of wash water are used to wash one

truck chute and 50 gallons are used to wash out the hopper of a concrete pump truck.

For larger sites, a below-grade washout should be at least 10 feet wide and sized to contain all

liquid and solid waste expected to be generated in between cleanout periods. A minimum of 12-

inches of freeboard must be provided. The pit must be lined with plastic sheeting of at least 10-

mil thickness without holes or tears to prevent leaching of liquids into the ground. Concrete

wash water should never be placed in a pit that is connected to the storm drain system or that

drains to nearby waterways.

An above-grade washout can be constructed at least 10 feet wide by 10 feet long and sized to

contain all liquid and solid waste expected to be generated in between cleanout periods. A

minimum of 4-inches of freeboard must be provided. The washout structures can be

constructed with staked straw bales or sandbags double-or triple lined with plastic sheeting of at

least 10-mil thickness without holes or tears.

Concrete washout facilities shall not be located within 50 feet of storm drains, open ditches, or

water bodies and should be placed in locations that allow for convenient access for concrete

trucks. The contractor shall check all concrete washout facilities daily to determine if they have

been filled to 75 percent capacity, which is when materials need to be removed. Both above-and

below-ground self-installed washouts should be inspected daily to ensure that plastic linings are

intact and sidewalls have not been damaged by construction activities. Prefabricated washout

containers should be inspected daily as well as to ensure the container is not leaking or nearing

75 percent capacity. Inspectors should also note whether the facilities are being used regularly.

Additional signage for washouts may be needed in more convenient locations if concrete truck

operators are not utilizing them.

26

The washout structures must be drained or covered prior to predicted rainstorms to prevent

overflows. Hardened solids either whole or broken must be removed and then they may be

reused onsite or hauled away for recycling.

Once materials are removed from the concrete washout, a new structure must be built or

excavated, or if the previous structure is still intact, inspect it for signs of weakening or damage

and make any necessary repairs. Line the structure with new plastic that is free of holes or tears

and replace signage if necessary. It is very important that new plastic be used after every cleaning

because pumps and concrete removal equipment can damage the existing liner.

Construction Site Chemical Control

The purpose of this management measure is to prevent the generation of nonpoint source

pollution from construction sites due to improper handling and usage of nutrients and toxic

substances, and to prevent the movement of toxic substances from the construction site.

Many potential pollutants other than sediment are associated with construction activities. These

pollutants include pesticides; fertilizers used for vegetative stabilization; petrochemicals;

construction chemicals such as concrete products, sealers, and paints; wash water associated

with these products; paper; wood; garbage; and sanitary waste.

Disposal of excess pesticides and pesticide-related wastes should conform to registered label

directions for the disposal and storage of pesticides and pesticide containers set forth in

applicable Federal, State and local regulations that govern their usage, handling, storage, and

disposal.

Pesticides should be disposed of through either a licensed waste management firm or a

treatment, storage and disposal (TSD) facility. Containers should be triple-rinsed before

disposal, and rinse waters should be reused as product.

Other practices include setting aside a locked storage area, tightly closing lids, storing in a cool,

dry place, checking containers periodically for leaks or deterioration, maintaining a list of

27

products in storage, using plastic sheeting to line the storage areas, and notifying neighboring

property owners prior to spraying.

When storing petroleum products, follow these guidelines:

Create a shelter around the area with cover and wind protection;

Line the storage area with a double layer of plastic sheeting or similar material;

Create an impervious berm around the perimeter with a capacity of 110 percent greater

than that of the largest container;

Clearly label all products;

Keep tanks off the ground; and

Keep lids securely fastened.

Post spill procedure information and have persons trained in spill handling on site or on call at all

times. Materials for cleaning up spills should be kept on site and easily available. Spills should be

cleaned up immediately and the contaminated material properly disposed of. Maintain and wash

equipment and machinery in confined areas specifically designed to control runoff.

Thinners or solvents should not be discharged into sanitary or storm systems when cleaning

machinery. Use alternative methods for cleaning larger equipment parts, such as high-pressure,

high-temperature water washes, or steam cleaning. Equipment-washing detergents can be used,

and wash water may be discharged into sanitary sewers if solids are removed from the solution

first. (This practice should be verified with the local sewer authority.) Small parts can be cleaned

with degreasing solvents, which can then be reused or recycled.

Solid Waste Management and Portable Sanitary Management

The purpose of this management measure is to prevent the potential for solid waste such as

construction debris, trash, etc. from construction sites due to improper handling and storage.

Debris and litter should be removed periodically from the BMP’s and surrounding areas to

prevent clogging of pipes and structures. All construction material shall be stored in designated

28

staging areas. Roll-off containers shall be placed on site and all empty containers, construction

debris and litter shall be placed in the containers.

Portable sanitary units may be utilized on-site or bathrooms will be provided within construction

trailers. A sanitation removal company will be hired to pump/remove any sanitary waste. In the

event that portable sanitary units are used and then cleaned after being emptied, the rinse water

may not be disposed of to the storm drain system. It shall be contained for later disposal if it

can’t be disposed of on-site. Remove paper and trash before cleaning the portable sanitary units.

The portable sanitary units shall be located away from the storm drain system if possible. Provide

over head cover for wash areas if possible. Maintain spill response material and equipment on site

to eliminate the potential for contaminants and wash water from entering the storm drain

system.

Permanent Control Measures and Facilities for Long Term Protection

Towards the completion of construction, permanent sediment and erosion control measures will

be developed for long term erosion protection. The following permanent control measures and

facilities have been proposed to be implemented for the project:

1. A Sand Filter will be utilized and incorporates a sediment chamber and filer bed as parallel

vaults adjacent to a parking lot. Stormwater filtering systems capture and temporarily store

the WQv and pass it through a filter bed of sand, organic matter, or soil. Filtered runoff may

be collected and returned to the conveyance system, or allowed to partially exfiltrate into

the soil.

2. Hydrodynamic Separator Water Quality Structure will be used to provide pretreatment of

the water quality flow rate for separating sediment, debris, floatables, etc. from the runoff

prior to discharge to the SMP's.

3. Catch Basins / Trench Drain sumps will be used to remove some of the coarse sand and grit

sediment before entering the drainage system. Each catch basin will be constructed with an

18 inch deep sump.

29

4. Seeding of at least 70% perennial vegetative cover will be used to produce a permanent

uniform erosion resistant surface. The seeded areas will be mulched with straw at a rate of 2

tons per acre such that the mulch forms a continuous blanket.

Specifications for Soil Restoration

Prior to the final stabilization of the disturbed areas, soil restoration will be required for all

vegetated areas to recover the original properties and porosity of the soil. Soil Restoration

Requirements are provided on Table 5 below:

Table 5 Soil Restoration Requirements

Type of Soil Disturbance Soil Restoration

Requirement Comments/Examples

No soil disturbance Restoration not permitted Preservation of Natural Features

Minimal soil disturbance Restoration not required Clearing and grubbing Areas where topsoil is stripped only – no change in grade

HSG A&B HSG C&D Protect area from any ongoing construction activities apply 6 inches

of topsoil Aerate* and apply 6 inches of topsoil

Areas of cut or fill HSG A&B HSG C&D Clearing and grubbing Aerate and apply 6 inches of topsoil

Apply full Soil Restoration**

Heavy traffic areas on site (especially) in a zone 5-25 feet around buildings but not within a 5 foot perimeter around foundation walls)

Apply full Soil Restoration (decompaction and compost enhancement)

Areas where Runoff Reduction and/or Infiltration practices are applied

Restoration not required, but may be applied to enhance the reduction specified for appropriate practices.

Keep construction equipment from crossing these areas. To protect newly installed practice from any ongoing construction activities construct a single phase operation fence area.

Redevelopment projects Soil Restoration is required on redevelopment projects in areas where existing impervious area will be converted to pervious area.

30

* Aeration includes the use of machines such as tractor-drawn implements with coulters making a narrow

slit in the soil, a roller with many spikes making indentations in the soil, or prongs which function like a

mini-subsoiler.

** Per "Deep Ripping and De-compaction, DEC 2008."

During periods of relatively low to moderate subsoil moisture, the disturbed subsoils are

returned to rough grade and the following full soil restoration steps applied:

1. Apply 3 inches of compost over subsoil.

2. Till compost into subsoil to a depth of at least 12 inches using a cat-mounted ripper,

tractor-mounted disc, or tiller, mixing, and circulating air and compost into subsoils.

3. Rock-pick until uplifted stone/rock materials of four inches and larger size are cleaned off

the site.

Specifications for Final Stabilization of Graded Areas

Final stabilization of graded areas consists of the placement of topsoil and installation of

landscaping (unless the area is to be paved, or a building is to be constructed in the location).

Topsoil is to be spread as soon as grading operations are completed. Topsoil is to be placed to a

minimum depth of six inches on all embankments, planting areas and seeding/sod areas. The

subgrade is to be scarified to a depth of two inches to provide a bond of the topsoil with the

subsoil. Topsoil is to be raked to an even surface and cleared of all debris, roots, stones and

other unsatisfactory material.

Planting operations shall be conducted under favorable weather conditions as follows:

Permanent Lawns - April 15 (provided soil is frost-free and not excessively moist) to May

15; August 15 to October 15.

31

Temporary Lawn Seeding - if outside of the time periods noted above, the areas shall be

seeded immediately on completion of topsoil operations with annual ryegrass (Italian rye) at a

rate of six pounds per 1,000 square feet. Temporary lawn installation is permitted provided the

soil is frost-free and not excessively moist. The permanent lawn is to be installed the next

planting season.

On slopes with a grade of 3 horizontal to 1 vertical or greater, and in swales, a geotextile netting

or mat shall be installed for stabilization purposes as shown on the Plans. Seeded areas are to be

mulched with straw or hay at an application rate of 70-90 pounds per 1,000 s.f. Straw or hay

mulch must be spread uniformly and anchored immediately after spreading to prevent wind

blowing. Mulches must be inspected periodically and in particular after rainstorms to check for

erosion. If erosion is observed, additional mulch must be applied. Netting shall be inspected

after rainstorms for dislocation or failure; any damage shall be repaired immediately.

All denuded surfaces which will be exposed for a period of over two months or more shall be

temporarily hydroseeded with (a) perennial ryegrass at a rate of 40 lbs per acre (1.0 lb per 1000

square feet ); (b) Certified "Aroostook" winter rye (cereal rye) @ 100 lb per acre (2.5 lb/1000

s.f.) to be used in the months of October and November.

Permanent turfgrass cover is to consist of a seed mixture as follows:

(a) Sunny sites

Kentucky Bluegrass 2.0-2.6 pounds/1000 square feet

Perennial Ryegrass 0.6-0.7 pounds/1000 square feet

Fine Fescue 0.4-0.6 pounds/1000 square feet

(b) Shady sites

Kentucky Bluegrass 0.8-1.0 pounds/1000 square feet

Perennial Ryegrass 0.6-0.7 pounds/1000 square feet

32

Fine Fescue 2.6-3.3 pounds/1000 square feet

All plant materials shall comply with the standards of the American Association Of Nurserymen

with respect to height and caliper as described in its publication American Standard for Nursery

Stock, latest edition.

VII. CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE

During the construction phase and following construction of the project, a number of

maintenance measures will be taken with respect to the site maintenance. Measures to be taken

included the following:

1. During Construction

A comprehensive sediment and erosion control plan will be in place during the construction

period. Maintenance measures for sediment and erosion controls will include:

A qualified professional acceptable to the municipality will be hired by the owner or operator to

monitor the installation and maintenance of the sediment and erosion control plans. The

qualified professional shall report directly to the Engineering Consultant and shall be responsible

for ensuring compliance with the design of the sediment and erosion control plans.

The qualified professional so hired will inspect all sediment and erosion control measures at least

every seven calendar days. In the event that there has been a variance with the design of the

sediment and erosion control measures so that the ability of the measures to adequately perform

the intended function is lessened or compromised and/or the facilities are not adequately

maintained, the qualified professional shall be required to report such variance to the Engineering

Consultant within 48 hours and shall be empowered to order immediate repairs to the sediment

and erosion control measures.

33

The qualified professional will also be responsible for observing the adequacy of the vegetation

growth (trees, shrubs, groundcovers and turfgrasses) in newly graded areas and for ordering

additional plantings in the event that the established plant materials do not adequately protect

the ground surface from erosion.

2. Following Construction

Site maintenance activities on the property will include:

Grounds maintenance, including mowing of lawns;

Planting of trees, shrubs and groundcovers; pruning of trees and shrubs;

Application of fertilizer and herbicides;

Maintenance of stormwater management area;

Grounds maintenance on the site will be performed by landscaping contractor.

Fertilizer is typically applied twice in the year - once in the spring and once in the fall. The

application of fertilizer is usually necessary to maintain healthy lawn growth due to competition

for nutrients with trees and shrubs and since the clippings are often removed. It is not

recommended that fertilizer be applied during the summer. It is at this time that lawns are

typically dormant.

Fertilizers come in three basic types: (1) Organic; (2) Soluble synthetic and (3) Slow release.

Organic fertilizers are derived from plant or animal waste. Since they are heavier and bulkier

than other fertilizers, it is necessary to apply a much greater amount at one time. Soluble

synthetic fertilizers are predictable with determining the exact impact on a lawn. However more

applications are necessary since their effect is often short term. Slow release fertilizers have a

high percentage of nitrogen so quantities that need be handled at one time are smaller. Slow

release fertilizers will be utilized by the project.

34

A complete fertilizer contains all three of the primary nutrients - nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P)

and potassium in the form of potash (K). Typically, a 3-1-2 ratio of nutrients (N-P-K) is used for

lawn applications.

Fertilizer shall be applied by the landscape contractor in accordance with the manufacturer’s

instructions. The application of fertilizer does require some skill on the part of the operator.

Should there be a spill of fertilizer, the landscape contractor shall be required to scrape or

vacuum it up. The area will then be watered in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions

to ensure that the fertilizer becomes soluble and available to plants and does not run off.

Black Diamond Equity LLC will be responsible for the long-term operation and maintenance of

the permanent stormwater management practices. The permanent stormwater management

practices shall be maintained in accordance with the Maintenance Inspection Checklists provided

in Appendix E.

VIII. CONCLUSION

This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan has been prepared to describe the project’s pre and

post-development stormwater management improvements and its sediment and erosion control

improvements to be utilized during construction. The proposed permanent improvements and

the interim improvements to be utilized during construction have been designed in accordance

with the requirements of the:

Requirements of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation

(NYSDEC) SPDES General Permit No. GP-0-20-001, effective January 29, 2020.

Chapter 184 "Stormwater, Drainage, Erosion and Water Pollution Control" of the Village

of Briarcliff Manor Code.

The project employs a variety of practices to enhance stormwater quality and reduce peak rates

of runoff associated with the proposed improvements. These measures include a sand filter,

hydrodynamic separators, and proposed subsurface infiltration systems.

35

Based on the foregoing, it is our professional opinion that the proposed improvements will

provide water quantity and quality enhancements which exceed the above mentioned

requirements and are not anticipated to have any adverse impacts to the site or any surrounding

areas.

APPENDIX A

EXISTING HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS

Scenario:

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

APPENDIX B

PROPOSED HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS

Scenario:

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

BRIARCLIFF

APPENDIX C

NYSDEC STORMWATER SIZING CALCULATIONS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITSDESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION

Continuous Deflective Separation Unit

DESCRIPTION

Date Printed: 12/14/2020

SYMBOL

VALUE

UNITS

265 South Highland Avenue Redevelopment

DESCRIPTION

Date Printed: 12/14/2020

Perimeter Sand Filter

DESCRIPTION SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

DESCRIPTION SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

DESCRIPTION SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

DESCRIPTION SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

SYMBOL VALUE UNITS

Continuous Deflective Separation Unit

DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION

DESCRIPTION

Date Printed: 12/14/2020

APPENDIX D

GEOTECHNICAL DATA REPORT

CARLIN SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES Consulting Geotechnical and Environmental Engineers

61 Main Street, Sayreville, New Jersey 08872 Tel. (732) 432-5757 Fax. (732) 432-5717

8 January 2021

Principal: Robert B. Simpson, P.E.

Associates: Meredith R. Anke, P.E. Stephen Rossi, P.E. Catherine Simpson, E.I.T Michal Wroblewsi, E.I.T. Kurt W. Anke Eric J. Shaw

JMC Site Development Consultants 120 Bedford Rd. Armonk, NY 10504 Attn: Mr. Paul J Dumont, EIT Senior Designer Re: Report on Subsurface Soil and Foundation Investigation Proposed Development 265 South Highland Ave. Briarcliff Manor, NY (CSA Job #20-162) Dear Mr. Dumont: In accordance with our proposal dated 10 September 2020 and your subsequent authorization, we have completed a Subsurface Soil and Foundation Investigation for the referenced site. The purpose of this study was to determine the nature and engineering properties of the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions for the new construction, to recommend a practical foundation scheme, to determine the allowable bearing capacity of the site soils, and to determine the soil permeability in the new subsurface stormwater management areas. We understand that the planned construction will consist of a Taco Bell restaurant and a 7-Eleven convenience store with a fueling station and fuel island canopy. The proposed construction will also include two subsurface stormwater management areas, a site retaining wall and new driveways and parking areas. To guide us in our study, you have provided us with a site plan that indicate the location of the proposed construction. Our scope of work for this project included the following:

1. Reviewed the proposed layout, the existing site conditions, the expected soil conditions, and planned this study.

2. Retained General Borings Inc. to advance twelve (12) test borings at the

subject site.

3. Performed four (4) borehole infiltration tests at selected locations on the subject site.

2

4. Laid out the boring locations in the field, provided full time inspection of the explorations, obtained soil samples, and prepared detailed logs and a Boring Location Plan.

5. Performed soil identification tests on selected soil samples in our laboratory.

6. Analyzed the field and laboratory test data and prepared this report containing the results of this study.

1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

The project site is located at 265 South Highland Avenue in Briarcliff Manor, New York.

The site is currently developed with two commercial buildings. The remainder of the site is paved with asphalt parking and driveways. There is also a retaining wall along the northern property line that is approximately 4 to 8 feet in height. Site grades vary from approximate elevation +90.0 to elevation +70.0 and generally slope down from southeast to northwest.

2.0 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION

We understand that the planned construction will consist of a new Taco Bell restaurant, a

7-Eleven convenience store. The proposed building finished floor elevations are +77.5 and +81.0, respectively. Cuts and fills in the area of the proposed Taco Bell are on the order of four (4) feet. Cuts and fills in the area of the proposed 7-Eleven are on the order of two (2) feet.

In order to achieve the desired site grades, the existing retaining wall will be continued

along the northern property line. The new retaining wall will range up to approximately five (5) feet in height. Site development will also include a new feul pump island canopy, underground storage tanks, two subsurface stormwater management areas, a site retaining wall and new driveways and parking areas.

The following evaluation is based on information that has been provided to our office as

of the date of this report. Once the planned construction has been completed, a copy of the plans should be forwarded to our office so that we can review them along with the recommendations in this report. At that time, any changes or additional recommendations can be provided, if required. 3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS To determine the subsurface soil and groundwater conditions at the site, twelve (12) test borings were advanced by General Borings, Inc. at the locations shown on the enclosed Boring Location Plan. The borings were performed using hollow stem augers and split spoon sampling. Detailed boring logs have been prepared and are included in this report. The borings were completed in October 2020 under the full-time inspection of Carlin-Simpson & Associates. Our field engineer visually identified all of the soil samples obtained during the boring operations and

3

select samples were tested in our laboratory. The results of these tests are also included in this report.

3.1 Soils

The soil descriptions shown on the boring logs are based on the Burmister Classification System. In this system, the soil is divided into three components: Sand (S), Silt ($) and Gravel (G). The major component is indicated in all capital letters, the lesser in lower case letters. The following modifiers indicate the quantity of each lesser component:

Modifier Quantity trace (t) 0 -10% little (l) 10% - 20% some (s) 20% - 35% and (a) 35% - 50%

The subsurface soil conditions encountered in the test borings can be summarized as follows: Stratum 1A Asphalt

At the surface in borings B-1, B-2, and B-4 to B-10 is asphalt pavement that ranges in thickness from approximately 3 to 4 inches.

Stratum 1B Topsoil

At the surface in borings B-3 and B-11 is topsoil that ranges from approximately 2 to 3 inches in thickness.

Stratum 2 Existing Fill

Below the surface layers in eleven (11) of the borings is existing fill that generally consists of brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (to some) Silt, trace (to some) coarse to fine Gravel. The existing fill includes debris (i.e. wood) in select boring locations. In the borings, this stratum extends to depths ranging from 1’6” to 12’0” below the existing ground surface.

Stratum 3 Silty Sand

Beneath the existing fill is medium dense to dense brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (to some) Silt, trace (to little) coarse to fine Gravel. Borings B-2, B-8, and B-10 were terminated in this stratum at a depth of 32’0”, 27’0”, and 20’0” below the existing ground surface, respectively. This stratum in the remainder of the borings extends to depths ranging from 4’6” to 16’0” below the existing ground surface.

Stratum 4 Weathered Schist Bedrock

Underlying existing fill in borings B-1 and B-11, and below the Silty Sand in borings B-3 and B-5 through B-7 is completely weathered Schist. This layer is soil like in state, however there are denser pockets that likely cannot be conventionally excavated. The weathered rock was encountered at depths ranging from 1’6” to 16’0” below the existing ground surface. Each of the remaining borings were terminated upon auger refusal on probable harder bedrock at depths ranging from 5’5” to 20’3” below the existing ground surface.

4

3.2 Groundwater Observations for groundwater were made during sampling and upon completion of the drilling operations at each boring location. During the subsurface investigation, groundwater was encountered in some of the test borings at depths ranging from 6’0” to 24’6” below the existing ground surface (elevations +73.7 to +56.5). During construction, we expect that perched or trapped water may be encountered within the silty site soils and/or along the soil/rock interface, especially during wet periods. Proper groundwater control measures may be required in the event that water is encountered in the site excavations. Groundwater on the subject site will be controlled by the topography and the underlying bedrock surface. As surface water infiltrates the ground, the water will travel along the soil/rock interface and through fractures in the bedrock. Variations in the location of the long-term water table may occur as a result of changes in precipitation, evaporation, surface water runoff, and other factors not immediately apparent at the time of this exploration. 4.0 SUMMARY OF DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS

Below is a summary of the major design and construction considerations for this project.

Additional recommendations are provided in the following sections of this report.

Subsurface Conditions (Section 3.0) - Existing Fill is present at the site to depths of 1’6” to 12’0” below the existing ground

surface (elevations +77.5 to +69.0). - Groundwater is present at depths ranging from 6’0” to 24’6” below the existing ground

surface (elevations +73.7 to +56.5). - Completely weathered Schist bedrock was encountered in most of the boring locations at

depths ranging from 1’6” to 16’0” below the ground surface (elevations +76.0 to +63.7). - A summary of the subsurface observations is provided in Tables 2, 3, 6, 8 and 10, below.

Building Areas Preparation (Section 5.1)

- Surface materials must be stripped from proposed building areas. - Existing fill is present below both building footprints. The existing fill is not an

acceptable material to support the new building foundations and floor slabs. - The existing fill shall be completely removed and replaced with new compacted fill. - New backfill shall be compacted to at least 95% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density

(ASTM D1557).

Building Foundations Recommendations (Section 5.2) - The new foundations may be designed as spread footing type foundations bearing on

virgin soil or engineer-approved compacted fill. - Net design bearing pressure is 4,000 psf. - Minimum depth for frost protection is 42 inches. - Seismic Site Class is D or Stiff Soil Profile.

5

Building Floor Slabs Recommendations (Section 5.3) - The virgin soil and new compacted fill can be used for support of the proposed floor

slabs. - The floor slabs may be designed as slab on grade. - Modulus of subgrade reaction is 200 pci.

Canopy Evaluation (Section 6.0)

- The existing fill is not an acceptable material to support the canopy foundation. - After the demolition of the building is complete and all debris is removed, the exposed

subgrade soil shall be densified prior to excavating canopy foundations. - The foundations shall be lowered to bear directly on virgin soil below the existing fill. - Alternatively, the existing fill can be completely removed from below the foundation

areas and replaced with new compacted fill. - New backfill shall be compacted to at least 95% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density

(ASTM D-1557). - The new foundations may be designed as spread footing type foundations bearing on

virgin soil or engineer-approved compacted fill. - Net design bearing pressure is 4,000 psf. - Minimum depth for frost protection is 42 inches.

Additional Site Recommendations (Section 7.0)

- Subsurface stormwater Management Systems (Section 7.1) Borehole infiltration tests were performed in the proposed subsurface stormwater

management areas in borings B-3, B-7, B-9 and B-11. - New Retaining Wall (Section 7.2)

Existing fill is not suitable for support of the proposed retaining wall and shall be completely removed from the wall area and replaced with new structural fill.

Retaining wall may be designed as an MSE wall or a reinforced concrete wall. For an MSE wall, additional excavation will be required beyond the wall area in

order to install the geogrid reinforcement. Retaining wall foundation or base shall bear on virgin soil, weathered bedrock, or

new compacted fill. Net design bearing pressure is 4,000 psf.

- Pavement (Section 7.4) Densified existing fill, virgin soil, new compacted fill, and weathered rock may be

used to support the pavement.

5.0 BUILDING EVALUATION We understand that the planned construction will consist of a Taco Bell restaurant and a 7-Eleven convenience store. The proposed building finished floor elevations are +77.5 and +81.0, respectively. Below is a summary of boring observations for each proposed building.

6

Taco Bell

Borings B-1, B-1A and B-2 were preformed in the Taco Bell building footprint. Existing site grades in the proposed building range from +82.0 to +73.0. We expect cuts and fills on the order of 4-feet to achieve the desired finished floor elevation. There is an existing 6-foot-high retaining wall that runs through the proposed building footprint. A summary of the boring observations for the Taco Bell are provided in Table 1 below.

Table 1 – Summary of Boring Observations for the Taco Bell

Boring No.

Approximate Ground Surface

Elevation

Observed Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth to Bottom of

Existing Fill (Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock (Elevation)

B-1 +74.0 NE to 5’5” 1’6” (+72.5) CWR @ 1’6” (+72.5) AR @ 5’5” (+68.6)

B-1A +75.0 NE to 13’0” 5’0” (+70.0) AR @ 13’0” (+62.0) B-2 +81.0 24’6” (+56.5) 12’0” (+69.0) NE to 32’0”

NE – Not Encountered AR – Auger Refusal on Probable Bedrock CWR – Schist, Completely Weathered Existing fill is present throughout the Taco Bell building footprint to depths ranging from

1’6” to 12’0” below the existing ground surface (elevations +72.5 to +69.0). The depth of the existing fill is variable and may be deeper or shallower in unexplored areas of the site. The existing fill is not an acceptable bearing material for the new Taco Bell building foundation or floor slab. The consistency and density of the fill are not predictable. Certain areas may contain clean dense soils while other areas may contain loose material, void spaces, and/or debris, as shown by the boring data. The existing fill material creates the possibility of intolerable differential settlements under loading. Based on the boring observations and proposed construction, we anticipate an excavation of up to twelve (12) feet below existing grade will be required to remove the existing fill within the building footprint. Where existing fill is present within the proposed building footprint, the existing fill shall be completely removed and replaced with new compacted fill as described in Section 5.1 below. Provided that the existing fill and any other unsuitable materials encountered during construction are removed from the proposed building footprint and that the building area is prepared as outlined in this report, it is our opinion that the new structural fill, virgin soil, and weathered rock can support the new Taco Bell building foundations and floor slab.

7

7-Eleven

Borings B-4, B-5 and B-6 were preformed in the 7-Eleven building footprint. Existing site grades in the proposed building range from +82.0 to +79.0. We expect cuts and fills on the order of 2 feet will be required to achieve desired finish floor elevations. A summary of the boring observations for the building are provided in Table 2 below.

Table 2 – Summary of Boring Observations for 7-Eleven

Boring No.

Approximate Ground Surface

Elevation

Observed Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth to Bottom of

Existing Fill (Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock (Elevation)

B-4 +79.0 10’0” (+69.0) 5’5” (+73.6) NE to 32’0”

B-5 +79.7 6’0” (+73.7) 8’0” (+71.7) CWR @ 16’0” (+63.7) AR @ 20’3” (+59.45)

B-6 +80.5 NE to 7’0” NE CWR @ 4’6” (+76.0) AR @ 7’0” (+73.5)

NE – Not Encountered AR – Auger Refusal on Probable Bedrock CWR – Schist, Completely Weathered

Existing Fill was encountered in most of the 7-Eleven building borings to depths of 5’5”

and 8’0” below the existing ground surface (elevations +73.6 and +71.7). The depth of the existing fill is variable and may be deeper or shallower in unexplored areas of the site. The existing fill is not an acceptable bearing material for the new 7-Eleven building foundations or floor slab. The consistency and density of the fill are not predictable. Certain areas may contain clean dense soils while other areas may contain loose material, void spaces, and/or debris, as shown by the boring data. The existing fill material creates the possibility of intolerable differential settlements under loading. Based on the boring observations and proposed construction, we anticipate an excavation of up to eight (8) feet below the existing ground surface elevation will be required to remove the existing fill within the building footprint. Where existing fill is present within the proposed building footprint, the existing fill shall be completely removed and replaced with new compacted fill as described in Section 5.1 below.

The proposed 7-Eleven building footprint is in close proximity to the eastern property line. We expect that the proposed building area preparation will require an excavation of up to eight feet below the existing ground surface to remove the existing fill. To safely layback the slope in accordance with OSHA guidelines, the excavation will extend beyond the property line by at least 12 feet. Therefore, temporary construction easements will be required for the excavation to extend onto the neighboring property, or a temporary support of excavations system (SOE) will be necessary in this area. Provided that the existing fill and any other unsuitable materials encountered during construction are removed from the proposed building footprint and that the building area is

8

prepared as outlined in this report, it is our opinion that the new structural fill, virgin soil, and weathered rock can support the new building foundations and floor slab.

5.1 Building Areas Preparation As part of the site development, the existing structures will be demolished. All debris resulting from the demolition of these structures must be completely removed from the new building footprints, extending at least ten (10) feet beyond the new building limits, where practical. This shall include the complete removal of all foundations, floor slabs, retaining walls, utilities, pavement, and miscellaneous debris. Where the removal of existing structures or associated materials extends below the planned building, the resulting excavations shall be backfilled with new compacted fill as described below. Existing utilities, where they are encountered within the planned building areas, should be either abandoned or rerouted around the new structures. Once the utility has been rerouted or abandoned, the section of pipe and any associated structure within the building areas should be completely removed. The removal of the pipe and structure must also include any loose fill around the pipe or structure. After the pipe, associated structure, and associated loose backfill have been removed, the resulting excavation shall be backfilled with new controlled fill as described below.

Removal of Existing Fill Existing fill is present throughout both building footprints. The existing fill extends to depths ranging from 1’6” to 8’0” below the existing ground surface (elevation +73.6 to +69.0). As discussed above, the existing fill is not a suitable bearing material for the new building foundations or floor slabs and must be completely removed and replaced as described below. Based on the boring observations and the proposed construction, we anticipate an excavation up to 12-feet in the Taco Bell and up to 8-feet in the 7-Eleven below existing ground surface elevations will be required to remove the existing fill. The excavation shall extend through the existing fill, down to the virgin soil. At the bottom of the excavation, the removal of the unsuitable material shall extend horizontally beyond the building limits a minimum distance of 1’0” plus a distance equal to the depth of the excavation below the planned foundation bearing elevation. For example, if the removal of the existing fill extends vertically 5’0” below the planned foundation bearing elevation, the excavation must extend horizontally a minimum of 6’0” (1’0” plus 5’0”) beyond the new building limits at that location. The removal of the existing fill from the proposed building areas shall be performed under the full time inspection of Carlin-Simpson & Associates. The on-site representative from Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall direct the contractor during this operation to ensure that all of the unsuitable material has been removed from the proposed building areas. During the removal of the unsuitable material, the contractor should segregate the potentially re-usable existing soil/fill material from the non-reusable fill (i.e. debris and topsoil). The on-site representative from Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall evaluate the suitability of the

9

excavated materials for use as compacted fill during the excavation and prior to its re-use. Potentially usable fill should be stockpiled and covered with tarps or plastic sheeting for protection from excess moisture. Any fill material that is or becomes wet must be dried prior to its re-use. After the surface materials and existing fill have been removed and prior to the placement of new structural fill, the exposed subgrade soil must be graded level and proofrolled by several passes of a vibratory drum roller. The proofrolling operation is necessary to densify the underlying soils. Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall be retained to observe the proofrolling of the subgrade. If any soft or otherwise unsuitable soils are noted, the unsuitable material shall be removed and replaced with new structural fill. Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall be responsible for determining what material, if any, is to be removed and will direct the contractor during this operation.

Installation of New Structural Fill New fill required to achieve final grades shall consist of either engineer-approved on-site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported sand and gravel shall contain less than 20% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. The new fill shall be placed in layers not exceeding one (1) foot in thickness and each layer shall be compacted to at least 95% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D1557). Each layer must be compacted, tested, and approved by the Carlin-Simpson & Associates field representative prior to placing subsequent layers. The suitability of the excavated soil for reuse as compacted structural fill is discussed in Section 7.6 below.

If imported structural fill will be required during construction, the imported structural fill shall meet the following specified gradation:

US Standard Sieve Size Percent Finer By Weight 3 inch 100 No. 4 30-80 No. 40 10-50 No. 200 0-20

5.2 New Building Foundations

Once the planned building areas have been prepared as described in Section 5.1 above,

the new foundations may be constructed on the virgin site soils, new compacted fill, and weathered bedrock. The new building foundations may be designed as shallow spread footings using net design bearing pressures as listed in Table 3 below.

All of the exterior footings shall bear at the minimum depth listed below for protection

from frost. Interior column footings may bear on the virgin soil or new structural fill just below the floor slabs provided the structure is heated during winter. The footings shall have minimum dimensions as listed below.

10

Table 3 – Building Foundation Design Parameters

Description Value Foundation Bearing Material Virgin Soil, New Compacted Fill,

Weathered Bedrock Net Design Bearing Pressure 4,000 psf Minimum Frost Depth 42 inches Minimum Column Dimension 30 inches Minimum Wall Dimension 18 inches

The excavations for the new foundations shall be performed under the full-time

inspection of Carlin-Simpson & Associates. The on-site representative shall confirm that the foundation bearing material is capable of supporting the design bearing pressure. In the event that weathered rock or rock is encountered in the foundation excavations, “Special Construction Procedures” must be employed. At that time Carlin-Simpson & Associates should be contacted to provide further recommendations of foundations bearing on dissimilar material (i.e. rock and soil). Prior to the placement of formwork, reinforcement steel, and concrete, the bearing subgrade soil shall be cleaned of all loose soil and where soil is encountered at the subgrade elevation, it shall be compacted with several passes of a small vibratory drum trench compactor (i.e. Wacker Model RT560), a heavy vibratory plate tamper (i.e. Wacker BPU 3545A or equivalent), or “jumping jack” style tamper (i.e. Wacker Model BS 600). This must be performed under the observation of Carlin-Simpson & Associates. If instability is observed during the compaction of the bearing subgrade, the soft soil shall be removed and replaced with new compacted fill.

5.3 Floor Slabs on Grade

The floor slabs may be designed as a slab on grade bearing on densified virgin soil or on new engineer-approved structural fill. Floor slabs design parameters are provided in Table 4 below. A minimum of 6 inches of 3/4-inch clean crushed stone is recommended beneath the concrete slabs for additional support and drainage.

Table 4 – Building Floor Slabs Design Parameters

Description Value Slabs Subgrade Material Densified Virgin Soil or New Structural Fill Modulus of Subgrade Reaction (k) 200 pci Crushed Stone Cushion Thickness 6 inches

We anticipate that small fills will be required in the proposed building areas to achieve

the desired finished floor elevations. New fill for the floor slabs shall consist of either suitable on-site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported sand and gravel shall contain less than 20% material by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. The new fill shall be placed in layers not exceeding

11

one (1) foot in loose thickness and each layer shall be compacted to at least 92% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D1557). Fill layers shall be compacted, tested, and approved before placing subsequent layers.

5.4 Building Settlement

Settlement of individual footings, designed in accordance with recommendations presented in this report, is expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed structure. For footings placed on natural soils or new compacted fill approved by Carlin-Simpson & Associates and constructed in accordance with the requirements outlined in this report, maximum total settlement is expected to be on the order of 1-inch or less. Maximum differential settlement between adjacent columns or load bearing walls is expected to be ½-inch.

The above settlement values are based on our engineering experience with similar soil conditions and the anticipated structural loading. These estimated settlements are intended to guide the structural engineer with their design. It is critical that Carlin-Simpson & Associates be retained to observe the foundation bearing surfaces and to confirm the recommended bearing pressures.

5.5 Seismic Design Considerations From site-specific test boring data, the Site Class was determined from New York State Building Code Section 1613.2.2. The site-specific data used to determine the Site Class typically includes soil test borings to determine Standard Penetration resistances (N-values). Based on estimated average N-values in the upper 100 feet of soil profile, the site can be classified as Site Class D – Stiff Soil Profile. New structures should be designed to resist stress produced by lateral forces computed in accordance with Section 1613 of the New York State Building Code. The values in Table 5 shall be used for this project.

Table 5 – Seismic Design Values

Description Value Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods, [Fig 1613.2.1 (1)] SS=0.294g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period, [Fig 1613.2.1 (2)] S1=0.061g Site Coefficient [Table 1613.2.3 (1)] Fa= 1.57 Site Coefficient [Table 1613.2.3 (2)] Fv= 2.40 Max Considered Earthquake Spectral Response for Short Periods [Eq 16-36] SMS=0.460g Max Considered Earthquake Spectral Response at 1-Second Period [Eq 16-37] SM1=0.148g Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods [Eq 16-38] SDS=0.307g Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period [Eq 16-39] SD1=0.098g

12

6.0 CANOPY EVALUATION Site development will also include a new pump island canopy. Boring B-10 was completed in the vicinity of the canopy footprint. A summary of the boring observations in the proposed canopy area is provided in Table 6 below.

Table 6 – Summary of Boring Observations for the Fuel Island Canopy

Boring No.

Approximate Ground Surface

Elevation

Observed Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth to Bottom of Existing Fill

(Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock

(Elevation) B-10 +82.0 NE to 22’0” 4’6” (+77.5) NE to 20’0” NE – Not Encountered

Exiting fill was encountered in boring B-10 to a depth of 4’6” below the existing ground surface (elevation +77.5). The depth of the existing fill is expected to be variable and may be deeper in unexplored areas of the site. The existing fill is not an acceptable bearing material for the new canopy foundations. The consistency and density of the soil fill are not predictable. Certain areas may contain clean dense soils while other areas may contain loose material, void spaces, and/or debris. The existing soil fill creates the possibility of intolerable differential settlements under loading. To eliminate the potential for damaging differential settlements, the new canopy foundations shall be lowered to bear directly on the virgin Silty Sand (Stratum 3) below the existing fill layer. Alternately, where loose existing fill extends beyond a depth where lowering the proposed footings is not practical, it should be completely removed to virgin soil and replaced with new compacted fill to the planned subgrade elevation. Recommendations for preparation of the canopy area are provided in Section 6.1. Foundation recommendations for the canopy are provided in Section 6.2 below.

6.1 Canopy Area Preparation As part of the site development, the existing building in the footprint of the new canopy will be demolished. All debris resulting from the demolition of this structure must be completely removed from the new canopy area, extending at least ten (10) feet beyond the new canopy limits, where practical. This shall include the complete removal of all foundations, walls, floor slabs, utilities, pavement, and miscellaneous debris. Where the removal of existing structures or associated materials extends below the planned canopy foundations, the resulting excavations shall be backfilled with new compacted fill as described below. In addition, existing utilities, where they are encountered within the planned canopy footing area, should be either abandoned or rerouted around the new structure. Once the utility has been rerouted or abandoned, the section of pipe and any associated structure within the canopy area should be completely removed. The removal of the pipe and structure must also include any loose fill around the pipe or structure. After the pipe, associated structure, and associated loose backfill have been removed, the resulting excavation shall be backfilled with new controlled fill as described below.

13

Densification of Subgrade Soils (Proofrolling) After any existing structures and utilities are removed as outlined above; the exposed subgrade shall be proofrolled with at least five (5) passes of a large vibratory drum roller (i.e. Dynapac CA 250 or equivalent). The proofrolling is necessary to densify the underlying soils. The proofrolling must be performed prior to the excavation for new foundations and the placement of new fill in the canopy areas. In areas where the existing subgrade is to be cut, the proofrolling of the subgrade in those areas should be performed once the proposed subgrade is achieved. A representative from Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall observe the proofrolling operation. If any excessive movement is noted during the proofrolling, the soft soil shall be removed and replaced with new compacted fill. The Carlin-Simpson & Associates representative shall be responsible for determining what material, if any, is to be removed and will direct the Contractor during this operation.

Installation of New Structural Fill New fill required to achieve final grades shall consist of either engineered-approved on-

site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported sand and gravel shall contain less than 20% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. The new fill shall be placed in layers not exceeding one (1) foot in thickness and each layer shall be compacted to at least 95% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D1557). Each layer must be compacted, tested, and approved the Carlin-Simpson & Associates field representative prior to placing subsequent layers. The suitability of the excavated soil for reuse as compacted structural fill is discussed in Section 7.6 below. If imported structural fill will be required during construction, the imported structural fill shall meet the specified gradation in Section 5.2.

6.2 New Canopy Foundation Design Recommendations

The new canopy foundations may be designed as shallow foundations lowered to bear on virgin soils, new compacted fill, or weathered bedrock. Alternately, where loose existing fill extends beyond a depth where lowering the proposed footings is not practical, the existing fill must be completely removed from beneath the “zone of influence” of the new canopy foundation. In this case, at the bottom of the excavation, the removal of the existing fill shall extend horizontally beyond the foundation footprint a minimum distance equal to the depth of the excavation below the planned foundation bearing elevation on each side of the foundation. For example, if the removal of the existing fill extends vertically two (2) feet below the planned footing bearing elevation, the excavation must extend horizontally a minimum of three (3) feet (1 foot plus 2 feet) beyond the new footing limits at that location. The foundation design parameters in Table 7 below shall be used for design.

All of the exterior footings shall bear at the minimum depth listed below for protection from frost, however, in some cases, we anticipate that footings will extend deeper than the minimum frost depth to bear below the existing fill. The footings shall have minimum dimensions as listed below.

14

Table 7 – New Canopy Foundation Design Parameters

Description Value Foundation Bearing Material Virgin Soil, New Compacted Fill,

Weathered Bedrock Net Design Bearing Pressure 4,000 psf Minimum Frost Depth 42 inches Minimum Column Dimension 30 inches

7.0 SITE EVALUATION

Our recommendations for the proposed site development including the new subsurface stormwater management areas, retaining wall, new underground utilities, pavement of new driveways and parking areas, temporary construction excavations, and the suitability of the existing site soils for reuse as structural fill are provided below. A summary of the boring observations for the site are provided in Table 8 (Subsurface Stormwater Management Areas), and Table 10 (Retaining Wall Area).

7.1 Subsurface Stormwater Management System It is our understanding that two new subsurface stormwater management areas will be constructed at the site. Both will be located the central western portion of the site. Borings B-3 and B-11 were performed for the northern subsurface stormwater management area. The northern subsurface stormwater management area proposed invert elevation is +69.25. Groundwater was encountered in boring B-3 at a depth of 11’0” below the existing ground surface (elevation +69.0). Based on the boring observations and the proposed depth of the system, the eastern portion of the bottom of the system will be in Silty Sand (Stratum 3) and the western portion bottom of the system will be in weathered rock, and groundwater was observed close to the proposed invert elevation. Borings B-7 and B-9 were performed in the southern subsurface stormwater management area. The southern subsurface stormwater management area proposed invert elevation is +73.05. Groundwater was encountered in boring B-9 at a depth 7’0” below the existing ground surface (elevation +72.0). Based on the boring observations and the proposed depth of the system, the eastern portion of the bottom of the system will be in the existing fill (Stratum 2) and the western portion bottom of the system will be in Silty Sand (Stratum 3). A summary of the boring observations can be found in Table 8 below.

15

Table 8 – Summary of Boring Observations for Subsurface Stormwater Management Areas

Boring No.

Approximate Ground Surface

Elevation

Observed Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth to Bottom of Existing Fill

(Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock (Elevation)

B-3 +80.0 11’0” (+69.0) 6’0” (+74.0) CWR @ 14’6” (+65.5) AR @ 15’2” (+64.8)

B-7 +79.0 NE to 10’0” 3’0” (+76.0) CWR @ 7’6” (+71.5) AR @ 10’0” (+69.0)

B-9 +79.0 7’0” (+72.0) 7’0” (+72.0) AR @ 11’6” (+67.5)

B-11 +80.0 NE to 10’3” 5’0” (+75.0) CWR @ 5’0” (+75.0) AR @ 10’3” (+69.8)

NE – Not Encountered AR – Auger Refusal on Probable Bedrock CWR – Schist, Completely Weathered

During this study, four (4) borehole infiltration tests were performed in the proposed

subsurface stormwater management areas. The infiltration tests were performed in accordance with NYSDEC procedures. The results of infiltration tests that were performed are summarized in Table 9 below. The vertical permeability rate (Km) was also calculated using the equation below.

Table 9 – Summary of Stormwater Infiltration Test Pits and Test Results

Boring No.

Approx. Ground Surface

Elevation

Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth of Test Below Existing

Ground Surface

(Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock or Auger Refusal

(Elevation)

Field Infiltration

Rate

Calculated Vertical

Permeability Rate, Km

B-3 +80.0 11’0” (+69.0) 8’0” (+72.0) CWR @ 14’6” (+65.5) AR @ 15’2” (+64.8) 26.0 in/hr 3.7 in/hr

B-7* +79.0 NE to 10’0” 8’0” (+71.0) CWR @ 7’6” (+71.5) AR @ 10’0” (+69.0) 0.5 in/hr* 0.02 in/hr*

B-9** +79.0 7’0” (+72.0) 5’0” (+74.0) AR @ 11’6” (+67.5) 3.0 in/hr** 0.16 in/hr**

B-11* +80.0 NE to 10’3” 8’0” (+72.0) CWR @ 5’0” (+75.0) AR @ 10’3” (+69.8) 0.0 in/hr* 0.0 in/hr*

AR – Auger Refusal on Probable Intact Schist Bedrock NE – Not Encountered *Test performed in completely weathered rock ** Test performed in the existing fill stratum Note that test at B-7 and B-11 were performed in the weathered rock stratum. The

completely weathered rock stratum is soil like in state, however there are denser pockets that may have lower infiltration rates. In addition, test at B-9 was performed in the existing fill stratum. The infiltration rates in the existing fill may vary because the consistency and density of the fill are not predictable.

16

Should subsurface stormwater management areas be planned in other portions of the property, they should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The subsurface stormwater management systems must be designed in accordance with the applicable New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) regulations and the New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual (January 2015). The testing requirements are outlined in Appendix D of the manual.

7.2 New Site Retaining Wall

We understand that the new construction will also include a new retaining wall located along the northern property line. Boring B-8 was performed in the area of the new retaining wall. Currently, there is an existing retaining wall along the northern property line. The new retaining wall will extend the old wall easterly approximately 50-feet. It is our understanding that the new wall will range up to approximately 5 feet in height. A summary of the soil boring performed in the area of the proposed retaining wall is provided in Table 10, below.

Table 10 – Summary of Boring Observations for New Retaining Wall

Boring No.

Approximate Ground Surface

Elevation

Observed Depth to Groundwater

(Elevation)

Depth to Bottom of

Existing Fill (Elevation)

Depth to Bedrock (Elevation)

B-8 +82.0 15’0” (+67.0) 8’0” (+74.0) NE to 27’0” NE – Not Encountered The type of retaining wall for this project was unknown at the time of this report.

However, design options for this site include either a cast-in-place steel reinforced concrete wall or a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall. The MSE wall consists of segmental concrete block units with geogrid reinforcement. In this case, the MSE wall will require additional excavation beyond the wall area in order to install the geogrid reinforcement.

Preparation of Retaining Wall Area

In order to prepare the retaining wall area for construction, all surface materials including asphalt, concrete, topsoil, and surface vegetation must be completely removed from the new retaining wall area. The removal of the surface materials shall extend at least 5 feet beyond the proposed construction limits, where practical.

Based on the boring data, there is existing fill in the retaining wall area followed by virgin soil and weathered bedrock. The existing fill is not suitable for support of the proposed retaining wall in its current state. As discussed previously, these soils create the possibility of intolerable differential settlements under loading. In the event that existing fill material is present below the wall subgrade elevation, this material must be completely removed from the limits of new wall construction. The removal of the unsuitable material shall extend horizontally a minimum distance of 5 feet beyond the front face of the new wall or extend horizontally a minimum distance equivalent to the vertical depth

17

of the required excavation below the proposed wall base or foundation bearing elevation, whichever is greater. This is required to ensure that all unsuitable material has been removed from beneath the wall base or foundation zone of influence, which shall be defined by an imaginary plane projecting downward and away from the front edge of the wall base or foundation on a one horizontal to one vertical (1H:1V) projection. The exposed subgrade at the bottom of the excavation shall then be compacted by several passes with a vibratory drum trench compactor (i.e. Wacker Model RT560) or a vibratory drum roller (i.e. Wacker Model RD-25 Roller). The densification of the subgrade shall be inspected by a representative from Carlin-Simpson & Associates. In the event that soft or unsuitable soil is identified during the densification, the unsuitable material shall be removed, as directed by the Carlin-Simpson & Associates representative, and replaced with new compacted fill. Once the subgrade has been approved by Carlin-Simpson & Associates, the excavation can be backfilled to the planned subgrade elevation with new structural fill. New compacted fill shall consist of either suitable on-site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported fill shall contain less than 20% by weight passing the No. 200 sieve. The fill shall be placed in 12 inch thick loose layers and compacted to at least 95% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D1557). Each layer must be compacted, tested, and approved before placing subsequent layers. The footings or base of the wall can be designed using a net design bearing pressure as outlined in Table 10 below.

Drainage and Wall Backfill

Drains must be provided behind the retaining wall to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure against the wall. The drain should consist of a 4-inch perforated pipe surrounded by 12 inches of clean 3/4-inch crushed stone. The pipe and crushed stone shall be wrapped in a geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). The drain pipe should be installed behind the base or foundation of the retaining wall to collect the water behind the wall and be connected into the site stormwater collection system or extended to daylight beyond the wall area.

Behind the wall, the backfill placed adjacent to the wall and above the footing drain shall consist of freely draining aggregate meeting the requirements of AASHTO No. 57 or 67 Aggregate. This drainage fill shall extend a horizontally a minimum of 12 inches from the back of the wall and shall extend vertically to at least 2 feet below final grade behind the wall. The crushed stone shall be separated from the surrounding soil using a geotextile filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Fill material used to construct the reinforced soil zone of MSE walls shall consist of one of the following soil types according to their USCS designations (GP, GW, SW, SP, SM). The fill material must also meet the gradation in Table 11 below. The material passing the No. 200 sieve must be either non-plastic or of low plasticity. The maximum particle size shall be limited to 1.5 inches. Materials outside of these criteria, including on-site soils, require approval of the Wall Design Engineer and Carlin-Simpson & Associates.

18

Table 11 – Gradation Requirements for MSE Wall Reinforcement Zone

Sieve Size Percent Passing 1.5 inch 100 3/4 inch 75-100

No. 4 20-90 No. 40 0-60 No. 200 0-20

Fill material used as backfill behind non-MSE walls shall consist of suitable on-site soil approved by Carlin-Simpson & Associates or an imported sand and gravel mixture containing less than 20% material by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. The maximum particle size shall be 8 inches. Fill containing topsoil, brush, sod, peat, roots, or other organic, perishable or deleterious matter, including, but not limited to, snow, ice, or frozen soils, shall be considered unsuitable material for use behind the retaining wall.

The contractor shall be responsible for providing soil samples and completing all necessary laboratory testing, as required by Carlin-Simpson & Associates, to determine soil design parameters for any imported fill used in the construction of the wall. The wall design engineer must approve the fill to be utilized in the reinforced zone. Backfill placed behind the retaining wall shall be placed in 12-inch loose layers. Each layer shall be compacted using a hand guided mechanical tamper to 92% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D1557). Excessive compaction adjacent to the retaining wall must be avoided. Layers shall be tested and approved before placing subsequent layers. Large compaction equipment must not be used within 10 feet of the new wall to prevent potential damage to the wall.

Design Considerations The retaining wall base shall bear on virgin soil, weathered bedrock, or new compacted fill. For segmental block walls, the wall base must be adequately embedded for internal and global stability. For reinforced concrete walls, the footing or base of the wall shall bear at the minimum depth listed below for protection from frost.

The soil adjacent to the site retaining wall will exert a horizontal pressure against the wall. This pressure is based on the soil density and the Coefficient of Active Earth Pressure (ka). The values listed in Table 12 below shall be used for design of the new retaining wall.

19

Table 12 – Retaining Wall Design Parameters

Description Value Foundation Bearing Material Virgin Soil or New Compacted Fill Net Design Bearing Pressure 4,000 psf (2.0 TSF) Backfill Moist Unit Weight 130 pcf Backfill Friction Angle 30 degrees Cohesion 0 psf Active Earth Pressure Coefficient (ka) 0.33 Equivalent Fluid Pressure (EFP) 42.9 pcf Friction Coefficient 0.45 Minimum Frost Depth 42 inches Minimum Surcharge 250 psf

Where applicable, additional surcharge loads, such as driveways, parking areas,

structures, construction equipment, temporary materials storage, etc. must also be incorporated into the wall design.

The Wall Design Engineer shall prepare a complete wall design (i.e. drawings, specifications, and calculations), which shall be designed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of New York and submitted to Carlin-Simpson & Associates for review. MSE retaining walls shall be designed in accordance with the recommendations of the NCMA Design Manual for Segmental Retaining Walls (Current Edition) and in accordance with AASHTO standards. Carlin-Simpson & Associates can prepare an MSE wall design as an additional service upon request.

The design shall consider the internal stability of the reinforced soil mass and shall be in completed accordance with acceptable engineering practice. In addition, external stability, including sliding, overturning, and bearing, as well as global stability shall be evaluated in accordance with acceptable engineering practice.

The wall design engineer shall be responsible for determining the required geogrid reinforcement lengths and elevations based on his stability analysis (including global stability) and the properties of the geogrid reinforcement used in the design.

7.3 Utilities

New utilities may bear in the densified existing fill, virgin site soils, new compacted fill and weathered rock. The bottom of all trenches should be excavated clean and shaped so a hard bottom is provided for the pipe support. If any soft or unsuitable soil conditions are encountered during construction, the unsuitable materials must be removed and replaced with new compacted fill. Trench hammering may be required to install the new utilities in portions of the site where weathered rock is encountered above the planned utility invert elevation. Where rock is encountered in the utility excavations, it must be removed to at least six (6) inches below

20

planned pipe invert. The over-excavated six (6) inches shall then be filled with new sandy fill and compacted to at least 92% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D-1557) to act as a cushion on the rock. For areas where existing fill is encountered within the utility excavations, the subgrade at bottom of the utility excavation shall be compacted in place with a vibratory drum trench compactor or “jumping jack” style tamper. Carlin-Simpson & Associates must evaluate these areas for the presence of soft or unsuitable material within the existing fill matrix. If instability is observed, portions of this fill may have to be removed and replaced with new compacted fill. Carlin-Simpson & Associates will determine this during construction. In the event that the trench bottom becomes soft due to the inflow of surface or trapped water, the soft soil shall be removed and the excavation filled with a minimum of six (6) inches of 3/4-inch clean crushed stone to provide a firm base for support of the pipe. Sump pits and pumps should be adequate to keep the excavations dry.

After the utility is installed, the trench must be backfilled with compacted fill. The fill shall consist of suitable on-site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported fill shall contain less than 20% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. Large rock fragments and boulders must not be placed directly against the pipe. Controlled compacted fill shall be placed in one (1) foot loose layers and each layer shall be compacted to at least 92% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D-1557). The backfill must be free of topsoil, debris, and large boulders or rock fragments.

7.4 Pavement

We understand that the proposed construction will also include new paved parking areas

and driveways. Based on the provided site plan, we expect that cuts up to approximately 4 feet and fills up to approximately 2 feet will be required to achieve the planned subgrade elevations in the new pavement areas. The densified existing fill, virgin soil, weathered bedrock, and new compacted fill may be used to support the pavement.

To prepare the new pavement areas, the existing surface materials (i.e. topsoil,

vegetation, etc.) must be removed from the planned pavement areas. In the proposed pavement areas, the existing structures and debris resulting from the demolition of these structures must be completely removed from the new pavement area, extending at least five (5) feet beyond the new paving limits, where practical. After all debris has been removed, the exposed subgrade soil that is either at or below the planned subgrade elevation shall be proofrolled with a large vibratory drum roller (i.e. Dynapac 250 or equivalent) to densify the underlying soils. The on-site representative from Carlin-Simpson & Associates shall witness the proofrolling operation. If any excessive movement is noted during the proofrolling, the soft or unsuitable soil shall be removed and replaced with new compacted fill.

Areas where existing fill is encountered shall be compacted in place. Carlin-Simpson &

Associates must evaluate these areas for the presence of soft or unsuitable material within the

21

existing fill matrix. Portions of this fill may have to be removed and replaced with new compacted fill. Carlin-Simpson & Associates will determine this during construction. Where new fill is required to achieve final grades, it shall consist of either suitable on-site soil or imported sand and gravel. Imported sand and gravel shall contain less than 20% by weight passing a No. 200 sieve. New fill shall be placed in layers not exceeding one (1) foot in loose thickness and each layer shall be compacted to at least 92% of its Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D-1557). After the planned subgrade has been proofrolled and new compacted fill has been placed as required, the new pavement subbase may be placed on the existing site soils, bedrock, and new compacted fill.

Asphalt Pavement Section The new pavement subbase may be placed on densified existing fill, virgin soil, or new compacted fill. A minimum of six (6) inches of dense graded aggregate (DGA) is recommended for the subbase layer for drainage and additional pavement support. We recommend that the following pavement section be used for the parking lots and driveways. This pavement section is subject to local government approval. 2” Asphalt Top Course NYSDOT, Type 6F 3” Asphalt Base Course NYSDOT, Type 3 6” Stone Subbase (DGA) NYSDOT, Type 1 Approved Compacted Subgrade (Minimum CBR = 10)

Based on the boring data, we anticipate that the densified existing site soils, weathered

bedrock, and new compacted fill will provide a CBR value that is equal to or greater than 10, which can adequately support the above pavement sections.

Rigid (Concrete) Pavement

We expect that the proposed construction may also include rigid concrete pavement in portions of the site. The new concrete pavement should be designed for light vehicles (autos, pickup trucks, vans) and occasional delivery or trash pick-up truck traffic. The rigid concrete pavement section design is based on a 20-year design life and the anticipated traffic data. This pavement section is subject to local government approval.

Concrete Section 4,000 psi 5.5” Gravel Subbase Course NYSDOT Type 4 6” Approved Compacted Subgrade (Minimum CBR = 10)

The rigid concrete pavement should be reinforced with welded wire fabric or reinforcing steel bars for crack control. Contraction joints should also be provided with a maximum spacing of 10 feet. The project structural engineer or the site engineer shall determine the type, size, and spacing of the reinforcement based on the anticipated loading.

22

7.5 Temporary Construction Excavations and Excavation Protections

The proposed 7-Eleven building footprint is in close proximity to the eastern property line. We expect that the proposed building area preparation will require an excavation of up to eight (8) feet below the existing ground surface to remove the existing fill. To safely layback the slope in accordance with OSHA guidelines, the excavation will extend beyond the property line by at least 12 feet. Therefore, temporary construction easements will be required for the excavation to extend onto the neighboring property, or a temporary support of excavations system (SOE) will be necessary in this area.

Temporary construction excavations should be conducted in accordance with the most recent OSHA guidelines or applicable federal, state or local codes. A qualified person should evaluate the excavations at the time of construction to determine the appropriate soil type and allowable slope configuration. Based on the boring data, we believe the site soils would have the following classifications as defined by the OSHA guidelines.

Soil Type Possible Classification Maximum Slope or Bench Existing Fill “C” 1½H:1V Virgin Soil “B” or “C” 1H:1V or 1½H:1V

Weathered Rock “B” 1H:1V

Temporary support (i.e. trench boxes, sheeting and shoring, etc.) should be used for any excavation that cannot be sloped or benched in accordance with the applicable regulations, where necessary to protect adjacent utilities and structures, or where saturated soils or water seepage is encountered within the excavation.

A New York State licensed professional engineer must design all temporary and

permanent support systems. The contractor will select the shoring type and submit design calculations for the proposed shoring method to Carlin-Simpson & Associates for review. The soil adjacent to the temporary support system will exert a horizontal pressure against the system. This pressure is based on the soil unit weight, coefficient of active earth pressure, and depth of the excavation. Support of Excavation design parameters are listed in Table 13 below.

Table 13 – Temporary Sheeting and Shoring Design Parameters

Description Value Moist Unit Weight (pcf) 130 Friction Angle ( , deg) 30 Cohesion (c, psf) 0 Active Earth Pressure Coefficient (ka)1 0.33 Equivalent Fluid Pressure (pcf) 42.9 Passive Earth Pressure Coefficient (kp)1 3.0

23

7.6 Suitability of the In-Situ Soils for Use as Compacted Fill

The suitability of each soil stratum for use as compacted fill is discussed below. Stratum 2 Existing Fill

The existing fill generally consists of brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (to some) Silt, trace (to some) coarse to fine Gravel. The existing fill includes varying amounts of debris (i.e. wood). The existing fill is generally suitable for reuse, as long as it remains relatively dry for optimum compaction and all the debris (i.e. wood) is removed prior to reuse as compacted fill.

Stratum 3 Silty Sand

The Silty Sand generally consists of brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (to some) Silt, trace (to little) coarse to fine Gravel. This stratum is generally suitable for reuse. Note that some of this stratum will not be suitable for reuse if it is excavated from below the groundwater table.

Stratum 4 Weathered Schist Bedrock

Excavated rock or completely weathered rock may be used as fill material provided that the material is well graded and has been approved prior to use by Carlin-Simpson & Associates. All rock fill must be well blended with smaller rock fragments and/or soil. The maximum particle size for rock placed as fill in the building areas shall be three (3) inches in diameter. In other areas of the site, the maximum particle size shall be six (6) inches in diameter. Most of the excavated rock will be too large for use as compacted fill in structural areas. The excavated rock must therefore be processed through a crusher to provide suitable fill material. Rock fill should not be used where it will interfere with the installation of foundations, floor slabs or utilities. Also, it shall not be used as backfill directly against concrete walls or utilities.

The boring data indicates that the on-site soils contain a low to moderate percentage of silt (10 to 35%). The moderate silt content soils will be moisture sensitive. If the soil becomes too wet, it will be difficult to achieve adequate compaction. In addition, the site soils that extend below the groundwater table are completely saturated and therefore, unsuitable for reuse. Proper moisture conditioning of the soil will be required. New compacted fill should be within 2% (+/-) of its optimum moisture content at the time of placement. In the event that the on-site material is too wet at the time of placement and cannot be adequately compacted, the soil should be aerated and allowed to dry or the material removed and a drier cleaner fill material used. In the event that the on-site material is too dry at the time of placement and cannot be adequately compacted, water may be needed to increase the soil moisture content for proper compaction. The in-situ soils which exist throughout the site may become soft and weave if exposed to excessive moisture and construction traffic. The instability will occur quickly when exposed to these elements and it will be difficult to stabilize the subgrade. We recommend that adequate site drainage be implemented early in the construction schedule and if the subgrade becomes wet, the contractor should limit construction activity until the soil has dried.

24

The minimum compaction requirements for the various areas of the site are summarized in Table 14 below.

Table 14 – Minimum Compaction Requirements

Area Maximum Modified Dry Density (ASTM D-1557)

Below Foundations 95% Below Floor Slabs 92% Retaining Wall Subgrade 95% Retaining Wall Backfill 92% Pavement Areas 92% Exterior Slabs and Sidewalks 92% Utility Trenches 92% Landscape Areas 90%

8.0 GENERAL

The findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report represent our professional opinions concerning subsurface conditions at the site. The opinions presented are relative to the dates of our site work and should not be relied on to represent conditions at later dates or at locations not explored. The opinions included herein are based on information provided to us, the data obtained at specific locations during the study and our past experience. If additional information becomes available that might impact our geotechnical opinions, it will be necessary for Carlin-Simpson & Associates to review the information, reassess the potential concerns, and re-evaluate our conclusions and recommendations.

Regardless of the thoroughness of a geotechnical exploration, there is the possibility that conditions between borings and test pits will differ from those encountered at specific boring or test pit locations, that conditions are not as anticipated by the designers and/or the contractors, or that either natural events or the construction process have altered the subsurface conditions. These variations are an inherent risk associated with subsurface conditions in this region and the approximate methods used to obtain the data. These variations may not be apparent until construction.

The professional opinions presented in this geotechnical report are not final. Field observations and foundation installation monitoring by the geotechnical engineer, as well as soil density testing and other quality assurance functions associated with site earthwork and foundation construction, are an extension of this report. Therefore, Carlin-Simpson & Associates should be retained by the Owner to observe all earthwork and foundation construction, to document that the conditions anticipated in this study actually exist, and to finalize or amend our conclusions and recommendations Carlin-Simpson & Associates is not responsible or liable for the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report if Carlin-Simpson & Associates does not perform the observation and testing services.

25

Therefore, in order to preserve continuity in this project, the Owner shall retain the services of Carlin-Simpson & Associates to provide full time geotechnical related monitoring and testing during construction. At a minimum, this shall include the observation and testing of the following: 1) the removal of existing fill and unsuitable soil, where required; 2) the proofrolling of the subgrade soil prior to the placement of new compacted fill; 3) the placement and compaction of controlled fill; 4) the excavation for the new foundations; 5) the construction of retaining walls; and 6) the preparation of the subgrade for the floor slabs and pavement areas.

This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical

engineering practice. No other warranty is expressed or implied. The evaluations and recommendations presented in this report are based on the available project information, as well as on the results of the exploration. Carlin-Simpson & Associates should be given the opportunity to review the final drawings and site plans for this project to determine if changes to the recommendations outlined in this report are needed. Should the nature of the project change, these recommendations should be re-evaluated. This report is provided for the exclusive use of JMC Site Development Consultants and the project specific design team and may not be used or relied upon in connection with other projects or by other third parties. Carlin-Simpson & Associates disclaims liability for any such third-party use or reliance without express written permission. Use of this report or the findings, conclusions or recommendations by others will be at the sole risk of the user. Carlin-Simpson & Associates is not responsible or liable for the interpretation by others of the data in this report, nor their conclusions, recommendations or opinions. If the conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from those stated in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that additional recommendations can be made. Thank you for allowing us to assist you with this project. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact this office.

Very truly yours, CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES

CATHERINE K. SIMPSON, E.I.T. Project Manager

ROBERT B. SIMPSON, P.E. File No. 20-162

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-1

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +74.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 9/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 9/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

1 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace S-1 50/6" Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel) 1'6" Rec = 2"

2 moistSchist, completley weathered Gray coarse

3 to fine SAND, little Silt, and (-) coarse31 to fine Gravel

4 S-2 50/4" Schist, CWR, Gr cf S, l $, a (-) cf G Rec = 10"moist

5S-3 50/5" same 5'5" Rec = 4"

6 End of Boring @ 5'5" moistBedrock

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

No Groundwater Encountered

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-1A

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +75.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 9/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 9/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

18

2 S-1 8 FILL (Br cf S, t (+) $, l cf G) Rec = 9"6 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

3 6 little Silt, little (+) coase to fine Gravel)6

4 S-2 5 FIL (same, s $, s (+) cf G) Rec = 3"4 moist

5 3 5'0"3

6 S-3 4 Br cf S, t $, t cf G Rec = 13"5 moist

7 46

8 S-4 6 same, t (+) cf G Rec = 12"7 Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt, moist

9 6 trace coarse to fine Gravel

105

11 S-5 4 same, l cf G Rec = 4"10 moist

12 50/4"Auger refusal @ 12'6"

13 13'0" moived 3' eastEnd of Boring @ 13'0" auger refusal @ 13'0"

14 possible bedrock

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

No Groundwater Encountered

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-2

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +81.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 7/Oct/20

930 24'6" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 8/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

110

2 S-1 8 FILL (Br cf S, l (+) $, l cf G, w/wood) Rec = 12"7 moist

3 68

4 S-2 9 FILL (same, s $, s (+) cf G) Rec = 8"14 moist

5 1212

6 S-3 18 FILL (same, l $) Rec = 13"19 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

7 13 little (+) Silt, some (-) coarse to fine Gravel,18 with wood)

8 S-4 13 FILL (same) Rec = 14"17 moist

9 16

1012

11 S-5 11 FILL (same) Rec = 16"13 moist

12 12 12'0"

13

14

154

16 S-6 4 Br cf S, t (+) $, s (-) cf G Rec = 10"11 wet

17 11 Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (+) Silt,some (-) coarse to fine Gravel

18

19

2013

21 S-7 7 same Rec = 8"7 wet

22 9

8/Oct/20

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-2

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 2 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Depth

(ft.)Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKS

23

24

254

26 S-8 2 Br, gr cf S, l (+) $, t cf G Rec = 8"3 wet

27 4 Brown, gray coarse to fine SAND, little (+) Silt, trace coarse to fine Gravel

28

29

3016

31 S-9 27 same, s $ Rec = 20"37 wet

32 26 32'0"End of Boring @ 32'0"

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-3

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +80.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 6/Oct/20

945 11'0" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 6/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKS3 Topsoil 0'2"

1 S-1 6 FILL (Br cf S, l $, l cf G) Rec = 12"9 moist

2 710

3 S-2 13 FILL (same) Rec = 15"13 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND,

4 12 little Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel)

510

6 S-3 10 FILL (same) 6'0" Rec = 12"8 Br cf S, t $, l (-) cf G moist

7 56

8 S-4 6 same Rec = 10"7 moist

9 4Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt,

10 little (-) coarse to fine Gravel10

11 S-5 8 same, s $, t cf G Rec = 10"7 wet

12 6

13

1414'6"

15 Schist, Completely Weathered, GrayS-6 50/2" coarse to fine SAND, some Silt, little 15'2" Rec = 2"

16 coarse to fine Gravel moistEnd of Boring at 15'2"

17

18

19

20

21

22

6/Oct/20

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-4

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +79.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 8/Oct/20

10:30 10'0" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 8/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

110

2 S-1 10 FILL (Br cf S, l (+) $, t cf G) Rec = 20"10 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

3 10 little (+) Silt, trace coarse to fine Gravel)12

4 S-2 16 FILL (same) Rec = 6"23 moist

5 2712 5'5"

6 S-3 22 Br cf S, l $, s cf G Rec = 10"20 moist

7 2714

8 S-4 16 Br cf S, s (-) $, l mf G Rec = 12"17 moist

9 15Brown coarse to fine SAND, little (+) Silt,

10 some coarse to fine Gravel9

11 S-5 7 same Rec = 8"11 wet

12 4

13

14

15 15'0"4

16 S-6 7 Gr cf S, s (+) $, l cf G Rec = 20"8 wet

17 10

18Gray coarse to fine SAND, some (+) Silt,

19 little coarse to fine Gravel

2022

21 S-7 19 same, l (+) $ Rec = 18"12 wet

22 39

8/Oct/20

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-4

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 2 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Depth

(ft.)Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKS

23

24

2510

26 S-8 14 Gr cf S, s $, l (-) cf G Rec = 22"16 wet

27 17 Gray coarse to fine SAND, some Silt,little (-) coarse to fine Gravel

28

29 Boulder

3013

31 S-9 19 same, l (+) cf G Rec = 24"22 wet

32 17 32'0"End of Boring @ 32'0"

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-5

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +79.7GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 7/Oct/20

1400 6'0" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 7/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

112

2 S-1 14 FILL (Br cf S, l (-) $, l (+) cf G) Rec = 15"15 moist

3 2023

4 S-2 19 FILL (same, t $) Rec = 9"13 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

5 15 little (-) Silt, little (+) coarse to fine 7 Gravel)

6 S-3 16 FILL (same) Rec = 8"19 moist

7 1317

8 S-4 14 8'0" Rec = 7"11 Br cf S, t $, t cf G wet @ bottom 6"

9 7

104

11 S-5 4 same, s (+) $ Rec = 22"4 wet

12 3 Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt,trace coarse to fine Gravel

13

14

158

16 S-6 50/6" same, l cf G 16'0" Rec = 10"wet

17 Dense drilling @ 16'0"

18 Schist, Completley Weathered, Gray Bedrock starting @ 16'0"coarse to fine SAND, some Silt,

19 little coarse to fine Gravel

20S-7 50/3" Gr cf S, s $, l cf G (weathered rock) 20'3" Rec = 3"

21 End of Boring @ 20'3" wet

22

7/Oct/20

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-6

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +80.5GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 9/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 9/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

112

2 S-1 12 Br cf S, l (+) $, l cf G Rec = 18"12 Brown coarse to fine Sand, little (+) moist

3 12 Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel12

4 S-2 20 same Rec = 15"18 4'6" moist

5 50/4" Gr, br cf S, l (+) $, t cf G (weathered rock)S-3 50/6" Schist, Completely Weathered, Gray Rec = 5"

6 brown coarse to fine SAND, mistlittle (+) Silt, trace coarse to fine Gravel

7 7'0" Auger refusal @ 7'0"End of Boring @ 7'0" Bedrock starting @ 4'6"

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

No Groundwater Encountered

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-7

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +79.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 6/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 6/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

114 FILL (Br cf S, l (-) $, l cf G)

2 S-1 9 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, Rec = 14"7 little (-) Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel) moist

3 5 3'0"5

4 S-2 8 Br, cf S, s (+) $, t (+) mf G Rec = 10"5 moist

5 5 Brown coarse to fine SAND, 4 some Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel

6 S-3 3 same, s (-) $ Rec = 8"2 moist

7 713 7'6"

8 S-4 21 Gr cf S, l (+) $, l cf G (weathered rock) Rec = 7"50/3" Schist, Completely Weathered, Gray moist

9 coarse to fine SAND, little (+) Silt,little coarse to fine Gravel Auger refusal @ 10'0"

10 10'0" BedrockEnd of Boring @ 10'0"

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

No Groundwater Encountered

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-8

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +82.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 8/Oct/20

16:00 15'0" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 8/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

111

2 S-1 8 FILL (Br cf S, t (+) $, l (-) cf G) Rec = 6"7 moist

3 77

4 S-2 4 FILL (same) Rec = 05 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND,

5 6 trace (+) Silt, little (-) coarse to fine6 Gravel)

6 S-3 5 FILL (same, br, gr s (+) $) Rec = 18"7 moist

7 76

8 S-4 5 FILL (same, a $) 8'0" Rec = 20"10 Br cf S, t $, l cf G moist

9 15

1015

11 S-5 14 same Rec = 15"15 moist

12 16

13Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace Silt,

14 little coarse to fine Gravel

154

16 S-6 8 same, t cf G Rec = 14"8 wet

17 7

18

19

20 Boulder24

21 S-7 31 same Rec = 0"14

22 6

8/Oct/20

CARLIN - SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, N.J. B-8

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 2 of 2Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Depth

(ft.)Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKS

23

24 Brown coarse to fine SAND, some (-) Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel

255

26 S-8 10 Br cf S, s (-) $, l cf G Rec = 8"12 wet

27 5 27'0"End of Boring @ 27'0"

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-9

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +79.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 7/Oct/20

900 7'0" HSA DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 7/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'3"

18

2 S-1 9 FILL (Br cf S, t $, l cf G) Rec = 15"11 moist

3 86

4 S-2 10 FILL (same, s $) Rec = 12"9 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

5 6 trace Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel)7

6 S-3 12 FILL (same, l $, s cf G) Rec = 7"13 moist

7 10 7'0"8

8 S-4 11 Br cf S, t (+) $, t cf G Rec = 14"10 wet

9 7 Brown coarse to fine SAND, trace (+) Silt, trace coarse to fine Gravel

104

11 S-5 6 same, s $, l cf G Rec = 8"50/6" 11'6" wet

12 End of Boring @ 11'6"

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

7/Oct/20

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-10

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +82.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 7/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 7/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKSAsphalt 0'4"

17

2 S-1 14 FILL (Br cf S, l (-) $, l (+) cf G) Rec = 12"11 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, moist

3 8 little Silt, little coarse to fine Gravel)13

4 S-2 12 FILL (same) Rec = 14"11 4'6" moist

5 4 Br cf S, s $, l cf G2

6 S-3 3 same Rec = 12"3 moist

7 44

8 S-4 3 same, gr Rec = 8"4 moist

9 4

10 Brown coarse to fine SAND, some Silt,4 little coarse to fine Gravel

11 S-5 6 same Rec = 11"11 moist

12 10

13

14

1510

16 S-6 16 same Rec = 22"19 moist

17 13

18

19

205

21 S-7 11 same, s (+) $, l (+) cf G Rec = 21"34 moist

22 20 End of Boring @ 22'0" 22'0"

No Groundwater Encountered

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATES TEST BORING LOG BORING NUMBERSayreville, NJ B-11

Project: Proposed Redelopment, 265 South Highland Avenue, Briarcliff Manor NY SHEET NO.: 1 of 1Client: JMC, PLLC JOB NUMBER: 20-162Drilling Contractor: General Borings Inc. ELEVATION: +80.0GROUNDWATER CASING SAMPLE CORE TUBE DATUM: Topo DATE TIME DEPTH CASING TYPE HSA SS START DATE: 6/Oct/20

DIA. 3 1/4" 1 3/8" FINISH DATE: 6/Oct/20WGHT 140# DRILLER: J WyantFALL 30" INSPECTOR: JP

Depth (ft.)

Casing Blows

per Foot

Sample Number

Blows on Sample

Spoon per 6"

Sym

IDENTIFICATION REMARKS1 Topsoil 0'2"

1 S-1 2 FILL (Br cf S, l (+) $, l cf G) Rec = 10"3 moist

2 4 FILL (Brown coarse to fine SAND, 8 little Silt, some (-) coarse to fine Gravel)

3 S-2 11 FILL (same, l (-) $, s cf G) Rec = 9"13 moist

4 14

5 5'0"34

6 S-3 50/5" Gr cf S, s (-) $, l cf G (weathered rock) Rec = 8"moist

7 very dense drillingSchist, Completely Weathered

8 Gray coarse to fine SAND, some (-) Siltlittle coarse to fine Gravel

9

10S-4 50/3" same 10'3" Rec = 3"

11 End of Boring @ 10'3" moist

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

No Groundwater Encountered

B-1

B-1A

B-2

B-8

B-11

B-3

B-7

B-9

B-4

B-5 B-6

B-10

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERROBERT B. SIMPSON, P.E.

FIG -1

1" = 30'

RBS

20-162

CKS

PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT265 SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE

BRIAR CLIFF MANOR, NEW YORK

14 DEC 2020

CARLIN-SIMPSON AND ASSOCIATES61 Main StreetSayreville, NJ 08872

Consulting Geotechnical andEnvironmental Engineers

BORING LOCATION PLAN

GENERAL NOTES:

1. GENERAL LAYOUT WAS OBTAINED FROM A DRAWING THAT WAS PREPAREDBY JMC, PLLC, ENTITLED "SCHEMATIC UTILITIES PLAN", DATED 21 AUGUST2020, DRAWING NUMBER C-300.

2. BORING LOCATIONS WERE LAID OUT IN THE FIELD BY CARLIN-SIMPSON &ASSOCIATES (CSA).

3. THE BORINGS WERE PERFORMED BY GENERAL BORINGS, INC. A IN OCTOBER2020 UNDER THE FULL TIME INSPECTION OF CSA.

4. LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE.

LEGEND:

- BORING LOCATION

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

PERC

ENTA

GE

FIN

ER B

Y W

EIG

HT

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

SIEVE ANALYSIS

BORINGSYMBOL DEPTHSAMPLE DESCRIPTION

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATESSAYREVILLE, NJ 08872

PROJECT BY JOB NODATE

B-1

B-2

S-2

S-2

3'0" - 4'0"

3'0" - 5'0"

Gray coarse to fine Sand, little Silt, and (-) coarse to fine Gravel

FILL (Brown coarse to fine Sand, some Silt, some (+) coarse to fine Gravel

Proposed Redevelopment 265 South Highland Avenue, Briar Cliff Manor, NY NJA 20-16229-Oct-20

and

trace

little

some

and

trace

little

some

0

10

20

35

50

35

20

10

0

GRAVEL SANDC M F C M F

SILTS & CLAYSIDENTIFIED BY PLASTICITY

3 3/4 3/8 4 8 30 60 100 200 300

NAT MC

1.4%

8.9%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0.010.1110100

PERC

ENTA

GE

FIN

ER B

Y W

EIG

HT

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

SIEVE ANALYSIS

BORINGSYMBOL DEPTHSAMPLE DESCRIPTION

CARLIN-SIMPSON & ASSOCIATESSAYREVILLE, NJ 08872

PROJECT BY JOB NODATE

B-4

B-7

S-4

S-2

7'0" - 9'0"

3'0" - 5'0"

Brown coarse to fine SAND, some (-) Silt, little medium to fine Gravel

Brown coarse to fine SAND, some (+) Silt, trace (+) medium to fine Gravel

Proposed Redevelopment 265 South Highland Avenue, Briar Cliff Manor, NY NJA 20-16229-Oct-20

and

trace

little

some

and

trace

little

some

0

10

20

35

50

35

20

10

0

GRAVEL SANDC M F C M F

SILTS & CLAYSIDENTIFIED BY PLASTICITY

3 3/4 3/8 4 8 30 60 100 200 300

NAT MC

13.1%

12.1%

APPENDIX E

TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL & PERMANENT

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICE INSPECTION CHECKLISTS

1

JMC Project 20021 265 South Highland Avenue Redevelopment

265 South Highland Avenue & 265 Albany Post Road Village of Briarcliff Manor, NY

Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Inspection and Maintenance Checklist

Erosion and Sediment

Control Measure

Inspection/Maintenance Intervals

Inspection/Maintenance Requirements

Stabilized Construction Entrance

Daily Periodic top dressing with additional aggregate as required Clean sediment in public right-of-ways immediately

Silt Fence Weekly + After Each Rain Remove & redistribute sediment when bulges develop in the silt fence.

Inlet Protection Weekly + After Each Rain Remove sediment as necessary and replace filter fabric, crushed stone etc. Any broken and damaged components should be replaced. Check all materials for proper anchorage and secure as necessary.

2

JMC Project 20021 265 South Highland Avenue Redevelopment

265 South Highland Avenue & 265 Albany Post Road Village of Briarcliff Manor, NY

Permanent Stormwater Management Practice Inspection and Maintenance

Checklist

Stormwater Management

Practice

Inspection/Maintenance Intervals

Inspection/Maintenance Requirements

Drain Inlets / Trench Drains

Monthly Check for blockage and/or erosion at top of each inlet. Repair/remove as necessary. Check for sediment and debris collected within sumps and clean out as necessary.

Subsurface Stormwater Management Detention Facility (R-Tank Units)

Annually + After Major Storms

Check level of sediment and debris accumulated within the system. Check structural integrity of the system pipes, structures, etc. for cracking, bulging or deterioration. Repair/remove as necessary. Confirm all inlets and outlet structures/pipes are operating properly.

Hydrodynamic Water Quality Structure

(See Maintenance Guidelines in Appendix F)

Open access cover for visual inspection and measure the distance from the standing water surface to the sediment pile with a measuring stick or tape. If less than 4 feet, insert hose from vacuum truck into the sump and screen through both access covers to clean out the standing water, layer of oil, sediment, trash, etc. The screen must be powerwashed to ensure it is free of trash and debris.

3

The owner/operator responsible for inspection and maintenance as outlined above: Mr. Edward Glackin Black Diamond Equity, LLC PO Box 1932 Huntington, NY 11743 Phone: (516) 359-9484

p:\2018\18100\drainage\reports\2020-06-02_pd (swppp)\appendices\temporary & permanent s&e inspection and maintenance checklist.docx

APPENDIX F

CASCADE SEPARATOR INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE GUIDE

Cascade Separator® Inspection and Maintenance Guide

ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS

MaintenanceThe Cascade Separator® system should be inspected at regular intervals and maintained when necessary to ensure optimum performance. The rate at which the system collects sediment and debris will depend upon on-site activities and site pollutant characteristics. For example, unstable soils or heavy winter sanding

regular sweeping of paved surfaces will slow accumulation.

Inspection

performed. Pollutant transport and deposition may vary from year to year and regular inspections will help ensure that the system is cleaned out at the appropriate time. At a minimum, inspections should be performed twice per year (i.e. spring and fall). However,

winter sanding operations may lead to rapid accumulations, or in

A visual inspection should ascertain that the system components are

sediment in the system. Measuring pollutant accumulation can be

instrument. If absorbent material is used for enhanced removal of hydrocarbons, the level of discoloration of the sorbent material

inspection. A simple form for doing so is provided in this Inspection and Maintenance Guide.

Access to the Cascade Separator unit is typically achieved through one manhole access cover. The opening allows for inspection and cleanout of the center chamber (cylinder) and sediment storage sump, as well as inspection of the inlet chamber and slanted

chambers and sump.

The Cascade Separator system should be cleaned before the level of sediment in the sump reaches the maximum sediment depth and/or when an appreciable level of hydrocarbons and trash has accumulated. If sorbent material is used, it must be replaced

impacted when maximum sediment storage capacity is exceeded. Contech recommends maintaining the system when sediment level reaches 50% of maximum storage volume. The level of sediment is easily determined by measuring the distance from the system outlet invert (standing water level) to the top of the sediment pile. To avoid underestimating the level of sediment in the chamber, the measuring device must be lowered to the top of the sediment pile carefully. Finer, silty particles at the top of the pile typically offer less resistance to the end of the rod than larger particles toward the bottom of the pile. Once this measurement is recorded, it should be compared to the chart in this document to determine if the height

of the maximum sediment storage.

CleaningCleaning of a Cascade Separator system should be done during

convenient method of removing pollutants from the system. Simply remove the manhole cover and insert the vacuum tube down through the center chamber and into the sump. The system should be completely drained down and the sump fully evacuated of sediment. The areas outside the center chamber

up exists in these areas.

However, the system should be cleaned out immediately in the event of an oil or gasoline spill. Motor oil and other hydrocarbons that accumulate on a more routine basis should be removed when an appreciable layer has been captured. To remove these pollutants, it may be preferable to use absorbent pads since they are usually less expensive to dispose than the oil/water emulsion that may be created by vacuuming the oily layer. Trash and debris can be netted out to separate it from the other pollutants. Then the system should be power washed to ensure it is free of trash and debris.

Manhole covers should be securely seated following cleaning

Disposal of all material removed from the Cascade Separator system must be done in accordance with local regulations. In many locations, disposal of evacuated sediments may be handled in the same manner as disposal of sediments removed from catch

are damaged, replacement parts can be ordered from the manufacturer.

A Cascade Separator unit can be easily cleaned in less than 30 minutes.

Model Number

DiameterDistance from Water Surface to Top of

Sediment PileSediment Storage Capacity

ft m ft m y3 m3

CS-3 3 0.9 1.5 0.5 0.4 0.3

CS-4 4 1.2 1.5 0.5 0.7 0.5

CS-5 5 1.3 1.5 0.5 1.1 0.8

CS-6 6 1.8 1.5 0.5 1.6 1.2

CS-8 8 2.4 1.5 0.5 2.8 2.1

CS-10 10 3.0 1.5 0.5 4.4 3.3

CS-12 12 3.6 1.5 0.5 6.3 4.8

Note: The information in the chart is for standard units. Units may have been designed with non-standard sediment storage depth.

Cascade Separator® Maintenance Indicators and Sediment Storage Capacities

800.925.5240www.ContechES.com

SUPPORT

• •

Cascade Separator Maintenance 08/20

ENGINEERED SOLUTIONS

Cascade Separator® Inspection & Maintenance Log

Cascade Model: Location:

DateDepth Below Invert to Top of Sediment1

Floatable Layer 2

Describe Maintenance

Performed

Maintenance Personnel

Comments

1.

Once this measurement is recorded, it should be compared to the chart in the maintenance guide to determine if the height of the sediment pile

chamber, the measuring device must be carefully lowered to the top of the sediment pile.

2.

event of an oil spill, the system should be cleaned immediately.

APPENDIX G

CONTRACTOR’S CERTIFICATION

JMC Project

, NY

CONTRACTOR'S CERTIFICATION

“I hereby certify under penalty of law that I understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and agree to implement any corrective actions identified by the qualified inspector during a site inspection. I also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of the most current version of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("SPDES") general permit for stormwater discharges from construction activities and that it is unlawful for any person to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Furthermore, I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, that I do not believe to be true, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations”

Company Name:

Address:

Telephone Number:

Name and Title:

Signature: Date:

Permit Identification No.:

Name and Title of Trained Contractor:

Elements of the SWPPP Contractor is responsible for:

s:\swmr template\support docs\nys contractors certification.docx

APPENDIX H

DRAWINGS

APPL

ICAN

T/OW

NER:

No. Revision Date By

Drawing No:

Project No:

Date:

Scale:

Drawn: Approved:

ANY ALTERATION OF PLANS,SPECIFICATIONS, PLATS ANDREPORTS BEARING THE SEAL

OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER OR LICENSED LANDSURVEYOR IS A VIOLATION OF

SECTION 7209 OF THE NEWYORK STATE EDUCATION LAW,EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR BYSECTION 7209, SUBSECTION 2.

COPY

RIGH

T ©

2020

by JM

C Al

l Righ

ts Re

serve

d. N

o par

t of th

is do

cume

nt ma

y be r

epro

duce

d, sto

red i

n a re

trieva

l sys

tem, o

r tra

nsmi

tted i

n any

form

or by

mea

ns, e

lectro

nic, m

echa

nical,

photo

copy

ing, r

ecor

ding o

r othe

rwise

, with

out th

e prio

r writt

en pe

rmiss

ion of

JMC

PLAN

NING

, ENG

INEE

RING

, LAN

DSCA

PE A

RCHI

TECT

URE

& LA

ND S

URVE

YING

, PLL

C | J

MC S

ITE

DEVE

LOPM

ENT

CONS

ULTA

NTS,

LLC

| JOH

N ME

YER

CONS

ULTI

NG, IN

C. (J

MC).

Any

mod

ificati

ons o

r alte

ratio

ns to

this

docu

ment

witho

ut the

writt

en pe

rmiss

ion of

JMC

shall

rend

er th

em in

valid

and u

nusa

ble.

APPL

ICAN

T/OW

NER:

No. Revision Date By

Drawing No:

Project No:

Date:

Scale:

Drawn: Approved:

ANY ALTERATION OF PLANS,SPECIFICATIONS, PLATS ANDREPORTS BEARING THE SEAL

OF A LICENSED PROFESSIONALENGINEER OR LICENSED LANDSURVEYOR IS A VIOLATION OF

SECTION 7209 OF THE NEWYORK STATE EDUCATION LAW,EXCEPT AS PROVIDED FOR BYSECTION 7209, SUBSECTION 2.

COPY

RIGH

T ©

2020

by JM

C Al

l Righ

ts Re

serve

d. N

o par

t of th

is do

cume

nt ma

y be r

epro

duce

d, sto

red i

n a re

trieva

l sys

tem, o

r tra

nsmi

tted i

n any

form

or by

mea

ns, e

lectro

nic, m

echa

nical,

photo

copy

ing, r

ecor

ding o

r othe

rwise

, with

out th

e prio

r writt

en pe

rmiss

ion of

JMC

PLAN

NING

, ENG

INEE

RING

, LAN

DSCA

PE A

RCHI

TECT

URE

& LA

ND S

URVE

YING

, PLL

C | J

MC S

ITE

DEVE

LOPM

ENT

CONS

ULTA

NTS,

LLC

| JOH

N ME

YER

CONS

ULTI

NG, IN

C. (J

MC).

Any

mod

ificati

ons o

r alte

ratio

ns to

this

docu

ment

witho

ut the

writt

en pe

rmiss

ion of

JMC

shall

rend

er th

em in

valid

and u

nusa

ble.